Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Reason for Concern

“We’re not the best situated to address issues like that. … Doesn’t that make a stronger case for us to leave those determinations to the legislative bodies rather than try to determine them for ourselves?” — Chief Justice John Roberts on Tennessee’s transgender care ban, Dec. 4, 2024

So just how worried should a reasonable person be about Donald Trump’s return to power? We’ve entered that awkward stage in post-election reporting where the op-ed journalists who watched the Donald abuse power the last time he held office are writing sensible columns about why everybody should probably calm down since, even with seriously eroded guardrails, nobody could possibly do all the terrible things he says he wants to do, and certainly not as fast as he says he wants to do them. 

Christian leaders agreed to support him in exchange for his promise to appoint an unprecedented number of conservative, pro-life judges: “God’s wrecking ball.”

If you’ve ever wondered how Trump can receive so much earnest support from conservative Christians while appointing a cabinet full of sex pests and incompetents, it’s because they don’t expect him to build God’s kingdom on Earth, they expect him to smash norms and destroy liberal institutions.

Trump had been out of office for almost two years when the Supreme Court did the unthinkable and overturned Roe v. Wade, gutting half-a-century’s worth of settled abortion law. For all the anxiety the decision may have created for swing district Republicans campaigning in the 2022 midterms, this moment still has to be seen as a major victory for the once and future president whose first election turned on a promise to enable such a decision through judicial appointments: promise fulfilled. 

And since modern Christian politics are rooted in the twofold mission of stopping abortion and curtailing LGBTQ rights, it looks like the SCOTUS that Trump made is about to give Evangelicals another reason to celebrate. 

As of this writing, the Supreme Court seems poised to let Tennessee’s bad-faith ban on gender-affirming care for transgender youth stand. U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts feigned helplessness while Brett Kavanaugh wondered if personal choices regarding medical services, important to less than 1.6 percent of all Americans, should be determined by the murderous impulses of the mob … er, majority. 

If oral arguments are any indication of what’s to come, Wednesday, December 4th, was a worrisome day for the trans community, women, and just anybody else who might be counting on the Roberts court to defend settled law. It’s an appropriately chilling prelude to Donald Trump’s return to power since his RNC was chock-full of anti-trans rhetoric, and he spent the closing weeks of his campaign blanketing swing states with ads designed to make undecided voters feel anxious about trans people. 

So, questioning whether or not Trump can fulfill the worst of his threats by fiat is probably beside the point. The mood is tense, and the stage is set for chaos. Even if you aren’t worried about what comes next, it’s probably a good idea to be prepared. 

Chris Davis is a freelance writer and journalist living in Memphis.

Categories
News News Blog News Feature

Legal Professionals Urge SCOTUS to Stop Tennessee’s Gender-Affirming Care Ban

Legal experts have filed a brief on behalf of transgender youth in the state in hopes of stopping a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors from taking effect.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee (ACLU-TN) said they are urging the Supreme Court of the United States to stop the state from banning hormone therapy for trans adolescents.

Last week ACLU-TN joined the American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP in filing a brief on behalf of Samantha and Brian Williams of Nashville and their 16-year-old transgender daughter, Dr. Susan Lacy of Memphis, and two families who filed anonymously.

This brief is in response to a June 2024 decision to hear a challenge to Tennessee’s ban. Advocates claim the law is a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause.

Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, staff attorney at the ACLU of Tennessee, said that Tennessee and other Southern states have “become a testing ground for targeted assault on the constitutional rights of trans Tennesseans.”

In September of 2023 the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed for the law restricting transgender youth from accessing gender-affirming medical care to remain in effect. The ruling came months after the court initially blocked the law from taking effect in July of the same year.

Governor Bill Lee signed the legislation into law March of 2023, and it prohibits healthcare professionals from administering gender-affirming care to minors. This legislation makes gender-affirming hormone therapy and puberty blockers inaccessible, and trans people in Tennessee will not have access to this care until they reach the age of 18. Similar restrictions have been made in states like Arkansas and Alabama.

“Every day this law remains in place, it inflicts further pain, injustice, and discrimination on trans youth and their families,” Cameron-Vaughn said in a statement. “Make no mistake — if the Supreme Court fails to protect trans Tennesseans’ access to the medical care they need to survive and thrive, local politicians will go even further. They will continue to rewrite the history that our schools teach, discriminate based on what we look like, where we’re from, and who we love, and control if, when, and how Tennesseans choose to start their families.”

Parents of the 16-year-old plaintiff said it has been “painful” to see their child not be able to access “life-saving healthcare,” and they’ve had to travel outside of the state for care.

“We have a confident, happy daughter now, who is free to be herself and she is thriving,” Samantha Williams, mother of 16-year-old L.W., said. “Tennessee’s ban has forced us at great expense to seek routine healthcare visits out of state and may at some point force us to leave Tennessee — the only home our children have ever known. No family should have to make this kind of choice.”

Officials said oral arguments are expected to be heard this term.

Categories
At Large Opinion

The Pander Posse

Right-wing radio host, election denier, and rabid Trumper Charlie Kirk said last week that MSNBC host Joy Reid, Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, and former First Lady Michelle Obama “used affirmative action” because they “do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously, so they had to steal a white person’s slot.”

This racist and misogynistic statement was part of Kirk’s response to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that Harvard University and the University of North Carolina could no longer use affirmative action or any other race-based criteria in their admissions policies.

Did SCOTUS rule thusly because racism doesn’t exist any longer? (Maybe they don’t listen to Charlie Kirk.) Or because people of color are no longer discriminated against in the United States? Or because economic and educational opportunities are no longer intrinsically more difficult for minorities to attain? Or because white supremacist media stars with millions of listeners and viewers have ceased to exist?

Or did the Supreme Court rule against affirmative action because it has become a bought-and-sold verdict factory for the Republican Party’s troglodyte wing? I’m going with the latter, but that’s just me.

Not missing an opportunity to get some media attention, Tennessee’s noisy GOP attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, immediately jumped on the “reverse racism” bandwagon, along with GOP attorneys general from Kansas, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Montana, Kentucky, and West Virginia. This pander posse proudly announced that they’d sent a letter to each of the country’s Fortune 100 CEOs warning them not to try any of that nefarious DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) stuff in their states, by God.

Here’s the money shot from the letter: “The Supreme Court’s recent decision should place every employer and contractor on notice of the illegality of racial quotas and race-based preferences in employment and contracting practices. As Attorneys General, it is incumbent upon us to remind all entities operating within our respective jurisdictions of the binding nature of American anti-discrimination laws. If your company previously resorted to racial preferences or naked quotas to offset its bigotry, that discriminatory path is now definitively closed.”

In other words, “You bigoted companies better not try any of that ‘woke’ stuff in our state or we’ll see you in court!” Ron DeSantis would be proud. These 13 gas-bags are pursuing the same economically suicidal policies that caused Florida’s largest employer (The Walt Disney Company) to drop plans for a nearly $1 billion corporate campus in Orlando that would have brought 2,000 high-paying jobs to the state. DeSantis’ anti-woke crusade has also resulted in the cancellation of several major conventions and conferences, a “brain drain” of the state’s scientists and teachers, and a drop in tourism. ‘Woke’ isn’t going to die in DeSantis’ Florida,” wrote the editorial board of the Miami Herald. “It’s just taking its dollars elsewhere.”

Tennessee, it should be noted, is headquarters to two Fortune 100 companies: FedEx and HCA Healthcare. Both corporations have active DEI programs. Google “DEI FedEx,” if you doubt it. I guess this means General “Stonewall” Skrmetti is about to absolutely, positively come down on them hard, right?

Tennessee is also home to facilities for several other companies on the Fortune 100 list, including Nike, Sysco, State Farm, Lowe’s, The Home Depot, and, not least, Ford, which is in the process of constructing a $5.6 billion plant in Western Tennessee to build EV pickup trucks.

Just for fun, here’s Ford’s DEI statement from its corporate website: “For more than a century, Ford has been a pioneer in providing opportunity to people regardless of race, gender, ability, sexual orientation and background. We view this less with pride than the sober realization that we must go further to create a company where our differences are truly valued and every team member can bring their whole selves to work. Creating a culture of belonging isn’t just the right thing to do, it’s also the smart thing. Diversity breeds innovation and the companies that attract the most talented and diverse workforce will succeed in our rapidly changing world. We are family. We celebrate our differences. We all belong.”

What kind of snowflakey bilge is that? Built Ford Tough? Really? It’s clear these woke assholes need to straighten up or get the heck out of Tennessee. Your move, General.

Categories
At Large Opinion

6/08/23

Boy, last Thursday was quite the news day!

We woke up to the startling revelation that New York City was basically paralyzed, hazed over by dense smoke from forest fires in Canada, our supposed “ally.” Eh?

Then it was announced that the Jack Daniel’s Tennessee Whiskey company had won its case over a dog-toy manufacturer that had created “poop-themed” chewies with a “Jack Spaniel’s” label. Justice was fetched. Woof!

Next we learned about the earthly departure of “Christian” broadcaster Pat Robertson, who made a career of claiming that LGBTQ folks caused hurricanes, earthquakes, and even the 9/11 attacks. Sadly, ol’ Pat missed out on a chance to blame extra-polite, denim-clad Canadian homosexuals for the smoke invasion, but he did have the good taste to leave us during Pride Month. Enjoy the eternal smoke, Pat.

Oh, and I almost forgot one other tiny bit of news from last Thursday: Former President Donald Trump announced that he was going to be indicted by the U.S. Department of Justice for mishandling classified documents after leaving office.

Trump, no doubt intentionally, preempted the DOJ’s official announcement of the indictment with his own, and quickly began grifting funds for his defense. It was all so unfair! Send money!

The messaging from the usual GOP piss-pots and pundits was remarkably consistent. They bemoaned the country’s “two-tiered justice system” and “selective prosecution.” They raged about “Joe Biden’s Justice Department,” and alleged that the coming Trump indictments were just a distraction from the ever-imminent prosecution of Hunter Biden for giving his father a $5 million bribe, or something, which the GOP could prove if only they didn’t keep misplacing “FBI whistleblowers.”

In fact, the Trump World response was so uniform that one could almost imagine it had been coordinated. Either that, or grievance and what-about-ism was the only ammo they had left. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s reaction was typical. He said “the indictment of Donald Trump was a dark day for the United States,” and that he “stood with” the former president, adding that “House Republicans will hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable.”

It’s worth noting that more than 30 elected Republican officials — including several congressmen and senators — are reputed to have exchanged texts and voice messages with former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows on January 6, 2021. Indictments for the January 6th insurrection case are presumably forthcoming, so there may be some understandable anxiety among those on Meadows’ speed-dial list.

Unsurprisingly, those defending Trump have it precisely backwards. President Biden didn’t indict Trump; the Department of Justice did, and only after months of investigation by a special counsel and his team. (Fun fact: When the feds prosecute somebody, their win rate is 99 percent.) The first-ever indictment of a former president is a huge deal, and the DOJ is not about to file a frivolous case. As the Friday release of the indictments made clear, Trump mishandled and resisted returning hundreds of government documents, even after being subpoenaed for them. There is no parallel with President Biden’s — or Mike Pence’s — handling of the same situation; both cooperated with investigators.

A true dark day for this country would be if the DOJ did not investigate a former president for criminal behavior. It would put presidents above the rule of law, giving them a privilege granted to no other American, creating a true two-tiered justice system.

There was one other piece of news from last Thursday that was overshadowed by Trump’s indictment revelation — but it was potentially as important. The Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling that Alabama’s Congressional Districts had been gerrymandered to minimize that state’s African-American vote. Only one of the state’s seven districts had a Black majority in a state with a 27 percent Black population.

In what most legal analysts considered a surprising ruling, the Court preserved at least a vestige of the 1982 Voting Rights Act by ruling that Alabama must redraw its district maps. It’s a decision with potential ramifications for similar cases in Louisiana, Georgia, and Texas. When future historians look back at June 8, 2023, they may see this SCOTUS decision — a blow to the plague of gerrymandering — as more consequential for the country than Trump’s whiny announcement. The years have a way of clearing the smoke.

Categories
Letter From The Editor Opinion

The Horror of Our Time

I’ve been something of a monster movie maniac ever since my dad took me, at age 5, to see King Kong (1933) as part of The Orpheum’s summer movie series. As I sat in the gorgeous old theater watching silver-hued stop-motion dinosaurs decimate the landing party, watching Kong, the king of Skull Island, take Fay Wray to his mountain keep, my velcro-clad feet barely sticking past the edge of the seat, something was awakened inside me. From that moment on, I was absolutely mad for monster movies.

I’ve written about it before, I know, though I don’t know if I’ve gone into the inception of my mania. I wrote about the anniversary of the publication of Dracula not long ago. (How did Flyer senior editor Bruce VanWyngarden do this for 20 years and keep his subjects straight? I’ve got respect.) It may be that I’ve mentioned monsters a few too many times in what should be a column for general audiences. But, as Flyer film editor Chris McCoy points out in this week’s film feature, mass media is experiencing a horror renaissance, and one that shows no signs of stopping. It’s touching nearly every element of popular culture — streaming services, movies, novels. Horror is hot right now. Even subgenres are tinged with it. My sister texted me this morning to say her favorite part of the not-exactly-new (but still in theaters) Doctor Strange movie was the “horror overtone.” Stephen Graham Jones’ postmodern Scream-like novel My Heart Is a Chainsaw won a truckload of awards. Oh, and Scream got another sequel last year. Stranger Things is the subscription driver at Netflix. The trend is evident in the artsier world as well, with one of America’s most impressive auteurs, Jordan Peele, apparently committed to the genre. His newest offering, Nope, due later this year, is on all the “most anticipated movie” lists.

I could go on, but why beat a horse with a dead stick? Horror is hot.

Why, though? And why does the trend show no signs of fizzling? Largely, I would argue, because at its heart, horror is about things feeling out of control. Whether it’s the arthouse horror film about processing trauma, the low-budget weekend slasher flick, or Stephen King’s newest bestseller (and they’re always bestsellers), at the bloody heart of the horrific piece of art, there’s something bigger and more powerful than the (usually teenage) protagonists.

And these days, who doesn’t feel at the mercy of something bigger, older, and more powerful than themselves?

The recent decisions from the Supreme Court of the United States are, to put it mildly, cause for alarm. Overturning Roe v. Wade, ruling that states may not pass certain (apparently restrictive?) handgun carry laws, that states may funnel tax dollars to private and religious schools, and, most recently, that school coach Joe Kennedy’s 50-yard-line prayer counts as private and protected speech — all of these are wildly unpopular and out of sync with the majority of public opinion. It almost seems as if SCOTUS is some grim eldritch horror. They’re protected by barricades, deep within some impregnable keep, ruling for life and able to wield powers no common citizen can imagine. Frankly, I think I’d rather be a middle school Dungeons & Dragons nerd facing some betentacled monster. It seems like the conflict with the better odds. Because, though the recent SCOTUS rulings have come with the speed and frenzy of a series of werewolf bites, they’re not exactly out of step with the court’s history. Their ruling that settled the 2000 recount dispute between Bush and Gore was a political act as well.

And that’s just politics. Many pundits far smarter and more politically plugged in than I worry about the future of federal environmental regulations given these recent rulings. From there, it’s not much of a mental leap to conjure the specter of climate change, a seemingly unstoppable spirit that’s haunted public discourse for my entire life.

So, yes, given the larger-than-life threats we must contend with each day, it does seem all too natural for the general populace to have an insatiable hunger for horror. Fiction, after all, is a way of confronting our fears in a safe space, working out what frightens us and why. It’s also a source of strength, at least for some people. If high school-aged babysitter Laurie Strode didn’t quit when faced with the seemingly unstoppable Michael Myers, then neither will we when we’re forced to confront our own boogeyman.

How do we fight these out-of-control monsters plaguing society? For that, I suggest looking for the people — the organizers, the volunteers, the visionaries — who have been doing this work for a long time. They know what they’re doing, and they know how best we can help. Don’t be a hero, be a helping hand. There’s no room for ego, and there are people far better suited than I to be our guides, our Dr. Loomis or Professor Van Helsing.

Maybe, in confronting this monster, we can shift the cultural needle. If it means securing hard-won rights, I won’t mind if the next decade is characterized by a craze for rom-coms or sports biopics. Heck, I’ll learn to love ’em.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

A New Third Rail

Since the bombshell announcement last Friday of the Supreme Court decision invalidating the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling on abortion, numerous political figures — governors, senators, an abundance of political candidates, and smaller fry galore — have gotten themselves on the record either for or against the court’s dramatic reversal.

Few and far between are those politicians who have spoken in more qualified, measured terms, but among the most cautious have been the two candidates for Shelby County District Attorney — incumbent Republican DA Amy Weirich and her Democratic challenger Steve Mulroy.

Both had addressed the pending decision weeks ago, after a draft of the ruling-to-be, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, had been leaked to the media.

Weirich’s first utterance on the subject came early in June on the occasion of a ceremony in which she received the endorsements of the Memphis Police Association and the Shelby County Deputy Sheriff’s Association.

The full SCOTUS decision had not yet been formally announced, a fact which underscored Weirich’s reluctance when she was asked point-blank what would be her attitude toward enforcing Tennessee’s new anti-abortion act, a “trigger” law that would come into effect once Roe was dissolved.

“To answer that question, we have to assume a lot of hypotheticals,” Weirich said. “And I think any conversation about a law that hasn’t gone into place about a Supreme Court decision that may or may not be overturned … is hypothetical and, quite frankly, political grandstanding. To even discuss what our office would do, you would first have to assume that doctors in this community would break the law. And then you would have to assume that that criminal conduct was reported to law enforcement. There’s a lot of criminal conduct that doesn’t get reported about.

“And then you have to assume that an investigation is conducted and that there is enough information to make a charge against someone. Too many hypotheticals, too many hoops to jump through. And that’s not, that’s not the universe I live in. I don’t make conjecture statements about what I will remand or could or should do. We deal in facts, we deal in truth, and we deal in the evidence that’s before us.”

On Friday, Weirich updated those sentiments: “It is a dangerous path for a DA to make broad and hypothetical statements without an actual charge or case before them. To do so violates Tennessee Code Annotated 8-7-106, which requires a DA to consider the unique facts and circumstances of a particular case.”

The law referred to by Weirich is sometimes called “the Glenn Funk law,” after a Davidson County (Nashville) DA of progressive bent who has long made public his refusal to prosecute any and all cases dealing with anti-abortion statutes. Funk repeated his adamance in the wake of the Roe reversal.

Candidate Mulroy, asked weeks ago about his attitude toward enforcing the state trigger law, declined to make a Funk-like disavowal, noting that 8-7-106 allows the state Attorney General to appoint a special prosecutor for cases disdained by local district attorneys. Mulroy did say abortion-law violations would be a very low priority in his tenure.

On Friday, Mulroy said, “This is a sad day. The politicized right-wing Court goes out of its way to overturn half a century of precedent, with women as the victims. As District Attorney, I’ll be very different from Amy Weirich.

“Weirich’s party and Donald Trump want her to turn her attention away from prosecuting violent crime and prosecute women and their doctors. We need to be focusing on carjackings, murders, domestic violence — not jailing doctors helping women make reproductive choices.”

Mulroy also said Weirich, who “won’t say what she thinks about prosecuting reproductive choice,” was “one of the few Tennessee DAs who, under a now sunsetted law, prosecuted pregnant women for ‘fetal assault’ for showing up to hospitals to get substance abuse treatment.”

Categories
At Large Opinion

Second World Problems

The term “first-world country” has come to mean a developed and industrialized nation characterized by strong and free democratic institutions, a healthy public education system, affordable healthcare, acceptance of the rule of law, a stable economy, and a decent standard of living for most of its citizens. Think Germany, Great Britain, Finland, France, etc.

A second-world country’s educational system is often theocratic or politically controlled; their healthcare is non-inclusive and inequitable. Their political infrastructure is less open than first-world democracies, often featuring a single dominant party and centralized government power. The “rule of law” depends on who is in power. Think Hungary, Romania, Turkey, Iran, etc.

Is the United States still a first-world country?

In the past couple of weeks, our Supreme Court has ruled that states can send tax dollars to private and religious schools, that states may not enact certain handgun carry laws, and that states may mandate that a woman carry a pregnancy to term, even in cases of rape and incest. The majority of justices on the court put their Christian/Catholic beliefs ahead of the law and were appointed by two presidents who did not win the popular vote. Oh, and our healthcare system is flawed, expensive, and inequitable.

Our first-world allies in Europe and elsewhere are still reeling from the Trump years, shocked that America could elect such a person. Now they see the highest court in our country acting like a rogue grand jury in Boise. Even the United Nations is alarmed, with human rights officials there describing the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision as a “shocking and dangerous rollback of human rights that will jeopardize women’s health and lives. The Supreme Court has completely disregarded the United States’ binding legal obligations under international law, including those stemming from its ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

In the January 6th Committee hearings, more mind-boggling evidence continues to emerge of President Trump’s relentless, multi-faceted, months-long attempt to stage a coup and keep himself in office, overturning the will of the people. That shouldn’t happen in a stable first-world democracy.

The truth is that we are currently ruled by a minority, thanks to gerrymandering, the Electoral College, the absurdity of each state having two senators (Wyoming, e.g., has half the population of Memphis), and the SCOTUS ruling that corporations are “people” and therefore can contribute millions to buy politicians.

The most recent Gallup poll shows that more than 80 percent of Americans say that abortion should be legal under all or some circumstances. The number of Americans who say that abortion should be illegal in all cases is 13 percent, an all-time low. More than 70 percent of Americans are for some type of gun reform. On issue after issue, state legislatures and the Supreme Court go against the will of the people under the guise of “states’ rights.” You remember states’ rights, don’t you? We fought a civil war over it. Now Tennessee will soon have harsher abortion laws than the Taliban.

But it’s not all the Republicans’ fault. Democrats are also to blame for their decades-long disorganization and simple, stupid trust that the GOP would play by the rules. Mitch McConnell hustled three SCOTUS justices in under Trump, all Federalist Society approved anti-abortionists.

Democrats wail and rage and demonstrate in the streets, but they lose the big battles because they think there are guardrails, some “rules” that must be followed. McConnell and the GOP don’t care ’bout no rules. Amy Coney Barrett, anyone?

Why didn’t President Obama rage and go on national TV and demand justice when he was denied a legitimate SCOTUS nomination for 10 months? Oh, the Democrats thought Hillary would win. Oops.

The Democratic response to these crises is always “VOTE!” which is becoming the party’s version of “thoughts and prayers.” Yes, there needs to be a huge voter turnout in November, but Democrats need to quit playing by rules the other party ignores. They need to reach the people who aren’t reading The New York Times and watching cable news shows. They need to hammer the country with what is at stake: women’s autonomy over their own bodies, more gun fetishism, a theocratic takeover of our public schools and courts, and the potential destruction of our electoral process. These are not first-world problems. But they are now our problems. And they are second to none.

Categories
At Large Opinion

Oh, My God!

It really is unbelievable, when you think about it. You have to wonder how this can possibly be happening in 2022. Women are being treated like chattel — their bodies controlled by the state as though they were livestock, their gender and sexuality no longer their own.

I’m talking, of course, about Afghanistan’s autocratic Taliban rulers, who last week ordered all Afghan women to wear body-covering burkas in public. The decree further mandated that women leave their homes only when necessary, even when wearing a burka. Male relatives will also face punishment — including possible jail time — if women in their family violate the dress code.

It was seen as a hard shift by the Taliban government, one that confirmed the worst fears of human rights activists. It is a cruel and absurd level of oppression and misogyny, but what do you expect when government and religious ideology are combined? It’s so distressing.

Meanwhile, in the United States of America, the Supreme Court (where six of the nine justices are Catholic) appears to be ready to overturn Roe v. Wade and thereby legalize religious-based laws banning or restricting abortion in 26 states (and counting). Seventy percent of Americans oppose making abortion illegal again, but this is a case where “majority rule” is truly a joke. As Republicans learned long ago: Control the judges and you control the law.

The problem, of course, is not necessarily that the justices are Catholic — liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor is Catholic, for example — the problem is that the five judges in question have been vetted and brought to the fore by the ultra-conservative Federalist Society, which opposes abortion rights. Presidents G.W. Bush and Donald Trump (both of whom lost the popular vote) followed their recommendations, and here we are. It’s been the Federalists’ stated goal to overturn Roe v. Wade for 50 years, and it looks like they’re about to succeed.

John Gehring, Catholic program director at the Washington-based clergy network Faith in Public Life, was interviewed by the AP: “The Catholic intellectual tradition has produced giants of liberal thought as well, but in recent decades the right has done a better job building institutions that nurture pathways to power.” No kidding.

And let’s not forget the Evangelical Christians’ contribution to this pending fustercluck. David Talcott, professor of philosophy at King’s College and an expert in Christian sexual ethics, told vox.com: “Conservative Catholics and conservative evangelicals have become allies of certain kinds, each defending the interests of other, a theological and philosophical overlap between the two.” Indeed.

I’m no religious expert, but I am sure of one thing: What we’re talking about here is, at its core, sexual repression. Abortion is just one spoke in the traditional religious shame-wheel that also includes opposition to sex without marriage, LGBTQ rights (including gay marriage), contraception, masturbation, etc. — pretty much anything involving fun sexy-time — because their god has decreed that sex is not for f**king around. It’s for baby-making. The guilt is just an added feature, not a bug.

It’s no accident that when contraception became readily available to women via the pill, the sexual revolution followed, and Roe v. Wade became the law of the land. The religious right and their Republican groomers have been working to turn back the clock ever since. Can’t have women acting all uppity, after all. They need to learn their place and make some damn babies. The conservatives played the long game — stacking the courts — and it looks like they may finally pull it off. Much to their regret, I predict.

There are two principal theories about the now-infamous leak that made Justice Samuel Alito’s preliminary majority opinion public: 1) A liberal justice or associate leaked it to provoke alarm among progressives and arouse the base for the midterms. 2) A conservative justice or associate leaked it to prevent any of the five in the majority from being able to back away from their initial opinion on subsequent votes.

Ironically, both results will probably happen. As for the leaker? If I were a betting man, I’d put money on Mrs. Clarence Thomas.

Categories
Opinion The Last Word

Just Anger

I had a fierce sense of justice when I was younger. I got in trouble in elementary school for pouring strawberry applesauce on the white basketball shorts of a boy who was bullying my friend. In church, when our Sunday school teacher would ask for “strong boys” to volunteer to put away folding chairs, I would carry as many chairs as I could under my small arms, to drive home the point that girls are strong, too.

After high school, I left my hometown and moved to Memphis for college. Sophomore year, I interned at Planned Parenthood. It was there that I learned about how much Planned Parenthood does for accessible healthcare outside of abortions, including but not limited to cancer screenings, prenatal care, and STD screenings and treatments. I also learned that we were expected to maintain a sense of decorum in the face of the pro-life protesters who set up camp outside of the building daily. We were not to give them any reason to harm us, defame Planned Parenthood, or paint us as angry or irrational. One day as I was walking into my internship, one of the protestors yelled at me, “Murderer! You are going to Hell for killing your baby!” She had so much venom and hatred in her voice, it took everything in me not to respond. Another thing I learned as a Planned Parenthood intern was that, quite commonly, people who once protested outside of the building would come in to seek abortions for themselves or for a loved one. We were not to chastise or shame these people. A few weeks after the protestor yelled at me, I came to Planned Parenthood as a patient to get tested for STDs. The same woman who had screamed at me weeks before was sitting in the waiting room, holding her stomach and impatiently tapping her foot. We made brief eye contact, and she turned her face away.

In college, I had multiple friends seek abortions. Each of them had a good reason, not that any of them owed that to anyone. One of my friends was raped and told me stone-faced that if she was forced to deliver her rapists’ baby, she would kill herself. I believe her. I have read first-hand accounts from people who lived pre-Roe v. Wade, who have similar stories but with sadder outcomes: Their friends died, by their own hand or by botched back-alley abortions. Restricting access to abortion causes death and suffering. I have friends who would not be thriving, or would not be here at all, if they were denied access to abortion. Several of my friends ,who had abortions when we were young, now have happy, healthy, wanted children.

The legality of Roe v. Wade stands upon the concept that we as adult citizens of the United States have a right to privacy and equal protections, based upon the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Other Supreme Court decisions based on the same amendment include Brown v. Board of Education, which desegregated schools, and Loving v. Virginia, which federally legalized interracial marriage. If the Supreme Court can overturn a landmark case providing equal reproductive rights, they may seek to overturn other civil rights decisions. Our very right to privacy is at stake. In fact, this is already happening to transgender and gay people who are having their rights eroded nationally. These struggles for bodily autonomy are linked together. Our fellow citizens facing injustice is a threat to all justice itself.

The history of the “pro-life” movement is steeped in racism. In the 1960s, before Roe v. Wade passed, being anti-abortion was seen as a “Catholic issue,” and supporting access to abortion in cases of rape, incest, and threat to the mother’s life was bipartisan. But the far right was troubled by all of the headway made by the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s in desegregating schools. Far-right evangelical leaders were opposed to desegregation and viewed abortion as an easy way to galvanize and unite Christians to vote far-right evangelical leaders into office. Defending the fetus was their political rallying cry, but defending racial segregation was the end goal.

Classism also plays a role in who is able to access abortion. Wealthy people will always be able to access abortion. They can fly themselves, their wives, mistresses, or children to a state or country where abortion is legal. Making abortion illegal creates barriers to abortion for the most financially vulnerable around us, who cannot afford to take off work for a day, much less fly to another state to access an abortion, and who are disproportionately people of color, particularly in the states most likely to outlaw abortion. These are the people who will be most likely to seek an illegal abortion in the event of an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy. They are the people who are most likely to die.

Do not let voting be the only measure you take. We are set to lose the protections of Roe under a Democratic-controlled House, Senate, and presidency. We must pressure our elected officials to codify Roe into federal law. We must protest, with our wallets and our voices. We must not be afraid to use the word abortion. We must drive home the reality that abortion is safe, normal, and a societal good. We must be outspoken, even if we cannot become pregnant ourselves. Remember, abortion is an issue of human rights, and safe abortions actually preserve life, rather than destroy it.

When I was a child, I had a fierce sense of justice. Now I am an adult, and that sense of justice has calcified into a deep anger at the injustices that marginalized people face in our supposedly free and equal country. When a document was leaked from the Supreme Court outlining their probable future decision to overturn Roe, many of my friends cried when they found out. I have not cried. I am furious. I need you, regardless of your age, gender, religion, or ability to bear children, to be furious with me, to inform yourself, and to take action, because outlawing abortion is an egregious violation of human liberties that will impact each and every one of us. Our right to privacy and equality is at stake, and we must fight.

Louise Page is an independent singer/songwriter based in Memphis. She is a classically trained pianist with a degree in Creative Writing from Rhodes College.

Categories
Letter From The Editor Opinion

Caught in the Devil’s Triangle

As the Memphis summer stubbornly surrenders to October, I’m sitting at a sidewalk table on South Main, drinking coffee. Tourists wander by, enjoying the morning sun, looking for the National Civil Rights Museum or Sun Studio or the Peabody. Who knows? It’s a glorious day. They’re on vacation, passing through. I’m probably going to be on Facebook in that photo one of them just took — a bit player in their memories of Memphis.

It’s been a strange and sad week hereabouts. The after-effects of the senseless murder of Memphis Chamber director Phil Trenary linger like a bad dream. Watching the surveillance video of Trenary was gut-wrenching. We see him walking along Front Street, chatting on his cell phone, headed home from a happy event at Loflin Yard. As we watch him stride out of the camera’s eye, we know what he didn’t know — that he had only minutes to live. It’s a gut punch, one of the most disturbing things I’ve ever watched. I wish whatever peace and strength can be found in these sad days to his family and friends.

To be honest, everything has seemed a little disjointed and awful recently. The country seems broken, like some essential element has gone missing. The truth itself has become a devalued currency — cheapened by the endless parade of prevarication and bluster and avarice that populates the seemingly 24-minute news cycle. We are exhausted, and the disconnect between American political tribes has never been greater.

Last Thursday morning, Americans watched a woman, Christine Blasey Ford, give testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee that SCOTUS candidate Brett Kavanaugh had assaulted her in high school. That afternoon, Kavanaugh spoke loudly and emotionally in his own defense.

Twenty million Americans watched the hearing. It was like a Rorschach test for the country. Those on the right saw Ford as disingenuous, a woman intent on destroying a good man, a Democratic party operative whose only motive was to delay Kavanaugh’s rightful confirmation. Many others, including me, saw Kavanaugh’s performance as a perjurious charade, with one lie cascading after another. His body language, his tears, his sniffs and snorts, his anger all seemed calculated and fake — total bullshit. I was reminded of the time when I was in high school and my father saw an inscription in my yearbook that mentioned “slamming Buds.” He said, “You better not be drinking beer.” Oh no, I said. That’s just what we call each other, “slamming Buds.” I’m sure my father knew I was full of crap, just as I’m sure Kavanaugh knows that “boofing” and the “Devil’s triangle” aren’t terms for flatulence and a drinking game with quarters, and that he was a belligerent drunk on many occasions.

Will Kavanaugh’s lies — big and small — keep him off the Supreme Court? Sadly, I doubt it. Will an FBI investigation and additional testimony from his friends and classmates that utterly destroy Kavanaugh’s self-created image of a church-going choir boy and dedicated student-athlete have a real effect? Sadly, I doubt it. The Republicans are going for the trifecta — control of all three branches of government — while they have the chance, and nothing is going to stop them.

For good reasons, one-party control of the government was not at all what our Founding Fathers had in mind. They wanted a system of checks and balances when it came to wielding power. But checks and balances don’t work if there is no balance, if one party holds all the checks, if the three branches of government become a version of the Devil’s triangle. And nobody, not the Founding Fathers or any of us, was prepared for an amoral, loose-cannon president like Donald Trump, or for the pervasive influence of easily manipulated and targeted social media. We are in a fix, my friends.

But enough angst for now. My coffee cup is empty, and solutions to our national ennui and our local problems seem no closer than they were after my first sip. An election nears, however, and in my opinion, the great American experiment with democracy is approaching a crossroads.

What to do? It’s not an original thought, but it’s all I’ve got right now: Register to vote and cast your ballot like our country’s future depends on it.

Bruce VanWyngarden

brucev@memphisflyer.com