Sunday, February 16, 2020

NO TAMPON TAX 
A male lawmaker worries women will abuse a tax break to hoard tampons

“That is what our elected representatives think of us,” one menstrual equity advocate says.


By Anna North Feb 13, 2020
A worker holds tampons in a production hall of Ontex Hygieneartikel 
Deutschland GmbH in Germany. 
Sebastian Kahnert/picture alliance via Getty Images

A debate erupted this week in the Tennessee state legislature over the danger of women buying too many tampons.

The concern came up during a hearing Tuesday about taxation of the products. Specifically, Democratic lawmakers in the state have proposed a bill to include tampons and other menstrual products in Tennessee’s yearly sales tax holiday, a three-day weekend when residents can buy things tax-free.

But state Sen. Joey Hensley, a Republican, worried that this might lead to out-of-control tampon-buying.

“I would think since it’s a sales tax holiday, there’s really no limit on the number of items anybody can purchase,” he said, according to the Associated Press. “I don’t know how you would limit the number of items someone could purchase.”

Hensley’s remarks have gotten nationwide coverage, with some questioning his grasp of the human menstrual cycle. Associated Press reporter Kimberlee Kruesi noted that his comment reminded her of “the time NASA thought a woman needed 100 tampons for a week in space.”

A Tennessee (male) lawmaker asking if women would buy a crazy amount of feminine hygiene products if those products qualified for the state's annual tax free weekend reminds me of the time NASA thought a woman needed 100 tampons for a week in space. #tnleg— Kimberlee Kruesi (@kkruesi) February 11, 2020

The lawmaker told Vox in an email that he is not actually against adding tampons to his state’s tax holiday, and that his concern was merely “getting the facts regarding the cost of the bill.”

Whatever happens in Tennessee, the hearing was also part of a bigger debate around the cost of tampons and menstrual pads, which can put them out of reach for low-income people. When someone can’t afford menstrual supplies, they are sometimes forced to miss work or school — as Jennifer Weiss-Wolf, author of the book Periods Gone Public: Taking a Stand for Menstrual Equity, puts it, “would you be able to walk down the street if you didn’t have a pad or a tampon?”

Lawmakers around the country have tried to make tampons more affordable by lifting sales taxes on the products, noting that many other necessities, like bandages, are already tax-exempt. Others have gone further by providing the products for free in places like schools, homeless shelters, and jails.

But Tennessee is not yet part of this movement. A measure to lift the sales tax on tampons entirely in the state failed in the legislature last year, even though the state already exempts proceeds from gun shows, fees for private gyms, and admission to county fairs, Weiss-Wolf said.

“This is not a question of affordability, it’s a question of priority,” Brandon Puttbrese, a spokesperson for Tennessee state Sen. Sara Kyle, who sponsored the tax holiday bill, told Vox in an email, noting that last year, the state legislature gave tax breaks to sports agents, architects, and accountants, among other groups.

The controversy over Kyle’s measure shows that even though more than half of Americans will have a period at some point in their lives, the need for affordable menstrual products is sometimes poorly understood. Hensley’s comments were a reminder of “what it means and feels like to not be fully represented in the halls of governance,” Weiss-Wolf said.
A new bill would make tampons part of Tennessee’s yearly sales tax holiday

Tennessee’s annual sales tax holiday lets residents buy items from clothing to computers without paying the usual 7 percent sales tax, Kruesi reports. Held at the end of July, it’s often a time when families do back-to-school shopping.

This year, Kyle, a Democrat, introduced a bill to include tampons and menstrual pads in the list of items Tennesseans can buy tax-free during the holiday. It’s especially important to include these products in a holiday aimed at back-to-school buying, Weiss-Wolf said, since “they’re what people need to be productive and present in school,” just as much as notebooks or pencils.

But in the hearing Tuesday, the bill faced pushback from Republicans, including Hensley. “I understand the importance of these products for women,” the legislator from Hohenwald, Tennessee, told Vox. But, he said, he wants more information on the cost of the bill.

According to the AP, Tennesseans who use tampons and other menstrual products spend about $120 a year on them, and the cost of the bill to the state would be about $132,700 annually.

Of course, it’s possible that people would choose to buy more than a year’s supply of tampons, but it’s not clear why that would be a greater concern than, for example, residents buying more than a year’s supply of clothes or computers.

Hensley’s comments were an example of “disrespect and outright misogyny, to sort of just assume the worst about women,” Weiss-Wolf said, leaving her with “disappointment and disgust that that is what our elected representatives think of us.”
Advocates are pushing for menstrual equity around the country — but they’re also facing pushback

The Tennessee measure is part of a bigger movement around the country toward “menstrual equity,” or making tampons and other period products affordable and accessible to all. It’s a recognition that people simply can’t go about their daily lives, or participate in the economy or society, if they don’t have reliable access to menstrual products, Weiss-Wolf said.

In recent years, nine states, including New York and Nevada, have taken steps toward menstrual equity by eliminating the so-called “tampon tax,” or sales tax on tampons and pads. Others, like Virginia, are working on measures to do so.

Five states, including New York and California, have passed legislation requiring that tampons and pads be provided free in public schools, a recognition that students need reliable access to the products in order to attend and participate fully in class. Additionally, several states have passed bills requiring that the products be made available free to people who are incarcerated.

Advocates of repealing the “tampon tax” argue that the taxes aren’t just detrimental to the health and well-being of those who menstruate — they’re also unconstitutional. The group Period Equity, which Weiss-Wolf co-founded, helped launch an initiative last year to push more states to repeal tampon taxes, arguing that they constitute illegal discrimination against people who menstruate.

Tennessee, however, is one of 31 states that still impose sales tax on tampons and pads. A measure to repeal it failed last year amid questions about how the state would make up the resulting loss in revenue. But in fact, Tennessee ended the year with a budget surplus, Weiss-Wolf said — and chose to use it to give residents a tax break on ammunition.

Overall, she and others say, questions about the cost of repealing tampon taxes miss the point that menstrual products are basic necessities for millions of Americans. New York City Council member Julissa Ferreras-Copeland, who sponsored a measure to make the products free in city schools, shelters, and jails, made this point in 2016 by comparing tampons to a product whose cost lawmakers don’t often worry about. “They’re as necessary as toilet paper,” Ferreras-Copeland said, “so they ought to be just as freely accessible.”
LIKE PETITIONING THE MONARCH
Over 1,000 Alleged Oracle Employees Have Signed a Petition Demanding Founder Larry Ellison Cancel a Trump Fundraiser

AND ABOUT AS LIKELY TO SUCCEED 

Time•February 15, 2020


Over 1,000 Alleged Oracle Employees Have Signed a Petition Demanding Founder Larry Ellison Cancel a Trump Fundraiser

Oracle founder and CTO Larry Ellison‘s decision to throw a fundraiser for President Donald Trump has apparently angered some of his employees. So much so that they have allegedly set up a Change.org petition demanding he cancel the Feb. 19 event and have asked other Oracle employees to sign.

The petition, first reported by Vox, launched on Friday and so far has over 1,000 signatures from alleged employees. (The computer technology company employs around 136,000 people worldwide).

It asks company leadership to “[stand] up against Ellison’s damaging association with the Trump campaign” and says his support of Trump “does not affirm Oracle’s core values of diversity, inclusiveness and ethical business conduct.”

“As Oracle employees, we must hold our leaders accountable for upholding their ethical responsibilities,” the petition, which anyone can sign, continues. “Ellison’s financial support of Donald Trump endangers the well-being of women, immigrants, communities of color, the environment, LGBTQ and trans communities, disabled people and workers everywhere.”

Oracle did not immediately respond to TIME’s request for comment.

Ellison is worth over $69 billion and is the fifth richest person in the U.S. according to Forbes. The Desert Sun reports that at Ellison’s upcoming fundraiser, for $100,000, guests can join a golf outing and take a photograph with the President. For $250,000, guests can also reportedly join a round table discussion.

“It signals what I and many others have always feared,” an Oracle employee reportedly told Vox. “Culturally, Oracle is the type of place where you’ll work with many lovely people who you share common ideals with, but those ideals have to be left at the door in service of the company.” Vox reports that five current and one former employee described “bubbling frustration at Oracle on Thursday.” Some employees started a Slack channel and added the link to the petition to their email signature, according to Vox.

The petition exhibits how the President has remained deeply unpopular in Silicon Valley, although he has continued to quietly fundraise from a select group of wealthy donors. The Wall Street Journal reports that Trump held a fundraiser in Palo Alto back in September; tickets reportedly cost up to $100,000 per couple and was held at a hidden location. Oracle CEO Safra Catz also served on Trump’s transition team, a decision that led Oracle senior executive George Polisner to resign in 2016.


Furious Oracle employees are demanding that Larry Ellison cancel his Trump fundraiser

Oracle employees say they “refuse to be complacent and complicit in Larry Ellison’s support of such a divisive person.”

By Theodore Schleifer@teddyschleifer Updated Feb 14, 2020
Oracle founder Larry Ellison delivering a keynote speech on September 16, 2019 in San Francisco, California. Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison’s decision to host a fundraiser for Donald Trump next week has awoken the usually passive workforce at his company, angering some employees who are going public with their disgust over Ellison’s actions.

Their reaction reflects how toxic Trump remains in Silicon Valley — and the ire that top tech executives can draw when they align themselves with the president. And it’s revealing that it’s happening at Oracle, which employees say has a conservative culture that has not been touched by the current bouts of workforce activism sweeping major tech companies.

“It signals what I and many others have always feared,” one current Oracle employee told Recode. “Culturally, Oracle is the type of place where you’ll work with many lovely people who you share common ideals with, but those ideals have to be left at the door in service of the company.”

Recode spoke with one former and five current employees who, in sum, described bubbling frustration at Oracle on Thursday. They said they were privately complaining to colleagues in their offices and sharing links about the fundraiser to friends on Facebook Messenger. But while many say that their coworkers, too, are upset, assessing the full scale of their anger is difficult because of Oracle’s culture: It discourages employees from talking about politics. That’s also why it is unclear how substantial the plans to protest Ellison will become.

Still, as of Friday afternoon, at least 230 people in the company feel strongly enough that they signed a petition addressed to Ellison that began circulating that morning. The Oracle employees are calling on him to cancel the fundraising event; they’ve also started a Slack channel, are adding the link to the petition in their email signatures; and are publicizing it in internal Oracle forums, trying to drum up pressure in a company not known for activism.

“Larry Ellison’s personal implicit endorsement and financial support of Donald Trump not only damages our brand perception and misrepresents the diverse views of our company, but it adversely affects the morale of the individuals and communities who comprise Oracle,” said the group behind the petition, called Oracle Employees for Ethics. “We are signing this petition because we want our voices heard and we refuse to be complacent and complicit in Larry Ellison’s support of such a divisive person.”


Oracle declined to comment for this story.

Ellison, the fifth-richest person in the US, surprised the tech industry on Wednesday when news broke that he would host Trump for a golf-filled fundraiser at his estate in California’s Coachella Valley next week. The event is, by far, the most significant public display of support for Trump 2020 by a tech titan.

Or as another Oracle employee, granted anonymity like others because they were candidly discussing their boss, told Recode: “Oracle is not supposed to be political but yet our CEO is doing something very political, no?”

“This fundraiser is a slap in the face to all of us, especially as Larry champions the environment and is building a hospital,” this employee said, referring to Ellison’s personal philanthropy. “This shows that he cares about money over all else. And that is what matters. But what is the average employee to do?”

Friday’s petition is a small but bold step for employees at Oracle. Companies like Google are famous for fostering an open culture that leaves room for rabble-rousers and vigorous political debate during the workday. Other tech giants have proven much more outspoken about Trump policies like the ban on immigrants from Muslim countries and the debate over letting DREAMers stay in the United States.

But Oracle, from C-suite on down, is basically the anti-Google, some current and former employees say. Politics rarely comes up in the office. And there is very limited cross-team communication on internal forums about political matters; plus, employees are concerned that any posts critical of management would be monitored.

Compared to other tech companies, employees at the business-to-business software company say their colleagues skew older and more conservative (although Oracle’s workforce relies heavily on immigrants who have come to the US on H-1B visas, a program that Trump has cracked down on.)

That explains why despite some employees’ frustrations with Ellison, they have been slow to mobilize en masse.

Plus, some employees say they feel resigned because they believe that Ellison will do whatever he likes — regardless of his employees’ frustrations.

“Everyone I spoke to had the general attitude of, ‘It sucks but we can’t tell Larry anything,’” said one former employee, who recounted his conversation with five of his colleagues on Thursday.

“There’s a thoroughly defeatist culture within Oracle,” one current employee said. “Won’t be any institutional challenge internally.”

It is not as though Ellison’s support for Republicans is a total shock. Oracle has been one of the Silicon Valley giants that has worked hardest to cultivate ties to the Trump administration. Other tech giants have tried to keep at least some distance from the administration, but Oracle CEO Safra Catz has reportedly been under consideration to take senior roles within the White House, and she has hired several former senior Trump aides at Oracle.

Oracle’s ties to the administration led one executive in 2016 to resign from the company and blast it on the way out — but he was an exception to the rule.

And not all of Oracle’s workforce is upset over Ellison’s plans to fundraise for Trump. One current employee told Recode that he was proud of Ellison’s decision.

“I personally love that Ellison is willing to stand up for what he believes in even though it goes against the grain of what most people in the field and employees at his company believe politically,” this employee said.

But one of the ironies of Ellison’s public display of support for Trump is that he is not a dyed-in-the-wool Trump backer. Ellison was particularly close to Bill Clinton, once attending a ritzy dinner fundraiser in Silicon Valley for the Clinton campaign’s reelection race for about a dozen of Clinton’s top California donors. He once joked that the Constitution should have been amended to give Clinton a third term.

He was backing Democrats like Harry Reid as recently as 2013. In 2015, he hosted Barack Obama at th
e same golf course that Donald Trump will visit next week. Ellison didn’t even donate to Trump in 2016. (He was a major donor to a Super PAC backing Sen. Marco Rubio in the Republican presidential primary.)

That’s what makes Ellison’s decision perplexing to at least one person who was once close to him.

“He is a huge, huge liberal Democrat,” said this person. They described Ellison, a registered Democrat, as having been “so proud of the fact that he was one of the few [Fortune 100] CEOs who didn’t put greed before everything.”

“Larry looked down on Republicans of all stripes — especially the conservative evangelical ones,” the person said. “This Trump stuff makes no sense.”


Larry Ellison is doing an unthinkable thing for a tech titan: Hosting a fundraiser for Donald Trump

It’s the most significant endorsement that Trump has gotten from a Silicon Valley leader.

By Theodore Schleifer@teddyschleifer Updated Feb 12, 2020
Larry Ellison risks blowback from his employees at Oracle. 
Phillip Faraone/Getty Images

Larry Ellison, the founder of Oracle and one of the world’s richest men, is throwing a fundraiser for Donald Trump — the most significant display of support from a major tech titan for the president, by far.

Ellison is hosting Trump at his estate in California’s Coachella Valley next week for a “Golf Outing and Reception,” according to a copy of the invitation obtained by the Desert Sun, a local newspaper. Tickets run as high as a quarter million dollars.

While Ellison has consistently backed Republicans in the past — he was a major donor to a super PAC backing Marco Rubio in 2016 — the fundraiser is sure to expose the flamboyant 75-year-old billionaire to a new wave of political and corporate scrutiny. Silicon Valley workforces are, in general, deeply oppositional to the Trump administration, and it will be revealing to see whether Ellison encounters any pushback or activism from Oracle’s 136,000 employees, who have already expressed frustration with Oracle ties to the current administration.

Oracle has not been known to have a particularly restless workforce, but tech workers are organizing in the age of Trump and have sought to minimize ties between their employers and the Trump administration. Companies like Google and Github have encountered employees who want the corporations to end their work with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, for instance.

Ellison, though, has long been one of Silicon Valley’s most eccentric and independent-minded leaders, so he might care little about the blowback. He is no longer Oracle’s CEO but its chief technology officer and executive chairman.

Recode asked Ellison’s team last September about whether he planned to back the president for reelection, but his spokespeople declined to comment. Ellison’s personal and Oracle spokespeople did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Wednesday.

The event will be held at Ellison’s private estate in Rancho Mirage next Wednesday, according to a copy of the invitation, on a golf course where he once played with Barack Obama. Ellison — far more comfortable with displays of opulence than many other tech billionaires — is a prodigious acquirer of property in Southern California.

What he has not been, up until now, is a major Trump donor. The most significant tech billionaire to back Trump to date has been early Facebook investor and board member Peter Thiel. Ellison has not made a political contribution of any type since the end of 2017, and he has never before donated to Trump or any Trump-backed group, according to federal records.

That makes this decision to host a major, high-profile event for Trump all the more unusual. But it’s also a major coup for the Trump team: Ellison is, after all, the country’s fifth-richest person, with a net worth of almost $70 billion.
I Am Watching China Wage a 'People's War' Against Coronavirus (65,000 Cases and Growing)

Our latest on-the-ground reporting as the world's emerging superpower tackles an unprecedented challenge. 


by Mitchell Blatt
February 15, 2020 Topic: Security Region: Asia Blog Brand: The Buzz 

The policy of quarantining Spring Festival returnees for 14 days has extended through most of China as coronavirus surpasses 65,000 cases.

At a news conference held by the State Council Information Office, He Qinghua, deputy director of the Bureau of Disease Prevention and Control, announced that Beijing would be imposing 14-day quarantines on anyone who comes into the capital from anywhere. Because the origins of so many hundreds of thousands of individuals entering the city are “unclear,” Beijing has to implement such a policy to meet its own needs, He said.


Beijing is not the only city to judge such a policy as being “in accordance with its needs,” however. Shanghai, Nanjing, and many other cities have similar quarantine policies in place. In Nanjing’s central district, Gulou, for example, various “temporary party committees” have been established at the neighborhood level, and volunteers have been dispatched to guard the entry gates to make sure no one who does not live inside enters. Anyone who has returned from anywhere in the country is supposed to “submit to group observation for 14 days after arriving,” according to signs placed at the gates of many neighborhoods.

The fact that such a policy is observed at the district level is indicative of the fact that responsibility for responding to coronavirus has been somewhat decentralized. While the central government gave an order to fight a “people’s war” against the virus, and provincial-level and municipal bodies have also set policies, much of the specifics are being decided by district governments.

Trivium China, a strategic advising firm, wrote in its “tip sheet” February 13 that Xi Jinping has announced a policy of “decentralization”: “Each county and district will be given leeway to determine their own level of risk regarding the virus.” Districts, of which Nanjing has eleven, are the administrative area just below a city. Decentralization to the district level is evident in Nanjing, where Jianye’s district government issued its own program for when various businesses would be allowed to reopen, as reported by The National Interest on February 13.


The Gulou district working group on coronavirus issued fliers that could be seen affixed to some closed shops directing anyone who had transited through Wuhan to register at their sub-district office and submit to self-quarantine inside their residence for 14 days.

Yet the scope of who is to be subject to such “group observation”-style quarantines is even broader at many apartment complexes and communities in Gulou. Signs out front of those in the Jiangdong Avenue area say that everyone who returns to Nanjing from elsewhere must be subject.

I talked to one person who is to be returning from Hangzhou, itself one of the cities most seriously affected, who said she broadly agreed with the policy. While not looking forward personally to being stuck inside (already being stuck inside in Hangzhou), she is resigned to the fact that it is necessary.

Inside the affected residential communities, checkpoints are set up at the main gate or road. Even deliverymen must drop their packages or their food off at the checkpoints. Although Communist Party members are encouraged to volunteer, not everyone who is picked as a guard is a party member.

The model of creating units described as temporary party committees and branches is being widely used to dispatch people to fight the spread on the streets. For example, Qingyuan city’s government affairs account states that on February 14, two new “temporary party branches” were established to monitor and check the temperature of passengers at its highway checkpoint. Similar temporary party apparatus were created in Pengzhou, Shandong, and elsewhere.



The Party has, after all, emphasized its claim to be leading the response to coronavirus. According to Elizabeth Economy, Director for Asia Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and a Distinguished Visiting Fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, coronavirus could be a “stress test” for Xi Jinping--and Xi would hate to fail . Economist George Magnus, author of Red Flags: Why Xi’s China Is in Jeopardy, writes that the crisis hits Xi and China at a terrible time, particularly for its economy. Columbia University professor Andrew Nathan says public opinion pertaining to the government’s response indicates a system that is “brittle, but not at the breaking point.”

The Party is certainly trying to make sure it isn’t. In fact, they would like to cite the response as evidence of the need for a strong Communist Party. “Only the CCP can lead China’s response to any disaster,” Jinan city’s education ministry wrote in an open letter to primary school students, which was published at the website of the People’s Daily.


It is often the case that only they are allowed to.

Currently based in China, Mitchell Blatt is a former editorial assistant at the National Interest, Chinese-English translator, and lead author of Panda Guides Hong Kong. He has been published in USA Today, The Daily Beast, The Korea Times, Silkwinds magazine, and Areo Magazine, among other outlets. Follow him on Facebook at @MitchBlattWriter.
Hundreds march in Hong Kong against potential coronavirus quarantine clinics
Reuters•February 15, 2020


First coronavirus death outside Asia reported

France reported the first fatality from the new coronavirus outside Asia on Saturday as the death toll from the outbreak jumped past 1,500 in China.

HONG KONG, Feb 15 (Reuters) - Hundreds of anti-government protesters marched in multiple Hong Kong neighbourhoods on Saturday against government plans to potentially turn some buildings into coronavirus quarantine centres, demanding full closure of the mainland China border.

The protests - which escalated in June over a perceived tightening of Beijing's grip over the city, which Beijing denies - have lost their intensity in recent weeks as panic over the virus kept most people indoors.

But anger has been brewing over Chief Executive Carrie Lam's refusal to completely shut the border with mainland China, where the new fast-spreading coronavirus is believed to have originated, with some medical staff going on strike and small-scale protests emerging in various locations in support.

On Saturday, hundreds rallied in the northern neighbourhoods of Tai Po and Tin Shui Wai as well as in Aberdeen on the Hong Kong island, chanting "Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of our times" and "Oppose pneumonia clinic". Most protesters wore surgical masks and many were dressed in all black.

Some buildings in those neighbourhoods had been designated as potential quarantine sites.

"The government didn't listen to public demands of a complete border closure, and now they want to set up epidemic clinics in 18 districts. Doing that is like creating more wounds rather than trying to stop the bleeding," Tin Shui Wai resident Chan Mei-lin said.

Television footage showed police in riot gear making several arrests and using pepper spray in Tin Shui Wai.

Three weeks ago, a group of protesters set alight the lobby of a newly built residential building in Hong Kong that authorities had planned to use as a quarantine facility, prompting the government to abandon the plan.

The government has closed most border points with China and has made quarantine compulsory for anyone coming into the city if they had been in mainland China over the past 14 days.

But Lam has said a full closure was "inappropriate", "impractical" and "discriminatory".

Over 1,500 people in mainland China have died from the flu-like virus, which can be transmitted from person to person, while more than 66,000 have so far been infected. In Hong Kong, there have been 56 confirmed cases and one death. 




(Reporting by Clare Jim and Jessie Pang; Writing by Marius Zaharia; Editing by Himani Sarkar)

Why aren’t brain injuries taken seriously?


Mike Bebernes Editor, Yahoo News 360•February 11, 2020
“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates

What’s happening

More than 100 members of the U.S. military suffered traumatic brain injuries as a result of an Iranian missile attack on a base in Iraq that housed American troops, according to the U.S. Department of Defense.

Iran bombarded the base in early January in retaliation for an American airstrike that killed Qassem Soleimani, one of the country’s top generals. Though there were no U.S. fatalities, the number of military members who have been treated for brain injuries has gradually increased in the weeks since the attack. Last month, President Trump downplayed the injuries, saying the soldiers were experiencing “headaches,” which he didn’t consider “very serious injuries relative to other injuries.”

To the general public, traumatic brain injury (TBI) is most commonly understood to be caused by a direct blow to the head like the ones football players endure. The impact from an explosion — even if it doesn’t cause bodily injury — could cause TBI. Brain injuries have been called the “signature wound” of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, where improvised explosive devices have been a persistent threat. More than 413,000 American soldiers have suffered TBI since 2000, according to the Department of Defense.

Most of those cases involved mild TBI, which can lead to headaches, cognitive impairment, mood changes and fatigue in the short term. Research has shown that even mild brain injuries can be linked to a increased long-term risk of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide.

Why there’s debate

The president’s comments echo a view, prevalent in the military and in sports, that brain injuries aren’t considered as serious as physical injuries. Part of the disconnect may stem from the nature of the injuries. A bullet wound, for example, is immediately noticeable and easily understood as life-threatening. The symptoms of head injuries, however, can take days to show up and are often difficult to define. Severe outcomes, like depression, may not manifest for months or even years and can be difficult to attribute directly to head trauma.

Some military veterans say the culture of the armed forces puts pressure on soldiers to return to action unless physically unable, which can lead to TBI symptoms going unreported. Others argue that military leadership has been too slow to respond to the issue and that the government doesn’t do enough to provide mental health services to veterans after their service is complete.

What’s next


The modern understanding of the impact of traumatic brain injuries is still relatively new. Scientists and doctors are working to develop better methods to diagnose, monitor and treat TBI. The military has instituted new procedures for managing brain injuries within its ranks in recent years. President Trump, however, appears committed to his view that TBI isn’t as serious as other injuries. “I viewed it a little bit differently than most, and I won't be changing my mind on that," he said Monday.
Perspectives

Symptoms can take time to surface

“The long-lasting effects of TBI can be delayed, and its victims can appear unchanged to the eye. Because of this, it is easy to dismiss mild TBI or concussion as a bump to the head, and the victims of TBI are often returned back to the field, the court, work or the battlefield all too soon without the necessary neuropsychological testing and subsequent treatment.”
— Neurologist Starane Shepherd, Newsweek

Veterans often see their symptoms as personality problems

“Victims of traumatic brain injury often blame themselves for their changed behavior, not realizing that blows or force to the head have caused lasting harm. … Step one is helping them understand they have injuries, not character flaws.” — Dr. Chrisanne Gordon, Columbus Dispatch

Fear of judgment prevents soldiers from seeking treatment

“A major hurdle has been to destigmatize brain injury and make people realize that injuries to the brain that can’t be seen are just as serious — and sometimes more difficult to treat — than bloody wounds to other parts of the body.” — Editorial, Washington Post

Mental health is consistently treated as less seriously than physical health

“Historically, mental health services get shortchanged in funding and support across the country, but the failure to care for the war fighters has been notably shameful. Looking back 18 years, we find that the medical campaign to treat psychological problems and brain injury has largely failed.” — Stephen N. Xenakis, USA Today

Medical science is only starting to understand brain injuries

“It's the brain — and medicine is only on the forefront of understanding what, exactly, goes on in there.” — Leah Asmelash, CNN

Many doctors still rely on ineffective treatments

"A lot of physicians will say, 'Well, you shouldn't do anything. Go into a dark room, don't strain the brain and wait until you recover.’ … And we have a national epidemic of people that are sitting in a room waiting for their headache to go away.” — Dr. Jamshid Ghajar to Military.com

TBI symptoms are often discounted

“What I know is that if you show most people an invisible wound, you’ll get invisible compassion. Wear earplugs all the time, and even your close friends will just blow it off. … Empathy requires stimulus, and in the average person’s perspective, anybody can just ‘fake’ post-traumatic stress or a TBI.” — Military veteran Bryan Box, New Republic


Brain Injuries Are Common in Battle. The Military Has No Reliable Test for Them.
WHAT THEY CALL CONCUSSION OR SERIOUS BRAIN TRAUMA WAS ONCE KNOWN AS SHELL SHOCK AND LAST CENTURY DURING THE BIG ONE WWI IT WAS AN EXECUTABLE OFFENSE ON THE BATTLEFRONT FOR COWARDICE
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=WWI
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=SHELL+SHOCK
SEE  https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=BATTLE+FATIGUE

Trump budget zeroes out 

funding for Stars and Stripes, 

the military's newspaper 

MORE MONEY FOR HIS WALL

THAT MEXICO REFUSES TO PAY FOR


The Trump administration pulled funding in its 2021 budget for Stars and Stripes, the U.S. military news organization that has published a daily newspaper continuously since World War II for troops stationed around the world.

PEANUTS
At a Thursday press conference in Belgium, Defense Secretary Mark Esper explained the rationale behind the decision to withhold approximately $15.5 million in funding for Stars and Stripes.
“So, we trimmed the support for Stars and Stripes because we need to invest that money, as we did with many, many other programs, into higher-priority issues,” Esper said.
President Trump with members of the military in a dining facility during a surprise Thanksgiving Day visit to Afghanistan in 2019. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
President Trump with members of the military in a dining facility during a surprise Thanksgiving Day visit to Afghanistan in 2019. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
The Pentagon’s 2021 spending proposal is $705.4 billion.
Stars and Stripes relies on government funding to cover half its budget, the news organization said, with the other half coming from a combination of sales, subscriptions and advertising in its print and online editions.
Though Stars and Stripes is funded as part of the Pentagon’s Defense Media Activity, the paper maintains its editorial independence and says it reaches a daily audience of 1 million readers.
In the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, the paper published an article about a press conference held by retired military officers who questioned Trump’s ties to Russia, headlined: “Former admirals and generals warn Trump is 'dangerous' to military and country.”
But it has been evenhanded in its coverage of the administration, reporting that the Air Force found “nothing improper” about service members who attended Trump’s 2018 visit to Ramstein Air Base in Germany wearing red “Make America Great Again” hats.
It is unclear whether the paper will survive the funding cuts.
Border Patrol Will Deploy Elite Tactical Agents to Sanctuary Cities

The New York Times•February 15, 2020

An agent with the U.S. Border Patrol Tactical Unit (BORTAC) stands guard behind the border fence between Mexico and the United States, as seen from Tijuana,Mexico November 15, 2018. REUTERS/Carlos Garcia Rawlins


The Trump administration is deploying law enforcement tactical units from the southern border as part of a supercharged arrest operation in sanctuary cities across the country, an escalation in the president’s battle against localities that refuse to participate in immigration enforcement.



The specially trained officers are being sent to cities including Chicago and New York to boost the enforcement power of local Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, according to two officials who are familiar with the secret operation. Additional agents are expected to be sent to San Francisco; Los Angeles, Atlanta, Houston, Boston, New Orleans, Detroit and Newark, New Jersey.


The move reflects President Donald Trump’s persistence in cracking down on sanctuary cities, localities that have refused to cooperate in handing over immigrants targeted for deportation to federal authorities. It comes soon after the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security announced a series of measures that will affect both American citizens and immigrants living in those places.

Lawrence Payne, a spokesman for Customs and Border Protection, confirmed the agency was deploying 100 officers to work with ICE, which conducts arrests in the interior of the country, “in order to enhance the integrity of the immigration system, protect public safety, and strengthen our national security.

The deployment of the teams will run from February through May, according to an email sent to CBP personnel, which was read to The New York Times by one official familiar with the planning.

Among the agents being deployed to sanctuary cities are members of the elite tactical unit known as BORTAC, which acts essentially as the SWAT team of the Border Patrol. With additional gear such as stun grenades and enhanced Special Forces-type training, including sniper certification, the officers typically conduct high-risk operations targeting individuals who are known to be violent, many of them with extensive criminal records.

The unit’s work often takes place in the most rugged and swelteringly hot areas of the border. It can involve breaking into stash houses maintained by smuggling operations that are known to be filled with drugs and weapons.

In sanctuary cities, the BORTAC agents will be asked to support interior officers in run-of-the-mill immigration arrests, the officials said. Their presence could spark new fear in immigrant communities that have been on high alert under the stepped-up deportation and detention policies adopted after Trump took office.

In a statement, ICE’s acting director, Matthew Albence, said the deployment comes in response to policies adopted by sanctuary cities, which have made it harder for immigration agents to do their jobs.

“As we have noted for years, in jurisdictions where we are not allowed to assume custody of aliens from jails, our officers are forced to make at-large arrests of criminal aliens who have been released into communities,” he said. “When sanctuary cities release these criminals back to the street, it increases the occurrence of preventable crimes, and more importantly, preventable victims.”

But Gil Kerlikowske, the former commissioner of CBP, which oversees tactical units along the border, said sending the officers to conduct immigration enforcement within cities, where they are not trained to work, could escalate situations that are already volatile. He called the move a “significant mistake.”

“If you were a police chief and you were going to make an apprehension for a relatively minor offense, you don’t send the SWAT team. And BORTAC is the SWAT team,” said Kerlikowske, who is a former chief of police in Seattle. “They’re trained for much more hazardous missions than this.”

It was a gun-wielding BORTAC agent who, in April 2000, seized Elian Gonzalez — a Cuban boy who was embroiled in an international asylum controversy — from his uncle’s arms after agents had forced their way into the home where the boy was staying.

The Border Patrol squads will be charged with backing up ICE agents during deportation operations and standing by as a show of force, the officials said.

ICE agents typically seek out people with criminal convictions or multiple immigration violations as their primary targets for deportation, but family members and friends are often swept up in the enforcement net in what are known as “collateral” arrests, and many such people could now be caught up in any enhanced operations.

ICE leadership requested the help in sanctuary jurisdictions because agents there often struggle to track down unauthorized immigrants without the help of the police and other state and local agencies.

Law enforcement officers in areas that refuse to cooperate with ICE and the Border Patrol — which include both liberal and conservative parts of the country — often argue that doing so pushes people without legal status further into the shadows, ultimately making cities less safe because that segment of the population becomes less likely to report crimes or cooperate with investigations.

The goal of the new joint operation, one of the officials said, was to increase arrests in the sanctuary jurisdictions by at least 35%.

The operation reflects an increasingly hawkish approach to immigration enforcement, following the firings and resignations of leaders who have been viewed in the White House as unwilling to take the harsh steps Trump and his advisers view as necessary to slow illegal immigration.

Other recent attempts at aggressive enforcement by ICE have faltered, such as a series of raids targeting more than 2,000 migrant families that were planned during the summer of 2019. Trump’s advance warnings on Twitter led many of those who were targeted to refuse to open their front doors, and ultimately, only 35 of those who had been targeted were arrested in the operation’s first several weeks.

Even with the added show of force from BORTAC, agents will be limited in their abilities compared to the police or sheriff’s deputies. Unlike operations on the border, where BORTAC agents may engage in armed confrontations with drug-smuggling suspects using armored vehicles, immigration agents in cities are enforcing civil infractions rather than criminal ones. They are not allowed to forcibly enter properties in order to make arrests, and the presence of BORTAC agents, while helpful in boosting the number of agents on the ground, may prove most useful for the visual message it sends.

The agents will not be busting down doors or engaging in shootouts, said one official with direct knowledge of the operation, who like the other official would not be identified because he was not authorized to discuss it.

Some CBP agents are permitted certain enforcement powers, including setting up immigration checkpoints, within 100 miles of a land or coastal port.

Naureen Shah, senior advocacy and policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, questioned whether the teams would use that authority in the targeted cities, most of which are within that 100-mile zone.

“This is about further militarizing our streets,” Shah said. “It could actually have deadly effects. We could see CBP officers who aren’t trained for interior enforcement using aggressive force.”

Many ICE agents say their jobs have become increasingly difficult, three years into Trump’s presidency, because of robust campaigns by immigrant advocacy organizations seeking to safeguard unauthorized immigrants by educating them on the legal limitations that ICE officers face. As a result, in many communities where immigrants reside, people now turn immediately to their phones when ICE agents are spotted to alert neighbors that they should stay inside.

Trump campaigned on a promise to crack down on sanctuary cities. Within a few months of taking office, the Justice Department moved to withhold certain federal funds from the jurisdictions. Last week, the department filed suit against state and local governments in California, New Jersey and Washington state over sanctuary policies there. Also this month, the Department of Homeland Security announced it would ban New Yorkers from enrolling in programs that allow travelers to speed through customs checkpoints in airports and at the border as a result of the state’s decision to offer driver’s licenses to immigrants living in the country illegally and bar Homeland Security agencies from accessing the state’s motor vehicle database.

The president again highlighted the issue in his State of the Union address, arguing that sanctuary cities “release dangerous criminal aliens to prey upon the public.”

In January, a New York City Council member wrote an open letter for his fellow councilors expressing concern about increasing ICE activity in the region, including collateral arrests. Last week, an acquaintance of a man in New York who was being arrested by ICE was shot in an incident that the agency later blamed on sanctuary policies.

The aggressive immigration enforcement tactics being implemented around the country are not limited to any one agency. In a widely circulated video recorded in El Paso, Texas, on Tuesday night, Border Patrol agents are shown subduing and using a Taser to apprehend a man in a Burger King restaurant.

The video shows the man pleading repeatedly with the agents while shouting that he had done nothing wrong. A female bystander asks the agents to leave the restaurant, as she cries while witnessing the episode. While the man was writhing in pain on the floor after being stunned repeatedly, another woman in the video approached the agents and asked, “Why are you still hitting him?”

A Border Patrol spokesman said in a statement that the apprehended man was a “suspected alien smuggler,” without offering any evidence to support that assertion. The spokesman did not respond to a request for the man’s name and nationality.

“The man refused to cooperate with the verbal instructions and attempted to avoid being handcuffed, and a struggle ensued,” the Border Patrol spokesman said.

In the same statement, the spokesman said that a “citizen” had notified law enforcement of a suspicious vehicle parked on his property. The Border Patrol said the man apprehended by the agents on Tuesday was the driver of the vehicle and that “record checks indicated that the man was in the country illegally and had a positive criminal history.”

An ICE spokesman declined to comment on the specifics of the latest effort in sanctuary cities, citing the agency’s policy against sharing information about enforcement operations before they have taken place. However, the spokesman added that the agency had “made it abundantly clear for years that, in jurisdictions where we are not allowed to assume custody of aliens from jails, our officers would be redirected to make at-large arrests.”








President Donald Trump and others in his administration have repeatedly pointed to the case as a reason for toughening the country's immigration policies. Garcia-Zarate was living in the country illegally and had been deported five times before the shooting.


Trump is sending armed tactical forces to arrest immigrants in sanctuary cities

It’s yet another attempt to target sanctuary cities.

By Nicole Narea@nicolenarea Feb 14, 2020
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents fire 
H&K P2000 handguns during a qualification test at a
 shooting range on February 22, 2018, in Hidalgo, 
Texas. John Moore/Getty Images

The Trump administration is reportedly sending armed and highly trained law enforcement units to sanctuary cities across the country to support US Immigration and Customs Enforcement in carrying out immigration raids.

As first reported by the New York Times, 100 US Customs and Border Protection officers, including those from the SWAT-like Border Patrol Tactical Unit, will be deployed from February through May across nine sanctuary cities: Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Houston, Boston, New Orleans, and Newark, NJ.

Border Patrol Tactical Unit agents receive special training for high-risk law enforcement activities, including sniper certification and other advanced weapons training. Their primary charge has been tracking down drug traffickers on the US-Mexico border, where violence can often break out, but now they will also be responsible for conducting routine immigration arrests in some of America’s largest cities, according to the Times.

It’s just the latest instance in which President Donald Trump has sought to target sanctuary cities — which do not allow local law enforcement to share information with ICE or hand over immigrants in their custody — for refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. Immigrants advocates say that the deployment is not only a waste of federal law enforcement resources, it also might endanger immigrant communities.

“This is transparent retaliation against local governments for refusing to do the administration’s bidding,” Naureen Shah, senior policy and advocacy counsel on immigrants’ rights for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. “It will put lives at risk by further militarizing our streets.”

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Heather Swift said in a statement Friday that the additional CBP agents (which she emphasized come from a variety backgrounds and not just tactical units) will help overstretched ICE officers deal with the rising number of immigrants who could be arrested on immigration violations but have yet to be detained.


“ICE does not have sufficient resources to effectively manage the sustained increase in non-detained cases which is exacerbated by the rise of sanctuary jurisdictions,” she said. “These officers have also been trained in routine immigration enforcement actions, which is what they have been asked to do.”
It’s all part of Trump’s campaign against sanctuary cities

Friday’s decision is just one in a long line of Trump’s attempts to crack down on sanctuary cities. The administration has tried to withhold federal law enforcement grants from sanctuary states and vacate California’s sanctuary laws (but has mostly failed). And it recently blocked New Yorkers from enrolling in Global Entry and other programs that offer faster processing for pre-vetted travelers in response to new state sanctuary laws.

At his State of the Union address earlier this month, Trump characterized sanctuary cities as a danger to public safety and broadly painted immigrants as violent criminals, highlighting a case of an immigrant arrested on charges of murdering and sexually assaulting a 92-year-old woman in New York City.

Trump has done this over and over during his time in office, turning his ire on international criminal gangs like MS-13 and invoking the stories of “angel moms,” parents of those killed by gang members.

But in reality, research suggests that his characterization doesn’t hold water: Sanctuary policies don’t appear to make a city more dangerous. While there isn’t a huge body of research on sanctuary policies’ impact on crime rates, studies have found that they either slightly decrease crime rates or have no effect.

A study published in the journal Urban Affairs Review in 2017 found that cities with similar characteristics but for their sanctuary policies had “no statistically discernible difference” in their rates of violent crime, rape, or property crime. Using data from the National Immigration Law Center and the FBI, researchers compared crime rates before and after cities passed sanctuary laws, finding that they had no effect on crime.

Another study by the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning think tank, examined the almost 2,500 counties that don’t accept requests from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain unauthorized immigrants. The study found that counties with sanctuary policies tend to have lower crime rates than those that don’t: about 35.5 fewer crimes per 10,000 people on average. The counties with the smallest populations exhibited even bigger differences in crime rates.

Many police chiefs say there’s good reason behind those results: Sanctuary policies facilitate better crime reporting and cooperation with law enforcement in criminal investigations.






New ICE crackdown in sanctuary cities sparks backlash
By Brittny Mejia, Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Leila Miller, Los Angeles Times
LOS ANGELES — Law enforcement officials are pushing back against a new federal immigration push to add more resources in sanctuary cities as the Trump administration continues to target those migrants who have entered the U.S. without legal documents. 
© Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times/TNS Federal immigration officials confirmed Friday that border agents and officers, including those in tactical units, will be deployed in Los Angeles and other so-called sanctuary cities to assist in the arrests of immigrants in the country illegally.

The relationship between ICE and many local law enforcement agencies has long been fraught. Since Trump took office, it has grown only more tenuous as police grapple with maintaining communication with ICE while also balancing transparency with community and civic leaders.

Those tensions are especially evident in California, where local law enforcement must abide by a “sanctuary” law, Senate Bill 54, which went into effect last year to provide protection for immigrants in the country illegally. In L.A., the police department stopped engaging in joint operations with ICE that directly involve civil immigration enforcement and no longer transfers people with certain minor criminal convictions to ICE custody.

In the latest flashpoint, U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman plans to deploy 50 Border Patrol agents and 50 field operations customs officers in nine areas, according to the agency. Specially trained officers will be sent to cities including Los Angeles, Chicago and New York.

Additional agents are expected to be sent to San Francisco, Boston, New Orleans, Detroit, Newark, N.J., and other cities, according to the agency. The deployment of the teams will run from February through May.

Q: What has been the reaction in Los Angeles?

A: Mayor Eric Garcetti and LAPD chief Michel Moore released a video Friday saying local police won’t be working with ICE.

“Regardless of your immigration status, I want every Angeleno to know your city is on your side. Here in Los Angeles, our police department does not coordinate with ICE or participate in immigration enforcement,” Garcetti said on Twitter.

“Immigration is a federal matter. Safety is a police matter. And we’re not going to mix those two,” Moore added.

L.A. County Sheriff Alex Villanueva also released a statement Friday saying, “I strongly oppose this irresponsible deployment of federal SWAT agents in Los Angeles County for civil immigration enforcement.

“This poorly thought-out plan can only be seen as a tactic to intimidate an already vulnerable population and drive them deeper into the shadows,” the statement said. “We are not any safer if an entire segment of our population is afraid to report crimes to local law enforcement.”

Q: What are federal immigration officials saying?

A. Customs and Border Patrol agents and officers being detailed to help ICE will come from different sectors and job positions, including some trained in tactical operations, according to the agency.

“ICE is utilizing CBP to supplement enforcement activity in response to the resource challenges stemming from sanctuary-city policies,” ICE Director Matthew Albence said in a statement.

Albence said in the statement that the action was being taken in response to sanctuary-city law enforcement agencies not cooperating with federal authorities by turning over immigrants being held in local jails. As a result, the statement continued, federal officers “are forced to make at-large arrests of criminal aliens who have been released into communities.”

“This effort requires a significant amount of additional time and resources,” Albence said. “When sanctuary cities release these criminals back to the street, it increases the occurrence of preventable crimes, and more importantly, preventable victims.”

The number of non-detained cases increased from 2.6 million in fiscal year 2018 to over 3.2 million in the following fiscal year, according to DHS.

“With 5,300 ERO (Enforcement and Removal Operations) law enforcement officers — some of whom were detailed to the border — ICE does not have sufficient resources to effectively manage the sustained increase in non-detained cases which is exacerbated by the rise of sanctuary jurisdictions,” the agency said in a statement.

Q: What about immigrant rights groups?

A: “This is transparent retaliation against local governments for refusing to do the administration’s bidding,” said Naureen Shah, senior policy and advocacy counsel on immigrants’ rights for the American Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. “It will put lives at risk by further militarizing our streets. Local governments should not face reprisals for focusing on local community needs and using taxpayer money responsibly, instead of helping to deport and detain community members.”

Advocates said that rapid response networks, which provide hotlines for immigrants facing arrest by immigration officers and dispatch trained legal observers to raids, will be on high alert over the weekend.

Hamid Yazdan Panah, advocacy director of Immigrant Defense Advocates in the Bay Area, said the operation is part of a repeated pattern by the Trump administration of using fear for political gain: “Sanctuary policies are a reflection of the shared values and the fabric of that community. This escalation isn’t going to stop that.”

———

©2020 Los Angeles Times


Saturday, February 15, 2020

Man declared incompetent in San Francisco pier killing case
President Donald Trump and others in his administration have repeatedly pointed to the case as a reason for toughening the country's immigration policies. Garcia-Zarate was living in the country illegally and had been deported five times before the shooting.

Associated Press•February 14, 2020


FILE - This undated file booking photo provided by the San Francisco Police Department shows Jose Inez Garcia-Zarate, a homeless undocumented Mexican immigrant who was acquitted of killing Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier in 2015. Garcia-Zarate was found incompetent to stand trial Friday, Feb. 20, 2020, on federal gun charges. U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria said in a court order that a psychiatric evaluator had concluded Garcia-Zarate was not competent to stand trial “because of mental illness that is not presently being treated." (San Francisco Police Department via AP, File)More


SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A Mexican man who was acquitted of killing a woman on a San Francisco pier in a case that became a national flashpoint was found incompetent to stand trial Friday on federal gun charges.

U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria said in a court order that a psychiatric evaluator had concluded Jose Inez Garcia-Zarate was not competent to stand trial “because of mental illness that is not presently being treated."
Chhabria said he would meet with lawyers from both sides next week to discuss the next steps. If either side objects to the findings, a hearing would likely be required to examine Garcia-Zarate's competency. If neither side disputes the findings, the court will discuss whether the defendant should be treated locally for mental illness or sent to a federal facility outside California.

Defense attorney Tony Serra said he would contest the finding.


“He is entitled to a hearing," Serra said. “I'm protesting that he is competent enough for this case."
Friday's decision is the latest delay to a case that touched off a national debate over immigration and sanctuary city policies.
Garcia-Zarate was due to stand trial in January for two counts of illegal gun possession. But Chhabria postponed the trial for an evaluation amid concerns about his “apparent mental illness.”
President Donald Trump and others in his administration have repeatedly pointed to the case as a reason for toughening the country's immigration policies. Garcia-Zarate was living in the country illegally and had been deported five times before the shooting.
Jurors in California court found him not guilty of killing Kate Steinle in 2015. But they convicted him of being a felon in possession of a gun, leading to a three-year jail sentence.
A state appeals court threw out the conviction last August, finding that jurors received improper instructions from the trial judge. Federal prosecutors then charged him with gun possession in 2017.
Garcia-Zarate acknowledged holding the gun that killed Steinle. But he said it fired accidentally when he found it wrapped in a T-shirt under a bench on the pier, where Steinle was walking with her father. The weapon belonged to a U.S. Bureau of Land Management ranger who reported it stolen from his parked car.
The case fueled criticism of San Francisco's sanctuary city policy, which limits local officials from cooperating with federal immigration authorities on deportations.
The San Francisco sheriff's department released Garcia-Zarate from jail several weeks before the shooting despite a federal request to detain him until immigration authorities could take him into custody.

---30---