#Kentucky's Supreme Court

[coochiequeens]

A small victory for women in American politics

Kentucky’s next Supreme Court is shaping up to be a historic one for women. 

Deputy Chief Justice Debra Hembree Lambert will become Kentucky’s chief justice in January. (Administrative Office of the Courts photo)

With the election of Kentucky’s first Black female justice, Pamela Goodwine, women will hold four of the court’s seven seats. Additionally, the court will be led by the first female chief justice, Deputy Chief Justice Debra Lambert, starting in January. 

As of earlier this year, 17 states have female majorities on their supreme court benches, according to a report from the Brennan Center for Justice. Alaska was also poised to gain a female majority after seven women sought a seat on its Supreme Court this summer. 

Goodwine’s election also makes her the first woman in history who will serve at every level of Kentucky’s judiciary branch: district court, circuit court, appeals court and the Supreme Court. . She said in a statement to the Kentucky Lantern that the milestone “reminds me of the women who came before me, paving the way through hard work, determination and resilience, often overcoming significant obstacles to reach their goals.” 

“Their struggles paved the way for our successes today, and it is our duty to continue their legacy and to forge a path for others as well,” Goodwine said. “Throughout my life, education and career, I have faced what many described as insurmountable challenges, but I don’t give up on my dreams when things get hard. I simply work harder to make my dreams come true.” 

Women outnumber men in law schools

Two previous female justices — Sara Walter Combs and retired Janet Stumbo — both say the new majority of women on the high court is a reflection of the increase in women in the legal profession. 

In 2016, women for the first time made up the majority of students in the nation’s law schools, according to the American Bar Association, which says the change came slowly. In 1963, only 4% of first-year law students were female, rising to 20% in 1973, 39% in 1983 and 44% by 1993.

In Kentucky last year women made up the majority of law students at the University of Louisville (53%) and Northern Kentucky University (55%). Female and male enrollment were about even at the University of Kentucky in 2023-24 with 203 women and 206 men enrolled in the law school.

Judge Sara Walter Combs Combs was the first woman to serve on Kentucky’s Supreme Court after being appointed by Gov. Brereton Jones in 1993. She now serves on the Kentucky Court of Appeals. When she began taking law classes at night at the University of Louisville, she said she was one of very few women in her law class. 

“When I started my work career, I was a teacher, and the one thing that women could do, predominantly in that period of our history, was to teach or to be a nurse,” Combs said. “Well, they’re still wonderful professions; it’s just a matter that now there are more options for women beyond those two choices, and I think the more options we have, the better, because we all have different talents.” 

While she was reluctant to “to tie gender and competency to one another,” Combs applauded the women on the Kentucky Supreme Court. 

“They have good legal minds, they have a great work ethic, they’re collegial, they’re everything that a good judge should be. They just happen to be women,” Combs said. “I’m delighted that they haven’t been held back because of that fact, but I would prefer to emphasize the fact of their competence rather than their gender.”

When asked if the majority of women could be a sign of increasing diversity on the bench in the future, Combs said a diverse pool of judges is needed to review cases. 

“I hope it does, because our social problems are very diverse in nature and origin, and I think their solution will require some diversity of approach to how we solve these problems,” she said. 

Change takes time

Stumbo, who was the first woman elected to the Kentucky Supreme Court in 1993 and retired from the Court of Appeals in 2017, said that diversity on the bench — in terms of race and gender — is a change that happens over time. Kentucky judicial candidates are required to be a licensed attorney for some time before seeking election. A district judge requires two years while the Supreme Court requires eight years. 

Retired Justice Janet L. Stumbo stands beside her portrait, painted by artist Tona Barkley, following a dedication ceremony Dec. 6, 2023. The portrait joined others of justices in the corridors of the second floor of the Kentucky Capitol in Frankfort. (Photo by Brian Bohannon)

“The composition of the bar has changed greatly,” Stumbo said. “The number of women who are lawyers, the number of minorities who are lawyers, has increased dramatically, and that’s the way we’ll see more diversity on the bench.” 

Stumbo said that the majority of female justices shows that the electorate in Kentucky is also more accepting of women being in these high-ranking roles. 

“There’s definitely more work to be done, but women are succeeding and succeeding in ways that are getting them recognized as fine litigators and tenacious litigators and people that you’re proud to have representing you,” Stumbo said. 

Judge Goodwine speaks to supporters at her election night watch party in Lexington Nov. 5, 2024. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Arden Barnes)

Women would have won a majority of Kentucky Supreme Court seats no matter how the Nov. 5 election turned out. Goodwine’s opponent also was a woman, Lexington attorney Erin Izzo.

Goodwine echoed those sentiments. She said that each justice on the court “carries unique perspectives and experiences” and that it’s imperative that younger generations see themselves reflected in the highest levels of the judiciary. She said that many have “expressed gratitude to me for being a trailblazer helping to forge a path for others to follow in my footsteps in their chosen profession, and that increases my drive and dedication to ensure that our justice system reflects our community.” 

“This new chapter for our court affirms the progress we have made and also challenges us to move forward with purpose and conviction,” Goodwine said. “We honor the legacy of our forerunners by continuing to uphold the principles of fairness, justice and equality for all. It is a responsibility I take to heart, and I look forward to working with my esteemed colleagues to protect the rights and uphold the dignity of everyone in our state ensuring that the Kentucky Supreme Court is a beacon of justice for all.” 

[thashining]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by MeidasTouch (@meidastouch)

[whitesinhistory]

On July 28, 1916, the chief of police in Louisville, Kentucky, announced the arrest of at least three people for interracial relations, or miscegenation. He also announced plans to open an investigation into the practice, which would “spare no effort” to prevent people from forming or maintaining interracial romantic relationships in Louisville. 

Earlier that day, Louisville police made at least three arrests involving allegations of interracial romance. Authorities first arrested Harry Jenkins, a 34-year-old Black man, and Alice Shumaker, a 30-year-old woman who self-identified as Black but whom police believed to be white. Louisville law enforcement jailed both Mr. Jenkins and Ms. Shumaker on disorderly conduct charges, though they stood accused of little more than being found under the same roof together at the same time. Unwilling to accept Ms. Shumaker’s own racial self-identification, the local jailor forced her to submit to a blood test “to determine whether or not” she was Black.

The same white Louisville officers who arrested Mr. Jenkins and Ms. Shumaker also detained George Eaton, a 16-year-old Black boy. After subjecting George to a search, the officers found photographs of three teenaged white girls in his pocket. George claimed that the white girls had given him these photographs and refused to identify them. The officers arrested George, while the chief of police directed other high-ranking officials in his department to “make a round of photo galleries” in the city of Louisville to uncover the white girls’ identities. 

Kentucky criminalized interracial marriages from the year it was admitted into the Union in 1792. At the time that Mr. Jenkins, Ms. Shumaker, and George were arrested, state law made it illegal for a Black person—defined by the Kentucky Supreme Court as a person with “one–fourth part or more of Negro blood”—to marry or live with a white person. Those found in violation of the law faced a fine of up to $5,000 and up to a year in jail. Black people charged with miscegenation faced dehumanizing treatment by law enforcement, and investigations and court proceedings were often humiliating and intrusive. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court invalidated all laws criminalizing interracial marriage in 1967, Kentucky did not repeal its anti-miscegenation statute until 1974.

During the Jim Crow era, one of the racial boundaries white people protected most fiercely was the prohibition on romantic contact between Black men and white women. Fear of intimate contact between Black men and white women was fueled by the pervasive myth that Black men were violent, sexually aggressive, and always in pursuit of white womanhood. In Kentucky and other states, these fears led to the aggressive enforcement of anti-miscegenation laws, the degradation of interracial couples, and the destruction of multiracial families. To learn more about anti-miscegenation laws and other policies enacted to maintain white supremacy, read EJI’s report, Segregation in America.

[thenewdemocratus]

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell: 'Washington Democrats’ Prescription Drug Socialism Means Fewer Lifesaving Cures'

Source:Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican, Kentucky) talking about Senate Democrats plan to regulate drug prices. Source:The New Democrat “U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding prescription drug socialism.” From the Senate Republican Leader Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is talking about…

[autonom-us-project]

Abortion Rights in Kentucky

In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the landmark 1973 case Roe v. Wade, which had previously provided federal protections of the right to abortion.

With the responsibility of protecting the right to reproductive freedom left to the states, it can be difficult to keep track of all the constantly changing laws and regulations. To help, we’ve gathered the most important information on your state’s current laws, restrictions, and related details. Below is what you need to know about Kentucky’s current abortion legislation.

*Please note, information on this website should not be used as legal advice or as a basis for medical decisions. Consult an attorney and/or a physician for your particular case.

Where does the law currently stand on abortion in the state of Kentucky?

Abortion is currently banned in the state of Kentucky. 

When did Kentucky’s current abortion ban go into effect?

Following the overturning of Roe v Wade (1973) in 2022, the state’s trigger ban went into effect, banning nearly all access to abortion in Kentucky. However, this legislation has met opposition, with Kentucky voters rejecting an amendment to the constitution stating it does not protect abortion last November.

For more information on your state’s abortion legislation, see our breakdowns of various abortion bans, restrictions, and protections in the U.S.

Are there any exceptions to Kentucky’s abortion ban?

Currently, there are no exceptions in cases of rape, incest, or human trafficking, or if a fetus is non-viable. The only exceptions to the ban are:

Medical Necessity: If an abortion is necessary to “prevent…death or substantial risk of death due to a physical condition,” or “prevent the serious, permanent impairment of a life-sustaining organ” of a pregnant individual, as determined by a physician. 

The specifics can be read in Kentucky Legal Code 311.772. 

What are the penalties regarding abortion in the state of Kentucky?

Currently, there are no criminal penalties for a pregnant individual receiving or attempting to receive an abortion.

Those who provide abortion services in violation of Kentucky law face a Class D felony charge, punishable by 1 to 5 years in prison.

The specifics can be read in Kentucky Legal Code 311.772. 

I am pregnant in the state of Kentucky and wish to terminate my pregnancy. What now?

If you believe your pregnancy meets the requirements for a legal abortion in your state, (see the above on exceptions), schedule an appointment with a trusted physician as soon as possible. If not, you will need to arrange an appointment at a clinic providing abortion services out of state. Make sure the state you choose allows abortions at the gestational age your pregnancy will reach by the appointment date.

If you need financial assistance to do this, there are existing funds to help cover both the procedure and travel costs. 

Abortion funds can assist with the medical cost of the abortion itself. Practical Support Organizations, (PSOs), can assist with other costs incurred seeking an out-of-state abortion such as travel, lodging, childcare, provider referrals, emotional support, and judicial bypass for minors, among other needs. Here are a few resources available to those seeking support in Kentucky:

Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi [Fund & PSO] – Provides support for those seeking an abortion from Kentucky. Offers financial aid for abortion, transit (long or short distance), lodging, provider referrals, gas money, food assistance, rideshare and rental car assistance, emergency contraception (the morning-after pill), language services, and interpretation services. Provides Spanish language support. See their website for more information. 

Kentucky A Fund [Fund & PSO] – Provides support for those seeking an abortion from Kentucky. Offers financial aid for abortion and judicial bypass support. See their website for more information. 

Kentucky Health Justice Network [Fund & PSO] – Provides support for those seeking an abortion from Kentucky. Offers financial aid for abortion, lodging, transit, and interpretation services. Provides Spanish language support. See their website for more information. 

National Abortion Hotline [Fund & PSO] – Provides support for those seeking an abortion Nationwide. Offers financial aid for abortion, transit, and provider referrals. Provides Spanish language support. See their website for more information. 

Women’s Reproductive Rights Assistance Project [Fund] – Provides funding for those seeking an abortion Nationwide. Offers financial aid for abortion and emergency contraception (the morning-after pill). See their website for more information. 

Abortion Freedom Fund [Fund] – Provides funding for those seeking an abortion Nationwide. Offers financial aid for abortion. See their website for more information. 

Indigenous Women Rising [Fund] – Provides funding for Indigenous individuals Nationwide seeking an abortion. Offers financial aid for abortion. See their website for more information. 

Reprocare [PSO] – Provides support for those seeking an abortion Nationwide. Offers aid in the form of provider referrals, emotional support, language services, and abortion doula services. Provides Spanish language support. See their website for more information. 

The Brigid Alliance [PSO] – Provides support for those seeking an abortion Nationwide. Offers aid in the form of provider referrals, emotional support, language services, and abortion doula services. Provides Spanish language support. See their website for more information. 

Regardless of the legislation your state currently has in place, remember that safe and legal options are always available. The most important tool you can arm yourself with in these difficult times is knowledge, so stay informed about changes in legislation and policy where you live, and know that there are always resources available to help you through this ♥️

[instaviewpoint]

April 28 2024 In the Know News

Bombing Crucial Supply Ships, China talks with USA-Hamas-Fatah, and The Kentucky Derby April 28 2024by PK Morgan While sipping on some fresh hot coffee, a drive by the Great Lake Michigan yesterday has me dreaming of taking a fishing trip to explore, take pictures, and enjoy the late-spring outdoors in the canoe. Some of that mentality of boats probably stemmed from the recent attacks on…

[batboyblog]

Things the Biden-Harris Administration Did This Week #29

July 26-August 2 2024

President Biden announced his plan to reform the Supreme Court and make sure no President is above the law. The conservative majority on the court ruled that Trump has "absolute immunity" from any prosecution for "official acts" while he was President. In response President Biden is calling for a constitutional amendment to make it clear that Presidents aren't above the law and don't have immunity from prosecution for crimes committed while in office. In response to a wide ranging corruption scandal involving Justice Clarence Thomas, President Biden called on Congress to pass a legally binding code of ethics for the Supreme Court. The code would force Justices to disclose gifts, refrain from public political actions, and force them to recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have conflicts of interest. President Biden also endorsed the idea of term limits for the Justices.

The Biden Administration sent out an email to everyone who has a federal student loan informing them of upcoming debt relief. The debt relief plan will bring the total number of a borrowers who've gotten relief from the Biden-Harris Administration to 30 million. The plan is due to be finalized this fall, and the Department of Education wanted to alert people early to allow them to be ready to quickly take advantage of it when it was in place and get relief as soon as possible.

President Biden announced that the federal government would step in and protect the pension of 600,000 Teamsters. Under the American Rescue Plan, passed by President Biden and the Democrats with no Republican votes, the government was empowered to bail out Union retirement funds which in recent years have faced devastating cut of up to 75% in some cases, leaving retired union workers in desperate situations. The Teamster union is just the latest in a number of such pension protections the President has done in office.

President Biden and Vice-President Harris oversaw the dramatic release of American hostages from Russia. Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, former Marine Paul Whelan held since 2018, Russian-American reporter for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Alsu Kurmasheva convicted of criticizing the Russian Military, were all released from captivity and returned to the US at around midnight August 2nd. They were greeted on the tarmac by the President and Vice-President and their waiting families. The deal also secured the release of German medical worker Rico Krieger sentenced to death in Belarus, Russian-British opposition figure Vladimir Kara-Murza, and 11 Russians convicted of opposing the war against Ukraine or being involved in Alexei Navalny's anti-corruption organization. Early drafts of the hostage deal were meant to include Navalny before his death in Russian custody early this year.

A new Biden Administration rule banning discrimination against LGBT students takes effect, but faces major Republican resistance. The new rule declares that Title IX protects Queer students from discrimination in public schools and any college that takes federal funds. The new rule also expands protections for victims of sexual misconduct and pregnant or parenting students. However Republican resistance means the rule can't take effect nation wide. Lawsuits from Republican controlled states, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming, means the new protections won't come into effect those states till the case is ruled on likely in a Supreme Court ruling. The Biden administration crafted these Title IX rules to reflect the Supreme Court's 2020 Bostock case.

The Biden administration awarded $2 billion to black and minority farmers who were the victims of historic discrimination. Historically black farmers have been denied important loans from the USDA, or given smaller amounts than white farmers. This massive investment will grant 23,000 minority farmers between $10,000 and $500,000 each and a further 20,000 people who wanted to start farms by were improperly denied the loans they needed between $3,500-$6,000 to get started. Most payments went to farmers in Mississippi and Alabama.

The Biden Administration took an important step to stop the criminalization of poverty by changing child safety guidelines so that poverty alone isn't grounds for taking a child into foster care. Studies show that children able to stay with parents or other family have much better outcomes then those separated. Many states have already removed poverty from their guidelines when it comes to removing children from the home, and the HHS guidelines push the remaining states to do the same.

Vice-President Harris announced the Biden Administration's agreement to a plan by North Carolina to forgive the state's medical debt. The plan by Democratic Governor Roy Cooper would forgive the medical debt of 2 million people in the state. North Carolina has the 3rd highest rate of medical debt in the nation. Vice-President Harris applauded the plan, pointing out that the Biden Administration has forgiven $650 million dollars worth of medical debt so far with plans to forgive up to $7 billion by 2026. The Vice-President unveiled plans to exclude medical debt from credit scores and issued a call for states and local governments to forgive debt, like North Carolina is, last month.

The Department of Transportation put forward a new rule to bank junk fees for family air travel. The new rule forces airlines to seat parents next to their children, with no extra cost. Currently parents are forced to pay extra to assure they are seated next to their children, no matter what age, if they don't they run the risk of being separated on a long flight. Airlines would be required to seat children age 13 and under with their parent or accompanying adult at no extra charge.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development announced it is giving $3.5 billion to combat homelessness. This represents the single largest one year investment in fighting homelessness in HUD's history. The money will be distributed by grants to local organizations and programs. HUD has a special focus on survivors of domestic violence, youth homeless, and people experiencing the unique challenges of homelessness in rural areas.

The Treasury Department announced that Pennsylvania and New Mexico would be joining the IRS' direct file program for 2025. The program was tested as a pilot in a number of states in 2024, saving 140,000 tax payers $5.6 million in filing charges and getting tax returns of $90 million. The program, paid for by President Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, will be available to all 50 states, but Republicans strong object. Pennsylvania and New Mexico join Oregon and New Jersey in being new states to join.

Bonus: President Biden with the families of the released hostages calling their loved ones on the plane out of Russia

[qqueenofhades]

The 2025 project seems to reflect that the Republican Party is becoming more and more fascism, but it actually reflects the growing number of extreme nationalists, misogynists, and racists among ordinary Americans. US is a democracy, and politicians rely on votes to stay in power. The fact that the Republicans dare to draft such a project shows that they are confident it will gain significant public support. Politicians aren’t fools; they wouldn’t pursue something that only a small group agrees with while the majority opposes it. The global rightward shift is evident, and though I’m not American, my country is also deteriorating in many ways. Why is this happening? Because the economic base determines the superstructure?and in recent years, the global economy has been in decline?

Mmmm, I'm gonna have to challenge you here.

First of all, it's just flatly not true that there's a "growing number of extreme nationalists, misogynists, and racists among ordinary Americans." That movement has become more vocal and visible in post-2016 America, but there's absolutely no evidence -- and indeed, a lot of evidence to the contrary -- that their numbers are growing instead of shrinking. The Republicans got lucky with Trump's win in 2016 thanks to a combination of decades of anti-Hillary smears, extensive Russian interference/psyops, the anti-democratic Electoral College, and general misplaced complacence that he was never going to win and people didn't need to bother voting for two disliked candidates. They've flatly lost every competitive nationwide election since then -- 2018, 2020, 2022, and very probably 2024. In between, their hand-picked Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade (guaranteeing the right to an abortion in all 50 states) and set off a titanic tidal wave of voter support for abortion rights, even in very dark red states like Kansas and Kentucky (which are not liberal by any stretch of the word). In fact, the Republicans' (flatly false) excuse that they just wanted to "return [abortion rights to the states]" has been unveiled as another lie due to their desperate attempts in this election cycle to ratfuck voter-approved abortion questions off the ballot in Arkansas, Missouri, Florida, and elsewhere. This is a badly losing issue for them, even in deep red states, and they don't want people to vote on it, because they hate democracy. We'll get to that.

Likewise, polls of "culture war" issues like LGBTQ+ rights, abortion rights, immigrants' rights, etc., consistently get much more support among ordinary Americans than not. The ordinary public is becoming more liberal, not less, even in the face of constant aggressive and reactionary attempts to undo the sum total of social and civil rights movements from the 20th century. Republicans' views are getting less popular, not more, and this is also driven by the ongoing demographic change in America. Within a generation or two, whites may be in the statistical minority, and that deeply terrifies people whose entire political and social identity is built on ethnostate white supremacism. The reason Republicans are getting so extreme and antidemocratic now is because the electorate is getting younger and younger, more diverse, more accepting, and less tolerant of their age-old bullshit. As such, there is a very visible window of time outside which the Republicans will not be able to win competitive nationwide elections, even despite all the advantages they're building into the system and have always had. That terrifies them. It is also why they have decided to destroy democracy.

Which leads us into your next assertion that "US is a democracy, and politicians rely on votes to stay in power. The fact that the Republicans dare to draft such a project shows that they are confident it will gain significant public support. Politicians aren’t fools; they wouldn’t pursue something that only a small group agrees with while the majority opposes it." Yes, maybe, in some exceedingly generic logic that doesn't take any account of the actual situation in the US and the fact that the Republicans have made their hatred for democratic free and fair elections very, very clear. This is why Trump pushed the "election fraud" Big Lie in 2020 and sent a mob to attack the Capitol in an attempt to prevent the certification of Biden's win. This is why states controlled by Republicans have frantically enacted as many voter suppression and voter-removal laws as possible and conducted constant purges to get voters (especially the mysteriously missing 1 million Democrats in Florida) off the rolls. This is why they talk approvingly about Trump being "a dictator on day one." This is why they have pursued a decades-long strategy to capture the federal judiciary (by installing extreme right-wing hacks to the bench and then funneling extreme-right legislation into their courts to get a favorable ruling and/or send it to the extreme-right Supreme Court). And on, and on, and on. The Republicans are explicitly aware that their ideas cannot win in a free and fair election, because their ideas are terrible, and as such have been taking massive, ongoing, and coordinated efforts to disenfranchise American voters, expose them to lakes of sordid Russian propaganda/psyops in favor of Trump, double down on the xenophobia and white nationalism to stoke Fear Of The Other, and everything else they possibly can to prevent voters from voting for their opponents. They hate democracy and they are not counting on democratic methods to implement Project 2025. They intend to do it by secretive oligarch methods funded by right-wing billionaire dark money and their Russian friends. That's the whole point.

Indeed, you can see that in the fact that as soon as Project 2025 became widely known and therefore widely hated, the Republicans were thrown into a panicked fluster of disavowing it and insisting that Trump didn't actually know about it (which is a lie, but that's all the day). Because it is electoral kryptonite, they are trying every single method they can to lie to voters long enough to get into power and do it anyway. Authoritarians can often come to power through democratic elections, but once there, they do their utmost to degrade, erode, or otherwise destroy the institutional safeguards that prevent them from keeping power forever. Trump is a literally textbook example of this and he has made his intentions very clear. He flat-out told a group of Republicans at an event earlier this year that "we'll fix it so you won't have to vote again." He already tried a coup and somehow the Republicans nominated him again, because of the deep corruption of the party on every level, but the Republicans are not doing Project 2025 because they think it will organically generate popular support (and they know it doesn't.) It's a blueprint for a tiny group of extreme right-wing theocrats and fascists to get their way regardless of what the broader public says about it, and represents the culmination of decades of far-right power-play strategies related to exploiting economic, racial, social, and cultural grievances. They're doing this now in order to lock in their power before long-term demographic changes make it impossible for them to win another democratic American election. So their solution is to get rid of democratic American elections, the end. This is explicitly a project for permanent minority rule. They know that and that's what's driving their strategic choices here.

As such, essentially saying that the Republicans aren't really fascist, and/or the real problem and/or are just giving an increasingly fascist American population what they want, removes any moral responsibility for their deliberate choices and legitimizes the populist claim to be acting "for the people" instead of a corrupt institutional system. Everyone knows the many, MANY problems with American politics and government; we don't need to go through them again. But even if they were "just giving the people what they want," which as noted above they're not, it still wouldn't make it okay or defensible. To use the obvious example, just because Hitler was popular and democratically elected in 1933 doesn't make what he did right, and the social forces that propelled him to power weren't just a passive "reflection" of The People's Will but were shaped by the larger fascist-curious interwar 1930s. In fact, America also had a burgeoning fascist movement in the 1930s, driven by WWI and Great Depression fallout, but Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal explicitly created extensive government mechanisms to support society, provide new jobs and welfare, and other integrative and restorative economic methods. This crucial difference in approaches -- the New Deal vs. the Nazis -- is why America remained democratic despite the challenges and Germany fell into autocratic genocidal fascism.

This is because populism and dissatisfaction with democracy rises when people feel that the government is not listening to them, is not responsive to their needs, is ignoring them, or otherwise not doing what they want. It is driven by multiple factors, primarily but not only economic, and it is stoked by powerful interest groups who have a vested interest in using the fissures to discredit democratic governments and movements. It is also by no means limited to America, as you note at the end. Think of the decades-long campaign by the British media against the EU, driven by British isolationism and exceptionalism and a sense that the petty bureaucrats in Brussels had no right to be telling the almighty British Empire what to do. This created and stoked existing social grievances which were often domestically caused (since as Margaret Thatcher destroying the British social-welfare state in the 1980s) and turned that grievance against an external opponent who was easier to blame. As such, as we know, it led to the country voting for Brexit in 2016 despite what a whopping, overwhelming, incredible own goal that was and continues to be for the UK, especially economically and socially. It was obviously dependent on many contextual factors from British history, politics, and culture, and there were certainly many people who actually thought it was the right thing to do (and not just about racism, which uh, hmmm), but it's very difficult to think that this organically or naturally came about without a direct and extensive popular-pressure campaign designed to do just that.

People often vote against their own interests because they have been convinced that democracy is corrupt or ineffective or "just as bad" as authoritarianism, which allows illiberal populists to rise to power. These populists often use racial, religious, or cultural grievances, especially against perceived "outsiders," to artificially stoke existing prejudice and justify crackdowns and/or consolidations of their own personal power and destruction of institutional systems and safeguards meant to stop them from doing that. That's how we got Erdogan in Turkey, Bolsonaro in Brazil, Orban in Hungary, and Trump in the US. Other authoritarian movements around the world are also driven implicitly or explicitly by the massive autocratic and antidemocratic global influence disinformation machine headed by Putin in Russia. As such, it's not accurate to insist that this just represents a simple passive "rightward shift" among the global population overall. It is happening because it has been designed and manipulated and pressed into happening. It can still be electorally resisted, which is also the most effective strategy for removing authoritarians, but if we fail to vote out Trump once and for all in 2024, it will be MUCH harder and much more deadly.

Overall, to simplistically claim that the Republican party is just giving the increasingly fascist Americans what they want and expect it to derive broad popular support is, as I have demonstrated above, a diametrically backward conception of the problem. The Republicans are deliberately and increasingly fascist because they realize that very soon, if allowed to continue operating in its accustomed fashion, the American democratic system and American public opinion is going to make them obsolete. They're racing the clock to cement permanent super-minority rule, and to change the rules overall, before America's shifting demographic composition and ideological mindset locks them out. That is why they are throwing so much misinformation, fearmongering, lies, Russian propaganda, and everything else that they can think of at this election, to get Trump and loyal Project 2025 footsoldier Vance into the door before the door slams shut for a long time. That is why this election is so fucking existentially important and why it is so crucial to accurately conceptualize and describe the problem, what it is, and how to respond to it. As such, while I otherwise don't do this much anymore because I no longer have the desire to argue with the people who are likewise brainwashed in the opposite direction and insist it's a Pure Leftist Moral Duty not to vote against fascist authoritarianism (as, uh, also happened with the fragmented and infighting German left-wing opposition in 1932 and good thing nothing bad happened next):

The end.

[our-trans-punk-experience]

WARNING for trans america

Regarding the U.S. v. Skrmetti case, which challenges Tenessee state law prohibiting trans youth recieving any affirming medical care, being heard in the supreme court I have this below quote from anti-trans group "Our Duty".

"Various gender critical groups are coordinating a rally that will occur in Washington, D.C. on DECEMBER 4, 2024.  The transgender activists will be there in force, and we need to be there too."

If you were planning to stand in, there will be multiple groups such as Our Duty standing there. Now Our Duty is largely a parent group, so trans youth might want to watch out for that. If your parents ask questions about your experience of transition, be warned that Our Duty files amicus briefs (extra information testimonial petitions) to the supreme court taking testimony from its members about the lives of their trans children. They file similar amicus briefs to any trans-related case in both the US and the UK.

Below is the heading paragraph of the amicus brief they have submitted to the supreme court ahead of the Skrmetti case

"Parents of gender-dysphoric children are given false choices: treat your child with off-label use of cancer-drugs, experimental cross-sex hormones, and surgeries—or lose your child to suicide or the state. Parents seeking to avoid unproven treatments do so in fear of being investigated for abuse and losing custody of their children. To avoid these tragedies, Tennessee and Kentucky enacted statutes (collectively, the “Acts”) to safeguard children’s bodies and futures. See Tenn. Code §§ 68-33-101–110; Ky. Rev. Stat. § 311.372. The Acts are constitutional and should be upheld."

This brief also contains dozens and dozens of parent testimonials about their children's experience. I know none of these children, and some of them very well have simply experimented with gender before concluding they were cis, but many of these seem to be terrifying stories of conversion therapy. And regardless of what truth lies behind these stories, parents second hand testimony of the trans experience should not be used to make life worse for all trans children. Some of these stories are about these peoples children who are actually over 18 and so should not be considered at all in this case. And none of these children gave their consent for their stories to be shared.

At the end of this post i realise it might be a bit incoherent and not exactly follow one thread through. so ask follow ups about the case or about Our Duty if you want and ffs stay safe out there punks, and stay sharp. Tell your friends you love them

[dchan87]

The day after Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was announced as Kamala Harris’s choice for vice president, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told a crowd of lawmakers in Louisville, Kentucky, that a Harris administration would spell certain doom for the Republican Party. “Let’s assume our worst nightmare—the Democrats went to the White House, the House, the Senate,” McConnell said during his keynote speech at the National Conference of State Legislators Legislative Summit last week, according to Spectrum News. “The first thing they’ll do is get rid of the [Senate] filibuster. Second, you’ll have two new states: D.C., Puerto Rico. That’s four new Democratic senators in perpetuity.”

Puerto Rico will vote on a nonbinding ballot measure in November to determine the territory’s future political status, with voters being given three options, all of which would change its official status: statehood, independence, or independence with free association. It will be the seventh time that the island’s 3.2 million people vote to define their political relationship with the United States. Harris has not yet taken an official stance on the vote.

McConnell insisted that next on the historically moderate Democrat’s agenda would be to place as many liberal justices on the Supreme Court as possible, noting that doing so would be “unconstitutional”—while apparently ignoring the fact that that’s exactly what Donald Trump did to achieve SCOTUS’s current conservative supermajority.

“If they get those two new states and pack the Supreme Court, they’ll get what they want,” McConnell said.

Ultimately, McConnell believes that the Harris-Walz ticket “represents the far left of the Democratic Party.

“And by the way, that’s most Democrats today,” he added.

Following the address, Kentucky Senate President Robert Stivers broke down the Republican perspective on why Harris turned to Walz as her right hand.

“They’re trying to appeal to a rural voter that they have not appealed to in years,” Stivers said, reported Spectrum. “Now, whether they can or they can’t, that becomes a good question, and I think that will be based on the policies that they put forward. And hopefully, that’s what we get into.”

[coralreeferband]

Today is the last day to register to vote not only for Texas, but Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, and Tennessee

[thenewdemocratus]

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell: 'Supreme Court Can Police Itself

Source:Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican, Kentucky) arguing that a very friendly U.S. Supreme Court to Republicans, can police itself. Source:The New Democrat “McConnell: Supreme Court Can Police Itself. No Appeal To Heaven Required. U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks today on the Senate floor regarding the Supreme Court.” From…

[intheholler]

On Appalachian and Southern Stereotypes

After seeing some people leap at the opportunity to insult and further harm us under my posts, even by obviously leftist accounts, I wanted to address some of the most popular stereotypes of our region.

Not as an excuse. There are many negative, violent and otherwise harmful features of the American South. We have a horrific history especially in terms of the violence we inflicted and continue to inflict upon the Black community that cannot be forgotten, and, as a culture, we do need to pay our dues.

But maybe this will help y’all apply some nuance to the situation and understand that we aren’t all your enemy.

Stereotype 1: Everyone is a Republican Racist

Absolute horse shit, my friends. There are people like me all over the south and in the hollers. We just get drowned out by the fascists, and it is all by design. 

In my home state of North Carolina alone, they are working tirelessly to make it impossible for young, often liberal (if not outright leftist) voices to be heard. They specifically target regions with heavy POC populations.

As recently as May of this year, the North Carolina Supreme Court overturned their own previous ruling which once made gerrymandering illegal. This allows Republicans free range to draw their congressional lines wherever benefits them most. 

Meanwhile, Roy Cooper, our Democratic governor, has been in office since 2017.

Gerrymandering is a real problem, and it reflects the worst of us. But it does not reflect all of us.

We are a working class, pro-union people.

We are coal miners and mill workers and farmers.

We took up arms against the government and fought for our labor rights during the Coal Wars as recently as the 1920s.

We bled for labor rights at the Battle of Blair Mountain.

It’s a myth that you keep perpetuating that we are all closed minded, bigoted regressionists. It diminishes the efforts of everyone from the coal miners to people like me while we try to make the region a better place.

It actually only worsens what you say that you wish you could “saw off into the ocean.” 

That's my home you're talking about.

Stereotype 2: Everyone is Obese

36.3% of the overall population of the Southeast is obese. This is true.

Have you considered why that may be? For starters, Southerners are more likely to be uninsured compared to individuals living in the rest of the country.

"Among the total nonelderly population, 15% of individuals in the South are uninsured compared to 10% of individuals in the rest of the country."

Partially because they didn't even expand the same Medicaid benefits to us. and partially because we are just so fucking poor. 

17% of the American South is below the poverty line, compared to 13% in the Midwest, 13% in the West, and 13% in the Northeast.

Percentages under 5% may not seem like much, but when you consider 1% of the total United States population is around 3,140,000 people, yeah, that adds up real quick.

How does this relate? Well...

Mississippi has 19.58% of its residents below the poverty line, and a 39.1% obesity rate.

West Virginia has 17.10% of its residents below the poverty line, and a 40.6 % obesity rate.

Kentucky has 16.61% of its residents below the poverty line, and a 40.4% obesity rate.

Are you seeing the trend?

We, generally speaking, are more likely to be unable to afford to feed ourselves wholesome foods, and we are less likely to be able to afford medical insurance--two things that are obviously important to maintaing good health and a "healthy" weight.

By the same token... 

Stereotype #3: We're All Uneducated 

The South and Appalachia are some of the lowest ranked in terms of educational funding and spending per pupil in the entire country. We don't even break the top 30 on the list, y'all.

49. Tennessee at $8,324 per pupil 47. Mississippi at $8,919 per pupil 45. Alabama at $9,636 per pupil 42. Kentucky at $10,010 per pupil 36. North Carolina at $10,613 per pupil 35. South Carolina at  $10,719 per pupil 33. Georgia at $10,893 per pupil 32. West Virginia at $10,984 per pupil

The top three best-funded states, by comparison, receive between $18k and $20k per pupil.

In terms of higher education, student loans are a death sentence for everyone but especially impoverished kids just looking for a way out. It just isn't feasible for most of us. And that's if we even tested well after going to shitty schools our whole lives. If we had better education, we'd have better literacy in all things, including critical thinking, allowing us to better see through the bullshit we are taught. But we don't. And you aren't helping the ones who are trying in spite of that.

Stereotype 4: Bad Teeth

Quickly going to touch on this one--when we consider a lack of access to affordable, healthy food, shitty medical insurance in general and our poverty rate, this one is kind of obvious. Even so:

“Dental coverage was significantly lower than the national average in the South Atlantic (45.6%), East South Central (45.6%), West South Central (45.9%), and Pacific (48.0%) regions.”

Every time you make a toothless hillbilly joke, ask if poverty is really the butt of the joke you want to be making.

These are just the most pervasive of them, imo. And they can all be underlined by extreme poverty which is absolutely by design.

It also contributes to why it isn’t so easy to “just leave” as we are so often dismissively told to do. Moving is expensive.

And why should we have to, anyway? Why should we have to flee our homes?

Why, for those who feel safe enough and/or have no other choice, should we not stay and fight to better the region?

And why can’t you other leftists get behind us and help us in our fight instead of perpetuating harmful stereotypes? We're your people, too.

Just some food for thought. And I hope some of y’all take a big ol bite.

[mariacallous]

Eleven abortion referendums will be in front of voters in 10 states this Election Day — the largest number of pro-choice amendments the country has ever seen during a single election cycle.

From red states like Missouri and South Dakota to blue states like New York, the abortion rights ballot measures could have a monumental impact on access throughout the country. Over 20 states have enacted abortion bans since the Supreme Court repealed federal abortion protections in 2022. Citizen-led initiatives, like most of this year’s abortion rights measures, have become the response to many of the near-total abortion bans passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures.

“This is a public health crisis that we have right now,” said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo, executive director at the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, who has worked with campaigns in all 10 states where an abortion rights amendment is in play. “The citizens, in the absence of their local elected officials, are addressing it. They’re taking power into their own hands.”

In 2022, there were six ballot measures addressing abortion, which at the time was the most in a single year. Voters protected abortion care in every state it was on the ballot during that election cycle, including in deeply Republican states like Kentucky. Ohio, a state with a long and extreme anti-abortion history, also voted to codify abortion rights into its state constitution just last year.

This year’s ballot measures range in their approaches to and levels of abortion protections. Nebraska will have two competing abortion measures, one to restrict access and one to expand. Maryland, New York and Colorado are all seeking to codify abortion protections throughout pregnancy — exceptions to the rest of the measures, which would primarily enshrine access until viability or around 24 weeks. Colorado’s Amendment 79 would also allow the use of public funds for abortion care. Missouri’s Amendment 3 would restore abortion access until viability and protect women from being prosecuted for pregnancy outcomes like miscarriage and stillbirth — a particularly progressive measure in a notoriously anti-abortion state.

If passed, most amendments would generally go into effect shortly after Election Day or at the start of 2025. Measures in Montana and South Dakota would tentatively go into effect in July 2025, while Nevada’s may not until 2026. There will be litigation in any state that passes a pro-choice measure; this is likely the time when states will bring legal challenges against successful ballot initiatives and fight to keep other abortion regulations like waiting periods and other long-standing targeted restrictions on abortion providers.

The historic number of abortion rights measures is emblematic of just how politically prominent abortion care has become. And despite conservatives who claim to want to “leave abortion to the states” since Roe fell, many did everything in their power to stop voters from weighing in on abortion rights measures.

“This is not just a reproductive freedom issue, it’s also a democracy issue,” Fields Figueredo said. “It’s about who has power and who has the determination to control what happens to their body.”

Arizona

Arizona’s Proposition 139 seeks to enshrine access to abortion up until fetal viability, or around 24 weeks, into the state constitution. If passed, the state of Arizona will not be able to limit access to abortion before viability unless the government “has a compelling reason and does so in the least restrictive way possible,” according to the measure. Under the amendment, also known as the Right to Abortion Initiative, abortions would be allowed after fetal viability only when the health or life of the pregnant person is at risk. The measure also bars future laws from punishing anyone who assists someone getting an abortion.

The state currently has a 15-week abortion ban in effect with no exceptions for rape or incest. Earlier this year, the Arizona state Supreme Court greenlit a near-total abortion ban that the Republican-controlled legislature voted to repeal.

The measure needs a simple majority to pass.

Colorado

Colorado’s pro-choice amendment would create a constitutional right to abortion care throughout pregnancy and mandate that Medicaid and private insurance companies cover abortion care. Amendment 79, also known as the Right to Abortion and Health Insurance Coverage Initiative, would repeal a 1984 addition in the Colorado constitution which barred the use of public funds for abortion care.

The measure is distinct for two reasons. Nearly every other state where abortion is on the ballot is trying to enshrine access until fetal viability, not throughout pregnancy. Additionally, requiring that abortion care be a covered service under all health insurance plans is a step pro-choice groups have been pushing for for decades.

The state does not currently restrict abortion at any point in pregnancy, making it a refuge for those who need abortion care later in pregnancy. The measure needs at least 55% of the vote to pass.

Florida

Amendment 4 would restore abortion access until viability by adding language to the Florida constitution that states “no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” The ballot measure, also titled Amendment to Limit Government Interference with Abortion, does not change the state’s current law that requires parental consent for a minor to obtain an abortion.

Since the Supreme Court repealed Roe v. Wade in 2022, the state passed a 15-week abortion ban with no exceptions for rape or incest and then a six-week ban with exceptions for rape or incest. Under the leadership of Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), Florida has become one of the most extreme anti-abortion states in the country. If voters restore abortion access until viability, it would reestablish Florida as a critical safe haven in the Southeast, where most states have near-total abortion bans.

Florida has a supermajority requirement for citizen-led ballot initiatives, meaning the amendment needs to get at least 60% of the vote to pass.

Maryland

Maryland’s Question 1 guarantees the right to reproductive freedom, defined in the measure as “the ability to make and effectuate decisions to prevent, continue, or end one’s own pregnancy.” The amendment specifies that the government cannot “directly or indirectly, deny, burden, or abridge the right unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”

The Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment would codify Maryland’s current law, which allows access to abortion care at any point in pregnancy and has made the state a safe haven for abortion access. It’s an exception to most other pro-choice measures on the ballot this year because it enshrines abortion access throughout pregnancy without limits. Colorado and New York are the only two other states where pro-choice groups are hoping to codify abortion access throughout pregnancy.

The amendment would pass with a simple majority.

Missouri

Amendment 3 would codify the right to reproductive freedom, including abortion access until fetal viability, into the Missouri constitution. The measure would protect the right to make decisions about other reproductive health issues including birth control, prenatal care, childbirth, postpartum care, miscarriage care and “respectful birthing conditions.” The Right to Reproductive Freedom initiative states plainly that, if passed, Missourians cannot be prosecuted for their pregnancy outcomes including miscarriage, stillbirth and abortion.

The initiative is extremely progressive for a deep-red state that has such a long anti-abortion history. The state only had three abortion clinics in 2017, and the last clinic closed shortly after Roe fell. Missouri currently has a near-total abortion ban with an exception to save the life of a pregnant person.

If the amendment passes, it would be a huge win for reproductive rights groups, and Missouri could become one of the few Midwest states with abortion access. But the state would still have a lot of work to do since many of the prior abortion regulations, such as Missouri’s 72-hour waiting period and ban on telemedicine, would need to be challenged in court.

The measure needs a simple majority to pass.

Montana

Montana’s Right to Abortion Initiative would enshrine the “right to make and carry out decisions about one’s own pregnancy, including the right to abortion” until fetal viability. The government could regulate abortion after viability except in cases where abortion care is needed to protect the life or health of the pregnant person. The measure also protects Montanans from being prosecuted for “actual, potential, perceived or alleged pregnancy outcomes,” as well as protecting anyone who helps someone seeking abortion care.

The amendment would codify the state’s current abortion law, which restricts abortion care after 24 weeks. Montana voters need a simple majority to pass the amendment.

Nebraska

Nebraska will have two ballot measures addressing abortion, one in favor of abortion rights and one against. It’s the first time competing abortion measures will be on a state ballot since the Supreme Court repealed Roe.

The pro-choice amendment, also known as the Right to Abortion Initiative, would enshrine abortion access until fetal viability into the state constitution. The measure opposed to abortion rights seeks to codify the state’s current 12-week abortion ban, or a ban on abortion after the first trimester. The anti-choice initiative does have exceptions for rape, incest and in cases of a medical emergency.

Both amendments need a simple majority to pass.

Nevada

Nevada’s Question 6 would enshrine the right to abortion access until viability and when necessary to protect the health or life of the pregnant person throughout pregnancy. The amendment states that the right to abortion until viability “shall not be denied, burdened, or infringed upon unless justified by a compelling state interest that is achieved by the least restrictive means.”

The measure, which needs a simple majority to pass, would enshrine Nevada’s current abortion law into the state constitution.

New York

Proposal 1 would amend New York’s Equal Rights Amendment to include protections for “pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and reproductive healthcare and autonomy” which would codify abortion protections throughout pregnancy. While it does not explicitly state abortion protections, including protections for pregnancy outcomes and reproductive decisions in the state constitution would safeguard abortion access in the state.

The state’s Equal Rights Amendment currently criminalizes the denial of rights to people based on “race, color, creed or religion.” Proposal 1 would add ethnicity, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, as well as reproductive health outcomes.

The initiative is noteworthy because, if passed, it will be the first equal rights amendment to include protections for pregnant people and pregnancy outcomes. Abortion is currently legal in New York until viability. Expanding the equal rights amendment to include pregnant people would codify the current law.

South Dakota

South Dakota’s Amendment G breaks down abortion protections by trimesters, similar to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The initiative would codify abortion protections until 13 weeks or through the first trimester, and then allow the government to regulate abortion in the second trimester “only in ways that are reasonably related to the physical health of the pregnant woman.” In the third trimester, the state could regulate or ban abortions except in instances when the health or life of the pregnant person is at risk.

If the measure passes it would be a huge win for abortion rights groups because the state currently has a near-total abortion ban with no exceptions other than to save the life of a pregnant person. Pro-choice groups would still have a long way to go in restoring abortion access in the state, however. Even before Roe fell, South Dakota only had one abortion clinic left and zero in-state providers, and some regulations — like the state’s 72-hour waiting period before being able to access care — would likely need to be challenged in court.

The initiative needs a simple majority to pass.

[eugenedebs1920]

What bizzaro alternate American timeline are we on? When did the United States start ignoring the Constitution? When did the good, honest, ethical citizens of this nation relinquish control over it? I must have missed that meeting because I don’t recall that sh*t

The timeline I grew up on, (although I had yet to be born) a sitting president was forced to resign over a cover up of illegal wire tapping among other things not nearly as corrupt. The timeline I grew up in a guy lost an election because he spelled potato wrong. The timeline in a guy almost got impeached because he had relations with a lady and said he didn’t. The timeline I grew up in America was the good guys. What happened!?

When did we urge the Supreme Court to allow corporations and the wealthy to purchase our elections?! When did we allow senators from Kentucky to block Supreme Court picks with no reasoning behind it?! When did we tell John Roberts racism had ended and we could remove voting protections from the Constitution!? When did we decide that a person can make fake electors to circumvent democracy, knowing lie about a stolen election to later stage a coup, then violate the Constitution again by allowing him to run for ANY federal office again? When, in any timeline can you steal classified documents, refuse to return them, then when the FBI raids where they are, there are more than 50 empty folders that once held top secret information, and you’re not locked the f*ck up!? When did we become an oligarchy?

I just don’t recall when this was acceptable. I simply can’t recall how this happened.

[patriottruth]

Dumb donald Chump crossed all my lines, so I told his crimes to the FBI. 'Cause Kamala needed cold hard proof, so I gave her some. Now she's got the envelope, where you think she got it from?

To report donald j. trump and all of his potential allies to the FBI for the federal crimes of 2024 election fraud:

https://tips.fbi.gov/home Choice 1: Federal Election Crime

Choice 2: Voter/Ballot Fraud/Corrupt Election Official

For the "Subject" information, choose "This subject is a business" Business Name: Electors and governors attempting to elect insurrectionist Donald J. Trump in violation of Sec3/14A

When did the crime occur? 11/05/2024

Where did the crime occur? Specific location: AL, AK, AZ, AR, FL, GA, ID, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV, WI, WY

How did you discover the election fraud? Donald J. Trump is an impeached, congressionally investigated, criminally indicted and prosecuted insurrectionist attempting to hold federal office in violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.

What false information was provided? The lies that a U.S. national popular vote, or a ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court, could clear Donald J. Trump's insurrectionist disqualification, instead of a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate.

Did the individual receive something in exchange for their illegal voting activity? Unknown

Did the subject vote multiple times or vote when ineligible to vote? Yes

Did an election official violate a voting law? Yes

Were ballots from the election destroyed? Unknown

Were vote tallies falsified? Unknown

Was there a voting machine/tabulation/software malfunction? Unknown

Please provide a brief description of the incident: On December 17th, 2024, state electors and governors from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming will be faced with the choices of engaging in fraud by an elections official or other individual, conspiracy against the United States, corruptly obstructing, influencing, and impeding an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights by giving aid and comfort to disqualified insurrectionist Donald J. Trump in violation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. State electors and governors attempting to vote for and create certificates of ascertainment to elect Donald J. Trump would be instantly disqualified from holding office per Sec3/14A, thereby rendering all their actions unlawful.

Are you reporting on behalf of yourself or someone else? Someone else

Victim Information: First Name: Kamala Middle Name: Devi Last Name: Harris Date of Birth: 10/20/1964 Phone Number: Business: (202) 456-1111 Email: vice.president@whitehouse.gov Address: 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500

Complainant Information: Please uncheck any fields you would prefer not to answer. You don't have to enter your personal information here if you don't want to.

Reported To Law Enforcement: Have you reported this information to another law enforcement or government agency (local, state, or federal)? No

At this point, you can click "Show All" to review your tip. Once you're satisfied with it, just click "Submit Tip" and you're good to go.

For anyone suggesting this is inaccurate, here you go (compiled from Wikipedia):

Article 2: Clause 3: Electoral College See also: Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Twentieth Amendment to the United States Constitution, Contingent election, Electoral College abolition amendment, Efforts to reform the United States Electoral College, and National Popular Vote Interstate Compact The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse [sic] by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse [sic] the President. But in chusing [sic] the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse [sic] from them by Ballot the Vice President.

Electoral College Elector Selection Process Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the Constitution requires each state legislature to determine how electors for the state are to be chosen, but it disqualifies any person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, from being an elector. Under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, any person who has sworn an oath to support the United States Constitution in order to hold either a state or federal office, and later rebelled against the United States directly or by giving assistance to those doing so, is disqualified from being an elector. Congress may remove this disqualification by a two-thirds vote in each house. (Wikipedia)

Conspiracy against the United States, or conspiracy to defraud the United States, is a federal offense in the United States of America under 18 U.S.C. § 371. The statute originated under a federal law enacted in 1867 that was codified in the Revised Statutes of the United States in 1874, in a subsequent codification of federal penal statutes in 1909, and ultimately in the United States Code in 1948. The crime is that of two or more persons who conspire to commit an offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States.

Statute 18 U.S.C. § 371 provides that:

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding is a felony under U.S. federal law. It was enacted as part of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 in reaction to the Enron scandal, and closed a legal loophole on who could be charged with evidence tampering by defining the new crime very broadly.

This part of the Act later became known as a charge against defendants associated with the 2021 U.S. Capitol attack for attempting to obstruct that year's Electoral College vote count, as well as former President Donald Trump for broader alleged activities to obstruct the election. In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in Fischer v. United States that the statute could only be applied when the defendant impaired a physical document or object used in an official proceeding or attempted to do so, a higher bar for conviction than had been used in trials to that point.

Legal basis The crime is codified as 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2). The relevant subsection reads:

(c) Whoever corruptly—

(1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

The term "official proceeding" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1515(a)(1) to include proceedings before federal judges, Congress, federal government agencies, and regulators of insurance businesses.

Conspiracy against rights is a federal offense in the United States of America under 18 U.S.C. § 241:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person […] in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;…

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Charges of conspiracy against rights concerning federal election offenses cover activities subverting the integrity of federal elections and do not require direct action towards an individual voter. Election conspiracies prosecuted under conspiracy against rights can be classified as either public schemes (where public officials commit a §241 violation under color of law) or private schemes (where conspirators impinge on the ability for voters to vote).

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced on July 18, 2023, that she had charged sixteen individuals with eight felony counts each, including forgery and conspiracy, alleging they had knowingly signed certificates of ascertainment falsely claiming they were "duly elected and qualified electors" for Michigan. One defendant entered into a cooperation agreement with prosecutors in October 2023 in exchange for charges against him being dropped. Nessel's office disclosed during an April 2024 court hearing that Trump, Meadows, Giuliani and Ellis were unindicted co-conspirators.

On August 1, 2023, at the request of Jack Smith and the Justice Department, a federal grand jury indicted Trump on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy against rights, obstructing an official proceeding and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding. The indictment accused Trump of orchestrating a criminal conspiracy to subvert the 2020 election, and identified the fake electors scheme as part of the conspiracy.

On August 15, 2023, Trump and eighteen others were indicted in Georgia. The defendants, who included Trump, Giuliani, Eastman, Meadows, Chesebro, Sidney Powell, David Shafer and Shawn Still among others, were charged with a variety of offenses, many of which related to involvement in the fake electors plot. On October 20, Chesebro pleaded guilty to conspiring to file a false document and was sentenced to five years of probation; he also agreed to testify against the other defendants. Three other defendants (including Powell) also pleaded guilty to charges.

On December 6, 2023, a Clark County, Nevada, grand jury indicted six Republican party officials, including the chair of the Nevada Republican Party, on two felony charges each of submitting fraudulent documents to state and local officials.

By December 2023, 24 fake electors had been criminally charged in three states, and Chesebro was "a witness in all of the cases". However, in January 2024, the Attorney General of New Mexico stated that the fake electors couldn't be prosecuted given the laws of that state.

An Arizona grand jury named eleven alleged fake electors in an April 2024 indictment. Among those named were former Arizona Republican Party chair Kelli Ward and Tyler Bowyer, chief operating officer of Turning Point USA. Names of seven others charged were redacted from the indictment, and Trump was listed as "Unindicted Coconspirator 1". The Washington Post reported the redacted individuals were Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Christina Bobb, Boris Epshteyn and Mike Roman. The Post reported that names of those indicted who were not in Arizona were redacted until they could be served with their indictments.