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)
Thursday, September 15, 2022
France debates the right to die: It's not just a 'legal' issue, but also a 'philosophical' one
Baby pulled alive from under rubble of collapsed building in Jordan
By Al Mayadeen English Source: Agencies 15 Sep 23:35
A miracle in Jordan: Four-month-old baby Malak was rescued from under the rubble of a collapsed building in Amman.
Jordanian mother Israa Raed expressed indescribable joy Thursday after her four-month-old daughter Malak was rescued from under the rubble of a collapsed building in Amman.
"I knew it was her by her pink pyjamas," Israa Raed, 26, said as quoted by AFP, after waiting for more than 24 hours for any news of her only child.
"Words cannot describe how happy I am," she said. "I thank God she's safe."
Since Tuesday, hundreds of rescuers have combed the site of the four-story residential building in Jabal Al-Weibdeh, one of Amman's oldest neighborhoods.
Local authorities said at least ten people were killed, but the survival of Malak – 'Angel' in English – brought some relief to many Jordanians who watched the disaster unfold.
"The doctor said it was a miracle for my daughter to come out safely from under the ruins of a four-story building," the mother said, standing outside Luzmila Hospital, where Malak was being kept under observation.
On Wednesday, rescue workers extracted the young girl from a narrow gap in the debris, according to video footage shared by the civil defense service. She was only slightly bruised.
"I had a gut feeling that she was alive, and my husband had reassured me that she was waiting for us."
Hussam Abboud, a 50-year-old rescue worker, said that "it was a divine miracle" that Malak came out alive.
Jabal Al-Weibdeh is one of the oldest districts of Amman as it dates back to the early 20th century and is inhabited by a large number of expatriates.
https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3685&... · PDF file
The neighborhood of Jabal al-Weibdeh is one of Amman’s most historic neighborhoods, founded in the 1930s atop one of Amman
'Miracle' in Jordan as baby pulled alive from collapsed building
AFP -
Jordanian mother Israa Raed said she was indescribably happy Thursday, after emergency workers rescued her four-month-old daughter Malak from the rubble of a collapsed building in the capital Amman.
"I knew it was her by her pink pyjamas," Israa Raed, 26, told AFP, after waiting more than 24 hours for news of her only daughter.
"Words cannot describe how happy I am," she said. "I thank God she's safe."
Hundreds of rescuers have been scouring the site of the four-storey residential building in Jabal al-Weibdeh, one of Amman's oldest neighbourhoods, since it toppled over on Tuesday.
At least 10 people were killed, authorities said, but the survival of Malak -- 'Angel' in English -- heralded some relief for many Jordanians who watched the disaster unfold.
Video footage shared by the civil defence service shows rescue workers extracting the little girl on Wednesday from a narrow gap in the debris. She sustained only minor bruises.
"The doctor said it was a miracle for my daughter to come out safely from under the ruins of a four-storey building," the mother said, standing outside Luzmila Hospital, where Malak was being kept under observation.
"I had a gut feeling that she was alive, and my husband had reassured me that she was waiting for us."
Raed, who sells perfume and makeup, said she left her only daughter with a friend who lived in the basement of the building so that she could deliver an order.
"I don't live there. My friend lives there and I left my baby girl with her." - A cry from the wreckage -
"After about an hour, I got a phone call telling me that my daughter fell," she recalled. "I started running like crazy. I thought she may have fallen from her bed, but when I arrived, I saw that the whole building collapsed over my daughter."
"I started screaming, 'Where is my girl? Where is my girl?'"
Just over 24 hours later, "the rescue workers told me that they heard a little girl's cry," she said.
Hussam Abboud, a 50-year-old rescue worker, said that "it was a divine miracle" that Malak came out alive.
She wasn't seriously injured in the collapse itself, and "a small hole" in the concrete enabled her to carry on breathing, Raed said.
But she said that alongside her joy at baby Malak's survival, she felt sadness, because her friend -- and that friend's own little daughter -- did not make it out alive.
Another mother, who was out grocery shopping when the building collapsed, lost her three children, aged 17, 12 and nine.
A 45-year-old man was rescued from under the rubble on Wednesday, and defence sources initially said others may still be trapped there.
"I was hoping we would bring the rest out safely," said Wissam Ziyadin, a 42-year-old rescue worker, as the prospects of pulling more people out alive dimmed.
Jordan's public prosecutor Hassan al-Abdallat ordered the arrest of three people, state news agency Petra reported.
The trio were said to the building's manager as well as two other people involved in maintenance work that was supposed to have been carried out on the structure, Petra added.
str-kt/hj/vl/am/dwo
In states where abortion is banned, children and families already face an uphill battle Naomi Cahn, Professor of Law, University of Virginia
THE CONVERSATION Thu, September 15, 2022 Of the 10 most child-friendly states, only one has attempted to ban abortion.
U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah is one of three Republicans in the Senate who have sponsored a bill called the Family Security Act, billed as a “pro-family, pro-life and pro-marriage plan” that would provide a monthly cash benefit starting at pregnancy and continuing through the child turning 17.
But so far, these are minority voices in the anti-abortion movement.
As a law professor who studies reproductive care, policies that affect families and political partisanship, I have been following the relationship between abortion restrictions and family well-being for decades. It turns out that states taking the strictest stands against abortion tend to have among the worst statistics on child and family well-being in the nation.
Unintended pregnancy and infant mortality
Take Mississippi, the state that enacted the abortion restriction law that was at the center of the Supreme Court’s June 2022 opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which struck down federal protection for the right to get an abortion.
In 2019, Mississippi had the highest rate of unintended pregnancy, defined as the percentage of women who recently gave birth but whose pregnancies were either unwanted or happened at an unwanted time. In Mississippi, 47% of women who recently had a child did not want to become pregnant or wanted to become pregnant later in life.
In all 10 states with the lowest teen birth rates, abortion is legal and likely to be protected for the foreseeable future. A pregnant activist calls for abortion rights in Chicago on June 25, 2022.
Another federal effort to support families came in the Affordable Care Act, enacted in 2010, with sweeping changes to the nation’s health insurance marketplace. One provision allowed states to expand Medicaid eligibility to more adults, with financial support from the federal government. If Medicaid were expanded, reproductive-aged women would be among the groups to experience the largest coverage gains.
As of August 2022, 12 states had not adopted the expansion: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin and Wyoming. Eight of those states have either a full ban on abortion or a ban after six weeks – before many people realize they are pregnant.
In a June 2022 Brookings Institution study of the states that are considered most child-friendly – measured by state expenditures per child and children’s overall well-being – the authors found that among the top 10, only Wyoming was even trying to ban abortion. For the 10 states Brookings rated least child-friendly, nine either had a trigger ban or other abortion restriction.
The overall pattern is clear: A strong social safety net and other anti-poverty programs are more likely to be available in states that also support abortion access, while actual measures of child and family well-being are often worse in states that restrict abortions.
The Tennessee trigger ban on abortion makes it a crime to terminate a pregnancy for any reason. There are no exceptions to the law − not for rape, incest or even in cases where the life of the mother is in danger. Instead, the law contains only a narrow affirmative defense.
As United States District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill recently explained, “An affirmative defense is an excuse, not an exception. The difference is not academic. The affirmative defense admits that the physician committed a crime but asserts that the crime was justified and is therefore legally blameless. And it can only be raised after the physician has already faced indictment, arrest, pretrial detention, and trial for every abortion they perform.”
As it stands, physicians in Tennessee now face the possibility of prosecution every time they perform an abortion. And while the law does offer a narrow affirmative defense, this defense is available only if proven to a jury after arrest, during an expensive and burdensome trial. Contrary to a recent suggestion by Stacy Dunn, president of Tennessee Right to Life, the impact of this law has nothing to do with its actual prosecution. Instead, the impact of this law, like all laws for that matter, turns on the possibility of prosecution.
Demonstrators hold signs and chant together in support of abortion rights as they march along Gay St. in downtown Knoxville during the Bans Off Our Bodies March on Tuesday, July 5, 2022.
It is simply the possibility of being arrested and going to prison that keeps folks from committing crimes. The threat alone is enough. The law recognizes this as the principle of general deterrence, a concept built around the idea that criminal conduct can be prevented through fear of retribution, i.e., prison sentences. To the extent fear is quite a strong motivator, it tends to work.
Of course, the concern here is that the criminal conduct deterred by this law is not something like robbing a bank or driving drunk – instead, it’s a medical procedure sometimes necessary to treat complications of pregnancy and keep women alive. The result is that we now live in a state where the mere existence of this law puts doctors in fear of performing this procedure, regardless of the circumstances, because terminating a pregnancy is now a Class C felony, a crime that carries up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.
It is also worth noting that enforcing this law, while not necessary to achieve its deterrent effect, is not a choice to be made by what Dunn refers to as “rogue prosecutors.” In Tennessee, all district attorneys have a legal duty to prosecute all violations of the state criminal statutes. In fact, earlier this summer when asked about district attorneys who would not enforce the trigger law or make it a low priority, Will Brewer, legal counsel for Tennessee Right to Life, responded, “in order to effectively do their jobs they need to make sure these laws are prosecuted to the fullest extent.”
The bottom line is this: The law Dunn’s organization worked so diligently to create, a law ironically referred to as the Human Life Protection Act, criminalizes a medical procedure without exception. Sometimes this medical procedure is necessary to save a mother’s life. While the law does not need to be enforced to be feared, enforcement is not only required, but even endorsed by Dunn’s own legal counsel.
This law does not protect life. This law threatens life.
I just hope we can change it before it actually takes a life. Chloe Akers is a Knoxville-based criminal defense attorney in private practice.
THE GOP WAR ON WOMENS BODILY AUTONOMY There Are Plenty Of Reasons To Take Lindsey Graham’s Abortion Bill Seriously
Jonathan Cohn Wed, September 14, 2022
Republican leaders in the Senate really don’t want voters paying attention to the abortion bill their colleague Lindsey Graham (S.C.) introduced Tuesday. The bill would establish a nationwide ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, with a limited set of exceptions for rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother. The ban would supersede existing state laws that allow more access to abortion, but ― critically ― not those that allow less.
To put it another way: California wouldn’t get to set its own abortion policy, but Texas would. As HuffPost’s Igor Bobic has noted, this is not what Graham suggested should happen after the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
“I’ve been consistent,” Graham told CNN in August. “I think states should decide ... the issue of abortion.”
Graham presented the bill as a blueprint that Republicans could use for legislation if they get control of Congress in the midterms. And perhaps he thought he’d get his colleagues to rally behind it, given that his last attempt at abortion legislation, a 20-week ban he proposed in early 2021, had support from nearly the entire caucus. But Graham got a very different response this time.
“Most of the members in my conference prefer this be dealt with at the state level,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) said at his weekly press conference.
“That wasn’t a conference decision,” Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), a former Senate GOP whip, told Politico. “It was an individual senator’s decision.”
Republican leaders in the Senate haven’t seemed this eager to distance themselves from a colleague since the spring, when Sen. Rick Scott (Fla.) unveiled a governing agenda that included cuts to Medicare and Social Security. The logic now is almost certainly the same as it was then: GOP leaders think Graham’s bill is a distraction at best, political poison at worst.
And they are probably right. The signs of a major Dobbs backlash are everywhere, from fundraising numbers to polls to the results of special elections. Republicans would much rather be talking about the economy ― especially this week, when a new monthly report on prices documented persistent inflation.
But there are plenty of reasons to take Graham’s bill seriously, as an indicator of what Republicans would like to do ― and a sign of what they might do if they get enough political power.
Here are a few of those reasons:
1. Graham’s bill would introduce a new, scientifically arbitrary timeline for abortion restrictions.
Graham describes his bill as a ban on “late-term” abortion. That term doesn’t come from science. It comes from abortion’s political opponents, who have typically used it to describe abortions at or (usually) beyond 20 weeks, as HuffPost’s Lydia O’Connor noted Wednesday.
Fifteen weeks of pregnancy, on the other hand, is just a few weeks into the second trimester ― well before tests can pick up many of the most serious fetal anomalies. And at 15 weeks, some women don’t even realize they’re pregnant, especially if they’re young or have poor access to medical care. 2. The limits in Graham’s bill are more extreme than his descriptions suggest.
Graham claims the bill would simply put American abortion laws on par with the laws in European countries, many of which have their own prohibitions. But this argument, a favorite of conservatives, is deeply misleading, for reasons that Adam Serwer laid out plainly in The Atlantic earlier this year.
The laws vary considerably from country to country. To the extent that restrictions exist, they typically have loosely written exceptions, including for the mental health of the mother, that make it possible to get abortions later in a pregnancy.
The exceptions in Graham’s bill, by contrast, include only rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother, and even those come with what looks like a big asterisk. Abortion rights advocates say the exceptions would be challenging to invoke because they come with strict deadlines and documentation requirements.
“When it comes to rape and incest exceptions, the substantial red tape that comes with reporting and proving an assault, along with the trauma and stigma associated with sexual violence, makes the exceptions largely unusable,” Elizabeth Nash, the principal policy associate for state issues at the Guttmacher Institute, told HuffPost.
3. Prohibiting abortion at all stages has long been a GOP goal ― and it still is.
McConnell and Cornyn had a lot to say about whether Graham’s bill is the caucus position and whether, ultimately, abortion rights should be an issue for the federal government or individual states. But neither disavowed Graham’s substantive position about when abortion should be legal.
And why would they? The party’s official position is that life begins at conception, that abortion is murder and that the law should treat it as such. It’s been that way for nearly 50 years and it was that way in 2016, which is the last time the GOP had an official platform. (Republicans didn’t formally approve a platform in 2020.)
Here’s what that 2016 platform said, just as a reminder: “We assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to children before birth.”
4. Abortion matters to a base that leaders can’t simply ignore.
Evangelicals are arguably the single most important voting bloc inside the Republican Party. They also exert outside influence because they vote in high numbers, with extra influence in Iowa and South Carolina ― two states that play early, critical roles in determining the GOP presidential nominee. And if the polling is correct, evangelicals overwhelmingly support near-total or total bans on abortion.
In theory, leaders like McConnell have the power to set the party’s legislative priorities ― and, in so doing, to keep a bill like Graham’s from getting a vote should the GOP get control of Congress. But if those leaders had (or were willing to use) that kind of power in order to keep abortion rights off the agenda, Graham would never have made his announcement in the first place.
And remember: It’s not as if a 15-week ban is the endgame for Republicans and conservatives who focus on abortion. They see it as a compromise on their eventual goal of prohibiting the procedure at all stages of pregnancy. They’ve spent decades fighting for the chance to get these laws on the books, and thanks to the Supreme Court, they finally can. It’s hard to imagine they’re going to back off now.
This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.
Hungarian doctors, opposition protest 'cruel' change in abortion rules
Hungarian PM Orban takes the oath of office in the Parliament in Budapest
Wed, September 14, 2022
BUDAPEST (Reuters) - Hungarian doctors and some opposition parties protested on Wednesday against a pending change in abortion rules that will require pregnant women to prove they had seen a definitive sign of life from the foetus before requesting the procedure.
Re-elected in April, nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban faces his toughest term in power since a 2010 landslide with the forint skirting all-time lows, energy costs surging and European Union funds in limbo amid a row over democratic standards.
Orban, whose Fidesz party has amended the definition of family in the constitution to allow an effective ban on adoption by same-sex couples, is also locked in a legal battle with the EU executive over a law curtailing LGBTQ+ rights.
Interior Minister Sandor Pinter submitted an amendment to abortion rules this week requiring pregnant women to submit evidence from their healthcare provider of a definitive sign of life, widely interpreted as hearing the heartbeat of the foetus.
The changes were brought about by government decree and are set to take effect on Thursday.
The Hungarian Medical Chamber said the largely procedural changes did not go against its ethical code founded on the protection of life.
However, it said Orban's government should have launched a social dialogue before implementing them, a practice often criticised by various parts of society and business groups facing similar abrupt changes in key legislation.
The opposition Jobbik party welcomed what it called a pro-life slant of the changes, but also criticised the lack of consultation before the proposal was pushed ahead.
The liberal opposition Parbeszed party said the changes were unacceptable and urged the interior minister to withdraw the decree.
"This amendment not only restricts the right of pregnant women to terminate their pregnancies, but it creates an extremely onerous and unnecessarily cruel situation for all involved as well as doctors," it said in a statement.
Some political analysts said the move could be aimed at clipping the wings of the far-right Our Homeland party, which was elected into parliament in April and originally campaigned for the changes.
"This could be a good tool to mobilise more conservative voters or to prevent excessive gains for Our Homeland to the detriment of Fidesz," said political analyst Attila Tibor Nagy.
Women's rights group Patent has called a rally against the changes for late September.
(Reporting by Anita Komuves and Gergely Szakacs; Editing by Bernadette Baum)
IT'S A FASCIST REGIME European Parliament says Hungary is no longer a 'full democracy'
Issued on: 15/09/2022 -
Hungary is no longer a "full democracy" and the EU needs to do everything to bring it back into line with European values, the European Parliament said Thursday.
MEPs voted 433 in favour, 123 against, to now describe Hungary -- ruled by populist Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who maintains close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin -- "a hybrid regime of electoral autocracy" in "serious breach" of EU democratic norms.
The vote was largely symbolic and does not change the course of EU decision making, which requires unanimity of all 27 member states -- including Hungary -- to adopt major issues, such as sanctions on Russia.
With their vote, the EU lawmakers roundly adopted a parliamentary report that said Hungary has been backsliding on democratic and fundamental rights since 2018 through the "deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian government".
The report said lack of action by EU institutions, including the commission which is tasked as "guardian" of the EU treaties enshrining democratic standards, had exacerbated the degradation.
While EU countries are treading a careful line around Hungary because of the need to win its assent on major decisions, diplomats privately are frustrated with Orban's cosy relationship with the Kremlin and his blocking of further sanctions on Moscow.
The commission has likewise been careful to avoid overt criticism, but unease over Hungary's swerve away from rule of law, particularly in failing to curb corruption, is becoming more evident.
Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said Wednesday, in her State of the European Union address to the European Parliament, that the EU "must fight for our democracies".
She said her EU executive would work to protect the member states "from the external threats they face, and from the vices that corrode them from within," notably calling out corruption although not naming Hungary directly.
She pledged legislative action to step up the fight against corruption, including against "illicit enrichment, trafficking in influence and abuse of power".
Her EU justice commissioner, Didier Reynders, told MEPs in a debate on rule of law breaches in Hungary that the commission "shares a large number of concerns expressed by the European Parliament" regarding Budapest.
The European Parliament in 2018 launched a procedure against the risk Hungary posed to European democratic values.
In theory, the mechanism can lead to Hungary losing its right to vote in the Council of the EU, where member states adopt decisions affecting the bloc.
(AFP)
European Parliament says Hungary no longer a democracy, but ‘electoral autocracy’
Parliament condemned "the deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian government to undermine European values". Members of the European Parliament voted for a document that recognizes that Hungary can no longer be considered a democracy. This decision was supported by 433 votes. Another 123 MEPs voted against the declaration, and 28 abstained.
The statement said that the lack of decisive action by the EU contributed to the emergence of a "hybrid regime of electoral autocracy" in Hungary. MEPs specify that elections are taking place in this country, but there is no respect for democratic norms and standards.
“The conclusions of this report are clear and irrevocable: Hungary is not a democracy. It was more important than ever for Parliament to take this position, given the alarming pace of backsliding on the rule of law in Hungary,” said Parliamentary Rapporteur on the situation in Hungary, Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield.
MEPs call on the European Commission to make full use of all the tools at its disposal and, in particular, the regulation of funding for Hungary.
Earlier media reported that the European Commission intends to recommend cutting the funding to the Hungarian government amid fears of large-scale corruption in the country.
EU lawmakers raise pressure to cut funds for Hungary over graft woes
The European Parliament in session, in Strasbourg, France
Thu, September 15, 2022 By Gabriela Baczynska
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - A large majority of European Union lawmakers voted on Thursday to condemn damage to democracy in Hungary under veteran Prime Minister Viktor Orban, stepping up pressure on the bloc to cut funding for the ex-communist country.
Citing corruption risks, the European Commission is expected to recommend later this week suspending billions earmarked for Budapest from the bloc's 1.1 trillion euro ($1.1 trillion) shared budget for 2021-27.
That would be the first such EU move under its new financial sanction dubbed "cash for democracy" and agreed two years ago precisely in response to Orban, as well as his allies in Poland, rowing back on liberal democratic tenets inside the bloc.
On Thursday, the European Parliament voted 433 in favour and 123 against to adopt a report declaring the "existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the (European) Union is founded".
"The situation has deteriorated such that Hungary has become an 'electoral autocracy'" rather than a democracy, the chamber said in a statement.
In response, Orban's ruling Fidesz party said the EU parliament was more interested in bashing Hungary than tackling an economic crisis caused by surging energy costs aggravated by by Russia's war in Ukraine and Western sanctions against Moscow.
"It is astounding that even in the current crisis the leftist majority of the European Parliament keeps busy only with attacking Hungary," Fidesz said in a statement.
"The left in Brussels wants to punish Hungary over and over again and withhold the funds due for our country."
Orban has been locked for years in acrimonious feuds with the EU, which Hungary joined in 2004, over the rights of migrants, gays and women, as well as the independence of the judiciary, media and academia.
The self-styled illiberal crusader denies, however, that Hungary is any more corrupt than other nations in the 27-nation bloc.
The European Commission has already blocked some 6 billion euros due for Budapest from the bloc's separate COVID economic stimulus package, citing insufficient anti-graft safeguards in Hungary's public procurement.
Funds worth as much as a tenth of Hungary's GDP could be at stake should other EU members approve the expected recommendation by the Commission, a prospect that has weighed on the Hungarian forint, central Europe's worst-performing currency.
Budapest has come under pressure in recent weeks to strike a deal with Brussels and unlock funding for Hungary's ailing economy, and Orban's government has promised to create a new anti-graft agency.
Member countries have three months to decide on the Commission's recommendation and they could limit the punishment if they found Budapest's actions in the meantime convincing.
($1 = 1.0021 euros)
(Reporting by Gabriela Baczynska; Additional reporting by Gergely Szakacs; Editing by Mark Heinricb and Tomasz Janowski)
HOMOPHOBIC KULTURKAMPF
Montana defies order on transgender birth certificates
Montana District Judge Michael Moses gestures during a court hearing over a state health department rule that prevents transgender people from changing their birth certificates, Thursday, Sept. 15, 2022, in Billings, Mont. Moses struck down the rule at the conclusion of the hearing. (AP Photos/Matthew Brown)
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Just hours after a Montana judge blocked health officials from enforcing a state rule that would prevent transgender people from changing the gender on their birth certificate, the state on Thursday said it would defy the order.
District Court Judge Michael Moses chided attorneys for the state during a hearing in Billings for circumventing his April order that temporarily blocked a 2021 Montana law that made it harder to change birth certificates.
Moses said there was no question that state officials violated his earlier order by creating the new rule. Moses said his order reinstates a 2017 Department of Public Health and Human Services rule that allowed people to update the gender on their birth certificate by filing an affidavit with the department.
However, the state said it would disregard the ruling.
“The Department thoroughly evaluated the judge’s vague April 2022 decision and crafted our final rule to be consistent with the decision. It’s unfortunate that the judge’s ruling today does not square with his vague April decision. The 2022 final rule that the Department issued on September 9 remains in effect, and we are carefully considering next steps,” said Charlie Brereton, director of the Department of Public Health and Human Services.
ACLU attorney Malita Picasso expressed dismay with the agency’s stance and said officials should immediately start processing requests for birth certificate changes.
“It’s shocking that after this morning’s hearing the department would allege there was any lack of clarity in the court’s ruling from the bench,” Picasso said. “It was very clear that Judge Moses expressly required a reversion to the 2017 policy, and anything short of that is a continued flagrant violation of the court’s order.”
Such open defiance of judge’s order is very unusual from a government agency, said Carl Tobias, a former University of Montana Law School professor now at the University of Richmond. When officials disagree with a ruling, the typical response is to appeal to a higher court, he said.
“Appeal is what you contemplate — not that you can nullify a judge’s orders. Otherwise, people just wouldn’t obey the law,” Tobias said. “The system can’t work that way.”′
The move could leave state officials open to contempt of court charges, which in some cases can lead to jail time for offenders, Tobias said. He added that the attorneys representing the state were likely aware of the potential consequences but were “caught in the middle” between a recalcitrant agency and the judge.
The legal dispute comes as conservative lawmakers in numerous states have sought to restrict transgender rights, including with bans on transgender girls competing in girls school sports.
The Montana law said people had to have a “surgical procedure” before they could change the sex listed on their birth certificate, something Moses found to be unconstitutional because it did not specify what type of procedure was required.
Gov. Greg Gianforte’s administration then created a new rule that blocked changes to birth certificates entirely, unless there was a clerical error.
“We knew from the beginning the Gianforte administration was going against the will of Montanans and the court’s orders,” said Shawn Reagor, director of equality and economic justice with the Montana Human Rights Network and a member of the transgender community.
After learning the state planned to defy the court order, Reagor said the Montana Human Rights Network “will not stand by while the Gianforte administration blatantly disregards rulings from the courts to continue a vindictive attack on the trans community.”
Moses said during Thursday morning’s hearing that his April ruling had been “clear as a bell” and compared the state’s subsequent actions to a person twice convicted of assault who tries to change their name following a third accusation to avoid a harsher punishment.
“Isn’t that exactly what happened here?” Moses asked. “I’m a bit offended the department thinks they can do anything they want.”
Only Tennessee, Oklahoma and West Virginia have sweeping prohibitions against birth certificate changes similar to what Montana has pursued, advocates for transgender rights say. Bans in Idaho and Ohio were struck down in 2020.
A Republican lawmaker who voted in favor of the 2021 law suggested Moses was biased in favor of the plaintiffs in the case. Moses was appointed to the court by former Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat.
“Like clockwork, Judge Moses issued yet another predetermined order in favor of liberal plaintiffs without thoroughly engaging with the legal issues at hand,” Sen. Greg Hertz of Polson said in a statement.
The ACLU of Montana had asked Moses to clarify his order after the state health department enacted its new temporary rule effectively banning birth certificate changes a month after Moses handed down his temporary injunction in the case. That rule was made permanent last week.
The state argued the injunction did not prevent the health department from making rules, but Moses said under case law the injunction reinstated the 2017 rules and any other changes are on hold while the case is decided.
State officials denied that the new rule preventing birth certificate changes was adopted in bad faith. Montana Assistant Solicitor Kathleen Smithgall said the state came up with the new rule to fill a gap in regulations after the 2021 law was blocked.
“Judge Moses mischaracterized the words of his own order, the parties’ motives, and the state of the law,” said Kyler Nerison, a spokesperson for Attorney General Austin Knudsen.
Lebanese cheer as their dancers win America’s Got Talent
This image released by NBC shows host Terry Crews, left in suit, with members of the female Lebanese dance troupe Mayyas after winning "America's Got Talent," Wednesday, Sept. 14, 2022. (Trae Patton/NBC via AP)
BEIRUT (AP) — The news of a Lebanese dance group winning the TV competition show America’s Got Talent brought a rare moment of joy on Thursday to many in this crisis-hit Mideast country.
Mayyas, an all-female dance troupe, dazzled the show’s judges and audience on the competition’s 17th season before winning $1 million and a headlining show at the Luxor Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas. The group paid tribute to their native country during their performances and on social media in the buildup to the finale.
The victory is a major boost for any aspiring artist. But inside Lebanon, where the political leadership is scrambling to overcome years of economic and political turmoil, there was a high-profile rush to congratulate the dance troupe.
Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati and a handful of lawmakers congratulated Mayyas on social media, while President Michel Aoun’s office in a statement said the Lebanese head of state will award the dancers Order of Merit medallions upon their return home.
In their hypnotic winning performance in the finale, Mayyas dressed in gold-colored outfits, as they fluttered in sync on stage in a performance that brought together traditional belly-dancing and inspirations from India, the United States and the United Kingdom, where their choreographer attended years of dance workshops.
Holding white feathers, they formed a flowing snow-covered cedar tree, Lebanon’s national symbol, before they swayed together holding glowing balls like a moving constellation of stars.
Lebanese, who have been in the grip of the ongoing crises for years, found a rare moment of pride and joy in their country.
“I am among Lebanese citizens who over the past three years went through severe financial, psychological, and social crises,” Marie Ziyade, a fan of Mayyas, told The Associated Press. “I have always had hope in the people of my country, but Mayyas brought me joy.”
Lebanon’s crippling economic crisis has pushed three-quarters of its population into poverty, and resulted in a massive brain drain of young professionals leaving the country for better job opportunities abroad.
Nour Massalkhi is among a surging number of the country’s youth who left Lebanon for better jobs and lives. Since leaving in 2019 when the economy crumbled, she says she’s felt a sense of “anger and despair” watching her native country’s rapid decline from her new home in the United Arab Emirates.
But she says Mayyas’ journey to the top on America’s Got Talent is a “small glimmer of hope” that Lebanon needs.
“Their win was only one example of the hundred other artists, innovators, and entrepreneurs that continue to persevere abroad,” Massalkhi told the AP. “Everything from the music to the choreography and down to their outfits are curated with extreme precision and honors our Lebanese roots.”
The dance group’s victory was never going to stop Lebanon’s economy from spiraling or help break months of political deadlock and tensions that have followed decades of rampant corruption, nefarious financial mismanagement and sect-based power-sharing. But it may have brought a brief moment of hope for the troubled country.
“Mayyas is a group based on merit, that brings together women who have a passion for dance and are talented at it, and coordinate together to put out creative and stunning work,” Ziyade said. “I wish our government would appoint ministers and officials the same way … we could have fixed our devastated country.”
