She got 12 years for $31 of pot. Years after her parole, she was jailed for the unpaid court fees.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/09/12/patricia-spottedcrow-marijuana-year-sentence/

This article is from September 12, 2019.  However it is a reminder of several factors of our justice system.  First the hysteria around cannabis needs to be addressed at the federal level.  I don’t know if it is older people not able to process that reefer madness was a complete lie made up to scare people / kids off using the devil’s weed.  The other thing I noticed was that the sentence was way over the top.  Why?   Racism clearly.  She is Native American in a state known for being very racist against the first people.  The third thing I noticed was the lack of rehabilitation the state had just looking for her to be returned to prison.  The lack of support for a former inmate, the stigma of the conviction in the population, and the crazy need for the state to keep applying more pressure to get money / harass a former inmate until they break and are returned to prison. Please notice the difference in treatment a poor woman got in the legal system vs what wealthy tRump got.  Hugs

===============================================================

 

Sitting in her jail cell this week, Patricia Spottedcrow couldn’t imagine where she was going to get the money she needed for her release.

In 2010, the young Oklahoma mother, who had been caught selling $31 worth of marijuana to a police informant after financial troubles caused her to lose her home, was sentenced to 12 years in prison. It was her first-ever offense, and the lengthy sentence drew national attention, sparking a movement that led to her early release.

 
 

But once she was home free, Spottedcrow still owed thousands in court fees that she struggled to pay, since her felony conviction made it difficult to find a job. Notices about overdue payments piled up, with late fees accumulating on top of the original fines. On Monday, the 34-year-old was arrested on a bench warrant that required her to stay in jail until she could come up with $1,139.90 in overdue fees, which she didn’t have. Nearly a decade after her initial arrest, she was still ensnarled in the criminal justice system, and had no idea when she would see her kids again.

 
 

“I had no idea how I was going to pay this off,” Spottedcrow told KFOR on Wednesday, after strangers raised the money for her release. “I knew I was going to be sitting here for a while.”

In 2011, Spottedcrow became an unwitting poster child for criminal justice reform when the Tulsa World featured her in a series about women incarcerated in Oklahoma. Then 25, she had just entered prison for the first time, and didn’t expect to be reunited with her young children until they were teenagers.

At the time of her arrest, Spottedcrow was unemployed and without a permanent home, the paper reported. She was staying at her mother’s house in the small town of Kingfisher, Okla., when a police informant showed up and bought an $11 bag of marijuana. Two weeks later, he returned to buy another $20 worth of the drug from Spottedcrow. Both mother and daughter were charged with distribution of a controlled substance, and, because Spottedcrow’s children were at home when the transaction took place, possession of a dangerous substance in the presence of a minor.

 
 

“I was home on vacation and it was just there, and I thought we could get some extra money,” Spottedcrow told the paper. “I’ve lost everything because of it.”

The two women both were offered plea deals that would have netted them only two years in prison, the World reported, but Spottedcrow didn’t want her 50-year-old mother, who has health issues, incarcerated. Because neither had a prior criminal record and they had sold only a small amount of pot, they took their chances and pleaded guilty without negotiating a sentencing agreement, assuming they would be granted probation.

Instead, the judge sentenced Spottedcrow to 10 years in prison for the distribution charge, plus another two years for possession. Her mother received a 30-year suspended sentence so that she could take care of the children. Kingfisher County Associate District Judge Susie Pritchett, who retired not long afterward, told the World she thought the sentence was lenient. The mother-daughter pair had been behind “an extensive operation,” she claimed, adding, “It was a way of life for them.”

 
 

Spottedcrow said that wasn’t true. “I’ve never been in trouble, and this is a real eye-opener,” she told the paper at the start of her prison stint. “My lifestyle is not like this. I’m not coming back. I’m going to get out of here, be with my kids and live my life.”

Share this articleShare

After the World’s story published in 2011, supporters rallied around Spottedcrow’s cause, urging officials to reconsider her punishment. At the time, Oklahoma had the highest per capita rate of female incarceration in the country, a title it continues to hold today. Advocates contended that lengthy sentences like hers were part of the problem, and questioned whether racial bias could have played a role — Spottedcrow is part Native American and part African American.

That same year, a different judge reviewed Spottedcrow’s sentence and agreed to shave off four years. Then, in 2012, then-Gov. Mary Fallin (R) approved her parole. Spottedcrow got home in time to surprise her kids when they stepped off the school bus. The American Civil Liberties Union described her release as a “bittersweet victory,” noting that serving only two years of a 12-year sentence was highly unusual, but the penalty that she received for a first-time, nonviolent drug offense wasn’t out of the ordinary for Oklahoma.

 
 

It also wasn’t the end of her troubles. In 2017, five years after Spottedcrow was released from prison, Ginnie Graham, a columnist for the World, checked in to see how she was doing. The picture that she painted was dispiriting: Spottedcrow’s growing family was living in a motel off the interstate because having a felony drug conviction on her record made it virtually impossible for her to find housing, and she hadn’t been able to find work, either.

“I’ve never had Section 8 or HUD, but I need it now,” she said. “I even called my (Cheyenne and Arapahoe) tribe to help, and they didn’t. I called the shelters, and they don’t take large families.”

That same year, at a forum on criminal justice reform, Spottedcrow explained that she couldn’t go back to working in nursing homes like she had done before her arrest because of her felony conviction. And in a small town like Kingfisher, every other potential employer already knew about her legal woes.

 
 

“I can’t even go in and act like I feel good about getting this job, because they already know who I am,” she said. “So it’s been really hard.”

While Spottedcrow struggled to care for her six children, the Kingfisher County Court Clerk’s Office mailed out more than a dozen notices saying she had fallen behind on her payments. Each letter meant that the court had tacked on another $10 fine, and that another $80 would be added on top of that if the office didn’t get the money within 10 days. When Spottedcrow first reported to prison, she owed $2,740 in fines. After her release, she made payments at least every other month, according to the World. But it barely made an impact on her ballooning debt: When she was arrested this week, she owed $3,569.76.

“We ask folks for years and years to continue to not have any interaction with law enforcement, to pay these fines and fees, and to pay for this supervision,” Nicole McAfee, director of policy and advocacy for the ACLU of Oklahoma, told KFOR. “In a way, we just oftentimes set folks up for failure.”

 
 

Spottedcrow’s arrest on Monday brought renewed attention to her nearly decade-old court case. KFOR morning news anchor Ali Meyer, who detailed the saga in a widely shared Twitter thread, noted that cannabis has been a booming industry in Oklahoma ever since the state legalized medical marijuana in 2018, and left it up to doctors to determine who qualified.

On Tuesday afternoon, Meyer posted the number for the Kingfisher County Court Clerk’s Office, which would allow anyone to make payments on Spottedcrow’s behalf. By Wednesday, seven anonymous supporters had covered not just the $1,139.90 that she needed to get out of jail, but her entire $3,569.76 outstanding balance, the station reported.

Smiling broadly as she left the Oklahoma County Jail, Spottedcrow thanked the strangers whose donations meant she was finally free.

“It’s amazing,” she said. “It feels wonderful. I don’t even know what to say. It just feels really good. I feel like I hit the lotto.”

Trump’s sweeping deportation threat is unworkable and aimed at ‘rabid’ Republicans, says Newt Gingrich

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/13/trump-immigration-newt-gingrich

Well well well.  Now that he got his party / his guy elected, he admits it was all just a game that was not possible.  He is trying to shove some of the years of slime off himself and crawl to the side of good.   Too late Newt.  You choose your path, stay in your pen or your own fellows will turn on you and destroy you themselves.  Hugs

==================================================================

Former US House speaker says documented people, Dreamers, mothers and children must not be deported

 

Man in suit speaks into microphone

Newt Gingrich during the Republican national convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on 17 July 2024. Photograph: Patrick T Fallon/AFP/Getty Images

Newt Gingrich, the former US House speaker and presidential hopeful, said a section of his own Republican party was “rabid” over immigration and predicted Donald Trump’s suggestion that he could deport documented people as well as millions of undocumented people will not come to pass.

“I’d be very surprised if you see any significant effort to change the game for people who are here legally,” Gingrich said, weeks before Trump’s return to the White House. “I just think there’s a very small faction of the party that’s rabid about this.”

 

He also warned that public support for mass deportations would “collapse” if stories began to come out “about mothers or babies or children being deported”.

The president-elect may not welcome Gingrich’s intervention. After all, Trump won last year’s election promising mass deportations involving the armed forces and detention camps. He has chosen ultra-hardliners including Tom Homan and Stephen Miller and has suggested his administration will attempt to remove children and documented people, telling NBC: “I don’t want to be breaking up families, so the only way you don’t break up the family is you keep them together and you have to send them all back.”

Also at issue is the fate of millions of so-called Dreamers, undocumented people who were children when they were brought to the US, and Trump’s vow to remove birthright citizenship, a right protected by the 14th amendment but which Trump says he will strike down by executive order.

Amid widespread predictions of chaos and protest, Gingrich said he was “passionately in favor of trying to help find a path to create legality for the Dreamers”, a position that may put him less at odds with Trump, given Trump’s suggestion he might accept a deal on the matter.

Gingrich continued: “It’s nonsense to say somebody who came here when they were two, only speaks English, graduated as a high school valedictorian and is currently a nurse or a doctor should be deported. We’re going to deport them and they don’t speak the language of whatever country their parents came from, and they’ve earned the right to be Americans?

“ … I think [the Trump administration has to] to realize that there are gradations here that we’re dealing with, and try to think through, how do you both meet the long-term identity and national security interests of the country and meet the human concerns. And I think it’s a real challenge.”

Now 81, Gingrich was a Georgia representative from 1979 to 1999, the last four years as House speaker. In 2012, he ran for the Republican presidential nomination. A prolific author, he remains close to Trump, to whom he offered advice during the attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

Gingrich spoke to the Guardian to mark the release of Journey to America with Newt and Callista Gingrich, a PBS documentary made with his wife about immigrants who have made major contributions to US public life.

“We are a nation of law despite some of the things that have been said [by Trump and his allies],” he said. “And I think that if you have legal standing in the American system, it’s very difficult to deport you. On the other hand, if you have no legal standing, it’s pretty easy to deport you, right? And I’m for doing the easy first. That’s why we should give [Dreamers] legal status, as a practical matter.”

Along those lines, Gingrich has put out a seven-step immigration plan, perhaps for Trump to consider.

Gingrich offered another warning: “Lincoln once said that with popular sentiment, anything is possible; without popular sentiment, nothing is possible. Well, you get very many human stories about mothers or babies or children being deported, then support for the deportation program will collapse.”

Let’s talk about no drill baby drilling in Alaska, Biden, and a question….

Local Unitarian churches host Big Gay Wedding Day to support LGBTQ+ rights amid uncertainty

https://www.wxxinews.org/local-news/2025-01-12/local-unitarian-churches-host-big-gay-wedding-day-to-support-lgbtq-rights-amid-uncertainty

I post this to again affirm that not all Christian denominations / churches are bigoted racist jerks using their holy book to bash others they don’t like.  There are many good supportive Christians in the world as there are members of other faiths along with people of no faith.  We should call out the bigots who use their religion to control others rather than as a guide for how they live their lives.  But remember we must not blame all religious people / people of faith for the actions of those who are abusive of others.  I am a live and let live person.  I don’t want to control the lives of other people.  I can barely handle being an adult in my own life, I don’t need the job of telling everyone else how to live.  The caveat I will add to the live and let live way of life, it assumes others do not want to cause harm to others.  Society has a responsibility to protect and care for each other and protect those who need such from those who do not respect the personhood of others.   Hugs

=================================================================

 

WXXI News | By Stephanie Ballard-Foster
Published January 12, 2025 at 10:48 AM EST
 
Beth Bloom (L) and Pat Uleskey (R), among the couples getting married Saturday in downtown Rochester.
Stephanie Ballard-Foster
/
WXXI News
Beth Bloom (L) and Pat Uleskey (R), among the couples getting married Saturday in downtown Rochester.
 

Love and resilience were on full display this past weekend at the inaugural Big Gay Wedding Day, held at Rochester’s First Universalist Church.

Organized by local Unitarian Universalist congregations, including First Unitarian Church of Rochester, First Universalist Church of Rochester and the Unitarian Universalist Church of Canandaigua, the free event offered LGBTQ+ couples the opportunity to marry in a safe and affirming environment.

The event came at a time of growing concern over potential shifts in federal policies that some worry could threaten marriage equality and other LGBTQ+ protections under the incoming administration. Advocacy groups have voiced fears that hard-won rights for queer and trans individuals may be at risk.

Caliana (L) and Angelas Rolon Torres (R) who were among the couples getting married Saturday in downtown Rochester.
Stephanie Ballard-Foster
/
WXXI News
Caliana (L) and Angelas Rolon Torres (R) who were among the couples getting married Saturday in downtown Rochester.

Rev. Lane-Mairead Campbell, Minister of the First Universalist Church of Rochester and one of the event’s organizers, said the importance of providing certainty and support for LGBTQ+ couples in the face of these challenges cannot be overstated.

“We’re seeing anti-transgender legislation being upheld and passed like across our country, and so this is a way that we could provide some certainty for our community and be able to provide some space to be able to get married legally, safely, quickly, inexpensively,” said Campbell.

Local vendors were on hand to donate flowers, cakes and professional photography services to create a celebratory atmosphere. After the ceremonies, couples and their supporters gathered for a reception.

Rev. Shari Halliday-Quan, Lead Minister at the First Unitarian Church and an event organizer, said her own experience demonstrates why events like this are important. In 2012, same-sex marriage was illegal in New York, so she and her now-wife planned to marry in Massachusetts, where their Unitarian Universalist congregation welcomed same-sex weddings. By the time they wed, New York had legalized same-sex marriage, allowing them to marry at home.

A wedding cake at an event in downtown Rochester on Saturday, titled, 'Big Gay Wedding.' Local vendors donated flowers, cakes, and professional photography for the event which was organized by LGBTQ+ advocates.
Stephanie Ballard-Foster
/
WXXI News
A wedding cake at an event in downtown Rochester on Saturday, titled, ‘Big Gay Wedding.’ Local vendors donated flowers, cakes, and professional photography for the event which was organized by LGBTQ+ advocates.

Even though more than a decade has passed, Halliday-Quan said the need to create safe and affirming spaces for queer couples remains pressing.

“It matters deeply,” she said. “I think today, that right now, we’re helping couples secure rights that they’re worried will be taken away. We all hope that that won’t be the case. But what I want folks to know, and what I think today really celebrates and uplifts, is that queer and trans people have a place in our community, that you are loved and worthy.”

Among the couples married during the event were Caliana and Angeles Rolon Torres, who first discovered the opportunity while scrolling through Instagram. The couple, grateful for the chance to marry without financial barriers, said the event was especially meaningful after facing financial struggles.

“It means the world in that regard,” said Caliana. “The fact that we can do something like this, and there’s any organization doing something like this that enables people to get married, not only for free, but also before people are worried about it and things like that, is incredible. Like, outside of the marriage itself, the fact that this is happening is an amazing concept.”

Since the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York in 2011, more than 25,000 same-sex couples in the state have tied the knot. Nationally, there are an estimated 711,000 married same-sex couples in the United States.

Yesterday an event by the same name was held in Missouri courtesy of the local Pride organization.

House GOP puts Medicaid, ACA, climate measures on chopping block

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/10/spending-cuts-house-gop-reconciliation-medicaid-00197541

This is more than the general republican wish to hurt poor people to help the wealthy.  This is about the tRump tax cut give aways to the very wealthy in the US costing the add of 8 trillion to the national debt.  The republicans wrote the bill so the minor cuts to the lower income’s taxes sunset with in a couple years, but the wealthy people got to keep theirs for ten years.  Now they are due to sunset and the government will receive a huge influx of revenue again to pay the bills of running a country, paying for the world’s largest bloated military, and to help the poorest people in the country survive with some dignity.  But tRump and the republicans are determined to make those cuts permanent and never ending while constantly pushing for more cuts to their taxes.  Their goal is to push the entire cost of running the government on to those least able to pay for it, the lower incomes while the upper incomes pay little to nothing.  Then using the complaints of the people that their taxes are too high they will cut social services and the social safety nets for the poorest among us including the elderly and disabled.  Plus they will stop funding road repairs and other infrastructure projects and when people complain will privatize the roads, selling sections to companies who will be able to charge tolls of any amount they wish to make profit off the public needing to get somewhere.  How we stop them I don’t know.  Idiots worried about the price of eggs bought every lie tRump made about how he was going to magically bring all the prices down to 2020 levels … when the stores were empty and we had no toilet paper.  Now he admits that he can not and will not be lowering prices, and the cult is not getting upset about being lied to by the leader of their cult.   Hugs

lawmakers estimating Trump’s domestic policy agenda — including tax cuts and border security proposals — costing as much as $10 trillion over the coming decade.

=============================================================

The menu of potential spending offsets has been circulated by House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington.

Rep. Jodey Arrington gives the thumbs-up sign.
 

House Republicans are passing around a “menu” of more than $5 trillion in cuts they could use to bankroll President-elect Donald Trump’s top priorities this year, including tax cuts and border security.

The early list of potential spending offsets obtained by POLITICO includes changes to Medicare and ending Biden administration climate programs, along with slashing welfare and “reimagining” the Affordable Care Act.

Five people familiar with the document said those provisions are options to finance Republicans’ massive party-line reconciliation bill or other spending reform efforts, including those being spearheaded by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency.

The people, granted anonymity to discuss closed-door negotiations, said that the list originated from the House Budget Committee, chaired by Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas). Republicans involved in the reconciliation plans have been generally targeting the listed programs for several months, but internal GOP fights over trillions of dollars in potential cuts are just beginning.

The overall savings add up to as much as $5.7 trillion over 10 years, though the list is highly ambitious and unlikely to all become law given narrow margins for Republicans in the House and Senate.

Cuts to Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act and the country’s largest anti-hunger program would spark massive opposition from Democrats and would also face some GOP resistance. House Speaker Mike Johnson can’t afford any Republican defections if he wants to pass a package on party lines.

Even proposed cuts to green energy tax credits, worth as much as $500 billion, could be tricky — as the document notes, they depend “on political viability.” Already 18 House Republicans — 14 of whom won reelection in November — warned Johnson against prematurely repealing some of the IRA’s energy tax credits, which are funding multiple manufacturing projects in GOP districts.

A House GOP source said that the “document is not intended to serve as a proposal, but instead as a menu of potential spending reductions for members to consider.”

Johnson and GOP leaders are hunting for trillions of dollars in cuts, with lawmakers estimating Trump’s domestic policy agenda — including tax cuts and border security proposals — costing as much as $10 trillion over the coming decade.

Johnson, with scores of House Republicans this week to chart the way forward, and groups of GOP members are set to meet with Trump in Florida this weekend.

In addition to Medicaid and ACA cuts, the document floats clawing back bipartisan infrastructure and Inflation Reduction Act funding.

One senior GOP lawmaker, asked if there were any particularly controversial spending offsets dividing Republicans, replied: “They all feel pretty controversial.”

Johnson agreed to make $2.5 trillion in spending cuts through the budget reconciliation process as part of last year’s government funding negotiations. Asked in a brief interview Wednesday evening if he was targeting $5 trillion in spending offsets, he replied, “Not sure yet.”

The policy menu suggests Republicans could capture major savings from Medicaid — up to an estimated $2.3 trillion. The list includes so-called per-capita caps on Medicaid for states, meaning the program would be paid for based on population instead of being an open-ended entitlement, and would institute work requirements in the program.

The list also includes a policy to equalize payments in Medicaid for able-bodied adults with those of traditional Medicaid enrollment — those with disabilities or low-income children, which would save up to $690 billion.

It would “recapture” $46 billion in savings from Affordable Care Act health insurance plan subsidies, which are set to expire at the end of the year, setting up a major policy battle. It would also limit eligibility for plans based on citizenship status.

Also on the chopping block are President Joe Biden’s climate policies, which are estimated to yield as much as $468 billion. That includes Trump’s repeated promise to repeal Biden’s “EV mandate,” as well as discontinuing “Green New Deal” provisions from the bipartisan infrastructure law and green energy grants from the IRA.

The green energy cuts could be particularly tricky from a political perspective. GOP lawmakers have long backed some technologies supported under the climate law, including supporting hydrogen, biofuels and carbon capture.

Suggestions for Resources, Actions

Building an open web that protects us from harm

We live in a world where right-wing nationalism is on the rise and many governments, including the incoming Trump administration, are promising mass deportations. Trump in particular has discussed building camps as part of mass deportations. This question used to feel more hypothetical than it does today.

Faced with this reality, it’s worth asking: who would stand by you if this kind of authoritarianism took hold in your life?

You can break allyship down into several key areas of life:

  • Who in your personal life is an ally? (Your friends, acquaintances, and extended family.)
  • Who in your professional life is an ally? (People you work with, people in partner organizations, and your industry.)
  • Who in civic life is an ally? (Your representatives, government workers, individual members of law enforcement, healthcare workers, and so on.)
  • Which service providers are allies? (The people you depend on for goods and services — including stores, delivery services, and internet services.)

And in turn, can be broken down further:

  • Who will actively help you evade an authoritarian regime?
  • Who will refuse to collaborate with a regime’s demands?

These two things are different. There’s also a third option — non-collaboration but non-refusal — which I would argue does not constitute allyship at all. This might look like passively complying with authoritarian demands when legally compelled, without taking steps to resist or protect the vulnerable. While this might not seem overtly harmful, it leaves those at risk exposed. As Naomi Shulman points out, the most dangerous complicity often comes from those who quietly comply. Nice people made the best Nazis.

For the remainder of this post, I will focus on the roles of internet service vendors and protocol authors in shaping allyship and resisting authoritarianism.

For these groups, refusing to collaborate means that you’re not capitulating to active demands by an authoritarian regime, but you might not be actively considering how to help people who are vulnerable. The people who are actively helping, on the other hand, are actively considering how to prevent someone from being tracked, identified, and rounded up by a regime, and are putting preventative measures in place. (These might include implementing encryption at rest, minimizing data collection, and ensuring anonymity in user interactions.)

If we consider an employer, refusing to collaborate means that you won’t actively hand over someone’s details on request. Actively helping might mean aiding someone in hiding or escaping to another jurisdiction.

These questions of allyship apply not just to individuals and organizations, but also to the systems we design and the technologies we champion. Those of us who are involved in movements to liberate social software from centralized corporations need to consider our roles. Is decentralization enough? Should we be allies? What kind of allies?

This responsibility extends beyond individual actions to the frameworks we build and the partnerships we form within open ecosystems. While building an open protocol that makes all content public and allows indefinite tracking of user activity without consent may not amount to collusion, it is also far from allyship. Partnering with companies that collaborate with an authoritarian regime, for example by removing support for specific vulnerable communities and enabling the spread of hate speech, may also not constitute allyship. Even if it furthers your immediate stated technical and business goals to have that partner on board, it may undermine your stated social goals. Short-term compromises for technical or business gains may seem pragmatic but risk undermining the ethics that underpin open and decentralized systems.

Obviously, the point of an open protocol is that anyone can use it. But we should avoid enabling entities that collude with authoritarian regimes to become significant contributors to or influencers of open protocols and platforms. While open protocols can be used by anyone, we must distinguish between passive use and active collaboration. Enabling authoritarian-aligned entities to shape the direction or governance of these protocols undermines their potential for liberation.

In light of Mark Zuckerberg’s clear acquiescence to the incoming Trump administration (for example by rolling back DEI, allowing hate speech, and making a series of bizarre statements designed to placate Trump himself), I now believe Threads should not be allowed to be an active collaborator to open protocols unless it can attest that it will not collude, and that it will protect vulnerable groups using its platforms from harm. I also think Bluesky’s AT Protocol decision to make content and user blocks completely open and discoverable should be revisited. I also believe there should be an ethical bill of rights for users on open social media protocols that authors should sign, which includes the right to privacy, freedom from surveillance, safeguards against hate speech, and strong protections for vulnerable communities.

As builders, users, and advocates of open systems, we must demand transparency, accountability, and ethical commitments from all contributors to open protocols. Without these safeguards, we risk creating tools that enable oppression rather than resisting it. Allyship demands more than neutrality — it demands action.

https://werd.io/2025/building-an-open-web-that-protects-us-from-harm

Peace & Justice History for 1/11

January 11, 1952
The Peace Pledge Union organized “Operation Gandhi,” which became the first British protest against nuclear weapons. Ten members staged a “sit-down” at the War Office in London.
===================================
January 11, 1998

Twenty-five thousand occupied the site of one of 30 dams to be built on the Narmada River in India.

They objected to a World Bank-funded project to build 30 large, 135 medium and 3000 small dams to harness the waters of the Narmada and its tributaries to provide electrical power and irrigation to Gujarat and Rajasthan provinces.Local residents known as Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save the Narmada movement), organized as they became concerned about their livelihoods, the dams’ environmental impact and a host of other issues.
The largest proposed dam, Sardar Sarovar, would submerge 61 villages and displace more than 320,000 people.
A Brief Introduction to the Narmada Issue 
International Rivers project 
=====================================
January 11, 2002

The first of the detainees/enemy combatants arrived at Guantánamo Bay, the U.S. military base on the southeastern coast of Cuba.

Detainees in a plane on their way to Guantanamo
Detailed report of the status of Guantánamo detainees 

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryjanuary.htm#january11

The Beginning Of The End For Gay Marriage

Jill Bearup’s Transphobia is Even Worse in 2025 (Just Stab Me Now)

Again Ethel is a woman I have been following since she was a teenager.  She has gone through all the stages of transitioning, from doubt, trying to make it something else to finally admitting to herself and the world she is a woman and now living her life as one.   The grand thing is she still fights so very hard for trans people despite the costs to her for taking on one of the growing popular atheist anti-trans people and others. She lost 2/3rd her income but never backed down, always telling the truth.  She makes every video well researched and documents it, also she provides a transcript for those who would rather read than listen.  I admit I admire her and her strength in her life struggles.  But if you wish to learn more about those attacking trans stuff or the false idea that trans women are destroying female sports,  I would watch her videos.   Hugs

The 19th Explains: How Trump’s Cabinet nominees will get confirmed

Originally published by The 19th

The 119th Congress was officially sworn in Friday, meaning the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate will soon begin the process of confirming President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees

Article II of the U.S. Constitution enables the president to appoint officials to the Cabinet and other positions with the “advice and consent” of the Senate. Many of the committees, all of which have a majority of Republicans, will hold hearings on the nominees related to their area of expertise: the Senate Judiciary Committee, for example, holds hearings for the nominees for attorney general and other top posts at the Department of Justice. Those hearings will begin soon, with senators likely prioritizing confirming nominees to national security positions. 

Republicans will control the Senate 53 to 47 seats once Senator-elect Jim Justice of West Virginia is sworn in later in January and Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine appoints a senator to fill Vice President-elect JD Vance’s seat. 

Some nominees like Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, are expected to easily sail through the Senate, while others are likely to garner more opposition and scrutiny. Here’s how the process will work: 

When do hearings start?

Sen. Roger Wicker, who leads the Senate Armed Services Committee, is set to hold Pete Hegseth’s confirmation hearing for secretary of defense starting January 14, even before Trump’s inauguration. The hearing for former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard’s nomination for director of national intelligence in the Senate Intelligence Committee is also set to take place that week, according to Punchbowl News. The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to prioritize confirming Pam Bondi, Trump’s nominee for attorney general, and his nominees for deputy attorneys general before taking up the nomination of Kash Patel to lead the FBI, the outlet reported.  

Are hearings required for every nominee?  

Not necessarily. There are over 1,300 political appointee positions that require Senate confirmation, and some nominees, like military promotions, often go straight to the Senate floor. But nominees for the Cabinet and other high-profile political appointments almost always have confirmation hearings. 

What happens at a confirmation hearing?

Before a hearing, senators on relevant committees will request biographical information and a financial disclosure from the nominee. At the hearing, senators will ask questions about a nominee’s background, their qualifications and their views. Nominees for positions that require a security clearance also traditionally undergo an FBI background check. 

Gabbard and Patel are expected to draw scrutiny for their records and stances on national security issues. Democrats will likely question Hegseth about a past allegation of sexual assault against him, which he denies, as well as his previous comments opposing women in combat roles. Senators on both sides of the aisle are also likely to question Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump’s nominee for Health and Human Services secretary, on his views on abortion, vaccines and food policy. 

How does a nominee get confirmed after a hearing?  

After a committee holds a hearing, its members can report the nomination favorably or unfavorably to the full Senate for a final vote. In 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid led his fellow Senate Democrats in changing the chamber’s rules to require only a simple majority to invoke cloture, or end debate, on presidential nominations other than Supreme Court nominees. A simple majority is also needed for final confirmation. In 2017, then-Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Republicans also lowered the threshold for Supreme Court nominees.  

Historically, it’s been very rare for the Senate to reject a president’s Cabinet nominee. The last time the Senate voted down a Cabinet nominee was in 1989, when senators rejected Sen. John Tower, then-President George H.W. Bush’s nominee for defense secretary, due to concerns about his drinking. Some Cabinet nominees like former Rep. Matt Gaetz, Trump’s first pick for attorney general, also bow out of the process before they go up for confirmation.