Wednesday, May 11, 2016
US v. NC
The U.S. sued North Carolina, and North Carolina sued the U.S. over North Carolina's new law on LGBT rights.
I gotta say, the U.S. had the better speech announcing their suit. Loretta Lynch really meant it.
Comments:
<< Home
So, I was less impressed with General Lynch than you were. I felt like she was a bit all over the place and bordered on "reductio ad Hitlerum" (or, at the very least, "waving the bloody shirt").
As far as it being a bit scattered, I felt like she confused news reporters all over the country with her argument, as I was astonished by the number of reputable news orgs (including NPR) that kept reporting "Title IX" as part of the CRA 1964.
Moreover, I resent the escalation of this issue. I agreed with you a few weeks ago when the Razor intimated that this contretemps did not merit such overwhelming national attention. Now, from an administration fast becoming notable for a rather mercurial utilization of its prosecutorial discretion, we are told that this is a landmark civil right case.
As far as it being a bit scattered, I felt like she confused news reporters all over the country with her argument, as I was astonished by the number of reputable news orgs (including NPR) that kept reporting "Title IX" as part of the CRA 1964.
Moreover, I resent the escalation of this issue. I agreed with you a few weeks ago when the Razor intimated that this contretemps did not merit such overwhelming national attention. Now, from an administration fast becoming notable for a rather mercurial utilization of its prosecutorial discretion, we are told that this is a landmark civil right case.
I think she does "mean it," but has trouble explaining why in legal terms.
And McCrory does NOT mean it. He had no desire to be drawn into this swamp. This is guy who ran on bread and butter issues. Not social issues. But the Republicans (almost all of whom have gerrymandered safe seats) in the legislature dragged him into it. He should have just vetoed the bill like Gov. Deal did in Georgia, but McCrory fears the GOP base -- the people who will decide if gets the nomination again.
And that's the problem on the National level. The Republicans in Congress and party activists, thanks to gerrymandered seats, are far more conservative and concerned about these sorts of issues than the average voter.
One of the interesting aspects of the Trump ascendancy is how LITTLE these issues matter to most voters, the people who vote in open highly publicized primaries. But the do matter, A LOT, a a vocal minority -- the people who control local and state party apparatuses and vote in primaries for State legislatures and Congress
And McCrory does NOT mean it. He had no desire to be drawn into this swamp. This is guy who ran on bread and butter issues. Not social issues. But the Republicans (almost all of whom have gerrymandered safe seats) in the legislature dragged him into it. He should have just vetoed the bill like Gov. Deal did in Georgia, but McCrory fears the GOP base -- the people who will decide if gets the nomination again.
And that's the problem on the National level. The Republicans in Congress and party activists, thanks to gerrymandered seats, are far more conservative and concerned about these sorts of issues than the average voter.
One of the interesting aspects of the Trump ascendancy is how LITTLE these issues matter to most voters, the people who vote in open highly publicized primaries. But the do matter, A LOT, a a vocal minority -- the people who control local and state party apparatuses and vote in primaries for State legislatures and Congress
It's personal for Loretta Lynch. She's a black woman who grew up in North Carolina.
I grew up there, too, and it infuriates me that NC is in the news for this and other regressive actions. On the one hand, I think the bathroom law will be almost impossible to enforce (are there going to be police stationed at bathrooms? Are there going to be signs on every bathroom in state institutions announcing this law? What's the penalty going to be?)---so in the end it may be inconsequential even if it stands.
But it does harken back to whites-only and blacks-only restrictions in public places, and it's an insidious step put forth by those conservative Republicans in gerrymandered districts. I'm nonplussed by where my state is going, because it's gotten much worse since McCrory was elected. I'm wondering if there's a lot of outside money coming in to push and bolster and empower this bunch of Republicans with safe seats.
Post a Comment
I grew up there, too, and it infuriates me that NC is in the news for this and other regressive actions. On the one hand, I think the bathroom law will be almost impossible to enforce (are there going to be police stationed at bathrooms? Are there going to be signs on every bathroom in state institutions announcing this law? What's the penalty going to be?)---so in the end it may be inconsequential even if it stands.
But it does harken back to whites-only and blacks-only restrictions in public places, and it's an insidious step put forth by those conservative Republicans in gerrymandered districts. I'm nonplussed by where my state is going, because it's gotten much worse since McCrory was elected. I'm wondering if there's a lot of outside money coming in to push and bolster and empower this bunch of Republicans with safe seats.
<< Home
