Mediaboss Marketing

ASHLAND The Attorney Generals of Kentucky and West Virginia came to Ashland Thursday afternoon to chew the fat about the rule of law, guns, God and opioids.

The appearance at the Train Depot was part of a two-leg tour by Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron, the first Black man to hold statewide office, and West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, whos held that seat in the Mountain State since 2013.

Hosted by Ashland Alliance, Tim Gibbs the chamber's president played moderator, lobbing up the questions from a list of vetted topics to the two men who pretty much agreed on everything.

Here's what the top cops in the Bluegrass and the Mountain State had to say:

Rule of Law

Cameron: The Rule of Law means applying the statutes and constitution to everyone equally, without fear or favor. No one is above the law and whether you're an individual or a business entity, it doesn't matter.

Morrisey: Rule of Law means applying the law regardless of political or economic circumstances. There are no Republican laws or Democrat laws. I think in this environment, attorney generals need to apply the law without political goals.

Context: Cameron has come under fire nationally after refusing to indict the police officers involved in the death of Breonna Taylor, while Morrisey joined the suit by the Texas Attorney General to overturn the results of a lawful federal election.

Economic Development in Appalachia

Morrisey: We have to be optimistic because we have a richness in our people and that's where economic development starts. If you look at the COVID monies, we can use that on capital expenditures for broadband and entice a lot of people from the cities to move to West Virginia and Kentucky to work remotely.

Cameron: I was speaking with the Judge-Executive of Floyd County today and he said five years ago, his sons were going to leave for the big city because there were no jobs there. Thanks to expanded internet access, they stayed and now work remotely. I believe broadband will encourage people to stay at home and stay in place and we can stop this brain drain.

Context: According to the Appalachian Regional Commission, broadband access in the entire region (ranging from western New York to northern Alabama) is about 78%, while national it is 83%. However, counties in central Appalachia still lag behind, particularly in Kentucky and West Virginia. They're at around 70% access, according to the ARC. The ARC also notes there is divide between urban areas of Appalachia and the rural areas. Neither AG addressed how blue collar workers will be helped through broadband access.

Federal Overreach

Cameron: We fight federal overreach daily. Whenever a new administration comes in, there's a grace period to see what they do. What I've seen from this current administration, from taxes to COVID to energy is they have tried to overreach in many different areas. The new clean power rules contained in the infrastructure bill would be disastrous to the Commonwealth of Kentucky. We could lose 30,000 jobs and see our electric bill increase by 27%.

Morrisey: When I started in 2013, I was up to my eyeballs in alligators with the Obama administration's overreach. This is Obama 4.0. The Biden administration does not have much respect for the rule of law. We see this in an unprecedented amount of illegal aliens and fentanyl flowing across the border, vaccine mandates that they're trying to push onto companies and an energy policy that would be cataclysmic for Kentucky and West Virginia.

Context: With all the talks about energy, in early July Cameron actually bucked against Morrisey by recommending the Kentucky Public Service Commission deny a request by Kentucky Power to put $67 million in upgrades into a coal fire plant in the northern panhandle of West Virginia. Biden's current push for a COVID vaccine mandate in the private sector hasn't received much push back from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers or the Business Roundtable, some of the top business organizations in the country.

The Opioid Crisis

Cameron: I believe in a two pronged approach of putting the people who distribute drugs in jail and going after the manufacturers of pharmaceutical drugs who marketed this poison in our communities. Kentucky is a part of a global settlement in which our commonwealth is getting $482 million to help restore our communities.

Morrisey: I think the opioid crisis is an example of how important it is to collaborate because this crisis does not recognize borders and jurisdictions. It is everywhere. I believe we should focus on the supply and the demand and look at the root causes of the problem. We need to spend this settlement money wisely.

Context: In July, the companies at the center of a massive class action lawsuit agreed to settle the litigation with a $26 billion payout, to be signed off by the states involved. According to an Aug. 24 Reuters article, West Virginia did not sign the agreement. Kentucky, however, did.

The Second Amendment

Morrisey: The Second Amendment is one of the most cherished basic liberties we have. When I took office, we increased reciprocity to 38 states, supported constitutional carry and are now opposing moves by the Biden Administration to regulate ghost guns and pistol braces. They're trying to say a pistol brace is a short-barreled rifle, when really it's a just a tool that allows the elderly and the disabled to exercise their rights.

Cameron: Our General Assembly has done a great job at protecting the Second Amendment and my office has helped craft resolutions for counties to say the federal government can't infringe on our freedoms. Right now, we are fighting for our ability to have bump stocks and continue to support the Second Amendment.

Context: While the Biden Administration is currently looking into regulating Ghost Guns guns put together with unfinished receivers the pistol brace regulations and the bump stock bans originated in the Trump Administration. The pistol brace rule was put out for public comment by the ATF in December 2020, during Trump's lame duck session, but rescinded within five days following an uproar by Congressional Republicans. The bump stock ban was put in place in 2019, in response to the 2017 Las Vegas massacre.

Religious Liberties

Cameron: We have seen during a period of emergency the scaling back of First Amendment rights when our executive here in Kentucky made the decision to shut down churches. You could go driving on a Sunday morning and see no cars in the church parking lots, but still see them at big box stores. I'm all for commerce, but religion is protected by the Constitution while big box stores are not.

Morrisey: When we started to see religions organized, people were prosecuted for their faith. Our Constitution was novel in that it has protections for peoples faiths. There's a lot of people eroding religion and we have to watch out for it because it's under assault. They're forcing business owners and bakers to do things they don't want to do and undermining the integrity of women's sports.

Context: During the lockdowns in 2020, Gov. Andy Beshear issued an executive order banning mass congregations, including at churches. Several churches flouted the rule and it was quickly rescinded. Also, the Bible doesn't mention a whole lot about women's sports.

(606) 326-2653 |

henry@dailyindependent.com

We are making critical coverage of the coronavirus available for free. Please consider subscribing so we can continue to bring you the latest news and information on this developing story.

The rest is here:
Ky., W.Va. AGs visit Ashland | News | dailyindependent.com - The Independent

The Second Amendment Foundation invites run rights activists across the country to participate in the 36th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference, which, due to the continuing COVID-19 pandemic, will once again be a virtual event held online Sept. 25 and 26, hosted by the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

The theme of this years conference is Saving Freedom! The event will appear on multiple platforms, including YouTube and Facebook.

Last years virtual conference had more than 6,500 pre-registered attendees, and SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb anticipates equally big participation. This years presentations will include a discussion about how COVID impacted Second Amendment supporters, plus a look at the situation in Illinois with FOID licenses.And, of course, there will an in-depth discussion of the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association case that will be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in November.

This yearsspeakers include:

To register for this years conference, go to http://www.saf.org/grpc/. You will receive information to join the event, which will be presented on the various platforms.

The conference agenda includes panel discussions covering such subjects as federal and state legislative affairs, grassroots activism, legal actions in defense of the Second Amendment, media and corporate attacks on the right to keep and bear arms, womens issues, advancing the gun rights message, and much more.

Despite the continuing attacks on the Second Amendment by the Biden administration, Gottlieb observed, the gun rights movement has seen many successful advancements of gun rights this year. We now have a record number of Second Amendment Sanctuary cities and counties pushing back on federal gun control mandates as well as a record number of constitutional carry states where you no longer need a permit to exercise your constitutional rights for personal protection and self-defense.

Since the first GRPC was held in Seattle in 1986, Gottlieb noted, the event has evolved from 20 speakers and 70 attendees more than 100 speakers several thousand people pre-registered for last years virtual event. The GRPC has become a must attend event for gun rights advocates and grassroots activists across the country, and more importantly so with Joe Biden in the White House.

And because the event is entirely online, gun rights activists can attend from the comfort of their own home. This will be an awesome event, Gottlieb predicted, and gun owners from coast to coast can virtually attend.

Support journalism byclicking here to our gofundmeor sign up for ourfree newsletter by clicking here

Android Users,Click Here To Download The Free Press AppAnd Never Miss A Story. Its Free And Coming To Apple Users Soon.

More here:
SAF Invites Gun Owners To 'Join Us Online' For 2021 Gun Rights Policy Conference - The Free Press

NEWS TO KNOWOur daily roundup of headlines from Virginia and elsewhere.

More kids are hospitalized with COVID-19 than at any point during the pandemic, with at least 252 confirmed or suspected cases reported by hospitals last week. Now were seeing children who are coming in with pneumonia and the need for oxygen. Its very serious.Richmond Times-Dispatch

The Virginia Department of Health rolled out a QR code program aimed at making it easier for people to show proof of vaccination to employers and businesses. Because the QR code is digitally signed by the Virginia Department of Health, it cannot be altered or forged. Information from QR codes is only available if and when the individual chooses to share it, the department said in a statement.Richmond Times-Dispatch

Early voting begins today.WTOP

Virginia gubernatorial candidates Terry McAuliffe and Glenn Youngkin each raised more than $11 million in the latest reporting period, but a $4.5 million loan Youngkin gave his campaign left the GOP candidate with a significant fundraising advantage.Associated Press

The gubernatorial debate was marked by insults, jabs and constant interruptions, with each campaign falling back on familiar lines of attack. Princess Blanding, who will be on the ballot representing the Liberation Party, was not invited to participate.Washington Post, VPM

Dominion Energy is moving forward with plans for 15 solar and energy storage projects to comply with requirements of a 2020 clean energy law, the company said Thursday.Richmond Times-Dispatch

The city of Roanoke named its first youth and gang violence prevention coordinator, who will be responsible for the awareness, suppression, intervention and prevention of youth and gang-related activity.Roanoke Times

The family of a girl who authorities say suffered years of sexual abuse by a relative is taking the unusual step of waging a legal fight against a Virginia prosecutor to try to win a longer sentence for the defendant.Washington Post

Virginia Beach City Council members are beginning to think it may no longer be appropriate to share a lawyer with the School Board as the two bodies begin to find themselves in conflict over issues like collective bargaining and Second Amendment rights.Virginian-Pilot

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

SUBSCRIBE

More:
More children hospitalized with COVID-19 than ever before and more Virginia headlines - Virginia Mercury

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

The University of Texas at San Antonio is taking heat from the UT Systems board of regents for its recent decision to stop displaying the famous Come and take it flag at football games after some in the university community argued the slogan has a racist history.

Regents Chair Kevin Eltife said in a statement last week that he was disappointed by UTSA President Taylor Eighmys decision to end the six-year tradition, which included unfurling an enormous flag with the slogan across the student section during the fourth quarter of football games and firing a cannon.

The Board of Regents does not support abandoning traditions and history that mean much to students, alumni, and other Texans, Eltife said. I am very disappointed with this decision and will immediately ask our Board to establish policies that ensure that the governing body of the UT System will have the opportunity in the future to be consulted before important university traditions and observances are changed.

Eltife and a system spokesperson did not provide additional details as to what policies hes seeking.

UTSA started displaying the flag in 2011, the schools first football season, and it became an official tradition in 2016 to inspire fans and challenge opponents on the field.

The origins of the flag, which includes the slogan and an image of a cannon under a star, stem from the Battle of Gonzales during the Texas Revolution in 1835. As the story goes, Mexican authorities loaned a small cannon to the town of Gonzales for protection from Native American tribes. When the Mexican troops asked for the return of the cannon, the people of Gonzales responded by raising a handmade flag with the words Come and take it.

The flag has long been a symbol of Texas pride and has commonly been adopted by groups sending a message of defiance or protesting government overreach, such as Second Amendment supporters and abortion rights advocates.

Opponents of the tradition at UTSA raised concerns that versions of the motto were superimposed onto Confederate flags and flown at the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and had been co-opted by groups that expressed anti-Mexican and anti-immigrant sentiments.

Nearly 60% of the almost 35,000 UTSA student body is Hispanic, and the school is designated a Hispanic-Serving Institution by the federal government. The university has also emphasized its desire to be a Hispanic thriving institution.

Some historians said that while this particular moment in history sparked a feeling of rebellion toward the Mexican government, it also resulted in anti-Mexican sentiment that carried into the Texas Republic. The eventual creation of the Texas Republic also led to the re-legalization of slavery in that territory.

Tejanos lost land, lost political offices, lost economic power, UTSA history professor Omar Valerio-Jimenez said of this period in history. Its not a time when Tejanos did well.

Eighmy declined a request for an interview, but he said in a statement to The Texas Tribune on Monday that he appreciated the boards perspective.

We look forward to continuing our work together to advance education, research and service for the public good, Eighmy said.

UTSA administrators started getting pushback to the tradition in August when the school unveiled a new, $40 million sports facility, called the Roadrunner Athletics Center of Excellence, and decorated it with the flag and slogan.

A former UTSA professor started a petition, which garnered around 960 signatures, arguing UTSA should remove the phrase because it is anti-Mexican and pro slavery.

Sarah Zenaida Gould, executive director of the Mexican American Civil Rights Institute in San Antonio, said she thinks that part of the history has been lost over time for some, and commended the university for its decision.

I think the more that the public is starting to understand the context of things like the Battle of the Alamo and racial politics embedded in the Texas Revolution, I think that flag is only going to become more problematic if they let it stay, she said.

Initially, Eighmy said in early August that the meaning of the flag might be different for different people, and he announced a plan for a task force to explore current and future traditions.

But last week, he said in a letter to the UTSA community that he was ending the tradition and not proceeding with the task force.

Eighmy said in the note that an online search revealed multiple groups had adopted the slogan for particular causes over the past few years, many of which have values and agendas that differ from UTSAs mission as a public university.

The phrase as well intended as it was upon inception and adoption has increasingly become incongruent with UTSA Athletics and our institutions mission and core values, he wrote. For our athletics program and our university each with so much promise and upward momentum there is no benefit to becoming embroiled in a divisive issue that could carry well into the future and negatively affect our progress.

He tasked the vice president for intercollegiate athletics to work with football players, students, faculty, staff and alumni to create a new fourth-quarter tradition that will launch during the fall 2022 football season.

Since Eighmy announced his decision, a new petition urging the school to keep the tradition has circulated online with more than 3,000 signatures as of Tuesday morning. Lindee Fiedler, chair of the Young Americans for Freedom chapter at UTSA, said there is confusion among students in her organization about how the use of the flag is offensive. She wishes there had been a vote among the school community about what to do.

We are really wary [of erasing] history, Fiedler said. We dont want to get rid of that historical context of our state and of our school. ... It inspires a lot of pride for most of the students. And anybody who I guess is offended by it is probably a small amount of people.

This isnt the first time the UT System Board of Regents has intervened to side with university tradition.

The regents supported the University of Texas at Austins decision to keep The Eyes of Texas after students and faculty at the flagship university called on the school to stop singing the song because of their concerns with its origins at a campus minstrel show at the turn of the 20th century where students likely wore blackface.

Eltife worked closely with UT-Austin President Jay Hartzell to develop a list of initiatives to improve diversity on campus and stood by Hartzells decision to keep the song.

The Eyes of Texas has been UT Austins official school song for almost 120 years, Eltife said in an October statement. To be clear, the UT System Board of Regents stands unequivocally and unanimously in support of President Hartzells announcement that The Eyes of Texas is, and will remain, the official school song.

In San Antonio this past weekend, UTSA football fans continued the tradition in different ways, including waving smaller Come and take it flags and chanting the phrase in the stands.

Disclosure: The University of Texas at San Antonio, the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Texas System have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Join us Sept. 20-25 at the 2021 Texas Tribune Festival. Tickets are on sale now for this multi-day celebration of big, bold ideas about politics, public policy and the days news, curated by The Texas Tribunes award-winning journalists. Learn more.

Visit link:
UTSA stopped displaying Come and take it flag at football games and now faces criticism from its Board of Regents - The Texas Tribune

Senate Bill 8, the Texas anti-abortion law that went into effect this month, was expressly designed so that state officials could dodge accountability for the state's law in federal court. In a new legal filing, the U.S. Department of Justice has offered a potentially winning strategy for overcoming that legal ruse.

The Texas law seeks to avoid legal accountability for state officials by outsourcing the enforcement of the anti-abortion law to private actors. Under its terms, "any person" may sue "any person whoaids or abets the performance or inducement of abortion" and win a $10,000 bounty plus legal fees if the civil suit is successful. In the state's eyes, this means that no state official needs to answer in federal court since no state official is enforcing the state law.

The Justice Department has offered a different view. In an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction filed in United States v. Texas, the federal government stresses the many ways in which the Texas law "impermissibly regulates the Federal Governmentand poses unlawful obstacles to the accomplishment of federal objectives." In other words, because federal sovereignty and federal interests are being harmed by the state, the federal government may lawfully sue the state over those injuries in federal court.

How does the Texas abortion law injure federal sovereignty and interests? For one thing, the state law undermines Section 1983 of Title 42 of the U.S. Code, a federal statute which says that state officials may be sued for constitutional rights violations. If you have been following the roiling national debate over qualified immunity, you have probably heard of Section 1983 since it is the law under which federal civil rights lawsuits are filed against abusive cops.

There is no question that banning pre-viability abortions, as the Texas law does, is flatly unconstitutional under existing Supreme Court precedent. What that means is that those parties impacted by the state law are entitled to seek legal recourse in federal court by filing Section 1983 lawsuitsexcept that the Texas law was specifically designed to block those parties from seeking that very recourse.

Forget abortion. Say a progun control state legislature did the same thing. Namely, it passed a law banning handguns but then outsourced the law's enforcement to private gun control activists in an attempt to shield state officials from facing Section 1983 lawsuits over the state's blatant Second Amendment violation. Either way, the state's scheme would be a menace to both constitutional rights that have been clearly recognized by the Supreme Court and to congressionally authorized federal judicial action against those rights violations.

The Texas abortion law also runs afoul of a longstanding rule that says that states may not impose civil or criminal penalties on federal officials for carrying out their federal duties. That rule applies here because the Texas law, as the U.S. motion notes, "purports to prohibit federal personnel and contractors from carrying out their federal obligations to assist in providing access to abortion-related services to persons in the care and custody of federal agencies." Likewise, the law "purports to impede the Department of Defense's implementation of its statutory obligation to provide such medical services [abortion] to service members."

These are not far-fetched legal arguments. As the federal government's motion points out, "the Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized the authority of the United States, even without an express statutory cause of action, to seek equitable relief to vindicate various federal interests and constitutional guarantees." Such federal arguments have prevailed before and they may prevail here again.

Link:
The Justice Department May Have Found a Winning Argument Against the Texas Abortion Law - Reason