Is the Right to Contraception About To End in America?

My dogs that love gravy please make no mistake in thinking what these people are driving hard for.  It is not the 1950s as most of us assume, but for these die hard Christian white male power nationalists the goal is the 1850s.    Hugs

As of last week, Republican efforts to ban birth control in America have officially started, and teenagers in Texas are its first victims

 

 
 
Image by Thomas Breher from Pixabay

To paraphrase Pastor Niemöller, first they came for our abortion rights. Now they’re coming for our birth control.

Psychologist Dr. Marty Klein notes at Psychology Today that there are typically only a few reasons why people oppose birth control. They are:

— Fundamentalist religions fear sexual pleasure, which birth control facilitates
— Contraception effectively limits family size, empowering women
— Contraception promotes personal autonomy [making women more likely to challenge male authority]
— Birth control may make abortion more acceptable to society

As of last week, Republican efforts to ban birth control in America have officially started, and teenagers in Texas are its first victims.

When Clarence Thomas wrote in his Dobbs concurring opinion that the Supreme Court should next overturn the right to birth control in the United States, a lawyer and a judge in Texas were apparently listening.

Most Americans have no idea this high-stakes drama — heading toward the Supreme Court but already now law in Texas — is even going on.

Lost in the Christmas holiday chatter, a Trump-appointed federal district judge in Texas just a week ago put a stop to teenagers getting confidential access to federally-funded birth control pills and devices in that state.

He did it based on a lawsuit filed by attorney Jonathan Mitchell, the same man who co-authored the Texas “abortion vigilante” law. Everybody ridiculed that effort at first, you’ll recall, but the Supreme Court upheld it and today it’s Texas law and spreading across Red states like a fungus.

Mitchell is also known as the guy who supported the Mississippi abortion ban before the Supreme Court that led to the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade.

Perhaps anticipating Clarence Thomas’ later call to overturn Supreme Court decisions legalizing birth control,  homosexual behavior, and gay marriage (Griswold v Connecticut, Lawrence v Texas, Obergefell v Hodges), Mitchell even wrote in his amicus brief for the Dobbs case an originalist reference similar to the argument the Texas judge would later make against birth control:

“The right to marry an opposite-sex spouse is ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’; the right to marry a same-sex spouse obviously is not.”

In the Texas federal lawsuit Mitchell brought, Deanda v. Becerra, Trump-appointed Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled that teens between 15 and 18 shouldn’t be able to make birth control decisions independent of their parents because, he ruled, that had always been the law in the early years of America:

“For centuries, the common law held minors were incapable of giving consent to make important life decisions.”

Somehow, he managed to overlook the fact that the age of sexual consent “for centuries” was, in every American state from the founding of this nation in 1789, 10 to 12 years old. It wasn’t raised to 14, 15, or 16 in any US state until the 1930s.

But don’t try to argue facts with people running on religious or male-power arguments.

Although the fight for women’s bodily autonomy is as old as time, this part of the story begins in 1970.

Richard Nixon had a reputation as an awkward, bumbling prude when it came to sex, but even he knew that teenagers should be able to get birth control without their parents’ consent.

A teenage pregnancy could destroy a young woman’s life, and, at that time, over one-in-ten girls became pregnant between 15 and 19 years old. Fully 92 percent of those teenage pregnancies, according to research published in the following decade, were unintended and could have been prevented with access to birth control.

So, in 1970, President Nixon signed into law Title X, a federal grant program that included funds for confidential access to birth control for people across the nation regardless of their age.

Nonprofit agencies were formed in each state to receive the federal money and provide birth control (among other services): in Texas “Every Body Texas” is the group that administers Title X statewide through 32 agencies and 156 clinics.

The week of Christmas, because of Kacsmaryk’s Deanda v. Becerraruling, Texas agencies affiliated with Every Body Texas learned they had to start turning away teenagers, virtually all of them girls and women, who were seeking confidential birth control.

This is now the law in Texas.

Picking up the beat, Republican legislators in Missouri, Idaho, and Louisiana have introduced or are proposing birth control bans in those states, according to the Pew Trust. Expect Republicans in your state to soon try the same.

Lest you think that hyperbolic, consider how Republicans in the US House and Senate voted when Democrats introduced the Right to Contraception Actimmediatelyafter Clarence Thomas suggested the Court should overturn that right.

Fully 195 Republicans voted against the legislation in the House; only 8 supported it. And when it reached the Senate, it was killed by a Republican filibuster.

The Deanda v. Becerradecision in Texas banning confidential dispensing of contraception to teenagers will be appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, known across the nation as the place most likely to uphold crackpot rightwing rulings. From there it goes to the six crackpot rightwingers on the Supreme Court.

Republicans appear quite fixated on banning both abortion and birth control nationwide.

Authoritarian societies have a long history of trying to regulate women’s bodies.

The first books the Nazis burned in May of 1933 were birth control guides by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, shortly before Hitler banned birth control in that nation (soldiers were allowed to possess condoms “to maintain their good health”).

Birth control was similarly banned in Romania by Nicolae Ceaușescu, bringing that nation Europe’s highest infant mortality rate and lowest life expectancy (particularly for women), a legacy which continues to this day even though Ceaușescu was overthrown and killed in 1989.

And now the GOP wants to ban birth control in the United States, starting with the youngest and most vulnerable among us. Authoritarians, after all, always first attack those least able to defend themselves before they climb the ladder of the society they intend to conquer.

This opening shot — coming out of Texas, just like the first ban on abortion (and from the same lawyer) — should make all Americans sit up and take notice.

Arizona Bill Would Outlaw Sunday Drag Brunches And Define Drag “Exaggerating Gender” As Adult Content

Can’t have the more popular drag shows cutting into church attendance can we.   Hugs

Phoenix’s CBS affiliate reports:

Before the legislative session begins on Monday, three bills have already been introduced by Republican senators aimed at regulating and limiting drag shows in Arizona. The most controversial of the three is a bill that wants stricter regulations on adult drag shows, including limiting the hours they’re allowed to operate.

Introduced by Republican Senator Anthony Kern, SB 1030 specifically calls for regulation and business licenses for drag shows and a limitation of their hours, not allowing shows between 1 a.m. and 8 a.m. Monday-Saturday and prohibiting shows on Sundays from 1 a.m. to 12 p.m. That would impact Sunday morning drag brunches.

Read the full article.

Kern last appeared on JMG in August 2022 when he and US Rep. Paul Gosar were ordered to pay a Democratic state lawmaker $75,000 for filing a “lawsuit for the purpose of harassment.” In 2014, Kern was fired from a local police department for lying to superiors. In 2020, Kern joined US Rep. Louie Gohmert in a lawsuit seeking to overturn the Electoral Count Act. Also in 2020, Kern was among the 11 local Republicans who falsely claimed to be Arizona electors. In January 2021, Kern tweeted a video showing himself as present during the attack on the US Capitol. In April 2021, reporters spotted him counting ballots inside the Maricopa County election center, despite rules saying that the counters must be nonpartisan.

JackFknTwista minute ago

Why not on Saturday ?
The Jewish Community hole the Sabbath sacred,- on Saturday.

JackFknTwist3 minutes ago

So more and more they push their fascist agenda. Maybe they’ll call drag performers and the gays ‘degenerates’.
This is exactly what the Nazis did and then packed the degenerates off to the Camps with the Jews.
It’s not so long ago.
I was classed as a criminal in Ireland until 1994.
But then the faeries all came to my rescue.

ZRAinSWVA8 minutes ago

I don’t do drag, but dressing in drag is ostensibly “speech”, so FOAD

biki13 minutes ago

So I guess Harry Styles in a dress is a no no too?

mythictom biki3 minutes ago

*horrified gasp*

But Catholic priests in dresses are a-ok. For now.

Elagabalus bovsklo3 hours ago

They’re trying to bring Putin’s Russia to Amerikkka

2patricius2 bovsklo2 hours ago

He thinks wearing a suit and tie while attacking people in drag makes him a real man. If he really wanted to outlaw drag, he would outlaw vestments for preachers and robes for judges.

juanjo54 Darreth2 hours ago

This has nothing to do with Christianity. It has everything to do with a bunch of fascists looking for a group to “other” and allow the general public to hate while the fascists take away everyone’s civil liberties while transferring all economic power to the wealthy elites.

Elagabalus 2patricius22 hours ago

No, it doesn’t, but having read John Boswell’s “Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality,” I know that for most of the church’s 2000+ year history there have only been isolated brief pockets of time where some sort of accommodation was made for gay people but mostly it’s been full-on hate for over 2000 years. That’s just a fact.

juanjo54 J.Martindale26 minutes ago

I am not a Christian and never have been. I do not particularly like Christianity given the long history of issues between them and my own people. That said, far-right extremists have used the religious beliefs of of Americans to manipulate them just as often as they they have used to racial and ethnic prejudices of Americans to manipulate the American people.

The fact is that these fascist arseholes know that they can no longer just scream “fa&&ot” and work up a crowd the way they used to, so now they use Trans folks and drag queens and nonsense about grooming to get foolish people riled up. But it is just the same as the old stories from my younger day back in the 50s and 60s when it was how gay people had to recruit new gay people by turning children gay.

nocadrummer3 hours ago

“Exaggerating Gender” As Adult Content.
And yet, it’s okay to take the kids to HOOTERS.

Thumbnail

DmR nocadrummer3 hours ago

But, but, but, that’s good old fashioned Christian Traditional Family Values Cishet type of stuff. You know, stuff that little boys will grow up and ooogle to and little girls will aspire to be.

amy cuscuriae nocadrummer3 hours ago

Little heterosexual boys just love titties! They make the boys blush and giggle.

Tor3 hours ago

Not before Sunday, noon!

Thumbnail

Happy_Housewife3 hours ago

Does this mean there can’t be a Catholic Mass on Sundays?

Karl Dubhe IV3 hours ago

Fucking hell, talk about the party of small government, eh?

Proposed GOP select panel would be empowered to review ‘ongoing criminal investigations’

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/07/gop-panel-criminal-investigations-00076890

tRump was desperate to first get his hands on and then get back or keep the highly classified documents he stole.   Now Jim Jordan one of his biggest as kissers is going to be able to access and get briefed on some of the nations biggest highly classified secrets.   Why?  What does he need that information for, and who will he share it with?   He normally wouldn’t have the clearance for it.  McCarthy gave away the country to get the Speakers gavel.  Hugs

The proposed “select subcommittee” would operate under the Judiciary Committee expected to be chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), pictured, nominates Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) to be Speaker of the House.
 

A proposed subcommittee to investigate “weaponization” of the federal government — a key demand of House conservatives who delivered Speaker Kevin McCarthy the gavel — would be given sweeping investigatory powers that include explicit authority to review “ongoing criminal investigations.”

The language of the proposed “select subcommittee,” which would operate under the Judiciary Committee expected to be chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), also gives the panel power to access any information shared with the House Intelligence Committee. That panel typically receives the highest-level classified intelligence and briefings of any committee in Congress.

Both provisions appear to have been added during final negotiations between McCarthy and a band of hardline detractors that briefly denied him the speakership. An earlier version of the proposal made no mention of ongoing criminal investigations or the Intelligence Committee and limited the probe to the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice.

 
 

The panel’s expected formation comes as the Justice Department continues to arrest and prosecute hundreds of rioters charged with breaching the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and amid two ongoing criminal investigations connected to former President Donald Trump. Those include the probe of his effort to overturn the 2020 election and his decision to warehouse highly sensitive national security documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate after leaving office.

Both Trump-related probes are now overseen by special counsel Jack Smith, who was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland in November to manage the sensitive grand jury investigations.

The subcommittee proposal would permit McCarthy to name 13 members to the panel, including five after consultation with Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries — a structure similar to the Jan. 6 select committee. Pelosi opted to reject two of McCarthy’s picks to that panel, prompting him to withdraw from any participation.

Unlike the Jan. 6 committee, however, the GOP-led probe would be housed under Jordan’s committee. Subpoenas issued by the panel would be authorized by Jordan.

The panel would also be empowered to investigate how executive branch agencies “obtain information from, and provide information to the private sector, non-profit entities, or other government agencies to facilitate action against American citizens,” a likely harbinger of a review of FBI interactions with social media companies in advance of the 2020 election and more broadly.

The proposal also includes blanket clauses permitting the panel to pursue “any other issues related to the violation of the civil liberties of citizens of the United States” and “any other matter relating to information collected pursuant to the investigation conducted under this paragraph at any time during the One Hundred Eighteenth Congress.”

 

Florida schools ban book about gay penguins in reaction to Don’t Say Gay law

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/01/373813/

And the erasing of gays from society continues in Florida.   The don’t say gay law is working just the way the republican’s hoped it would.  It is a fact that some kids have two dads or two moms, yet the republicans inred states want to outlaw anyone knowing about them.  They are demanding those families are not real families, that those kids are dirty somehow.   They want them ostracized and targeted for bullying.  They want the fact that being gay is normal and shared widely in the animal kingdom.  Kids will be forced into a heterosexual mode of acting only.    Hugs

 
Only half of Democrats think "And Tango Makes Three" is appropriate
Photo: Little Simon

In the wake of Florida’s Don’t Say Gay law, schools in the state are banning books with LGBTQ+ themes, including And Tango Makes Three, a book about a baby penguin named Tango who has two dads.

The Don’t Say Gay law, also known as the Parental Rights in Education Act, was signed into law last year by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and bans discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K through 3 and restricts such discussions in older grades.

Conservatives said the bill was necessary to stop sexual discussions in schools as well as instruction about sex and that the law wasn’t anti-LGBTQ+. The DeSantis administration called opponents of the bill “groomers,” another word for child sex abusers.

But it turns out that the bill is doing what opponents said it would do: making LGBTQ+ people a taboo topic in schools.

Popular Information reports that Lake County’s school district banned three books in grades K-3: A Day in the Life of Marlon Bundo (about a gay bunny who likes hula hooping), And Tango Makes Three, and In our Mothers’ House (about three kids with two moms).

A statement says that the books were “administratively removed due to content regarding sexual orientation/gender identification prohibited in HB 1557.” H.B. 1557 is the Don’t Say Gay law.

Seminole County Public Schools banned three books citing the Don’t Say Gay law. The books were 10,000 Dresses (about a boy with a dream of making dresses), I am Jazz (about the experiences of trans activist Jazz Jennings), and Jacob’s New Dress (about a boy who wants to wear a dress to school).

None of the books contain sexual content, but the district said they, “pursuant to the aforementioned statute [the Don’t Say Gay law], would be deemed as not being age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in kindergarten through grade 3.” They were removed from district libraries and “will only be available for check-out to a student in grade 4 or 5 when the parent has provided written consent and picks up the book from the principal or designee at the school.”

The DeSantis administration said in response to one of the legal challenges against the Don’t Say Gay law that it only applies to classroom instruction and not library books, but the Florida Department of Education is telling school librarians that “there is some overlap between the selection criteria for instructional and library materials” in its training materials for the Don’t Say Gay law and they should be “avoiding unsolicited theories that may lead to student indoctrination.” The materials tell librarians to “err on the side of caution.”

Opponents of the Don’t Say Gay law cited high suicide rates among LGBTQ+ youth and argued that erasing LGBTQ+ identities from school will make them feel more alone and isolated.

“42% of LGBTQ youth seriously considered attempting suicide last year,” Chasten Buttigieg said of the bill last year. “Now they can’t talk to their teachers?”

GOP lawmaker wants to force young trans adults to de-transition

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/01/gop-lawmaker-wants-force-young-trans-adults-de-transition/

This man who authored the bill felt his religion and his opinion was more valid than all the science and medical data that shows he is wrong.   He claims that identifying as a different gender than assigned at birth is a temporary problem, giving the idea it is a phase people go through like adolescence or acme.   That was what people tried to claim about gay people in the past, that it was a phase young adults would grow out of, or it was done as rebellion against parents.    That was wrong then and it is wrong about trans people now.   These right wing people are just recycling all the old tropes against gay people to use against trans people.  The goal is to destroy all the social advances in the US society and return to a past that was regressive and oppressive before equality and civil rights for minorities.   Please understand that for trans people to wait that late in life until 26 means not only living as the wrong gender all that time but also the human body has by then been set into the mold of the wrong gender for the person.    During puberty so many changes happen to create a male or female body that simply by looks is a lifetime sentence of being in the wrong body.  If you are one gender imagine looking like the other all your life because someone said you couldn’t have the medical treatment needed to help you live as you really are.    Hugs

 
Oklahoma State Sen. David Bullard (R)
Oklahoma State Sen. David Bullard (R)Photo: Oklahoma Senate

In Oklahoma, a new bill called the “Millstone Act of 2023” has been proposed that would ban gender-affirming care in all forms for anyone under 26 years old. The bill targets healthcare providers and says anyone who violates the rule could face felony charges and have their medical license revoked.

The bill’s name reportedly refers to a passage in the Bible that says it is better to tie a large stone to your neck and drown than to cause harm to a child. It was introduced by state Sen. David Bullard (R), who was also behind a state law that passed last year banning trans youth from using school bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity.

In a statement to The Oklahoman, Bullard said gender-affirming surgery is “a permanent solution to a temporary problem” and called it a violation of doctors’ Hippocratic Oath to do no harm.

“We want to make sure that if we’re going to do a procedure like this that is irreversible, then we want to make sure an individual is at their full maturity when it comes to cognitive development,” he said.

He also explained why he wanted to restrict gender-affirming care to such a late age.

“At the age of 18, you can vote, but a vote is not a permanent change in your body that cannot be reversed. At the age of 21 you can drink, but at the end of the day if you decide to put the alcohol down, you can put the alcohol down. But with this surgery, there is no going back. We just want to make sure that the brain is fully developed before we allow this kind of surgery, permanent thing to happen.”

He also said he did not speak to a single transgender person before writing the bill.

Oklahoma has passed a slew of anti-trans legislation as of late.

In October, Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) signed into law a bill that bans the Children’s Hospital at Oklahoma University Hospital from using funds from the American Rescue Plan Act for gender-affirming care for minors. And in addition to signing Bullard’s bathroom bill, he also signed laws banning transgender students from participating in school sports and banning non-binary birth certificates in the state.

The Millstone Act is also one of multiple bills that have been proposed targeting gender-affirming care for trans adults as Republicans continue to expand their crusade against trans people. Bills targeting medical care for trans adults have recently been proposed in South Carolina and New Hampshire as well.

“We have been saying a slow moving genocide targeted at eliminating transgender people through eliminating gender affirming care is happening,” wrote activist Erin Reed in December. “It continues.”

Trying to catch up with news after spending most of the last four days in bed

https://www.thedailybeast.com/herschel-walker-staffer-matt-schlapp-groped-my-crotch?ref=home

Bad Women’s Anatomy Is Getting WORSE

I don’t care if you watch it, but I want to make a point about the resurgence of bathroom bills.  You know those bills that say trans people must use the bathroom of their assigned sex at birth.   Mostly because cis women have been told that trans women or women who do not look feminine enough will violate and hurt them.   Yes we must judge everyone by their looks so we can tell who fits the girl enough or the boy enough categories.   We already know that the idea that a person will go to the effort to claim to be trans to assault women in a bathroom is debunked and stupid.  If a guy wants to assault women they are not going to change their entire life to do it in a woman’s bathroom, they will just charge into one and do it, or do it when the woman comes out or a dozen other ways.  It simply is not reasonable.   But let’s go back to comfort.  A cis female person I respect said she would be uncomfortable in a bathroom with a “manly looking woman”.   OK please look at this person in the video that says they are trans.   That means if these “go to the toilet of your assigned birth” laws are enforced this person would be forced by law to use a female’s bathroom no matter how uncomfortable for them or the women.   This is the stupidity of these laws and the people pushing the bigotry.   Look at this guy, what bathroom does he belong in?   These bathroom laws are based in bigotry and made up fears.   What are you people doing in the bathroom, holding a social gathering?  We have to understand what is driving these bathroom bill laws is an attempt to stop societal change and progression by the groups that are scared of the new ways.  The die hard religious groups, the traditionalist who say it was not done this way when I was growing up, and the people that just simply feel the need to control society to make sure it stays the same so they feel comfortable.    Hugs

And is it worth it? How to make it better?

image

Conservative lawyers/judges are the worst.

—————————————————————————-
image

Republicans need the lies to keep their party afloat. The simple truth would sink them all.


image


image

Maybe 48 hours, maybe!

FOX pundit?

(via justsayin59)


image

Maybe 48 hours, maybe!

FOX pundit?

(via justsayin59)


image

This is America. #voteblue https://www.instagram.com/p/Cmy3ANJMakK/

They’re not pro-life. They’re pro-tribalism.

They’re pro cruelty, pro suffering, anti autonomy.


image


image

No loyalty. No virtue. No shame. #MAGAValues


image


image


image

Republicans on asylum: follow the rules, do things the right way. Dont follow the rules? You are illegal. Respect or get out!

Republicans on Santos breaking rules: …


image

Millions suffered for Trump’s illegal privileges.


image

Language matters. No person is illegal. Stop the dehumanization.


image


image
image
image
image

And by “purged” we mean…purged. With extreme prejudice.

B-b-b-but prosecuting these people would be divisive.

– democratic “leadership”

That they failed despite having all the advantages is hilarious.

That they are still there to try again is not funny at all.

Hang em high and burn what’s left.

Christopher Miller’s signature, though.


image

They have rigid rules for others, none for themselves. They forgive no one.


image

Authoritarians create refugees.





image


image


image


image


image


image



image


image


image—————————————————————————–










image


image






Afghan war orphan remains with Marine accused of abduction

https://apnews.com/article/afghanistan-politics-united-states-government-virginia-children-97a4e2f4c38925d50e5511a3232974f0

Burried in the story is what I think it clearly amounts to, forcing a change of religion for the child.   The Marine claimed that taking the girl amounted to Christian love and that his family was raising the girl as a Christian in a good Christian home, despite the family she was with being devote Muslims who was raising the girl in the Muslim faith.   What I don’t understand is this is a simple case of kidnapping and religious bigotry of a adoption court that ruled for the Marine even though other courts and the government had ruled that the little girl belong with the Muslim family.  if you read the story the court not only had to skip my of the required procedures in order to let the Marine adopt the child he kidnaped, but they flat out broke the law to do it.    I can not understand why this is being allowed.    Is it religious bigotry, political, or the fact that he is a Marine that keeps the police from taking the child from the kidnapper and returning her to her real family.  Even the US government who said the Marine broke several laws by taking the child has not ordered him to return the child.   Weird.    Hugs

yesterday
 
 
FILE - A Qatar Airways aircraft takes off with foreigners from the airport in Kabul, Afghanistan, Thursday, Sept. 9, 2021, as some 200 foreigners, including Americans, flew out of the country, the first such large-scale departure since U.S and foreign forces concluded their frantic withdrawal at the end of the previous month. (AP Photo/Bernat Armangue, File)
1 of 5
FILE – A Qatar Airways aircraft takes off with foreigners from the airport in Kabul, Afghanistan, Thursday, Sept. 9, 2021, as some 200 foreigners, including Americans, flew out of the country, the first such large-scale departure since U.S and foreign forces concluded their frantic withdrawal at the end of the previous month. (AP Photo/Bernat Armangue, File)
 

The Afghan woman ran down the street towards her friend’s apartment as soon as she heard the news: the White House had publicly weighed in on her family’s case.

Surely her child, who she says was abducted by a U.S. Marine more than a year ago, would now be returned, she thought. She was so excited that it was only after she’d arrived that she realized she wasn’t wearing any shoes.

“We thought within one week she’d be back to us,” the woman told The Associated Press.

Yet two months after an AP report on the high-stakes legal fight over the child raised alarms at the highest levels of government, from the White House to the Taliban, the baby remains with U.S. Marine Corps Major Joshua Mast and his family. The Masts claim in court documents that they legally adopted the child and that the Afghan couple’s accusations are “outrageous” and “unmerited.”

“We are all concerned with the well being of this child who is at the heart of this matter,” said White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre after the AP detailed the child’s plight in October.

Last month, the U.S. Justice Department filed a motion to intervene in the legal wrangling over the fate of the child, arguing that Mast’s adoption should never have been granted. The government has said Mast’s attempts to take the child directly conflicted with a U.S. foreign policy decision to reunite the orphan with her Afghan family. They asked that the case be moved from a rural Virginia court to federal court, but were denied by Presiding Circuit Court Judge Richard E. Moore.

Additionally, federal authorities say multiple investigations are underway.

“We all just want resolution for this child, whatever it’s going to be, so her childhood doesn’t continue to be in limbo,” said Samantha Freed, a court-appointed attorney assigned to look after the best interests of the child. “We need to get this right now. There are no do-overs.”

The legal fight has taken more than a year, and Freed is worried it could take months — maybe even years — more. The child is now 3 ½ years old. The Afghan family spoke with the AP on condition of remaining anonymous out of fear for their safety and concerns for their relatives back in Afghanistan.

Mast became enchanted with the child while on temporary assignment in Afghanistan in late 2019. Just a few months old, the infant had survived a Special Operations raid that killed her parents and five siblings, according to court records.

As she recovered from injuries in a U.S. military hospital, the Afghan government and the International Committee of the Red Cross identified her relatives, and through meetings with the State Department, arranged for their reunification. The child’s cousin and his wife — young newlyweds without children yet of their own — wept when they first saw her, they said: Taking her in and raising her was the greatest honor of their lives.

Nonetheless, Mast — in spite of orders from military officials to stop intervening — was determined to take her home to the United States. He used his status in the military, appealed to political connections in the Trump administration and convinced the small-town Virginia court to skip some of the usual safeguards that govern international adoptions.

Finally, when the U.S. military withdrew from Afghanistan last summer, he helped the family get to the United States. After they arrived, they say, he took their baby from them at the Fort Pickett Virginia Army National Guard base. They haven’t seen her since and are suing to get her back.

The Afghan woman gave birth to a daughter just weeks after the girl they’d been raising was taken from them. Every time they buy an outfit or a present for their daughter, they buy a second matching one for the child they pray will come back to them soon.

The Masts did not respond to repeated requests for an interview. Stepping out from a recent hearing, Joshua Mast told AP they’ve been advised not to speak publicly.

In court filings, Mast says he acted “admirably” to bring the child to the United States and care for her with his wife. They say they’ve given her “a loving home” and have “done nothing but ensure she receives the medical care she requires, at great personal expense and sacrifice.” Mast celebrated his adoption of the child, whose Afghan family is Muslim, as an act of Christian faith.

The toddler’s future is now set to be decided in a sealed, secret court case in rural Virginia — in the same courthouse that granted Mast custody. The federal government has described that custody order as “unlawful,” “improper” and “deeply flawed and incorrect” because it was based on a promise that Afghanistan would waive jurisdiction over the child, which never happened.

The day Mast and his wife Stephanie Mast were granted a final adoption, the child was 7,000 miles away with the Afghan couple who knew nothing about it.

In court, Mast, still an active duty Marine, cast doubt on whether the Afghan couple is related to her at all. They argue that the little girl is “ an orphan of war and a victim of terrorism, rescued under tragic circumstances from the battlefield.” They say she is a “stateless minor” because she was recovered from a compound Mast says was used by foreign fighters not from Afghanistan.

The case has been consumed by a procedural question: Does the Afghan family — who raised the child for a year and a half — have a right under Virginia law to even challenge the adoption?

Judge Moore ruled in November that the Afghan family does have legal standing; the Masts’ appeal is under review.

The child’s Afghan relatives, currently in Texas, believe the U.S. government should be doing more to help them, because numerous federal agencies were involved in the ordeal.

“The government is not doing their job as they should,” said the Afghan woman. “And in this process, we are suffering.”

A State Department official said one of the agency’s own social workers stood with Mast when he took the baby at Fort Pickett, but “had no awareness of the U.S. Embassy’s previous involvement in reuniting the child with her next of kin in Afghanistan.” The official described how the U.S. had worked hard in Afghanistan to unite the child with her relatives.

“We recognize the human dimension of this situation,” said the official.

The Department of Defense said in a statement that the decision to reunite the child with her family was in keeping with the U.S. government’s foreign obligations, as well as international law principles that mandate family reunification of children displaced in war. The Defense Department said it is aware that Mast “took custody” of the child but declined to comment further.

The Afghan couple pleaded for help from the tangle of agencies at Fort Pickett: the military, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the police. Some didn’t believe them, some said there was nothing they could do, some tried to intervene to no avail.

The couple eventually reached Martha Jenkins, an attorney volunteering at the base.

“When I first heard their story, I thought there must be something lost in translation — how could this be true?” said Jenkins. She contacted authorities.

Almost two months after they lost the child, Virginia State Police dispatch records obtained by the AP show “an advocate” called to report what had happened.

“The family is on Fort Pickett, they are requesting an investigation to the validity of the adoption and if it was done under false pretenses,” wrote the dispatcher. The record notes that the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI were involved.

Jenkins, who was in Virginia temporarily, called every Virginia adoption attorney she could find until she reached Elizabeth Vaughan.

“It was very surprising to me that no one helped them,” said Vaughan, who offered to represent the Afghan couple for free. “I don’t think they had a lot of the paperwork Americans like to see when someone’s proving that they have custody. But there are laws about people, trusted adults, who arrive with a child. So much more investigating should have been done.”

A Marine Corps spokesperson wrote in a statement that they are fully cooperating with federal law enforcement investigations, including at least one focused on the alleged unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material. In emails Mast sent asking for help bringing the child from Afghanistan, now submitted as exhibitions in court, he referenced reading classified documents about the raid that killed the girl’s family.

Investigators and prosecutors declined to comment, citing the ongoing inquiries.

On the other side of the globe, the Taliban issued a statement saying it “will seriously pursue this issue with American authorities so that the said child is returned to her relatives.”

Now every night before bed, the Afghan couple scroll through an album of 117 photos of the year and half they spent raising her — a sassy child with big bright eyes, who loved to dress up in shiny colors and gold bangle bracelets. There’s a photo of the child wearing a black and green tunic and tiny gold sandals, nestled on the young Afghan man’s lap, smiling mischievously at the camera. In one video, she runs alongside the man, bouncing down the sidewalk to keep up with his stride.

They’ll soon be moving to a new two-bedroom apartment. There, they say, the little girl’s room will be ready for her, whenever she comes home.

 

The untold story of how a US woman was sentenced to six years for voting

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/27/pamela-moses-voting-rights-mistake-jail

This story was in a news article how Mark Meadows a high ranking republican / Christian dominionist who did voter fraud in NC.   But while like always republicans who scream about all the voter fraud but they excuse it as they keep getting caught doing it.   Again I am so sick of the double standard.   Here in Florida DeathSantis got a lot of press by going after former felons who were told they could vote with his election police, yet they never go after the known republicans who have been found guilty of voter fraud who live in the Villages.  DeathSantis and the local press never mention them and that they are republicans, while screaming about the democrats trying to steal the elections.   Hugs

Pamela Moses at home in Memphis.
Pamela Moses at home in Memphis. Photograph: Andrea Morales/The Guardian

The case of Pamela Moses sparked a national outcry – but newly uncovered documents reveal the extent of its injustice

It was the morning after Labor Day and Pamela Moses was in a rush.

All summer, the outspoken activist had been feuding with election officials in Memphis, Tennessee. She wanted to get her name on the ballot for Memphis’s 2019 mayoral election, even gathering enough signatures to do so. But officials said she could not run – a prior felony conviction made her ineligible to seek office.

 

Now, there was a new problem. In late August, the local elections commission sent her a letter saying they were going to cancel her voter registration. Moses was confused – she had been voting for years. That day, she was determined to sort it out.

But what unfolded over just a few hours that day on 3 September 2019 would upend her life. It would lead to a sudden arrest months later at O’Hare airport in Chicago and culminate in a six-year prison sentence for voter fraud.

Her case would go on to touch a nerve in the US and cause a national outcry. While there’s no comprehensive data on voter fraud prosecutions based on race, it was one of several recent examples in which Black defendants like Moses have faced long criminal sentences for voting errors, while white people have faced little punishment for more fraud. Long after the abolition of poll taxes and literacy tests, Black Americans still face significant scrutiny for trying to exercise their right to vote.

To make matters worse there is a byzantine bureaucracy in Tennessee and other US states, which can make it nearly impossible for people with felony convictions to vote again. The system has allowed officials to block people from voting for owing small sums of money and prosecutors to bring charges against others who make good-faith mistakes about their voting eligibility.

But at the center of the Moses case was a relatively simple question: should someone who makes a voting mistake face serious criminal charges?


Nearly everyone in Memphis seems to know Moses, 45, or has heard of her.

She’s a self-taught student of the law – the librarians in the county law library know her by name – and has sued many of the top officials in Memphis, frequently representing herself in court. She’s appeared in local papers over the years. She’s had disagreements with other local activists and founded her own non-profit.

“If she sees something that she feels is unjust, she’s going to say something about it,” said Dawn Harrington, who has been friends with Moses for over two decades and is the executive director of Free Hearts, a criminal justice non-profit. “She’s not going to be afraid of the backlash that might happen.”

“She’ll always take you to the limit,” said Michael Working, a criminal defense attorney in Memphis who has represented Moses and known her for a decade. “She’s willing very often to be publicly flogged by the government on principle.”

In person, Moses is at times mercurial, but often charming. She can rattle off the history of Memphis neighborhoods, the names of local judges, lawyers and statutes that she’s researched, sprinkling in bits of hip-hop history (she also writes and produces her own music). She is fiercely protective of Taj, her teenage son.

Few officials attracted Moses’s ire as much as Amy Weirich, a Republican who served as the district attorney in Shelby county, which includes Memphis. Several years ago, Moses made local headlines when Weirich prosecuted her for stalking and harassing a local judge, tampering with evidence and forgery.

In 2015, Moses pleaded guilty to those charges and was sentenced to several years of probation. Years later, she would say that pleading guilty and not fighting the case “was the worst mistake of my life”. She believed she was innocent, but the conviction led people to think she was guilty.

Harrington, her longtime friend, said that the case cemented her status as someone who was disliked by people in high office in Memphis. “She had been on the bad side of the powers that be there,” she said.

When Moses pleaded guilty, there was a hearing in which a judge questioned her and made sure she understood the consequences of her decision. But there was one ramification that neither the judge nor any of the lawyers present brought up: Moses would lose the right to vote for life.


To understand Moses’s case, one needs to know that America has long stripped people convicted of felonies of the vote.

After constitutional amendments in the 19th century expanded the franchise to Black Americans, many states passed felon disenfranchisement laws as a way to continue to keep African Americans from the ballot box and therefore prevent them from wielding political power, said Christopher Uggen, a professor at the University of Minnesota who has studied the topic closely. He suggested the laws had persisted because people with criminal convictions are stigmatized, and so seeking redress for them is politically fraught.

Today, the laws continue to heavily affect Black Americans – 5.3% of the adult Black population is disenfranchised because of a felony, compared to 1.5% of the non-Black adult population. Overall, an estimated 4.6 million people can’t vote because of a felony conviction in the US.

Moses’s home state of Tennessee strips any person convicted of a felony of the right to vote. Nearly 472,000 people of voting age can’t vote in Tennessee because of a felony conviction, the vast majority of whom have completed their sentence, according to the Sentencing Project, a criminal justice non-profit. It’s estimated that more than one in five Black people of voting age in the state can’t vote because of a felony.

In Tennessee, it is also extremely difficult for these people to get their voting rights back once they complete their sentences. There are three different sets of rules, depending on when the person was convicted. A request to even just fill out the state’s required application for the restoration of voting rights can be rejected for any reason – without explanation.

Tennessee’s confusing system isn’t unusual. Many US states, particularly in the south, require anyone with a felony conviction to go through a bureaucratic process if they want to vote again.

In Mississippi, people with certain felony convictions have to petition the legislature to restore their voting rights individually – and hardly anyone makes it through.

In Florida, voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment in 2018 to repeal the state’s lifetime voting ban for most people with felonies. But the Florida legislature quickly stepped in and passed a measure that said completing a sentence meant paying all outstanding fines and court fees, which put voting again out of reach for many. Even if people can afford to pay, it’s extremely difficult to figure out how much they owe since the state has no centralized way of keeping track.

That uncertainty is the point of these laws, said Nicole Porter, the senior director of advocacy at the Sentencing Project.

I think there is intentionality behind the complications,” she said. “It’s about chilling or minimizing participation in the electorate by certain constituencies. It’s the modern-day manifestation of very hard policies that dominated the Jim Crow era.”


This was the tangled web Moses stepped into just after Labor Day in 2019.

Because she didn’t realize she had lost her voting rights, she had been voting regularly until the summer of 2019. When she was informed that her voter registration was about to be canceled, Moses called the elections commission and asked what to do. She said a staffer advised her to go through the restoration process. (The elections commission declined to say to the Guardian whether it had ever advised her to do so.)

The next step Moses took was the one on which her conviction – and its reversal – rested.

One of the people required to fill out the form for her voting rights restoration was a probation officer, who had to confirm that Moses’s criminal sentence had concluded. When Moses showed up at the probation office on 3 September, she met with the manager on duty, named Kristoffer Billington, who had worked for the probation office for five years. He had never filled out the form before, he would later testify in court.

Moses told him her probation was finished, and he went to the back of the office to research her case. Billington called a colleague in a different office for help. They both looked at Moses’s file in the computer system.

According to the information they saw, it looked like Moses had finished her probation in 2018. But there was a problem – Moses’s computer file still showed she was on unsupervised probation. Billington thought this was a bureaucratic error and believed someone had forgotten to close out her file.

As he was examining the case, the receptionist repeatedly called Billington’s office to tell him Moses was growing impatient and wanted to turn in the form to the election office, he would later testify. After about an hour of research, he wrote on the form that Moses had completed her probation, signed it and returned it to her.

Billington had made a mistake. Unbeknown to him, there were more case files that showed Moses’s felony probation wouldn’t expire until the following year, 2020. In parallel, Moses had been fighting in court that summer to have a judge declare that her sentence was over because she wanted to run for mayor. In court filings, she argued that her probation had expired. But courts disagreed. Moses didn’t think those rulings were correct and thought Billington and the probation office would be able to give her a more definitive answer.

It might seem hard to believe that there was a dispute about something as basic as when Moses’s sentence ended. But those kinds of ambiguities are actually quite common, Uggen said.

“People who aren’t subject to supervision don’t really understand how fuzzy things like release and supervision dates are,” he said. “Anybody inside the system or across jurisdictions knows that what’s written on this piece of paper might be very different than that other piece of paper.”

And these bureaucratic mistakes can land people in prison.


Just 30 minutes after Moses left his office, Billington got a call from someone in the Tennessee attorney general’s office telling him he made a mistake on the form. And after Moses turned in the form, the elections office quickly caught the mistake too. A few days earlier, they had referred her to prosecutors for potential voter fraud, owing to the fact they had learned she had been regularly voting while on probation.

“Isn’t whether or not she completed the required probationary period for the 2015 felonies the subject of the [ongoing court case],” Pablo Varela, an attorney for the elections commission, emailed Kirby May, a prosecutor in the district attorney’s office shortly after Moses turned in the form. “How can the Court Clerk issue this attached document stating she has been granted final release from incarceration or supervision?”

May responded later that afternoon and attached a copy of a July court order saying Moses was still on probation. She was still ineligible to vote, he said.

Vicki Collins, a staffer at the elections commission, forwarded Moses’s application to the Tennessee secretary of state’s office to review. “The Shelby County Election Commission has been in an ongoing lawsuit with Ms. Moses. She has been denied the right to be on the ballot for Mayor because she is still on probation until 2020,” wrote Collins, who specialized in helping people with felony convictions get their voting rights back. A little over an hour later, a lawyer with the secretary of state’s office wrote back. She agreed Moses was ineligible to vote, but offered a new reason for why.

In 2015, one of the crimes Moses pleaded guilty to was tampering with evidence, which causes a permanent loss of voting rights in Tennessee. All of the research Billington had done at the probation office was irrelevant. It didn’t matter whether she was on probation or not.

The next morning, Collins, the elections staffer, appeared happy to learn Moses was permanently barred from voting. “LOOK AT HER STATUS!!! PERMANENTLY INELIGIBLE,” she wrote in an email, including a smiley face.

The same day, the elections office also received a letter from the Tennessee department of corrections alerting them to Billington’s error. The letter didn’t say that Moses was to blame or that Billington was deceived.

The elections office quickly wrote to Moses explaining she was permanently banned. “Absent a change in state law, future attempts to register to vote anywhere in Tennessee may be considered a class D felony,” read the letter from Linda Phillips, the election administrator in Shelby county.

Later that evening, Phillips expressed concern that she hadn’t received a reply from Moses. “I am a bit concerned that Pamela Moses did not respond to my email telling her she would never be able to register to vote.” She hinted at concerns for her own safety over the issue, writing “I do have a concealed carry permit,” in an email to a member of the election commission.

In a response to questions from the Guardian, Phillips said: “If incorrect information is provided to our office, intentionally or unintentionally, the state of Tennessee alerts us about the inaccuracies. That’s what happened in Ms Moses’s case.”

She also defended the emails she and Collins sent after learning Moses was ineligible to vote.

“Any email exchanges within [the elections commission] regarding announcements of Ms Moses’s ineligibility to vote should be perceived as urgent notice to ensure staff awareness, considering Ms Moses’s frequent and sometimes harassing visits to our offices,” she said.

Two months later, prosecutors filed a 14-count indictment, charging Moses with illegally voting nearly a dozen times after her 2015 guilty plea. She was arrested at O’Hare airport while returning to the US from a trip abroad.

Later, prosecutors offered her a deal, saying if she pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge she would get six months of unsupervised probation and no additional prison time. She refused.

“It was about the principle to me,” Moses said. “I hadn’t done anything wrong. All I did was try to get my right to vote back and you don’t like me,” she said. “I was OK with going to jail if people could understand what this is really about. I don’t regret making that decision.”

Just before the trial began, prosecutors dropped 12 of the 14 charges, declining to prosecute her for illegally voting. There was no evidence that anyone had told Moses she was ineligible to vote, and the fact that the elections office had sent her voter information made it harder to prove she knew.

The trial began on 3 November 2021 and lasted just two days. A single question remained: did Moses knowingly trick Billington to falsely say she was off probation when he filled out the form?

May, the assistant district attorney prosecuting the case, zeroed in on the numerous times after 2015 that Moses had asked courts to declare she was off probation and judges had rejected her requests.

“It’s like a child going up to both her parents, ‘Gimme, gimme, gimme’ … They make the mistake and give it, even though they’d told no, no, no. It’s the same thing, she knew what she was doing on September 3rd,” he said at the trial. “She was desperate to try to get her rights restored, she wanted to run for mayor, whatever, she was desperate. She didn’t care, she was going to try anyway. This was her last stitch [sic] effort.”

When Billington testified, he owned up to his mistake. But May argued Moses had deceived him, even though she was not in the room when he did his research and signed off on the form. Billington said Moses had told him she was off probation when she walked into the office and was acting impatient as he researched her case.

Ferguson, Moses’s lawyer, argued that the state was punishing Moses for its own mistake. “If they can’t get it right, we can’t convict her for not getting it right,” he said in his closing argument.

Ultimately the jurors found Moses guilty. In late January, W Mark Ward, the judge overseeing the case, sentenced Moses to six years in prison. Weirich, the prosecutor, said Moses had brought a trial and any harsh punishment on herself by refusing to take the plea.

“I gave her a chance to plead to a misdemeanor with no prison time. She requested a jury trial instead. She set this unfortunate result in motion and a jury of her peers heard the evidence and convicted her,” she said at the time.


Local reporters had been following Moses’s case, but in early February, it started to receive national attention. The Guardian published a story highlighting Moses’s punishment. The next evening, Rachel Maddow did a segment on Moses’s case, comparing her six-year sentence to those of white Trump supporters who had received lesser sentences for intentional acts of voting fraud. The New York TimesWashington Post and Associated Press, among other outlets, followed. Moses, detained in prison, didn’t know her case was getting more attention.

Then, a few weeks later, new information came to light.

Through a public records request, the Guardian obtained the result of an internal investigation from the Tennessee department of corrections looking into why Billington had signed off on Moses’s voting eligibility. The supervisors who had investigated squarely placed the blame on Billington for the error, undercutting the prosecution’s idea that Moses had deceived him into signing off on the form.

Perhaps most significantly, Moses’s lawyers had never seen the document before – prosecutors hadn’t turned it over with all of the other evidence in the case. That lack of disclosure was potentially unconstitutional and entitled Moses to a new trial.

The day after the Guardian published the document, Moses had a previously scheduled hearing to request a fresh trial. Judges rarely granted such requests – the hearing was supposed to be a formality on the way to an appeal. At any rate, that morning, Moses’s lawyer submitted the missing document to the court.

Remarkably, Ward unexpectedly granted Moses’s request for a new trial. He said that the document should have been turned over to Moses’s lawyers before the initial trial and that he had erroneously allowed certain other evidence to be admitted. Moses, who had been in jail, broke down in tears in the courtroom.

It wasn’t the first time Weirich’s office has come under fire for failing to disclose evidence to a defendant. A 2014 study by the Fair Punishment Project found her office ranked first in Tennessee in prosecutorial misconduct. Weirich sought to distance herself from the error. The department of corrections, not her office, was to blame for not turning over the missing document, she said.

Two months later, Weirich announced she would drop all charges against Moses. “She has spent 82 days in custody on this case, which is sufficient,” she said in a statement, also noting Moses remained permanently barred from voting. “In the interest of judicial economy, we are dismissing her illegal registration case and her violation of probation.”

Both Weirich and Ward would go on to lose their re-election bids in August.


Moses’s case may have prompted a national outpouring of disapproval, but tendentious-seeming voter fraud charges have not disappeared.

In August, for instance, Florida’s governor, Ron DeSantis, announced the state was prosecuting 19 people with prior criminal records for voter fraud. Many of the people charged said they were confused about their eligibility and that no one had told them they couldn’t vote.

Crystal Mason, a Black woman in Texas, is still appealing a five-year prison sentence for casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election while on supervised release for a federal felony. Mason has said she had no idea she was ineligible, and the ballot had even been rejected.

Moses, as well as those who have followed her case, doubt that it will be one of the last.

Both the Shelby county elections commission and the Tennessee department of corrections declined to say whether they had changed their processes for helping people determine their voting eligibility in the wake of Moses’s case. “Any changes in that process would be done at the state level,” Phillips said.

One morning at the end of April, just after the charges were dropped against her, Moses held a press conference at the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis. She was there to speak publicly for the first time about Weirich’s decisions to drop the charges against her.

Pamela Moses
‘When it comes to Black people in the south, whatever we do, if it’s wrong, you’ve got to pay for it’, said Moses. Photograph: Andrea Morales/The Guardian

“When it comes to Black people in the south, whatever we do, if it’s wrong, you’ve got to pay for it,” she said. “If there was a white person and I got treated the way I did, I would be just as upset. But you don’t see white people getting treated like that.”

Since her case was dropped Moses has been working on an album and documentary, and she’s continued to push to be able to vote again.

She’s still seeking a gubernatorial pardon from her 2015 conviction and is suing Tennessee to try to get the state’s felon disenfranchisement law declared unconstitutional. She’s also suing local officials for damages in her voter fraud case. “I don’t know what the future holds, but I do know I will get to vote again,” she said.

“I want people to take away that it’s not over just because Pamela is free,” said Dawn Harrington, Moses’s friend.” Because there are so many other Pamelas all across the state.”