Archive for the ‘Eric Holder’ Category

Despite controversies and bans, facial recognition startups are flush with VC cash – TechCrunch

If efforts by states and cities to pass privacy regulations curbing the use of facial recognition are anything to go by, you might fear the worst for the companies building the technology. But a recent influx of investor cash suggests the facial recognition startup sector is thriving, not suffering.

Facial recognition is one of the most controversial and complex policy areas in play. The technology can be used to track where you go and what you do. Its used by public authorities and in private businesses like stores. But facial recognition has been shown to be flawed and inaccurate, often misidentifies non-white faces, and is disproportionately affects communities of color. Its flawed algorithms have already been used to send innocent people to jail, and privacy advocates have raised countless concerns about how this kind of biometric data is stored and used.

With the threat of federal legislation looming, some of the biggest facial recognition companies like Amazon, IBM and Microsoft announced they would stop selling their facial recognition technology to police departments to try to appease angry investors, customers, and even their own employees who protested the deployment of such technologies by the U.S. government and immigration authorities.

The pushback against facial recognition didnt stop there. Since the start of the year, Maine, Massachusettsand the city of Minneapolis have all passed legislation curbing or banning the use of facial recognition in some form, following in the steps of many other cities and states before them and setting the stage for others, like New York, which are eyeing legislation of their own.

In those same six or so months, investors have funneled hundreds of millions into several facial recognition startups. A breakdown of Crunchbase data by FindBiometrics shows a sharp rise in venture funding in facial recognition companies at well over $500 million in 2021 so far, compared to $622 million for all of 2020.

About half of that $500 million comes from one startup alone. Israel-based startup AnyVision raised $235 million at Series C earlier this month from SoftBanks Vision Fund 2 for its facial recognition technology thats used in schools, stadiums, casinos and retail stores. Macys is a known customer and uses the face-scanning technology to identify shoplifters. Its a steep funding round compared to a year earlier when Microsoft publicly pulled its investment in AnyVisions Series A following an investigation by former U.S. attorney general Eric Holder into reports that the startups technology was being used by the Israeli government to surveil residents in the West Bank.

Paravision, the company marred by controversy after it was accused of using facial recognition on its users without informing them, raised $23 million in a funding round led by J2 Ventures.

Last week, Clearview AI, the controversial facial recognition startup that is the subject of several government investigations and multiple class-action suits for allegedly scraping billions of profile photos from social media sites, confirmed to The New York Times it raised $30 million from investors who asked not to be identified, only that they are institutional investors and private family offices. That is to say, while investors are happy to see their money go toward building facial recognition systems, they too are all too aware of the risks and controversies associated with attaching their names to the technology.

Although the applications and customers of facial recognition wildly vary, theres still a big market for the technology.

Many of the cities and towns with facial recognition bans also have carve-outs that allow its use in some circumstances, or broad exemptions for private businesses that can freely buy and use the technology. The exclusion of many China-based facial recognition companies, like Hikvision and Dahua, which the government has linked to human rights abuses against the Uighur Muslim minority in Xinjiang, as well as dozens of other startups blacklisted by the U.S. government, has helped push out some of the greatest competition from the most lucrative U.S. markets, like government customers.

But as facial recognition continues to draw scrutiny, investors are urging companies to do more to make sure their technologies are not being misused.

In June, a group of 50 investors with more than $4.5 trillion in assets called on dozens of facial recognition companies, including Amazon, Facebook, Alibaba and Huawei, to build their technologies ethically.

In some instances, new technologies such as facial recognition technology may also undermine our fundamental rights. Yet this technology is being designed and used in a largely unconstrained way, presenting risks to basic human rights, the statement read.

Its not just ethics, but also a matter of trying to future-proof the industry from inevitable further political headwinds. In April, the European Unions top data protection watchdog called for an end to facial recognition in public spaces across the bloc.

As mass surveillance expands, technological innovation is outpacing human rights protection. There are growing reports of bans, fines and blacklistings of the use of facial recognition technology. There is a pressing need to consider these questions, the statement added.

Visit link:
Despite controversies and bans, facial recognition startups are flush with VC cash - TechCrunch

The Trumpies: Where Are They Now? – Washingtonian

Elaine Chao was one of the last few Trump-administration longtimers left gaping at the horror of January 6the now infamous day when a supporter of the 45th President stormed into the US Capitol wearing horns and face paint and sat in the Vice Presidents chair in the Senate chamber; a fellow Trump loyalist was killed as she tried to breach the House chamber; and hundreds of other so-called patriots marauded through the building in the name of Making America Great Again after maiming police officers outside. Widely viewed as an experienced voice of conservative reason when confirmed as Secretary of Transportation in 2017, Chao had outlasted many colleagues who jumped off the Trump train well before the Capitol insurrection. It wasnt the first time she had stuck it out in a controversial administration. After heading the Labor Department through the entirety of George W. Bushs tenure, she was rewarded with a board seat at Dole Food Company, and later News Corp. and Wells Fargo, with a payout from the latter reported to potentially hit $5 million. But this time, her loyalty seems to have come with complications.

Although she resigned in protest on January 7, until very recently Chaos only publicized post-Trump gig was a slot at the right-leaning Hudson Institute; in late June, she was named to the board of a maker of self-driving truck technology. Her association with Trump, along with an inspector generals finding that she used agency resources to help her wealthy familys shipping business, will mess with her ability to get on the board of a Fortune 500 company, says a former Republican strategist: They need people with pristine reputations.

Such has been the fate of the Always Trumpers who stayed until the cataclysmic end, or at least through the 2020 election. Whereas a number of insiders who got out early found their way in the private sector, seven months out from the transition, the die-hards are still branded with a scarlet T. Trump attorney general Bill Barrs former firm, Kirkland & Ellis, has not rehired him, compared with Covington & Burling, where Barack Obamas AG Eric Holder returned as partner. And while Colin Powell joined the venture-capital firm Kleiner Perkins and accepted multiple board seats, including at the Council on Foreign Relations, after he was Secretary of State under Bush, Mike Pompeo is doing Fox News hits and serving as a fellow at the Hudson Institute. (I guess he could go to the MyPillow board, the former GOP strategist quips.)

Some Trumpies were never considered terribly qualified to begin with. (See: press sec Stephanie Grisham, adviser Hope Hicks.) As for others, if they were really Trump boosters, they knew what they were getting into, says Doug Heye, a former communications director for the RNC and top aide to exGOP majority leader Eric Cantor. This is the natural progression of the orbit that theyre in. They werent necessarily expecting gigs with a Washington or Wall Street imprimatur, the theory goes, because they saw their future in the land of Keeping America Great.

Still, the stain of January 6 is making post-administration life harder than usual for former powerbrokers who could otherwise expect softer landings. The publishing industry has faced open revolt from its own authors who petitioned to keep Trumpers from cashing in on tell-all memoirs. After Mike Pences $3-million-plus, two-book deal with Simon & Schuster went public, the company was hit with a petition signed by more than 200 employees and 3,500 supporters (including its own authors) calling for the deal to be killed. Three months earlieron January 7S&S had canned a slated book by Missouri GOP senator Josh Hawley, who had sought to overturn Joe Bidens election.

Out of the public eye, meanwhile, other institutions are redlining Trumpers who endorsed the former Presidents stolen-election claims. The Council on Foreign Relations, the bipartisan think tank with a long embrace of administration formers, has four exTrump political appointees from Treasury and State (including former ambassador to India Kenneth Juster) serving as fellows and hasnt received any blowback. If we did get pushback, we would be prepared to defend our decisions . . . with the quality of their scholarship and the depth and range of their experience, a council spokesperson says. But its highly unlikely we would hire someone in any capacity who was promoting the factually incorrect idea that the election was stolen.

Sean Spicer and Reince Priebus were fellows at Harvards Kennedy School of Government despite their Trump ties, but when New York congresswoman Elise Stefanik became a congressional figurehead of the stolen-election movement, the institution removed her from a committee.

Will the ostracism last? Some are convinced there will never come a moment of forgive-and-forget for the Trump 2020 crowd. Anybody who knew [the President] and still thought it was a good idea for him to be in the Oval Office, says the former GOP strategist, they either have utterly broken judgment or were solely interested in advancing their own interests independent of what the national interest should have been.

But others believe the 2022 midterms will be a tell. If theres a red wave and Trumpers are newly empowered, K Street would come to see a lot more value in, say, a former congressman turned Trump chief of staff like Mark Meadows who could play nice with the incoming leadership. Proximity to power is a great way to launder a reputation.

Veep, 201721

Settling into his new 10,000-square-foot home north of Indianapolis, making moves for a 2024 run. Writing two books in a $3-million-plus deal. Launched the Trump-backed Advancing American Freedom, a dark-money political group. Distinguished visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Planning to podcast.

Speechwriter and senior adviser to the President, 201721

Launched America First Legal, an ACLU-style conservative legal watchdog created to challenge Biden-administration initiatives in conflict with Trumpian agendas. Reportedly living in Arlington, though still owns his CityCenter condo in DC; has been spotted at Cafe Milano with wife Katie Miller.

White House Chief of staff, 202021

On the board of Millers legal organization; senior partner at the Conservative Partnership Institute, an advocacy group/think tank founded by former senator Jim DeMint. Still has his Alexandria condo.

Office of Management and Budget director and other appointments, 201821

Founded the Center for Renewing America think tank to fight critical race theory in schools, voting-rights expansion, and Big Tech. Part of Millers legal watchdog and Pences political group.

White House legislative director, 2017-18; chief of staff to the VP, 201921

Co-chair of Pences political group. Cofounded his own group (the Coalition to Protect American Workers), which is buying ads to fight the Biden tax agenda and tax hikes on businesses.

VPs communications director and other appointments, 201721

Popping up on the right-wing airwaves recently, flacking as comms director for the Coalition to Protect American Workers, Shorts new group.

Assistant to the President (Office of American Innovation) 201820; Acting director, Domestic Policy Council, 202021

Founded the America First Policy Institute to promote the Trump agenda. The new think tank has put a bunch of Trumpies to work.

UN ambassador, 201718

Founded a dark-money group that focuses on border security, tax reform, and other pet issues for conservatives. Recently met with the ousted Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel and sparked outcry after referring to him as prime minister on Twitter. Expected to go for the Oval in 2024 . . . as long as her ex-boss doesnt run.

Acting deputy secretary of Homeland Security and other appointments, 201921

Representing congressmen Louie Gohmert and Andrew Clyde in a lawsuit challenging new security measures in the House. Leading an initiative to prevent expansion of the Supreme Court and push for states rights when it comes to voting laws.

Counselor to the President, 201720

Her pitch for a tell-allwhich may even include juice about the domestic dramas that dominated her latter years in powerreportedly snagged a multimillion-dollar advance from a conservative imprint at Simon & Schuster. Adviser for Ohio Senate candidate Bernie Moreno, a car dealer. Has registered a consulting business in DC with cousin Giovanna Pence.

Attorney general, 201920

Formerly of counsel at Kirkland & Ellis, Barr isnt back to billing by the hour for the firm but reportedly has a deal (with an unspecified publisher) for a memoir about his time heading DOJ.

White House communications director, 201718; counselor to the President, 202021

Though she had a stint as a Fox News executive vice president after her first White House departure, shes been off the grid since her second exit this past January.

White House Press secretary and other appointments, 201721

The first press sec in history never to hold a press conference, she was largely invisible to the public while on the job . . . the same as now.

Advisers to the President, 201721

Serving out their exile from the Acela corridor in a waterfront condo in Surfside, Florida, about an hour south of Dad and two blocks away from the condo building that recently collapsed. Reportedly informal advisers to Brooke Rollinss new think tank. Jared just landed a deal for a tell-all that a conservative imprint at HarperCollins will publish in 2022.

An unscientific ranking of Trumpie book deals by payout, sales, and publisher prestige

1. John Bolton $2 millionplus advance

2. Mike Pence* $3 millionplus advance

3. Kellyanne Conway* multimillion-dollar advance

4. Anonymous/Miles Taylor

5. Cliff Sims seven-figure advance

6. Jared Kushner* seven-figure advance

7. Nikki Haley

8. Sarah Huckabee Sanders

9. H.R. McMaster

10. Omarosa Manigault Newman

11. Anthony Scaramucci

12. Kayleigh McEnany*

13. Scott Atlas*

14. Mark Meadows*

15. Peter Navarro*

*Not yet published

Surgeon General, 201721

Medical expert/contributor for Wish-TV, an Indianapolis affiliate of the CW network; practicing anesthesiology at OrthoIndy Hospital; a deans fellow at UVAs business school. On the board of an antiviral-drug company banking on a pill to fight Covid.

Secretary of Homeland Security and other appointments, 201719

Founded a consulting firm, Lighthouse Strategies, to advise the tech sector on security threats. Sold her Old Town townhouse and moved to California.

Secretary of Energy, 201719

On the board of LE GP, a Texas-based energy transportation company. (He was on the board of an affiliated firm before coming to DC.) A chairman at Brooke Rollinss America First Policy Institute.

Secretary of Health and Human Services, 201821

Named to the Aspen Institutes Health Strategy Group, ex officio.

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, 201721

Launched the American Cornerstone Institute think tank and the Think BIG America PAC. Consulting for a biotech (Galectin Therapeutics) thats developing a cirrhosis treatment and recently joined the board of a homebuilding company (D.R. Horton).

See the article here:
The Trumpies: Where Are They Now? - Washingtonian

Trump’s 2020 loss gave the GOP the last key to ‘win’ the midterms – MSNBC

There was a time in the not too distant past when the Republican Party was known for its sneakiness, a product of the underhanded tricks of operatives like Lee Atwater and his protgs. These days, the GOP is more a fan of brute force tactics when it comes to winning elections, reworking the rules of the game to make it more winnable potentially even when they haven't won the most votes.

Even as the media shine lights on the individual components of the GOP's strategy from the slew of changes in election laws enacted or proposed in states like Georgia and Texas to the absolute circus that's taking place in Arizona's "audit" of the 2020 election it can be easy to miss how they fit together. But when you take a step back, it becomes clear that they're all interconnected, with one overarching goal: Republicans' opposition to free and fair elections boils down to a three-step plan to reclaim power in Washington and cement their control at the state level.

In three areas, the Republican Party is working to win elections not by persuading new voters to subscribe to their ideas, but by making their opponents incapable of victory.

I wrote last week about the choice Democrats face in whether to ban gerrymandering nationwide ahead of the 2022 midterms. While there are groups that want to end gerrymandering entirely, like former Attorney General Eric Holder's National Democratic Redistricting Committee, it has been an uphill climb to get politicians on board with giving up one of the most palatable uses of pure partisan power.

That works out well, though, for Republicans, who 10 years ago used their success in the 2010 midterms to draw favorable electoral maps that made it easier for them to keep control of the House. And that was done with the Voting Rights Act still in place to help keep their worst excesses in check.

In three areas, the Republican Party is working to win elections not by persuading new voters to subscribe to their ideas, but by making their opponents incapable of victory.

This time around, Republican legislatures are champing at the bit to use this period the first redistricting campaign since the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013 to redraw election districts in ways that box out Democratic voters. And this time around, federal courts have less power to step in to redraw explicitly partisan borders. There is the threat that, as in North Carolina, state courts could still toss out maps that are clearly biased toward one party but that's a risk some Republicans are willing to take.

In doing so, the GOP has the ability to win elections before the candidates are even in place if there just aren't enough Democratic voters in a given map, there's no chance that seat could be the tipping point for a majority in the House. And as we were reminded in this most recent election, the House has the power to determine a winner in a presidential election when the Electoral College fails to give a candidate a majority.

This is the step that has gotten the most attention lately in the media and in Congress, as it's the form of voter suppression Americans are most familiar with thanks to the fights to end Jim Crow in the 1960s. Today, Republicans are using the lie that the 2020 election was rife with voter fraud as an excuse to introduce dozens of bills to change election laws to make it harder for their states' citizens to vote.

The real insidiousness here is that in many cases, these restrictions are subtle enough to seem logical and defensible to the unaware. Texas' new elections bill would shut down 24-hour voting locations and drive-thru voting; Georgia's new law sharply restricts the use of drop boxes to collect early voting ballots. In effect, Republicans argue, these laws are just about securing elections and resetting standards back to the pre-pandemic norm.

Is that the same as stripping people of their right to vote? No. But it does raise the difficulty of casting a vote. And in cases like the above, in which it was mostly urban, minority voters who took advantage of these easier voting methods, there is a definite attempt to reshape the electorate in effect.

It's akin to placing hurdles on a racetrack everyone still has the chance to run the race when the starting gun goes off, but there are obstacles in the way that will cause some people to trip or give up on running at all. What's worse is that the targeted way these changes are being designed makes it as though hurdles are being added to only some lanes.

Add the first two steps together and the odds of Democrats' keeping control of the House drop after the midterms. But it's step three that's the real innovation and the most anti-democratic idea that former President Donald Trump has brought to the table.

In contesting the results of the election, Trump offered no real evidence to prove that President Joe Biden had "stolen" the race from him. But his followers believed it and Republican leaders are hesitant to correct the record. That has led us to a place where investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, which Trump's rhetoric spawned, is a partisan issue.

The violent overthrow of the election is a bit too distasteful for most mainstream Republicans. What could be a real endemic threat, though, is the farce playing out in Arizona. For the last three months, a "forensic analysis" of the election results in Maricopa County has been hunting for any sign that Trump's claims about fraud were true. Trump has apparently even thought that the Arizona audit was his ticket back to the White House.

While the "audit" has made a bunch of money for its backers, it has come up totally empty so far. That hasn't deterred Cyber Ninjas, the firm running the audit, from insisting last week that it needs to take its sideshow door to door to really make sure there was no fraud. Worse, as MSNBC columnist Charlie Sykes recently wrote, the fever swamp in Arizona is spreading to Pennsylvania and potentially other battleground states. There's little stopping this from becoming a normalized part of the post-election process and justifying further restrictions on voting rights.

And there are more "legitimate" efforts to bring about the same potential outcome of Republicans' being declared the winners of elections in which they didn't get the most votes. The most dangerous involve Republicans' taking direct, partisan control over how elections are run and decided. Georgia's election law strips the secretary of state of his power over the State Election Board, giving it to the hyperpartisan Legislature. The scrapped version of Texas' election bill would have given judges the power to directly toss out results of elections that seemed, for whatever reason, dodgy.

When you think about the efforts to shape control of the House and limit who gets to vote and a new willingness to change the results of elections after the fact, you get a world where Trump's long-shot effort to have the House declare him the winner over Biden would have a real shot at success.

The genius of this plan is that it involves manipulating the outcome at every stage of the election process: before, during and after voters' trips to the polls. Taken separately, any one of them can be an infringement on the people's right to choose their elected officials. Together, they're a nightmare for democracy.

This is the plan, in plain view for anyone who is willing to look. It's naive to suggest that this behavior is somehow ahistorical or outside what America is capable of accepting. But it would be nice if it could have been relegated to the past, where it belongs.

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MSNBC Daily, where he helps frame the news of the day for readers. He was previously at BuzzFeed News and holds a degree in international relations from Michigan State University.

View original post here:
Trump's 2020 loss gave the GOP the last key to 'win' the midterms - MSNBC

The Clock Is Ticking on Preventing an Undemocratic GOP Power Grab in the House – Jacobin magazine

You wouldnt know it by watching Congress take long summer vacations and slowly mull infrastructure legislation, but Democrats are facing a fast-approaching deadline that could decide the partys political fate for the next decade.

By August 16, the US Census Bureau is scheduled to release data gathered in the 2020 census to the states, enabling state governments to begin redrawing their legislative and congressional districts.

If Democrats want to have their best shot at preventing Republicans from redrawing red states congressional districts in a way that could lock in a GOP House majority for a decade, they need to tweak and pass the For the People Act, their signature voting rights and democracy reform legislation, before that date.

The For the People Act would implement aseries of rules and procedures designed to curb partisan gerrymandering, the process of drawing legislative districts to benefit a political party. If the bill isnt passed before August 16, Democrats could modify its language to ensure some parts of its anti-gerrymandering provisions could take effect retroactively but not all of the legislations original redistricting reforms would be preserved this way. Theres also a risk that some Democrats may end up happy representing new, safely Democratic districts, and thus be less interested in passing reforms.

As of today, the bill has completely stalled. Itfailed in the Senate last month due to a Republican filibuster, and since a handful of conservative Democrats have steadfastly refused to eliminate or modify Senate filibuster rules requiring sixty votes to advance virtually all legislation, Republicans can continue to block the legislation indefinitely.

Its not clear how or when Democrats are planning to pass the bill. In recent weeks, Democratic lawmakers in the House and Senate have instead focused on negotiations over infrastructure legislation, a key priority of the Biden White House.

Both legislative houses are currently scheduled to be on recess for much of August. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, recently indicatedhe could keep senators in Washington for part of the August recess period but specifically to work on passing infrastructure legislation.

The For the People Act was supposed to be the Democratic Partys response to ongoing efforts by Republicans to restrict voting rights across the country. Supporters describe it as a democracy infrastructure bill or, as Elizabeth Hira, a policy counselor with the Brennan Center for Justice, calls it, the next great civil rights bill.

Not only is it beating back voter suppression, the likes of which weve been fighting since before 1965 with the Voting Rights Act, it actually does the forward-looking work to ask the question about what structural changes would need to exist in our democracy to actually create an inclusive democracy, Hira says.

To that end, the legislation would establish redistricting rules that include enhanced protections against minority voter dilution, mandate states use independent federal commissions to oversee their redistricting, and require transparency and public participation in the redrawing process.

For Democrats, the need to pass such a package could not be more urgent. Every ten years, following the release of updated demographic data from the US Census Bureau, states redraw congressional and legislative districts. Republicans, who dominated state legislative electionslast year, have proven to be willing to use the redistricting process to their extreme advantage.

And yet Democrats remain paralyzed on the issue a problem stemming from the top.

On the campaign trail, President Joe Bidenannounced that a first priority of a Biden Administration will be to lead on a comprehensive set of reforms like those reflected in the For the People Act (H. R. 1) to end special interest control of Washington and protect the voice and vote of every American.

As president, Biden followed this rhetoric with gestures signaling a desire to overhaul American democracy to be fairer and more inclusive. After the House passed its version of the For the People Act in March, he released a statementthat he was looking forward to signing the bill into law. Days later, Biden signed an executive order requiring federal agencies to expand ballot access.

The White House and Democrats even mobilized top brass to back the legislation. Vice President Kamala Harris hasled the administrations voting rights efforts, while former president Barack Obama and exattorney general Eric Holder held a teleconferencelast month urging Congress to compromise in order to get an iteration of the For the People Act passed.

Despite these gestures, however, the For the People Act remains stymied. On June 22, a vote to debate the bill failed in the Senate much to the chagrin of activists who, for months, have been calling on Senate Democrats and the Biden administration to embrace eliminating the filibuster.

Time is running out to pass the For the People Act, says Michael Li, the redistricting and voting counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice. He says August 16, or shortly thereafter, is the deadline for Democrats to pass a bill containing the most robust [redistricting] reforms possible.

You could pass some things after August 16. The partisan gerrymandering ban, for example, could be retroactive, he says. But other things like the procedural requirements (the transparency and public participation requirements) could not be implemented.

But making parts of the bill retroactive could leave it less politically viable, says Li because, as he notes, As a practical matter, the politics of passage. . . potentially become more complicated once [redistricting] maps are passed. Thats because members of the House, including Democrats, could in some cases end up pleased with their newly redrawn districts, and therefore less interested in redoing them by passing the legislation.

Because Democrats have waited so long to pass the For the People Act, even if lawmakers find a way to pass the bill before the August 16 deadline, they will now have to rewrite some of its language regarding nonpartisan redistricting if they want it to apply to this cycle.

It is too late to create federal commissions to draw maps, so even though that is still technically in the bill, it wont be possible and will need to come out of any final bill, says Li. But there is time to implement national map-drawing rules, including a ban on partisan gerrymandering.

The uncertainty about whether Democrats will actually pass the For the People Act and whether it would even make a difference in the redistricting process is concerning for advocates who say there is a unique danger in Democrats not using their current control of the government to do away with gerrymandering once and for all.

I would have come out of the gates with a partisan gerrymandering bill, says author David Daley.

Few would know better than Daley. His 2016 book,Ratf**ked: The True Story Behind the Secret Plan to Steal Americas Democracy,recountshow the GOP weaponized the redistricting process after the 2010 midterms in defiance of unfavorable demographic trends.

The plan was called REDMAP and it was simple: pour money into state races to control the process and use it to disempower the opposition. The results were devastating for Democrats.

Democrats did not regain control of the House of Representatives until the 2018 midterms, despitewinninga majority of votes in congressional races in 2012, and have faced uphill battles at the state level ever since.

A 2017studyfrom the Brennan Center described the impact: In the 26 states that account for 85 percent of congressional districts, Republicans derive a net benefit of at least 16-17 congressional seats in the current Congress from partisan bias significantly more than previously thought.

Now, Daley predicts that unless legislation is passed to stop it, this redistricting cycle will be a drunken bacchanalia of gerrymandering, making what came before seem tame by comparison.

Law professor Lawrence Lessig shares Daleys concerns. Speaking to theDaily Poster, Lessig predicts that the gerrymandering we saw in 2010 is going to be gerrymandering on steroids in 2020. Lessig notes that in 2010, people were still worried that the Supreme Court was going to come in and strike down extreme partisan gerrymandering, but now the court said, Were not going to do anything.

The Supreme Court decision Lessig was referring to came down in June 2019 in the case ofRucho v. Common Cause. The court found that partisan gerrymandering was a political issue, and therefore not reviewable by federal courts.

TheRuchodecision is not the only one clearing the path for extreme gerrymandering. Six years earlier, in the case ofShelby County v. Holder, the court struck down a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act that laid out the metrics used to determine which jurisdictions needed to obtain federal preclearance before changing their voting laws. The court found that the old standard which applied to places with a history of racial discrimination was no longer adequate and left it to Congress to find a new, workable formula. But lawmakers never came up with a substitute.

At the time, Greg Abbott, then Texas attorney general, lauded the decision, noting: Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may. . . take effect without approval from the federal government.

The warnings of Daley and Lessig are likely prophetic. Democrats took a drubbing in down-ballot elections in 2020, despite Joe Bidens campaignpledgeto retake state legislatures.

Making matters worse for the party is its unilateral disarmament in the redistricting wars. In the last decade, several Democratic states, including New York, Colorado, and California, haveimplemented nonpartisan redistricting measuressince the last census, while big red states have not.Most of thethirty-one statesin which state legislatures draw the districts as a partisan matter are controlled by the GOP.

Since the failure of the For the People Act in the Senate, Biden has continued to speak about the need for voting rights reform.

Last week, the presidentpointed out that seventeen states have enacted 28 new laws to make it harder for American to vote, not to mention nearly 400 additional bills Republican members of state legislature are trying to pass. He labeledthe GOP efforts the 21st century Jim Crow assault.

Its the most dangerous threat to voting and the integrity of free and fair elections in our history, Bidensaid.

Despite the tough talk, Bidenstopped shortof calling for Senate filibuster reforms that might allow Democrats to actually do anything about the threat.

Some Democrats, like House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-SC, have now started pushing to exempt voting rights legislationand other constitutional measures from the filibuster.

Its a weak proposal, especially since it would mean the filibuster would continue to block major Democratic priorities like overhauling climate policy, reforming labor laws, and increasing the federal minimum wage.

With less than a month left before the census data is set to be released to the states, these efforts and all of the talk about preserving voting rights may be too little, too late. Unless Democrats manage to spring into action, quickly and decisively, Biden may never have full control of Congress again.

See more here:
The Clock Is Ticking on Preventing an Undemocratic GOP Power Grab in the House - Jacobin magazine

Alvin Bragg Likely to Take Over Trump Investigation – The New York Times

Mr. Bragg said repeatedly during the campaign that he had sued Mr. Trump or his administration more than 100 times during his tenure at the attorney generals office. He also said he expected to be attacked by Mr. Trump, who said this week that the investigation was a form of political persecution being led by New York radical-left prosecutors.

Mr. Vance, who did not seek re-election, is coordinating his efforts with Letitia James, New Yorks attorney general.

Preet Bharara, a former United States attorney in Manhattan who supervised Mr. Bragg and endorsed his candidacy, said Mr. Bragg had varied experience as a prosecutor, and that his work on white-collar crime and public corruption cases could come into play in the investigation into Mr. Trump and the case against Mr. Weisselberg and Mr. Trumps business.

He can handle this, Mr. Bharara said.

For much of the primary, Mr. Bragg was thought to be trailing Ms. Farhadian Weinstein, another former federal prosecutor who also served as counsel to the former U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder, and the Brooklyn district attorney, Eric Gonzalez. She dominated the fund-raising battle and gave her own campaign $8.2 million, more than three times as much money as anyone else raised overall, and led in most polls.

But a late resistance to her candidacy grew, in part because of the money she spent on the race. On Primary Day, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who did not endorse a candidate, discouraged voters from supporting Ms. Farhadian Weinstein during a radio interview, and cited Mr. Bragg and another contender, Tahanie Aboushi, as better choices.

Ms. Farhadian Weinstein said in a brief interview on Friday that she would continue to be an advocate for issues she focused on during the campaign, particularly violence against women, which she said was startlingly common and underreported.

Mr. Bragg will face Thomas Kenniff, the Republican candidate, in November. Mr. Kenniff, a former state prosecutor in Westchester County, N.Y., a member of the Army Judge Advocate Generals Corps and an Iraq War veteran, has said the Manhattan district attorney should be focused on law and order. In recent weeks, he had begun to attack Ms. Farhadian Weinstein, but then switched to criticizing Mr. Bragg.

See the original post here:
Alvin Bragg Likely to Take Over Trump Investigation - The New York Times