Bay Area United Against War Newsletter, June 12, 2022



Monday, June 13, 2022, Doctors for Assange Statement


Doctors to UK: Assange Extradition

‘Medically & Ethically’ Wrong 



Ahead of the U.K. Home Secretary’s decision on whether to extradite Julian Assange to the United States, a group of more than 300 doctors representing 35 countries have told Priti Patel that approving his extradition would be “medically and ethically unacceptable”.


In an open letter sent to the Home Secretary on Friday June 10, and copied to British Prime Minster Boris Johnson, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice Robert Buckland, the Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, the doctors draw attention to the fact that Assange suffered a “mini stroke” in October 2021. They note:


“Predictably, Mr Assange’s health has since continued to deteriorate in your custody. In October 2021 Mr. Assange suffered a ‘mini-stroke’… This dramatic deterioration of Mr Assange’s health has not yet been considered in his extradition proceedings. The US assurances accepted by the High Court, therefore, which would form the basis of any extradition approval, are founded upon outdated medical information, rendering them obsolete.”


The doctors charge that any extradition under these circumstances would constitute negligence. They write:


“Under conditions in which the UK legal system has failed to take Mr Assange’s current health status into account, no valid decision regarding his extradition may be made, by yourself or anyone else. Should he come to harm in the US under these circumstances it is you, Home Secretary, who will be left holding the responsibility for that negligent outcome.”


In their letter the group reminds the Home Secretary that they first wrote to her on Friday 22 November 2019, expressing their serious concerns about Julian Assange’s deteriorating health.


Those concerns were subsequently borne out by the testimony of expert witnesses in court during Assange’s extradition proceedings, which led to the denial of his extradition by the original judge on health grounds. That decision was later overturned by a higher court, which referred the decision to Priti Patel in light of US assurances that Julian Assange would not be treated inhumanely.


The doctors write:


“The subsequent ‘assurances’ of the United States government, that Mr Assange would not be treated inhumanly, are worthless given their record of pursuit, persecution and plotted murder of Mr Assange in retaliation for his public interest journalism.”


They conclude:


“Home Secretary, in making your decision as to extradition, do not make yourself, your government, and your country complicit in the slow-motion execution of this award-winning journalist, arguably the foremost publisher of our time. Do not extradite Julian Assange; free him.”


Julian Assange remains in High Security Belmarsh Prison awaiting Priti Patel’s decision, which is due any day.



Dear friends, 

Recently I’ve started working with the Coalition to Free Ruchell Magee. On March 17, Ruchell turned 83. He’s been imprisoned for 59 years, and now walks with a walker. He is no threat to society if released. Ruchell was in the Marin County Courthouse on August 7, 1970, the morning Jonathan Jackson took it over in an effort to free his older brother, the internationally known revolutionary prison writer, George Jackson. Ruchell joined Jonathan and was the only survivor of the shooting that ensued. He has been locked up ever since and denied parole 13 times. On March 19, the Coalition to Free Ruchell Magee held a webinar for Ruchell for his 83rd birthday, which was a terrific event full of information and plans for building the campaign to Free Ruchell. (For information about his case, please visit: www.freeruchellmagee.org.)

Below are two ways to stream this historic webinar, plus 

• a petition you can sign

• a portal to send a letter to Governor Newsom

• a Donate button to support his campaign

• a link to our campaign website. 

Please take a moment and help. 

Note: We will soon have t-shirts to sell to raise money for legal expenses.

Here is the YouTube link to view the March 19 Webinar: 


Here is the Facebook link:


Sign the petition to Free Ruchell:


Write to Governor Newsom’s office:




Ruchell’s Website: 



Charlie Hinton


No one ever hurt their eyes by looking on the bright side



Tell Congress to Help #FreeDanielHale


U.S. Air Force veteran, Daniel Everette Hale has recently completed his first year of a 45-month prison sentence for exposing the realities of U.S drone warfare. Daniel Hale is not a spy, a threat to society, or a bad faith actor. His revelations were not a threat to national security. If they were, the prosecution would be able to identify the harm caused directly from the information Hale made public. Our members of Congress can urge President Biden to commute Daniel's sentence! Either way, Daniel deserves to be free.






Sign the petition:


If extradited to the United States, Julian Assange, father of two young British children, would face a sentence of 175 years in prison merely for receiving and publishing truthful information that revealed US war crimes.

UK District Judge Vanessa Baraitser has ruled that "it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America".

Amnesty International states, “Were Julian Assange to be extradited or subjected to any other transfer to the USA, Britain would be in breach of its obligations under international law.”

Human Rights Watch says, “The only thing standing between an Assange prosecution and a major threat to global media freedom is Britain. It is urgent that it defend the principles at risk.”

The NUJ has stated that the “US charges against Assange pose a huge threat, one that could criminalise the critical work of investigative journalists & their ability to protect their sources”.

Julian will not survive extradition to the United States.

The UK is required under its international obligations to stop the extradition. Article 4 of the US-UK extradition treaty says: "Extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense." 

The decision to either Free Assange or send him to his death is now squarely in the political domain. The UK must not send Julian to the country that conspired to murder him in London.

The United Kingdom can stop the extradition at any time. It must comply with Article 4 of the US-UK Extradition Treaty and Free Julian Assange.



Laws are created to be followed

by the poor.

Laws are made by the rich

to bring some order to exploitation.

The poor are the only law abiders in history.

When the poor make laws

the rich will be no more.


—Roque Dalton Presente!

(May 14, 1935 – Assassinated May 10, 1975)[1]

[1] Roque Dalton was a Salvadoran poet, essayist, journalist, political activist, and intellectual. He is considered one of Latin America's most compelling poets.







Screenshot of Kevin Cooper's artwork from the teaser.


 “In His Defense” The People vs. Kevin Cooper

A film by Kenneth A. Carlson 

Teaser is now streaming at:



Posted by: Death Penalty Focus Blog, January 10, 2022



“In his Defense,” a documentary on the Kevin Cooper case, is in the works right now, and California filmmaker Kenneth Carlson has released a teaser for it on CarlsonFilms.com


Just over seven months ago, California Gov. Gavin Newsom ordered an independent investigation of Cooper’s death penalty case. At the time, he explained that, “In cases where the government seeks to impose the ultimate punishment of death, I need to be satisfied that all relevant evidence is carefully and fairly examined.”


That investigation is ongoing, with no word from any of the parties involved on its progress.


Cooper has been on death row since 1985 for the murder of four people in San Bernardino County in June 1983. Prosecutors said Cooper, who had escaped from a minimum-security prison and had been hiding out near the scene of the murder, killed Douglas and Peggy Ryen, their 10-year-old daughter, Jessica, and 10-year-old Chris Hughes, a friend who was spending the night at the Ryen’s. The lone survivor of the attack, eight-year-old Josh Ryen, was severely injured but survived.


For over 36 years, Cooper has insisted he is innocent, and there are serious questions about evidence that was missing, tampered with, destroyed, possibly planted, or hidden from the defense. There were multiple murder weapons, raising questions about how one man could use all of them, killing four people and seriously wounding one, in the amount of time the coroner estimated the murders took place.


The teaser alone gives a good overview of the case, and helps explain why so many believe Cooper was wrongfully convicted.



New Legal Filing in Mumia’s Case

By Johanna Fernández

The following statement was issued January 4, 2022, regarding new legal filings by attorneys for Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Campaign to Bring Mumia Home

In her novel Their Eyes Were Watching God, Zora Neale Hurston wrote, “There are years that ask questions, and years that answer.”

With continued pressure from below, 2022 will be the year that forces the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office and the Philly Police Department to answer questions about why they framed imprisoned radio journalist and veteran Black Panther Mumia Abu-Jamal. Abu-Jamal’s attorneys have filed a Pennsylvania Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) petition focused entirely on the six boxes of case files that were found in a storage room of the DA’s office in late December 2018, after the case being heard before Judge Leon Tucker in the Court of Common Pleas concluded. (tinyurl.com/zkyva464)

The new evidence contained in the boxes is damning, and we need to expose it. It reveals a pattern of misconduct and abuse of authority by the prosecution, including bribery of the state’s two key witnesses, as well as racist exclusion in jury selection—a violation of the landmark Supreme Court decision Batson v. Kentucky. The remedy for each or any of the claims in the petition is a new trial. The court may order a hearing on factual issues raised in the claims. If so, we won’t know for at least a month. 

The new evidence includes a handwritten letter penned by Robert Chobert, the prosecution’s star witness. In it, Chobert demands to be paid money promised him by then-Prosecutor Joseph McGill. Other evidence includes notes written by McGill, prominently tracking the race of potential jurors for the purposes of excluding Black people from the jury, and letters and memoranda which reveal that the DA’s office sought to monitor, direct, and intervene in the outstanding prostitution charges against its other key witness Cynthia White.

Mumia Abu-Jamal was framed and convicted 40 years ago in 1982, during one of the most corrupt and racist periods in Philadelphia’s history—the era of cop-turned-mayor Frank Rizzo. It was a moment when the city’s police department, which worked intimately with the DA’s office, routinely engaged in homicidal violence against Black and Latinx detainees, corruption, bribery and tampering with evidence to obtain convictions. 

In 1979, under pressure from civil rights activists, the Department of Justice filed an unprecedented lawsuit against the Philadelphia police department and detailed a culture of racist violence, widespread corruption and intimidation that targeted outspoken people like Mumia. Despite concurrent investigations by the FBI and Pennsylvania’s Attorney General and dozens of police convictions, the power and influence of the country’s largest police association, the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) prevailed. 

Now, more than 40 years later, we’re still living with the failure to uproot these abuses. Philadelphia continues to fear the powerful FOP, even though it endorses cruelty, racism, and multiple injustices. A culture of fear permeates the “city of brotherly love.”

The contents of these boxes shine light on decades of white supremacy and rampant lawlessness in U.S. courts and prisons. They also hold enormous promise for Mumia’s freedom and challenge us to choose Love, Not PHEAR. (lovenotphear.com/) Stay tuned.

Workers World, January 4, 2022


Pa. Supreme Court denies widow’s appeal to remove Philly DA from Abu-Jamal case


Abu Jamal was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder of Faulkner in 1982. Over the past four decades, five of his appeals have been quashed.


In 1989, the state’s highest court affirmed Abu-Jamal’s death penalty conviction, and in 2012, he was re-sentenced to life in prison.


Abu-Jamal, 66, remains in prison. He can appeal to the state Supreme Court, or he can file a new appeal.


KYW Newsradio reached out to Abu-Jamal’s attorneys for comment. They shared this statement in full:


“Today, the Superior Court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to consider issues raised by Mr. Abu-Jamal in prior appeals. Two years ago, the Court of Common Pleas ordered reconsideration of these appeals finding evidence of an appearance of judicial bias when the appeals were first decided. We are disappointed in the Superior Court’s decision and are considering our next steps.


“While this case was pending in the Superior Court, the Commonwealth revealed, for the first time, previously undisclosed evidence related to Mr. Abu-Jamal’s case. That evidence includes a letter indicating that the Commonwealth promised its principal witness against Mr. Abu-Jamal money in connection with his testimony. In today’s decision, the Superior Court made clear that it was not adjudicating the issues raised by this new evidence. This new evidence is critical to any fair determination of the issues raised in this case, and we look forward to presenting it in court.”



Demand Mumia's Freedom:

Governor Tom Wolf -1(717) 787-2500  Fax 1 (717) 772-8284
Office of the Governor
508 Main Capitol Building
HarrisburgPA  17120    
After calling the governor, send an online communication about our concerns.   https://www.governor.pa.gov/contact/#PhoneNumber
Let us know what there response was, Thank you.  Mobilization4Mumia@gmail.com


Questions and comments may be sent to: info@freedomarchives.org



A Plea for the Compassionate Release of 

Leonard Peltier

Video at:


Screen shot from video.

Sign our petition urging President Biden to grant clemency to Leonard Peltier.




Email: contact@whoisleonardpeltier.info

Address: 116 W. Osborne Ave. Tampa, Florida 33603


Bury My Heart with Leonard Peltier

How long will he still be with us? How long will the genocide continue?

By Michael Moore

—VIA Email: michaelmoore@substack.com

LEONARD PELTIER, Native American hero. An innocent man, he’s spent 44 years as a political prisoner. The prosecutor who put him behind bars now says Peltier is innocent. President Biden, go to Mass today, and then stop this torture. (Sipa/Shutterstock)

American Indian Movement leader, Leonard Peltier, at 77 years of age, came down with Covid-19 this weekend. Upon hearing this, I broke down and cried. An innocent man, locked up behind bars for 44 years, Peltier is now America’s longest-held political prisoner. He suffers in prison tonight even though James Reynolds, one of the key federal prosecutors who sent Peltier off to life in prison in 1977, has written to President Biden and confessed to his role in the lies, deceit, racism and fake evidence that together resulted in locking up our country’s most well-known Native American civil rights leader. Just as South Africa imprisoned for more than 27 years its leading voice for freedom, Nelson Mandela, so too have we done the same to a leading voice and freedom fighter for the indigenous people of America. That’s not just me saying this. That’s Amnesty International saying it. They placed him on their political prisoner list years ago and continue to demand his release.


And it’s not just Amnesty leading the way. It’s the Pope who has demanded Leonard Peltier’s release. It’s the Dalai Lama, Jesse Jackson, and the President Pro-Tempore of the US Senate, Sen. Patrick Leahy. Before their deaths, Nelson Mandela, Mother Theresa and Bishop Desmond Tutu pleaded with the United States to free Leonard Peltier. A worldwide movement of millions have seen their demands fall on deaf ears. 


And now the calls for Peltier to be granted clemency in DC have grown on Capitol Hill. Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI), the head of the Senate committee who oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs, has also demanded Peltier be given his freedom. Numerous House Democrats have also written to Biden. 


The time has come for our President to act; the same President who appointed the first-ever Native American cabinet member last year and who halted the building of the Keystone pipeline across Native lands. Surely Mr. Biden is capable of an urgent act of compassion for Leonard Peltier — especially considering that the prosecutor who put him away in 1977 now says Peltier is innocent, and that his US Attorney’s office corrupted the evidence to make sure Peltier didn’t get a fair trial. Why is this victim of our judicial system still in prison? And now he is sick with Covid.


For months Peltier has begged to get a Covid booster shot. Prison officials refused. The fact that he now has COVID-19 is a form of torture. A shame hangs over all of us. Should he now die, are we all not complicit in taking his life? 


President Biden, let Leonard Peltier go. This is a gross injustice. You can end it. Reach deep into your Catholic faith, read what the Pope has begged you to do, and then do the right thing. 


For those of you reading this, will you join me right now in appealing to President Biden to free Leonard Peltier? His health is in deep decline, he is the voice of his people — a people we owe so much to for massacring and imprisoning them for hundreds of years. 


The way we do mass incarceration in the US is abominable. And Leonard Peltier is not the only political prisoner we have locked up. We have millions of Black and brown and poor people tonight in prison or on parole and probation — in large part because they are Black and brown and poor. THAT is a political act on our part. Corporate criminals and Trump run free. The damage they have done to so many Americans and people around the world must be dealt with. 


This larger issue is one we MUST take on. For today, please join me in contacting the following to show them how many millions of us demand that Leonard Peltier has suffered enough and should be free:


President Joe Biden


Phone: 202-456-1111

E-mail: At this link



Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland


Phone: 202-208-3100

E-mail: feedback@ios.doi.gov


Attorney General Merrick Garland


Phone: 202-514-2000

E-mail: At this link



I’ll end with the final verse from the epic poem “American Names” by Stephen Vincent Benet: 


I shall not rest quiet in Montparnasse.

I shall not lie easy at Winchelsea.

You may bury my body in Sussex grass,

You may bury my tongue at Champmedy.

I shall not be there. I shall rise and pass.

Bury my heart at Wounded Knee.



PS. Also — watch the brilliant 1992 documentary by Michael Apted and Robert Redford about the framing of Leonard Peltier— “Incident at Oglala”



Union Membership—2021

Bureau of Labor Statistics

U.S. Department of Labor

For release 10:00 a.m. (ET) Thursday, January 20, 2022

Technical information: 

(202) 691-6378 • cpsinfo@bls.gov • www.bls.gov/cps

Media contact: 

(202) 691-5902 • PressOffice@bls.gov

In 2021, the number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions continued to decline (-241,000) to 14.0 million, and the percent who were members of unions—the union membership rate—was 10.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The rate is down from 10.8 percent in 2020—when the rate increased due to a disproportionately large decline in the total number of nonunion workers compared with the decline in the number of union members. The 2021 unionization rate is the same as the 2019 rate of 10.3 percent. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were 17.7 million union workers.

These data on union membership are collected as part of the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly sample survey of about 60,000 eligible households that obtains information on employment and unemployment among the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population age 16 and over. For further information, see the Technical Note in this news release.

Highlights from the 2021 data:

• The union membership rate of public-sector workers (33.9 percent) continued to be more than five times higher than the rate of private-sector workers (6.1 percent). (See table 3.)

• The highest unionization rates were among workers in education, training, and library occupations (34.6 percent) and protective service occupations (33.3 percent). (See table 3.)

• Men continued to have a higher union membership rate (10.6 percent) than women (9.9 percent). The gap between union membership rates for men and women has narrowed considerably since 1983 (the earliest year for which comparable data are available), when rates for men and women were 24.7 percent and 14.6 percent, respectively. (See table 1.)

• Black workers remained more likely to be union members than White, Asian, or Hispanic workers. (See table 1.)

• Nonunion workers had median weekly earnings that were 83 percent of earnings for workers who were union members ($975 versus $1,169). (The comparisons of earnings in this news release are on a broad level and do not control for many factors that can be important in explaining earnings differences.) (See table 2.)

• Among states, Hawaii and New York continued to have the highest union membership rates (22.4 percent and 22.2 percent, respectively), while South Carolina and North Carolina continued to have the lowest (1.7 percent and 2.6 percent, respectively). (See table 5.)

Industry and Occupation of Union Members

In 2021, 7.0 million employees in the public sector belonged to unions, the same as in the private sector. (See table 3.)

Union membership decreased by 191,000 over the year in the public sector. The public-sector union membership rate declined by 0.9 percentage point in 2021 to 33.9 percent, following an increase of 1.2 percentage points in 2020. In 2021, the union membership rate continued to be highest in local government (40.2 percent), which employs many workers in heavily unionized occupations, such as police officers, firefighters, and teachers.

The number of union workers employed in the private sector changed little over the year. However, the number of private-sector nonunion workers increased in 2021. The private-sector unionization rate declined by 0.2 percentage point in 2021 to 6.1 percent, slightly lower than its 2019 rate of 6.2 percent. Industries with high unionization rates included utilities (19.7 percent), motion pictures and sound recording industries (17.3 percent), and transportation and warehousing (14.7 percent). Low unionization rates occurred in finance (1.2 percent), professional and technical services (1.2 percent), food services and drinking places (1.2 percent), and insurance (1.5 percent).

Among occupational groups, the highest unionization rates in 2021 were in education, training, and library occupations (34.6 percent) and protective service occupations (33.3 percent). Unionization rates were lowest in food preparation and serving related occupations (3.1 percent); sales and related occupations (3.3 percent); computer and mathematical occupations (3.7 percent); personal care and service occupations (3.9 percent); and farming, fishing, and forestry occupations (4.0 percent).

Selected Characteristics of Union Members

In 2021, the number of men who were union members, at 7.5 million, changed little, while the number of women who were union members declined by 182,000 to 6.5 million. The unionization rate for men decreased by 0.4 percentage point over the year to 10.6 percent. In 2021, women’s union membership rate declined by 0.6 percentage point to 9.9 percent. The 2021 decreases in union membership rates for men and women reflect increases in the total number of nonunion workers. The rate for men is below the 2019 rate (10.8 percent), while the rate for women is above the 2019 rate (9.7 percent). (See table 1.)

Among major race and ethnicity groups, Black workers continued to have a higher union membership rate in 2021 (11.5 percent) than White workers (10.3 percent), Asian workers (7.7 percent), and Hispanic workers (9.0 percent). The union membership rate declined by 0.4 percentage point for White workers, by 0.8 percentage point for Black workers, by 1.2 percentage points for Asian workers, and by 0.8 percentage point for Hispanic workers. The 2021 rates for Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics are little or no different from 2019, while the rate for Asians is lower.

By age, workers ages 45 to 54 had the highest union membership rate in 2021, at 13.1 percent. Younger workers—those ages 16 to 24—had the lowest union membership rate, at 4.2 percent.

In 2021, the union membership rate for full-time workers (11.1 percent) continued to be considerably higher than that for part-time workers (6.1 percent).

Union Representation

In 2021, 15.8 million wage and salary workers were represented by a union, 137,000 less than in 2020. The percentage of workers represented by a union was 11.6 percent, down by 0.5 percentage point from 2020 but the same as in 2019. Workers represented by a union include both union members (14.0 million) and workers who report no union affiliation but whose jobs are covered by a union contract (1.8 million). (See table 1.)


Among full-time wage and salary workers, union members had median usual weekly earnings of $1,169 in 2021, while those who were not union members had median weekly earnings of $975. In addition to coverage by a collective bargaining agreement, these earnings differences reflect a variety of influences, including variations in the distributions of union members and nonunion employees by occupation, industry, age, firm size, or geographic region. (See tables 2 and 4.)

Union Membership by State

In 2021, 30 states and the District of Columbia had union membership rates below that of the U.S. average, 10.3 percent, while 20 states had rates above it. All states in both the East South Central and West South Central divisions had union membership rates below the national average, while all states in both the Middle Atlantic and Pacific divisions had rates above it. (See table 5 and chart 1.)

Ten states had union membership rates below 5.0 percent in 2021. South Carolina had the lowest rate (1.7 percent), followed by North Carolina (2.6 percent) and Utah (3.5 percent). Two states had union membership rates over 20.0 percent in 2021: Hawaii (22.4 percent) and New York (22.2 percent).

In 2021, about 30 percent of the 14.0 million union members lived in just two states (California at 2.5 million and New York at 1.7 million). However, these states accounted for about 17 percent of wage and salary employment nationally.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Impact on 2021 Union Members Data

Union membership data for 2021 continue to reflect the impact on the labor market of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Comparisons with union membership measures for 2020, including metrics such as the union membership rate and median usual weekly earnings, should be interpreted with caution. The onset of the pandemic in 2020 led to an increase in the unionization rate due to a disproportionately large decline in the number of nonunion workers compared with the decline in the number of union members. The decrease in the rate in 2021 reflects a large gain in the number of nonunion workers and a decrease in the number of union workers. More information on labor market developments in recent months is available at: 

www.bls.gov/covid19/effects-of-covid-19-pandemic-and- response-on-the-employment-situation-news-release.htm.



Resources for Resisting Federal Repression

Since June of 2020, activists have been subjected to an increasingly aggressive crackdown on protests by federal law enforcement. The federal response to the movement for Black Lives has included federal criminal charges for activists, door knocks by federal law enforcement agents, and increased use of federal troops to violently police protests. 

The NLG National Office is releasing this resource page for activists who are resisting federal repression. It includes a link to our emergency hotline numbers, as well as our library of Know-Your-Rights materials, our recent federal repression webinar, and a list of some of our recommended resources for activists. We will continue to update this page. 

Please visit the NLG Mass Defense Program page for general protest-related legal support hotlines run by NLG chapters.

Emergency Hotlines

If you are contacted by federal law enforcement you should exercise all of your rights. It is always advisable to speak to an attorney before responding to federal authorities. 

State and Local Hotlines

If you have been contacted by the FBI or other federal law enforcement, in one of the following areas, you may be able to get help or information from one of these local NLG hotlines for: 

National Hotline

If you are located in an area with no hotline, you can call the following number:

Know Your Rights Materials

The NLG maintains a library of basic Know-Your-Rights guides. 

WEBINAR: Federal Repression of Activists & Their Lawyers: Legal & Ethical Strategies to Defend Our Movements: presented by NLG-NYC and NLG National Office

We also recommend the following resources: 

Center for Constitutional Rights

Civil Liberties Defense Center

Grand Jury Resistance Project

Katya Komisaruk

Movement for Black Lives Legal Resources

Tilted Scales Collective






1) It’s Been 50 Years. I Am Not ‘Napalm Girl’ Anymore.

By Kim Phuc Phan Thi, June 6, 2022

Ms. Phan Thi is the founder of the Kim Foundation International, which provides aid to child victims of war. 

The author at her home in Ontario.
The author at her home in Ontario. Credit...May Truong for The New York Times

I grew up in the small village of Trang Bang in South Vietnam. My mother said I laughed a lot as a young girl. We led a simple life with an abundance of food, since my family had a farm and my mom ran the best restaurant in town. I remember loving school and playing with my cousins and the other children in our village, jumping rope, running and chasing one another joyfully.


All of that changed on June 8, 1972. I have only flashes of memories of that horrific day. I was playing with my cousins in the temple courtyard. The next moment, there was a plane swooping down close and a deafening noise. Then explosions and smoke and excruciating pain. I was 9 years old.


Napalm sticks to you, no matter how fast you run, causing horrific burns and pain that last a lifetime. I don’t remember running and screaming, “Nóng quá, nóng quá!” (“Too hot, too hot!”) But film footage and others’ memories show that I did.


You’ve probably seen the photograph of me taken that day, running away from the explosions with the others — a naked child with outstretched arms, screaming in pain. Taken by the South Vietnamese photographer Nick Ut, who was working for The Associated Press, it ran on the front pages of newspapers all over the world and won a Pulitzer Prize. In time, it became one of the most famous images from the Vietnam War.


Nick changed my life forever with that remarkable photograph. But he also saved my life. After he took the photo, he put his camera down, wrapped me in a blanket and whisked me off to get medical attention. I am forever thankful.


Yet I also remember hating him at times. I grew up detesting that photo. I thought to myself, “I am a little girl. I am naked. Why did he take that picture? Why didn’t my parents protect me? Why did he print that photo? Why was I the only kid naked while my brothers and cousins in the photo had their clothes on?” I felt ugly and ashamed.


Growing up, I sometimes wished to disappear not only because of my injuries — the burns scarred a third of my body and caused intense, chronic pain — but also because of the shame and embarrassment of my disfigurement. I tried to hide my scars under my clothes. I had horrific anxiety and depression. Children in school recoiled from me. I was a figure of pity to neighbors and, to some extent, my parents. As I got older, I feared that no one would ever love me.


Meanwhile, the photograph became even more famous, making it more difficult to navigate my private and emotional life. Beginning in the 1980s, I sat through endless interviews with the press and meetings with royalty, prime ministers and other leaders, all of whom expected to find some meaning in that image and my experience. The child running down the street became a symbol of the horrors of war. The real person looked on from the shadows, fearful that I would somehow be exposed as a damaged person.


Photographs, by definition, capture a moment in time. But the surviving people in these photographs, especially the children, must somehow go on. We are not symbols. We are human. We must find work, people to love, communities to embrace, places to learn and to be nurtured.


It was only in adulthood, after defecting to Canada that I began to find peace and realize my mission in life, with the help of my faith, husband and friends. I helped establish a foundation and began traveling to war-torn countries to provide medical and psychological assistance to children victimized by war, offering, I hope, a sense of possibilities.


I know what it is like to have your village bombed, your home devastated, to see family members die and bodies of innocent civilians lying in the street. These are the horrors of war from Vietnam memorialized in countless photographs and newsreels. Sadly, they are also the images of wars everywhere, of precious human lives being damaged and destroyed today in Ukraine.


They are, in a different way, also the horrific images coming from school shootings. We may not see the bodies, as we do with foreign wars, but these attacks are the domestic equivalent of war. The thought of sharing the images of the carnage, especially of children, may seem unbearable — but we should confront them. It is easier to hide from the realities of war if we don’t see the consequences.


I cannot speak for the families in Uvalde, Texas, but I think that showing the world what the aftermath of a gun rampage truly looks like can deliver the awful reality. We must face this violence head-on, and the first step is to look at it.


I have carried the results of war on my body. You don’t grow out of the scars, physically or mentally. I am grateful now for the power of that photograph of me as a 9-year-old, as I am of the journey I have taken as a person. My horror — which I barely remember — became universal. I’m proud that, in time, I have become a symbol of peace. It took me a long time to embrace that as a person. I can say, 50 years later, that I’m glad Nick captured that moment, even with all the difficulties that image created for me.


That picture will always serve as a reminder of the unspeakable evil of which humanity is capable. Still, I believe that peace, love, hope and forgiveness will always be more powerful than any kind of weapon.



2) Trader Joe’s Workers File for Election to Create Company’s First Union

The workers, at a store in western Massachusetts, cited health and safety concerns and cuts to benefits at the grocery chain.

By Noam Scheiber, June 8, 2022

Maeg Yosef, an employee at the Trader Joe's store in Hadley, Mass., is one of the leaders of a union campaign.

Maeg Yosef, an employee at the Trader Joe's store in Hadley, Mass., is one of the leaders of a union campaign. Credit...Holly Lynton for The New York Times

In a sign that service industry workers continue to have a strong interest in unionizing after successful votes at Starbucks, REI and Amazon, employees at a Trader Joe’s in western Massachusetts have filed for a union election. If they win, they will create the only union at Trader Joe’s, which has more than 500 locations and 50,000 employees nationwide.


The filing with the National Labor Relations Board late Tuesday seeks an election involving about 85 employees who would form an independent union, Trader Joe’s United, rather than affiliate with an established labor organization. That echoes the independent union created by Amazon workers on Staten Island and the worker-led organizing at Starbucks.


“Over the past however many years, changes have been happening without our consent,” said Maeg Yosef, an 18-year employee of the store who is a leader of the union campaign. “We wanted to be in charge of the whole process, to be our own union. So we decided to go independent.”


Ms. Yosef said the union had support from over 50 percent of workers at the store, known as crew members.


“We have always said we welcome a fair vote and are prepared to hold a vote if more than 30 percent of the crew wants one,” said a company spokeswoman, Nakia Rohde, alluding to the N.L.R.B. threshold for an election. “We are not interested in delaying the process in any way.”


The company shared a similar statement with workers after they announced their intention to unionize in mid-May.


In explaining their decision, Ms. Yosef and four colleagues, all of whom have been with the company for at least eight years, cited changes that had made their benefits less generous over time, as well as health and safety concerns, many of which were magnified during the pandemic.


“This is probably where we get to all of these things coming together,” said Tony Falco, another worker involved in the union campaign, alluding to Covid-19.


Mr. Falco said the store, in Hadley, took several reassuring steps during the first 12 to 15 months of the pandemic. Management enforced masking requirements and restrictions on the number of customers who could be in the store at once. It allowed workers to take leaves of absence while continuing to receive health insurance and gave workers additional “thank you” pay as high as $4 per hour.


But Mr. Falco and others said the company was too quick to roll back many of these measures — including additional pay — as vaccines became widely available last year, and noted that the store had suffered Covid outbreaks in the past several weeks after masking became laxer. The store followed the policy of the local health board, which altered its mask mandate at various points, lifting it most recently in March.


Some employees were also upset that the company did not inform them that the state had passed a law requiring employers to provide up to five paid days off for workers who missed work because of Covid.


“It was in effect seven months, and they never announced it,” Ms. Yosef said. “I figured that out at the end of December, early January.”


Ms. Rohde, the spokeswoman, said this account was incorrect, but four other employees who support the union also said the company had not told them of the policy.


Trader Joe’s has generally resisted unionization over the years, including earlier in the pandemic. In March 2020, the chief executive, Dan Bane, sent employees a letter referring to “the current barrage of union activity that has been directed at Trader Joe’s” and complaining that union advocates “clearly believe that now is a moment when they can create some sort of wedge in our company through which they can drive discontent.”


The company’s response to the current campaign appears somewhat less hostile, though union organizers have recently filed charges of unfair labor practices, such as asking employees to remove pro-union pins.


Several employees said a broader issue was underlying their frustrations: what they saw as the company’s evolution from a niche outlet known for pampering customers and treating employees generously to an industrial-scale chain that is more focused on the bottom line.


The company’s employee handbook urges workers to provide a “Wow customer experience,” which it defines as “the feelings a customer gets about our delight that they are shopping with us.” But longtime employees say the company, which is privately held, has gradually become stingier with workers.


For years, the company offered health care widely to part-timers. In the early 2010s, the company raised the average weekly hours that employees needed to qualify for full health coverage to 30 from roughly 20, informing those who no longer qualified that they could receive coverage under the federal Affordable Care Act instead. (The company dropped the threshold to 28 hours more recently.)


“It was done under the guise of ‘You can get these plans, they’re the same plans,’ but they were not the same plans,” said Sarah Yosef, the Hadley store’s manager at the time, who later stepped back from the role and is now a frontline worker there.


“I had to sit there individually with crew members saying you’re going to be losing health insurance,” added Ms. Yosef, who is married to Maeg Yosef.


Retirement benefits have followed a similar trajectory: Around the same time, Trader Joe’s lowered its retirement contribution to 10 percent of an employee’s earnings from about 15 percent, for employees 30 and older. Beginning with last year’s benefit, the company lowered the percentage again for many workers, who saw the contribution fall to 5 percent. The company is no longer specifying any set amount.


Ms. Rohde, the spokeswoman, said the change was partly a response to indications from many workers that they would prefer a bonus to a retirement contribution.


Workers said the company’s determination to provide an intimate shopping experience had often come at their expense amid a rapid increase in business over the past decade, and then again with the resurgence of business as pandemic restrictions lifted.


For example, Trader Joe’s doesn’t have conveyor belts at checkout lines and instructs cashiers to reach into customers’ carts or baskets to unload items. This can appear to personalize the service but takes a physical toll on workers, who typically bend over hundreds of times during a shift.


(The company asks workers to perform different tasks throughout the day so they are not constantly ringing up customers.)


Maeg Yosef and her co-workers began discussing the union campaign over the winter, angry over the store’s failure to publicize the state-mandated paid leave benefit and the change in retirement benefits, and some have drawn inspiration from the successful union elections at Starbucks, Amazon and REI.


Their union campaign may also benefit from the same leverage that workers at those companies enjoyed as a result of the relatively tight job market.


“People just keep leaving — I know they want to hire people now,” Maeg Yosef said. “It’s hard to keep people around.”



3) Charging Decision Expected in Michigan Police Killing of Black Man

Patrick Lyoya was fatally shot by a white Grand Rapids officer during a traffic stop, renewing a national debate about police conduct and use of force.

By Mitch Smith, June 9, 2022


Protesters marched through downtown Grand Rapids, Mich., after videos of the shooting were released in April.

Protesters marched through downtown Grand Rapids, Mich., after videos of the shooting were released in April. Credit...Nic Antaya for The New York Times

The office of the county prosecutor in Grand Rapids, Mich., said he would announce on Thursday whether he would charge the white police officer who fatally shot Patrick Lyoya, a Black man, during a traffic stop in April.


Christopher Becker, the Kent County prosecuting attorney, was expected to share his decision at 3 p.m. Eastern time.


Mr. Becker previously said he was consulting experts to help determine whether Officer Christopher Schurr of the Grand Rapids police acted lawfully when he shot Mr. Lyoya while wrestling with the motorist, who had run away. The officer told Mr. Lyoya, 26, that he pulled him over for having license plates that did not match his car.


The death of Mr. Lyoya worsened longstanding tensions with the police in Grand Rapids, a city of about 200,000 people where 18 percent of residents are Black. Protesters marched through downtown after videos of the shooting were released in mid-April, with many calling for the officer to be named, fired and prosecuted. Some blamed city officials for not doing more to address years of complaints about police misconduct.


“Patrick Lyoya immigrated to the United States from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to pursue the American dream and provide a better and safer life for himself and his family,” Ben Crump, a lawyer for the family, said in a statement when the videos were released. “Instead, what found him was a fatal bullet to the back of the head, delivered by an officer of the Grand Rapids Police Department.”


The case also renewed a national conversation about when officers should face charges for on-duty killings. The law allows police officers to use deadly force when they have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm, and it remains relatively rare for American police officers to be charged or convicted in those cases.


Mr. Lyoya was pulled over on the cold, rainy morning of April 4. After stepping out of his car, the videos show, Mr. Lyoya appears confused as the officer tells him to get back in the vehicle. Officer Schurr asks him whether he speaks English.


Mr. Lyoya responds that he does speak English, and asks, “What did I do wrong?” After a brief exchange about whether Mr. Lyoya has a driver’s license, Officer Schurr grabs Mr. Lyoya, who pulls away and starts to run, the footage shows.


The officer tackles Mr. Lyoya in a nearby lawn, yelling “Stop!” as Mr. Lyoya appears to try to regain his footing. At one point, body camera footage shows Mr. Lyoya grasping for the Taser in Officer Schurr’s hand.


Midway through the struggle, the officer’s body camera stops filming. Chief Eric Winstrom of the Grand Rapids police said pressure was applied to the camera to turn it off during the struggle. It was not clear who applied that pressure or whether it was intentional.


Other cameras — from the officer’s vehicle, a nearby doorbell security system and a bystander’s cellphone — capture different portions of the encounter. Shortly before the fatal shot is fired, Officer Schurr yells, “Let go of the Taser.” Mr. Lyoya is facing the ground and pushing up, with the officer on top of him, in the moments just before the shooting.


After the shooting, city officials pledged to learn from the encounter and evaluate Police Department policies.


“When I saw the video, it was painful to watch,” Mark Washington, the Grand Rapids city manager, said when the videos were released. “And I immediately asked, ‘What caused this to happen, and what more could have been done to prevent this from occurring?’”


Mr. Lyoya’s parents said he was a good son who provided some financial support to his family and sometimes came by their home on weekends to help his siblings. He held a range of jobs over the years, including at a turkey processor and an auto parts manufacturer.


But Mr. Lyoya had struggled since arriving in Michigan. He had been arrested more than a dozen times, mostly for misdemeanors involving cars, and he also faced three charges for domestic violence. At the time of his death, Mr. Lyoya was on probation, his driver’s license was revoked and there were two warrants out for his arrest, including one for a domestic violence charge three days earlier. He had told friends he was trying to get his life together.


Acquaintances of Officer Schurr, who grew up near Grand Rapids, described him as a stickler for rules. He was a member of his college track team, and he married his wife during a Christian mission trip to Kenya in 2014. Members of his college team said Officer Schurr could be quick to anger.


After the shooting, city officials released records showing that Officer Schurr had been commended more than a dozen times and cited twice for minor issues, like damaging a police car, that did not result in any discipline.


Mr. Lyoya’s death was far from the first encounter in Grand Rapids to lead to calls for changes to police policy.


In 2017, officers searching for a middle-aged woman wanted for a stabbing instead handcuffed an 11-year-old girl at gunpoint while she was leaving a house. Those officers were not disciplined. Months prior, other Grand Rapids officers held five innocent teenagers at gunpoint. And in 2020, local outlets reported, an officer was suspended for two days after shooting a protester in the face with a gas canister.



4) Right-Wing Judges Say It’s “Harmless” to Label Climate Activist a Terrorist

By Natasha Lennard

—The Intercept, June 8, 2022


Jessica-ReznicekJessica Reznicek sits at the entrance to the drilling site in Sandusky, Iowa, where the Dakota Access pipeline goes under the Mississippi River on Aug. 10, 2016. Photo: Courtesy of Joshua Smith

A panel of three Trump-appointed judges this week upheld an excessive eight-year prison sentence handed down to climate activist Jessica Reznicek, ruling that a terrorism enhancement attached to her sentence was “harmless.”

The terror enhancement, which dramatically increased Reznicek’s sentence from its original recommended range, set a troubling precedent. Decided by a lower court in 2021, it contends that Reznicek’s acts against private property were “calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government.” The appellate justices’ decision to uphold her sentence, callously dismissing the challenge to her terrorism enhancement, doubles down on a chilling message: Those who take direct action against rapacious energy corporations can be treated as enemies of the state.

Reznicek, an Iowa-based member of the Catholic Worker Movement and a participant in the Indigenous-led climate struggle, engaged in acts of property damage in an attempt to stop the completion of the Dakota Access pipeline in 2016 and 2017. Along with fellow activist Ruby Montoya, Reznicek took credit for various acts of sabotage, which harmed no humans or animals but burnt a bulldozer and damaged valves of the pipeline. The damaged equipment was property not of the U.S. government, but of private pipeline and energy companies.

Following Reznicek’s guilty plea to a single charge of conspiracy to damage an energy facility—which brought a recommended sentencing range of 37 to 46 months—Judge Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger, in allegiance with prosecutors, added the terrorism enhancement. This increased her sentencing range to 210 to 240 months, making the eight-year sentence Reznicek ultimately received fit comfortably below the accepted range, though it’s more than double the previous recommendation. (Montoya, who also pleaded guilty, has filed a motion to withdraw her plea, claiming that it was coerced.)

Both courts’ decisions on Reznicek’s sentence reflect unsurprising but deeply troubling priorities in our criminal legal system. It would be unempirical to the point of foolishness to expect the courts, stacked as they are with right-wing justices, to side with individuals taking risks to stop environmental devastation rather than those corporations making millions on the back of it. Yet Reznicek’s appeal was on a point of law: Terrorism enhancements are only supposed to be applicable to crimes that target governmental conduct; Reznicek’s targets were private corporations.

The collapsing of government and corporate interests signified by Reznicek’s terrorism enhancement is worthy of profound challenge, but the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges did not even address the substance of the activist’s appeal. In a short, unsigned opinion, the court wrote that even if there had been an “error” in applying a terrorism enhancement, it was “harmless,” because Ebinger had stated on the record that she would have imposed an eight-year sentence with or without the terrorism enhancement.

It is a cynical move indeed to sidestep the chilling effect of labeling such acts as “terrorism,” as if it carries no material consequences for the future of water and Indigenous land protection and other social movements. As Reznicek’s support team wrote in a statement Monday, June 6, 2022, “Federal prosecutors only pursued terrorism enhancements against Reznicek after 84 Congressional representatives wrote a letter in 2017 to Attorney General Jeff Sessions requesting that Reznicek and other protesters who tamper with pipelines be prosecuted as domestic terrorists.” These members of Congress, note Reznicek’s supporters, have together received a combined $36 million in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry.

Determinations over which actions are labeled “terrorism” are always political, and in this case nakedly so given the clear pressure applied on prosecutors by politicians and their industry backers. Ebinger’s claim—that she would have imposed the excessive eight-year sentence with or without the terror enhancement triggered—cannot be considered the final word here. Reporting on Reznicek’s case, ABC News—an outlet hardly aligned with the environmental left—noted that neither white supremacist murderer Dylann Roof nor avowed neo-Nazi James Fields, who plowed his car into anti-fascist protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, received a terrorism enhancement when sentenced.

Reznicek’s legal team will continue to challenge her sentence in court, especially since the question of the misapplication of a terrorism enhancement remains open, despite the judges’ decision this week. A full court hearing by the 8th Circuit, an appeal to the far-right Supreme Court, or a request for clemency from President Joe Biden are all technical options, but hardly are any of these sites of optimism.

As her legal battles continue, Reznicek, whose acts of sabotage place her firmly on the right side of history, if not the law, deserves full-throated public support. As she noted in her 2017 statement claiming responsibility for the actions against the Dakota Access pipeline: “We acted from our hearts and never threatened human life nor personal property. What we did do was fight a private corporation that has run rampant across our country seizing land and polluting our nation’s water supply.”



5) “This is Exactly Who We Are”
Mother of Buffalo shooting victim speaks out
By Sheerpost Staff

Sheerpost, June 9, 2022


Zeneta Everhart and her 21-year-old son, Zaire Goodman, who survived the May 14 Buffalo shooting by white supremacist that left ten Black people dead. (Screenshot)

Zeneta Everhart, whose 21-year-old son, Zaire Goodman, survived the May 14 Buffalo shooting by a white supremacist that left ten Black people dead, testified before the House Oversight Committee Wednesday that domestic terrorism exists in this country for three reasons, the first being that “America is inherently violent.” 

“The very existence of this country was founded on violence, hate, and racism, with the near annihilation of my native brothers and sisters,” she continued. “My ancestors, brought to America thorough the slave trade, were the first currency of America…stripped of their heritage and culture, bargained for…sold, beaten, raped, and lynched. Yet I continuously hear after every mass shooting that this is not who we are as Americans and as a nation. Hear me clearly: this is exactly who we are.”

Everhart cited the failures of America’s educational system and its attempts to omit—or at least make it difficult to find—the real history of Black Americans and Indigenous peoples. She recounts, “the majority of what I learned about African American history I did not learn until I went to college, and I had to choose those classes…why is African American history not a part of American history?” 

“We have to change the curriculum in schools across the country so that we may adequately educate our children,” Everhart declared. “Reading about history is crucial to the future of this country. Learning about other cultures, ethnicities, and religions in schools should not be something that’s up for debate…our differences should make us curious, not angry. At the end of the day, I bleed, you bleed, we are all human.” 

Everhart, Director of Diversity and Inclusion for New York State Senator Tim Kennedy, cited guns as a third cause of domestic terrorism. She pointed out that the Buffalo killer’s parents gave him a shotgun for his 16th birthday, adding “Children should not be armed with weapons, parents who provide their children with guns should be held accountable, and lawmakers who…allow these mass shootings to continue, by not passing stricter gun laws should be voted out.” 

“To the lawmakers who feel that we do not need stricter gun laws, let me paint a picture for you,” Everhart said. My son Zaire has a hole in the right side of his neck, two on his back and another on his left leg caused by an exploding bullet from an AR-15. As I clean his wounds, I can feel pieces of that bullet in his back. Shrapnel will be left inside of his body for the rest of his life. Now, I want you to picture that exact scenario for one of your children.”

She called on the lawmakers to draft “common sense gun laws…No citizen needs an AR-15. These weapons are designed to do the most harm in the least amount of time.” She noted it took the Buffalo killer just two minutes to kill ten people and injure three others. “If, after hearing from me and the other people testifying here today does not move you to act on gun laws, I invite you to my home to help me clean Zaire’s wounds so that you may see up close, the damage that has been caused to my son, and to my community.” 

Everhart concluded by quoting Charles Blow’s “The Devil We Know:” “Race as we have come to understand it, is a fiction, but racism, as we have come to live it, is a fact.”



6) Aware of Injuries Inside, Uvalde Police Waited to Confront Gunman

More than a dozen students remained alive for over an hour before officers entered their classrooms. The commander feared a risk to officers’ lives, new documents show.

By J. David Goodman, June 9, 2022

An outdoor hallway at Robb Elementary School. The police response to a mass shooting there is now the subject of overlapping investigations by the Texas state police and the U.S. Justice Department.
An outdoor hallway at Robb Elementary School. The police response to a mass shooting there is now the subject of overlapping investigations by the Texas state police and the U.S. Justice Department. Credit...Ivan Pierre Aguirre for The New York Times

AUSTIN, Texas — Heavily armed officers delayed confronting a gunman in Uvalde, Texas, for more than an hour even though supervisors at the scene had been told that some trapped with him in two elementary school classrooms needed medical treatment, a new review of video footage and other investigative material shows. Instead, the documents show, they waited for protective equipment to lower the risk to law enforcement officers.


The school district police chief, who was leading the response to the May 24 shooting, appeared to be agonizing over the length of time it was taking to secure the shields that would help protect officers when they entered and to find a key for the classroom doors, according to law enforcement documents and video gathered as part of the investigation reviewed by The New York Times.


The chief, Pete Arredondo, and others at the scene became aware that not everyone inside the classrooms was already dead, the documents showed, including a report from a school district police officer whose wife, a teacher, had spoken to him by phone from one of the classrooms to say she had been shot.


More than a dozen of the 33 children and three teachers originally in the two classrooms remained alive during the 1 hour and 17 minutes from the time the shooting began inside the classrooms to when four officers made entry, law enforcement investigators have concluded. By that time, 60 officers had assembled on scene.

“People are going to ask why we’re taking so long,” a man who investigators believe to be Chief Arredondo could be heard saying, according to a transcript of officers’ body camera footage. “We’re trying to preserve the rest of the life.”


Investigators have been working to determine whether any of those who died could have been saved if they had received medical attention sooner, according to an official with knowledge of the effort. But there is no question that some of the victims were still alive and in desperate need of medical attention. One teacher died in an ambulance. Three children died at nearby hospitals, according to the documents.


Xavier Lopez, 10, was one of the children who died after being rushed to a hospital. His family said he had been shot in the back and lost a lot of blood as he awaited medical attention. “He could have been saved,” his grandfather Leonard Sandoval said. “The police did not go in for more than an hour. He bled out.”


Supervisors at the scene at some point became aware that there were people inside the classrooms who needed saving.

“We think there are some injuries in there,” the man believed to be Chief Arredondo said several minutes before the breach, according to the transcript. “And so you know what we did, we cleared off the rest of the building so we wouldn’t have any more, besides what’s already in there, obviously.” It was not clear from the transcript whom he was speaking to.


But even with additional documents and video, much about the chaotic scene remained unclear, including precisely when Chief Arredondo and other senior officers became aware of injuries inside the classrooms. It is not known whether Chief Arredondo or other officers inside the school learned of the 911 calls from a child inside the classrooms who said that some had been shot but were still alive.


Among the revelations in the documents: The gunman, Salvador Ramos, had a “hellfire” trigger device meant to allow a semiautomatic AR-15-style rifle to be fired more like an automatic weapon; some of the officers who first arrived at the school had long guns, more firepower than previously known; and Chief Arredondo learned the gunman’s identity while inside the school and attempted in vain to communicate with him by name through the closed classroom doors.


But with two officers who initially approached the door shot at and grazed, Chief Arredondo appeared to have decided that quickly breaching the classrooms without shields and other protection would have led to officers possibly being killed. He focused instead on getting other children out of the school while waiting for additional protection equipment.


The response by the police at Robb Elementary School is now the subject of overlapping investigations by the Texas state police and the U.S. Justice Department. It was the subject of a closed-door hearing at the State Capitol in Austin on Thursday that featured the director of the state police, Steven McCraw.


But details of what took place inside the school have been slow to emerge, and aspects of the early accounts delivered by Gov. Greg Abbott and top state officials, including Mr. McCraw, have had to be amended or completely retracted. The official narrative has shifted from a story of swift response by the local police to one of hesitation and delay that deviated from two decades of training that instructs officers to quickly confront a gunman to save lives, even at a risk to their own.


Now, more than two weeks after the gunman killed 19 children and two teachers, a clearer picture of the timeline of events and the police response has emerged, according to a Times review of law enforcement documents and video gathered as part of the investigation into the shooting.

A cascade of failures took place at the school: the local police radio system, later tests showed, did not function properly inside the building; classroom doors could not be quickly locked in an emergency; and after an initial burst of shooting from the gunman, no police officer went near the door again for more than 40 minutes, instead hanging back at a distance in the hallway.


According to the documents, Chief Arredondo, who had earlier focused on evacuating other classrooms, began to discuss breaching the classrooms where the gunman was holed up about an hour after the gunfire started inside the school at 11:33 a.m. He did so after several shots could be heard inside the classrooms, after a long lull, around 12:21 p.m., video footage showed.


But he wanted to find the keys first.


“We’re ready to breach, but that door is locked,” he said, according to the transcript, around 12:30 p.m.


By that point, officers in and around the school had been growing increasingly impatient, and in some cases had been loudly voicing their concerns. “If there’s kids in there, we need to go in there,” one officer could be heard saying, according to the documents. Another responded, “Whoever is in charge will determine that.”


A team made up of specially trained Border Patrol agents and a sheriff’s deputy finally went in after the gunman and killed him at 12:50 p.m.


The team entered, not over the objections of Chief Arredondo, but apparently not fully aware that he had given the go-ahead after holding officers back for more than an hour, according to a person briefed on the team’s response by a federal agent involved in the tactical effort. Amid the confusion and frustration in the hallway, the agent believed that the team was taking the initiative on its own to go into the classrooms.

The lack of clear orders underscored the chaos and poor communication in a response that included dozens of state and local police officers, sheriff’s deputies and federal agents from the Border Patrol, many of whom lived or worked nearby.


The delayed police response was part of a series of apparent failures in security that initially allowed the gunman to gain access to the school and classrooms inside, according to the documents from the investigation.


Investigators found that not only did an exterior door — through which the gunman entered — fail to lock, but most of the school’s interior doors, including those on classrooms, could not be immediately locked in the event of an emergency.


And most of the officers arrived with radios that did not function well inside the school building, according to the investigators’ review, potentially creating communication difficulties and confusion.


The system, installed two decades ago, had been designed for the expansive terrain in and around Uvalde, a town of 15,000 surrounded by ranches and farms 80 miles west of San Antonio, according to Forrest Anderson, who works on emergency management for Uvalde County.


“The system was designed because of prevailing conditions at the time,” Mr. Anderson said, to allow officers responding to an emergency to communicate with dispatchers who might be 30 to 75 miles away.

In the wake of the shooting, investigators tested the radios carried by the Uvalde Police Department, as well as by Chief Arredondo’s school police force, and found they did not transmit effectively inside the school or even just outside of it. Only the radios carried by Border Patrol agents appeared to function well, the review found.


Chief Arredondo arrived at the scene without any radio at all, and used a cellphone for some communications. It was not clear if he ever received a radio.


Chief Arredondo did not respond to several requests for comment.


In an interview published late Thursday by The Texas Tribune, Chief Arredondo, whose department had jurisdiction over Uvalde schools, said he never considered himself the commander at the scene and had assumed someone else had taken control of the response.


“I didn’t issue any orders,” Chief Arredondo said. He said that the inability to find a key to the classrooms was the reason for the delay in entering, and that he had left his police radios behind because they would have been an encumbrance.


He said that without the radios, he was unaware of the 911 calls coming from the classroom, and that none of the other officers in the hall had relayed that information.


The chief of police for Uvalde, Daniel Rodriguez, did not respond to a request for comment. Chief Rodriguez was on vacation when the shooting happened and was not present at the school, the city’s mayor, Don McLaughlin, said in a public meeting this week.


At a news conference on Thursday, the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District superintendent, Hal Harrell, said the district was in the “process of developing a list of actions we can take to strengthen security in all of our campuses.”

He said that would include the hiring of additional school police officers, and that officers would be posted at schools during the summer session. There was not a school police officer at the school when the gunman arrived.


“I want to honor our families at this time with support, love and the commitment to move forward as a district for our students,” he said.


The investigative documents provide additional details about the gunman and the weaponry he acquired.


Before entering the school, he had amassed an arsenal of weapons that included two AR-15-style rifles, accessories and hundreds of rounds of ammunition, according to the documents. He spent more than $6,000.


Mr. Ramos, 18, who dropped out of high school last year in the fall of his senior year, made the purchases legally, using money he appeared to have earned working at a Wendy’s and occasionally doing air-conditioning work for his grandfather, according to the documents.


Among the purchases was the “hellfire” trigger device. It was discovered inside one of the classrooms, but the gunman did not appear to have succeeded in using it during the attack, according to an analysis by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

After the gunman entered the school, surveillance footage showed him walking through nearly empty blue and green hallways decorated with uplifting messages and a few balloons. He did not appear to fire until he got to Room 111 and Room 112.


It was not clear why he stopped there. He had been a student at the school as a child, and his time there may have overlapped with at least one of the teachers, Irma Garcia, who taught in Room 112, according to the documents. On the day of the shooting, his cousin was in a classroom across the hall.


Chief Arredondo was among the first officers to enter the school and approach the classrooms where the gunman was.


Two Uvalde Police Department officers, a lieutenant and a sergeant, were shot and suffered grazing wounds after they tried to peer through a window in one of the classroom doors, the surveillance footage showed. The entire group of officers who had arrived by then sought cover down the hallway.


No one would approach the classroom doors again, the video showed, for more than 40 minutes, though well-armed officers began quickly arriving.


Fifteen children had come to class in Room 111 that Tuesday, according to the documents, along with one teacher, Arnulfo Reyes. Eleven of the children died in the shooting, three were uninjured, and one was wounded. Mr. Reyes was shot but survived.


In Room 112, which is connected internally by a thin blue door, there were 18 students and two teachers, Ms. Garcia and the teacher who had called her husband after being shot, Eva Mireles. Nine children were wounded but survived and one was listed as uninjured, according to the documents.

Ms. Mireles’s husband, Ruben Ruiz, who worked for Chief Arredondo as one of six uniformed members of the Uvalde school district’s Police Department, had rushed to the school, and it is now clear from the documents that he informed the responders on scene that his wife was still alive in one of the classrooms.


“She says she is shot,” Officer Ruiz could be heard telling other officers as he arrived inside the school at 11:48 a.m., according to the body camera transcript.


That message appeared to have reached a sergeant from the Uvalde Police Department, who was near Chief Arredondo inside of the school.


“There’s a teacher shot in there,” an officer could be heard telling the sergeant, according to the transcript, just before 12:30 p.m.


“I know,” the sergeant replied.


By that time, heavily armed tactical officers had arrived, along with protective shields. Chief Arredondo at that point signaled his support for going into the room, but began asking repeatedly for keys that would work on the door.


It was not clear from the transcript if anyone had tried the door to see if it was locked.


Around that time, an officer also informed Chief Arredondo of the gunman’s name.

“Mr. Ramos? Can you hear us, Mr. Ramos? Please respond,” the chief said, according to the transcript. Chief Arredondo tried in English and Spanish. Mr. Ramos gave no answer.


During that time, a large contingent of Border Patrol agents with long guns and shields massed near the door.


According to the transcript of body camera video, Chief Arredondo could be heard speaking into a phone, preparing for a breach and asking for someone to look into the windows of one of the classrooms to see if anything could be seen.


By 12:46 p.m. he gave his approval to enter the room. “If y’all are ready to do it, you do it,” he said, according to the transcript.


Minutes later, the team went in.


Mr. Ramos was in a corner near a closet in Room 111, facing the doorway, body camera footage showed. He exchanged fire with the officers as they entered. A bullet grazed a Border Patrol agent who was near the door. One of the bullets appeared to have struck the gunman in the head, killing him.


Across the room, the bodies of children lay in an unmoving mass, according to the documents. A similar cluster of bodies lay in Room 112.

Officers could be seen in video footage rushing a few children out of the room and carrying out Ms. Mireles, who appeared to be in extreme pain. She reached an ambulance, but died before reaching a hospital.

Inside the school, officers scrambled to carry or drag the limp bodies of children, some with severe gunshot wounds to their heads, to a triage area in the hallway.


For a time, the fourth graders’ bodies lay where they had been taken, contorted on blood-streaked linoleum under a large colorful banner. “Class of 2022,” it read. “Congrats!”


Edgar Sandoval and Serge F. Kovaleski contributed reporting.



7) 'It's War,' Says Amazon Labor Union After Company Fires Top Organizer

"Amazon fired our beloved Uncle Pat today!" said Christian Smalls, the union's president. "They retaliated against him for organizing."

By Jake Johnson, June 10, 2022


Pat Cioffi and Chris Smalls speak in front of an Amazon warehouse on Staten Island in New York on April 24, 2022.

"They fucked with the wrong uncle."


That was how Amazon Labor Union (ALU) president Christian Smalls responded Thursday after the e-commerce behemoth's management reportedly fired Pasquale "Uncle Pat" Cioffi, an organizer credited with convincing hundreds of hesitant employees to support the unionization effort at the JFK8 fulfillment center in Staten Island, New York.


"Amazon fired our beloved Uncle Pat today!" Smalls, a former Amazon employee who was fired after organizing against the company's lax coronavirus safety measures, wrote on social media. "They retaliated against him for organizing ever since our last rally... At our last rally he stated he flipped 500 people and ever since those remarks the company targeted him."


In a Twitter thread late Thursday, ALU noted that Cioffi, a former dockworker who was employed at Amazon for two years, was "instrumental in the JFK8 victory, and is one of our most influential and outspoken supporters."


"He was fired for arguing with a manager about mistreatment of workers," the union wrote. "What they did to Pat is unjustifiable. It's clearly motivated by anti-union animus and they're only going forward because they believe it's more cost-effective to fire him and deal with the backlash than it is to allow to him to continue organizing during our contract campaign."


Warning that "the situation at JFK8 has gotten out of control" due to Amazon's relentless union-busting campaign, ALU said it has filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) requesting immediate action to reverse Cioffi's firing, which came a month after Amazon fired two other JFK8 workers who were involved in the union drive.


"It's war," the union declared.


During a press conference in April, Cioffi—who has been described in media reports as a "Trump-supporting Republican"—said he "must have flipped four to five hundred 'noes' to a 'yes.'" The union ultimately won its election at JFK8 by just over 500 votes, a historic victory for the U.S. labor movement against one of the most powerful companies in the world.


"Everybody knows me from day shift, any shift, any department. They know who I am because I'm always making that extra effort to help them out in whatever the situation is," Cioffi told In These Times last month. "Amazon didn't make this about the ALU. They made it about Chris Smalls. But this wasn't really about Chris Smalls. This was about the people."


Cioffi was fired just days before an NLRB hearing at which Amazon is set to present evidence as part of its attempt to overturn the JFK8 election results. ALU maintains that Amazon's election objections are bogus and will be rejected by the labor board.


On Thursday, the NLRB denied Amazon's request to bar the public from watching the hearing, which is set to take place on Zoom.


"The board's hearings are not secret," Cornele Overstreet, the NLRB's regional director in Phoenix, said in response to Amazon's demand. "Accordingly, preventing the public from viewing its important processes is not an option."



8) Oakland A’s Pursue Two $1 Billion Stadium Deals as Coliseum Decays Around Them

Barry M. Bloom, Fri, June 10, 2022


The Oakland A’s have reached an inflection point, both for the stadium they currently occupy and where they may play in the future. The Oakland Coliseum is 56 years old, with a list of maintenance issues that make a feral cat’s hair stand up.


The cat infestation—and its accompanying feces problem—are  among many items on a list the A’s filed in a recent complaint with the Coliseum’s Joint Powers Authority that also includes broken seats and plumbing problems among the many issues.


“The stadium is 10 years past its useful life,” Dave Kaval, the club’s president, said as the A’s were swept in a four-game home series by the Boston Red Sox this past weekend. “So, it’s a very challenging situation. We’re doing the best we can. We need to have a modern fan-friendly facility.”


To that end, a decision on where the A’s will eventually play could finally come soon: In a ballpark on part of the Oakland waterfront known as the Howard Terminal or on a still undetermined parcel of land located near the Las Vegas strip.


“Our parallel paths continue,” Kaval said.


Even if the A’s announced tomorrow where they will wind up, it could be at least five years before a new stadium is constructed.


Beset by economic problems, which some angry fans say are of the team’s own making, the A’s have the second lowest luxury tax player payroll in Major League Baseball at $47.9 million, the lowest average attendance, at 8,282 for their first 30 dates, and a 20-39 record, good for dead last in the American League West, 17 games behind Houston.


After losing in excess of $100 million playing without fans or to limited capacity during two seasons of the pandemic, the A’s shed pitchers Chris Bassitt and Sean Manaea, plus first baseman Matt Olsen and third baseman Matt Chapman via trade or free agency. That caused a revolt among loyal fans who were also asked to pay higher ticket prices at the deteriorating Coliseum.


“The fans are obviously having their say and you have to respect that,” Boston manager Alex Cora said. “It’s a place that’s tough to come and play.”


The A’s continue to lose money, although they are eligible again for revenue sharing under the terms of the new five-year labor agreement. Kaval said ownership is spending $2 million a month on “an army of lawyers and a real estate team” in lieu of players.


“We have to know we have resources to invest in our talent,” Kaval said. “And that’s only going to come with a new stadium and those revenues. It’s the only way.”


Some clarity may be on the horizon. On June 30, the Bay Conservation & Development Commission [BCDC) convenes to vote on whether to give the A’s permission to build a $1 billion ballpark and $12 billion mixed-use project on port land. The vote would formally remove the Howard Terminal site from port activities.


The 54-acre site, once a port of delivery for pineapples shipped from Hawaii, is not in use and inhabited by the carcasses of shipping containers, just north of famous Jack London Square.


The A’s plans call for using team funds to mitigate the land and raise the slope of the parcel to ward off future flooding because of anticipated increased sea levels as a result of climate change. There’s no alternative plan to remediate those issues.


If the commissioners vote no, the Oakland project is dead. But the BCDC staff has advised the commissioners to pass the recommendation.


“It’s been a saga, but it’s trending in a good direction that they’re going to vote for it,” Kaval said.


If so, preliminary approval granted last year by the Oakland City Council has to be finalized in another vote. Since the initial vote, the A’s and the city have been negotiating a deal wherein the team pays for the stadium and onsite infrastructure and the city handles offsite infrastructure out of an amalgam of public funds.


There’s also a question of meeting the public requirement for affordable housing in the real estate portion off the project, which Kaval said the A’s have 25 years to build out.


Though Kaval cautioned that the two sides haven’t fully agreed on the deal’s parameters, that process is also moving ahead. The council voted 6-1 in favor of a modified term sheet last July.


Kaval said the council “is feeling pretty good about it. That’s why if we can get it to a vote, I think it’s a good chance it would get passed. But we still don’t have the vote scheduled. That worries me. The city may be waiting to see where the BCDC vote happens affirmatively. Then they’ll schedule their vote. Maybe that’s what it takes.”


John Fisher and his family bought the A’s in 2005 for $180 million, and since then proposed new ballpark sites have moved from Fremont to San Jose to the current Coliseum grounds and on to the Howard Terminal.


Fisher’s fortune is $3.3 billion, and even with their myriad issues, the A’s are worth $1.34 billion in Sportico’s most recent valuation of Major League Baseball franchises.


Building at the Coliseum is a “non-starter,” Kaval said, even though the A’s purchased half of that property in 2019 from the County of Alameda for $85 million. “This is a site that really doesn’t fit 21st century baseball. It’s like these old multi-purpose models. You have parking around it. That’s not what people are looking for now.”


The “parallel path” in Vegas is much further behind the Howard Terminal project. Officials in Nevada said they won’t begin to take the A’s seriously until the club formally announces it’s leaving Oakland.


Although Kaval said the club could soon select a Las Vegas site, funding discussions haven’t begun.


“We’re spending a lot of time finalizing sites, which we feel is a very important step in making it more real,” Kaval said. “We can then turn our attention to how a public-private partnership would work with the government entities.”


Minor league attendance for the team’s Triple-A affiliate playing at the three-year-old Las Vegas Ballpark is on par with attendance at the Coliseum, and in 2019, the last full season before the pandemic, that affiliate set a record average of 9,299 for 70 home dates. This year, the average is 7,114.


Kaval estimated that a domed stadium in Vegas would also cost about $1 billion.


Whether the A’s would have to pay a relocation fee to MLB is a matter of conjecture.


“That’s something at the league level,” Kaval said. “We’re working closely with the league to figure out the parameters of a relocation.”


MLB didn’t respond to a query about the subject.


That leaves the A’s playing in the Coliseum for the next two-plus seasons. This past Friday night with fireworks and the Red Sox in town, the A’s drew a season-high 17,852. On Saturday, when they honored the 50th anniversary of the 1972 World Series winners, 14,796 attended.


There was an announced crowd of 5,189 last week on a sparkling afternoon for the Astros, but there couldn’t have been more than 3,000 in the stands to see Houston’s Justin Verlander lose a no-hit bid with two out in the seventh inning.


Plumbing issues are so bad that A’s players and personnel complain about daily flooding in the home third base dugout, and metal flooring beneath the premium seats directly behind home plate is beset by corrosion.


The A’s pay $1.25 million in rent to the JPA each season and are not obligated to resolve any maintenance issues.


“Especially during the pandemic, a lot of the deferred maintenance just piled up,” Kaval said. “So it became even more challenging once we got up to speed and had fans here. It needs investment for it to be playable.”


If the Howard Terminal project is approved, the Coliseum will still need improvements in the interim. Kaval speculated that the JPA may be unwilling to make those improvements until the matter is settled, but said, “There has to be a bridge plan [to the new stadium] that isn’t figured out right now, unfortunately.”



9) Trauma Surgeons Detail the Horror of Mass Shootings in the Wake of Uvalde and Call for Reforms

By Andy Miller & Lauren Sausser, Kaiser Health News

Medical professionals say many patients cannot be saved when their injuries are caused by military-style rifles.

When Dr. Roy Guerrero, a pediatrician in Uvalde, Texas, testified before a U.S. House committee Wednesday about gun violence, he told lawmakers about the horror of seeing the bodies of two of the 19 children killed in the Robb Elementary massacre. They were so pulverized, he said, that they could be identified only by their clothing.


In recent years, the medical profession has developed techniques to help save more gunshot victims, such as evacuating patients rapidly. But trauma surgeons interviewed by KHN say that even those improvements can save only a fraction of patients when military-style rifles inflict the injury. Suffering gaping wounds, many victims die at the shooting scene and never make it to a hospital, they said. Those victims who do arrive at trauma centers appear to have more wounds than in years past, according to the surgeons.


But, the doctors added, the weapons used aren’t new. Instead, they said, the issue is that more of these especially deadly guns exist, and these weapons are being used more frequently in mass shootings and the day-to-day violence that plagues communities across the nation.


The doctors, frustrated by the carnage, are clamoring for broad measures to curb the rise in gun violence.


Weeks after the Uvalde school shooting, what steps the country will take to prevent another attack of this magnitude remain unclear. The House on Wednesday and Thursday passed measures aimed at reducing gun violence, but approval in the Senate seems uncertain at best.


Many physicians agree something substantial must be done. “One solution won’t solve this crisis,” said Dr. Ashley Hink of Charleston, South Carolina, who was working as a trauma surgery resident at the Medical University of South Carolina in 2015 when a white supremacist killed nine Black members of the Mother Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. “If anyone wants to hang their hat on one solution, they’re clearly not informed enough about this problem.”


The weapons being fired in mass shootings — often defined as incidents in which at least four people are shot — aren’t just military-style rifles, such as the AR-15-style weapon used in Uvalde. Trauma surgeons said they are seeing a rise in the use of semiautomatic handguns, such as the one used during the Charleston church shooting. They can contain more ammunition than revolvers and fire more rapidly.


Overall gun violence has increased in recent years. In 2020, firearm injuries became the leading cause of death among children and adolescents. Gun-related homicides rose almost 35% in 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in May. Most of those deaths are attributed to handguns.


Still, trauma surgeons such as Dr. Rob Todd at Atlanta’s Grady Memorial Hospital blamed military-style rifles and the end of the national assault weapons ban in 2004 for higher levels of deadly gun violence.


A study recently published by JAMA Network Open found that for every mass shooting death, about six other people were injured. Trauma surgeons interviewed by KHN said the number of wounds per patient appears to have increased.

“I feel we are seeing an increase in the intensity of violence over the past decade,” said Dr. Joseph Sakran, a trauma surgeon at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore. He cited the number of times a person is shot and said more gun victims are being shot at close range.


Survival rates in mass shootings depend on multiple factors, including the type of firearm used, the proximity of the shooter, and the number and location of the wounds, said Dr. Christopher Kang of Tacoma, Washington, who is president-elect of the American College of Emergency Physicians.


Several recent shootings have left few survivors.


The perpetrator of the Charleston massacre shot each of the nine people who were killed multiple times. Only one of those people was transported to the hospital, and, upon arrival, he had no pulse.


Last year, shootings at three Atlanta-area spas left eight dead — only one person who was shot survived.


The chaos at a mass shooting scene — and the presence of an “active” shooter — can add crucial delays to getting victims to a hospital, said Dr. John Armstrong, a professor of surgery at the University of South Florida. “With higher-energy weapons, one sees greater injury, greater tissue destruction, greater bleeding,” he added.


Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon who is chief medical correspondent for CNN, wrote about the energy and force of gunshots from an AR-15-style rifle, the type also used in the recent mass shooting in Buffalo, New York. That energy is equal to dropping a watermelon onto cement, Gupta said, quoting Dr. Ernest Moore, director of surgical research at the Denver Health Medical Center.


Medical advances over the years, including lessons learned from the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, have helped save the lives of shooting victims, said Armstrong, who trained U.S. Army surgical teams.


Those techniques, he said, include appropriate use of tourniquets, rapid evacuations of the wounded, and the use of “whole blood” to treat patients who need large amounts of all the components of blood, such as those who have lost a significant amount of blood. It’s used instead of blood that has been separated into plasma, platelets, and red blood cells.


Another effective strategy is to train bystanders to help shooting v

ictims. A protocol called “Stop the Bleed” teaches people how to apply pressure to a wound, pack a wound to control bleeding, and apply a tourniquet. Stop the Bleed arose after the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where 20 children and six adults were killed.


The CDC, which in the past two years has been able to conduct gun research after years of congressional prohibitions, has funded more than a dozen projects to address the problem of gun violence from a public health perspective. Those projects include studies on firearm injuries and the collection of data on those wounds from emergency rooms across the country.


For some doctors, gun violence has fueled political action. Dr. Annie Andrews, a pediatrician at the Medical University of South Carolina, is running as a Democrat for a seat in the U.S. House on a platform to prevent gun violence. After the school shooting in Uvalde, Andrews said, many women in her neighborhood reached out to ask, “What can be done about this? I’m worried about my kids.”


Dr. Ronald Stewart, chair of surgery at San Antonio-based University Health, told KHN that the people shot in Uvalde had wounds from “high energy, high velocity” rounds. Four of them — including three children — were taken to University Hospital, which offers high-level trauma care.


The hospital and Stewart had seen such carnage before. In 2017, the San Antonio hospital treated victims from the Sutherland Springs church shooting that left more than two dozen dead.


Two of the four Uvalde shooting victims have been discharged, University Health spokesperson Elizabeth Allen said, and the other two remained hospitalized as of Thursday.


It will take a bipartisan effort that doesn’t threaten Second Amendment rights to make meaningful change on what Stewart, a gun owner, called a “significant epidemic.” Stewart noted that public safety measures have curbed unintentional injuries in car crashes. For intentional violence, he said, progress hasn’t been made.



10) The World Can’t Keep Fishing Like This

By Peter Allgeier and Michael Punke, June 12, 2022

Mr. Allgeier is a former deputy United States trade representative and ambassador to the World Trade Organization under the George W. Bush administration. Mr. Punke is a former deputy trade representative and ambassador to the W.T.O. under the Obama administration. 

Natalie Fobes/Corbis Documentary, via Getty Images

The World Trade Organization has been struggling for over two decades to reach an agreement among its members to restrict global subsidies to the fishing industry that are pushing some fish stocks to the brink of collapse. As recently as last November, trade negotiators seemed poised to rein in these subsidies, until a spike in Covid-19 delayed the deal.


Now the question is whether an agreement can still be reached when trade ministers from the W.T.O.’s members, representing most of the world’s nations, gather in Geneva for several days of meetings, beginning Sunday. The session comes as some of the world’s fish stocks continue to decline from rampant overfishing that threatens their sustainability.


Success at the W.T.O. always requires U.S. leadership. But it also will require that the world’s largest financial enablers of harmful fishing, including China and the European Union, end their devastating handouts.


These include so-called capacity enhancing subsidies for fuel, vessel construction and modernization, the building of fishing ports and processing plants, as well as foreign access agreements that allow countries to fish in other nations’ waters for a fee once they’ve depleted their domestic fish supplies. This government support enables ships to range farther, remain at sea longer and catch and process more fish than they otherwise could afford to do. Worldwide, those harmful subsidies amount to an estimated $22 billion a year, according to a study published in the journal Marine Policy in 2019.

Fisheries can be a renewable source of food and jobs, but only if they are harvested in a sustainable manner. The United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that 34 percent of the world’s ocean fish stocks, comprising almost a quarter of the seafood produced, are already fished to the point of being biologically unsustainable. An additional 60 percent are currently fully fished — they can’t afford a further increase in fishing. Recognizing this, some leaders from the seafood retail sector are increasingly calling for an end to harmful fisheries subsidies, to ensure the longevity of their supply chains and to respond to consumer demand for fish that is sustainably, responsibly and legally caught.


The global fish trade generated $164 billion in revenue in 2018 and accounted for nearly 40 percent of the world’s caught or farmed fish. In the United States, the commercial fishing industry employs 1.2 million people.


The most pernicious threat to fish populations is overfishing by industrial-scale fishing operations subsidized by China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and various E.U. countries. China is estimated to spend more than $5.9 billion annually on these subsidies, and E.U. members continue to spend billions of euros even while the W.T.O. negotiations have been underway.


The United States isn’t blameless. While it has been a global leader in fisheries conservation, spending around $2 billion a year on marine protected areas, monitoring and surveillance of fisheries and scientific research, it still spends approximately $1.1 billion on capacity-promoting subsidies annually, like those for fuel expenditures. If the United States redirected that billion dollars on promoting long-term sustainability, it would help push other countries to do the same and lead to higher domestic catches in the long run.


If these capacity-enhancing subsidies end, it is not certain what will happen in the short term to supply and prices. But science shows that an ambitious W.T.O. agreement could help fish populations rebound, possibly leading to lower prices. Eliminating all harmful fisheries subsidies could add 35 million metric tons of fish to the global ocean by 2050, according to research conducted by scientists at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

As former W.T.O. ambassadors from both political parties, we worked to advance an ambitious agreement while in office. Now, the Biden administration has the opportunity to bring home a result that would benefit the global environment and U.S. fishing and seafood companies by leveling the global playing field and enhancing the long-term durability of the fishing industry.


In the W.T.O. negotiations, the U.S. needs to lead the world in reaching a deal that includes strong prohibitions on subsidies that fund illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, as well as distant-water fishing — fishing in other countries’ waters or on the high seas just outside them. Over half of high-seas fishing grounds would be unprofitable without subsidies and low wages (in some cases unfair wages or even forced labor) that are distorting the market and artificially propping up fishing in those areas, according to a study published in the journal Science Advances in 2018.


Strong rules in a W.T.O. agreement could eliminate harmful subsidies while tackling the use of forced labor on fishing vessels — exactly the kind of environmentally and socially supportive trade paradigm that the W.T.O. should, and can, foster. A W.T.O. deal could also help enhance transparency of these subsidy programs and help hold governments accountable. As with other W.T.O. agreements, violators could be subject to legal action.


To reach a meaningful agreement, the countries parceling out big subsidies will need to move beyond their supportive statements and be willing to cut their most harmful handouts. That includes the United States. But the W.T.O. is the sum of its members. Sustained leadership by the United States will be critical — but major members such as China, the European Union, Japan and the rest must act in the interests of sustainability.



11) ‘I Ache for Change’: Students on School Shootings After Uvalde

By Rebekah Boitey, June 12, 2022

Ms. Boitey recently completed 11th grade at Jack Britt High in Fayetteville, N.C. 


Thousands marched in cities across the country to condemn mass shootings and to call for federal legislation to restrict the use of military-style weapons.

Thousands marched in cities across the country to condemn mass shootings and to call for federal legislation to restrict the use of military-style weapons. Credit...Hilary Swift for The New York Times

I never feel comfortable returning to school after hearing about another shooting. I feel immense sadness, intense anger and fear. School shootings are no longer unimaginable or incomprehensible, but common and anticipated. I am 17, and many school shootings have occurred throughout my lifetime, yet I’ve seen no significant change. Instead of passing stricter gun laws, politicians have proposed armed teachers, and designing schools with a single exit.


I don’t sit in the front of the class, not because it makes me an easy target for my teacher’s attention, but because it makes me an easy target for the shooter. I worry that I’ll go to the bathroom at the wrong time and get stuck in the hallway as classroom doors lock and gunshots ring. I worry that instead of binging YouTube videos about D.I.Y. notebook and locker decorations I should have been watching how to turn my textbook into a chest plate.


My high school has multiple counselors that I have found to be incredibly supportive, and my school district has implemented the Say Something Anonymous Reporting System developed by Sandy Hook Promise. But without legislative changes, these programs can only do so much.


I ache for change. Children are being killed in classrooms that are supposed to prepare them for a future. I am angered that lawmakers continue to allow these shootings to happen, and that some even make it easier for them to occur. Adults have abandoned us, the responsibility of protecting ourselves has been passed on to us. We’re told to run in a zigzag pattern to avoid getting shot, and survivors are praised for having the ingenuity to cover themselves with their classmate’s blood. I can’t simply accept this as the way things must be.


The strongest feeling I have is desperation. Because I have felt this way many times before. I was 7 when Sandy Hook happened; 12 when I participated in my school’s walkout after the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas. Now, entering 12th grade, I mourn the children killed at Robb Elementary, and beg that something finally be done.


After the shooting in Uvalde, Times Opinion reached out to students across America to find out how we were affected by it and what, if anything, would help us feel safer at school. Like me, hundreds of students took the opportunity to have their voices heard. What follows is a selection of our responses.


‘I don’t want to be scared anymore.’



I feel useless, knowing that no matter what I do I can’t change anything. It’s out of control and no one is taking the lead in fixing the issue. Nothing helps me return to the classroom. So many thoughts are stuck in my head: Where should I sit to help protect myself if a shooter comes in? Could the person next to me suddenly lose it and let it out on all of us? School is no longer a safe space.



I am terrified to go to school. This year alone we had two lockdowns, one of them right before the P.S.A.T. Luckily, no one was hurt in either, but the fear it left in me and my school community for weeks after was heart-shattering. No one should be scared of going somewhere to learn and ending up dead. I want people to suck it up and give us gun control. I don’t want to be scared anymore.


I completely broke down after seeing the news of Uvalde. I sobbed in my mom’s arms. I felt, and still feel, helpless. Every day that goes by is just another day that I have to simply hope that I — or someone I love — is not in the wrong place at the wrong time. A few days after the Uvalde shooting, I visited my school resource officer in tears and asked about our precautions. She told me that the teachers are well trained, our doors are always locked. She also said she wished she could say it would never happen.



Every time someone drops a book in a classroom I look for the nearest exit. It’s insane that this reaction is in no way irrational. As long as seemingly anyone can access firearms without a sufficient background check, mental health screening or training, I will never feel safe.


‘In our current reality, we must be prepared for insanity.’



I remember my first lockdown drill vividly. I was 7. My teacher pushed desks against the door, quickly taped black paper over the windows and huddled us into a corner. She told us to open our scissors and take off our shoes if an intruder came in, to throw stuff at them. I felt safe at the time.


I don’t anymore. This past January, on the first day of the semester, my school went into lockdown. I was in the hallway. A teacher unlocked the doors to the gym and shepherded about 30 of us inside. We didn’t know where to hide in such a wide-open room. No one knew what was happening. Once it was over we were told to go straight to our next class. Then we were congratulated for making it through the lockdown. No apologies for the lack of communication, no acknowledgment of our stress — just an assumption that our numbness would dissipate. We know going to school isn’t safe. In our current reality, we must be prepared for insanity.



Nothing can change the fact that students woke up on a regular morning and went to class, just as I did, but never came home to their families. They never achieved their dreams or fulfilled their destinies.


I am blessed to go to a private school with insane levels of security. Every day when I walk through the bulletproof double doors past the highly trained armed security, I remember I am safe. It is hard to forget, though, that millions of kids just like me are not. We have a therapist on staff, but I have never used her as a resource. I prefer to feel the rage. I refuse to let go of it. I want to make sure I never normalize the idea that parents who send their kids to school — the safest place a kid should be — must pray that they return home.


‘There’s nothing I can do without the right to vote and a pocket full of cash.’



Parkland was the first major school shooting that I felt I really understood. It changed everything as far as how conscious I was of politics. I went to the first March for Our Lives in my town. I thought that something would come out of it, but nothing did.


Parkland has gone further and further down the list of recent shootings and, honestly, I can’t take investing myself emotionally into this anymore. I live in a red state and I’ve lost all hope of any kind of gun control legislation being enacted here, at least by the time I graduate. Lawmakers need to fight to make things right, or just commit to their complicity. There’s nothing I can do without the right to vote and a pocket full of cash.



The problem is not doors. The problem is that almost any person can obtain a gun capable of mass murder. I pray that each shooting will be a call to action, that there will be a push for change and reform. But I know we are helpless to people in power who refuse to keep us safe. I’m angry that our country allows children to be slaughtered over and over just to protect a nuance of an outdated amendment. I do not have faith in our government to protect anyone.



When I can vote, I will remember every politician who took blood money, who protected a multimillion dollar corporation over children.


‘We try to put Band-Aids on our invisible wounds’



Recently, one of my teachers shared how concerned she was for her child who is starting school soon. It really put into perspective just how long this has been going on. She has been worried about them for almost three decades — for her own safety in high school, then for her students’ and, now, for her child’s. It startled me. In a way, it’s comforting to see that I’m not alone in my mix of grief, fear and irritation.

My mom always says that having your child die before you is a parent’s worst nightmare. I guess my way of compartmentalizing is pretending to live in a world we don’t. The shooting in Uvalde exposed how sterilized I have become to such horrifying acts of violence. I have slowly become desensitized.



As a nation, we cannot limit safeguards to security guards or metal detectors. It is as if we try to put Band-Aids on our invisible wounds, on suffering, on the hidden difficulties in reconciling with tragedy. I would feel safer if the local, state and federal government put more effort into preventing shootings through increased funding for mental health services, gun buybacks and overall education. Additionally, I think a committee composed of middle and high school students, along with experts in mental health, gun violence and other relevant fields, would be successful in identifying both the underlying causes and potential solutions.



Since the chances of reasonable gun control measures passing in the Senate are slim to none, I’ll propose my own solution: Focus more on preventing kids from turning into shooters in the first place. Most shooters are males between 18 and 20; they were bullied in school, are social outcasts, have dysfunctional families or often express violent ideations on social media long before the actual shooting. School boards across the country need to implement an early warning system where classmates can report peers who reach out about violent behavior. These students would be contacted by a counselor who would provide support. We can save the most lives this way.



What It Took for a Country With a Strong Gun Culture to Give Them Up

By Aaron Timms, June 13, 2022

Mr. Timms, a writer, grew up in Sydney, Australia.

Michael Kennedy

Within hours of the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, last month, as President Biden flew home from a trip to Asia, he found himself wondering why liberal democracies like Australia, Canada and Britain can get gun violence under control, while America has tried for decades without success. “They have mental health problems. They have domestic disputes,” he said in an address to the nation later that night. “They have people who are lost. But these kinds of mass shootings never happen with the kind of frequency that they happen in America. Why?”


It’s easy to imagine his mind lingering on Australia. After a bitter fight with rural gun owners and conservative activists, Australia introduced sweeping measures to restrict gun access in the wake of a 1996 shooting that left 35 dead. The reforms were truly comprehensive in scope and included a ban on all automatic and semiautomatic shotguns, stringent licensing and permit requirements, and the introduction of compulsory safety courses for all gun owners, who were also required to provide a genuine reason for owning a firearm that could not include self-defense. The federal government also announced a gun amnesty and federal buyback that led to more than 650,000 weapons being surrendered to the police and destroyed.


Mass shootings and firearm deaths, including suicides, have markedly declined in the 26 years since Australia reformed its gun laws. To Mr. Biden, crossing the Pacific Ocean on Air Force One, that story must have offered a glimmer of hope, a sign that sometimes, countries can change, reducing gun violence and tragedy. If it could happen in Australia, why not in the United States?


Like America, Australia was a European settler colony, founded in the blood of massacred Indigenous people, and has a frontier myth in which guns and conquest have played a historically important cultural role. America had its cowboys, buckaroos and gunslingers; Australia its squatters, drovers and bushrangers. And like America, Australia today is a multiethnic state-based federation in which gun-friendly rural areas enjoy considerable political influence.

But these similarities tell only part of the story. Australia’s success in pushing through gun reform in the wake of the 1996 Port Arthur massacre was mostly the result of timing, luck and the idiosyncrasies of the Australian Constitution. On gun policy, the fundamental differences between Australia and America outnumber the similarities. If anything, a closer examination of Australia’s success with gun reform reveals the magnitude of the task ahead for America.


Resistance to gun reform in Australia had been fierce in the years leading up to Port Arthur. In 1987 two massacres in Melbourne left a total of 15 people dead and placed the issue of gun control firmly on the national political agenda. But the firearms lobby and lawmakers in gun-friendly states like Queensland and Tasmania worked to frustrate efforts at federal reform. Part of the problem, and an obvious point of similarity with the situation in the United States today, was that guns were mostly regulated by the states, which made reform dependent on national coordination.


Mere weeks before the Port Arthur massacre, a federal election was held that saw the conservatives — a coalition between the mostly urban and suburban center-right Liberal Party and the rural National Party — return to power after 13 years in opposition. The magnitude of their victory gave the incoming government an overwhelming mandate. Capitalizing on the depth of revulsion across Australia at the slaughter in Port Arthur, the new prime minister, John Howard, moved quickly to push through reforms, coordinated across all the states, that had stalled in the wake of earlier shootings.


The Australian gun lobby did not take these changes lying down. Gun owners protested against reform in the thousands. Effigies of the National Party leader, Tim Fischer, were burned at several rural demonstrations, and Mr. Howard took the extraordinary measure of addressing a crowd of gun supporters in the Victorian coastal town of Sale in a bulletproof vest. (He later said that he regretted wearing the vest.) But as in the United States, the 1990s in Australia were a politically more innocent time, with less polarization, more bipartisan agreement on basic issues of justice and fairness, and a less toxic media environment than the one we have become accustomed to.


It still took conviction and courage for conservative leaders to stand up to their constituents and advocate change. Mr. Fischer, in particular, faced fearsome opposition within his own party to his support for Mr. Howard’s reforms, and these divisions created real, lasting damage, permanently poisoning the country’s political discourse. But reform was still possible, thanks in large part to the shared norm of bipartisanship and the willingness of conservatives, acting on principle, to risk alienating their base.

In addition, Australia faced none of the structural or constitutional obstacles standing in the way of gun reform here in the United States. Australia does not have anything resembling the Second Amendment. It has no filibuster, no Bill of Rights and no constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms. The Australian Constitution explicitly codifies a handful of other rights like the right to a fair trial and freedom of religion, and Australia’s High Court has ruled that the Constitution contains an implied right to freedom of political communication. But on guns the country’s founding document has nothing to say. The great drama of contemporary Australian jurisprudence is about enshrining, rather than removing, rights within the Constitution, making the debate on individual rights and freedoms in Australia quite distinct from the one in America.


Australia loses as much as it gains from this constitutional deficiency — a point that’s often lost in American media coverage of gun policy in the emotional days that follow a mass shooting. Compared with the herculean effort that would be required to repeal the Second Amendment, Australia’s gun reforms entered into law relatively easily. But without a Bill of Rights, there’s no constitutional framework in Australia to prevent the mandatory and indefinite detention of asylum seekers, or to insulate free speech from the chilling effect of defamation suits.


The Port Arthur gunman reportedly chose his site, a former penal colony turned into an open-air museum, in part as a homage to Australia’s bloody history of colonial violence: The weakness of Australia’s architecture of express individual freedoms may have inadvertently helped put an end to frequent mass shootings, but the absence of a Bill of Rights is also, arguably, one of the reasons Indigenous Australians, those dispossessed and murdered by the same people who built Port Arthur, continue to endure life expectancy and standards of living well below the national average.


And despite the very real drop in gun violence witnessed across Australia since the mid-1990s, signs of erosion in the national framework of gun control have recently begun to emerge. There are now more guns in Australia than there were at the time of the Port Arthur massacre (3.8 million in 2020 compared with 3.2 million in 1996), and a quietly resurgent gun lobby is spending, on a per-capita basis, about as much as the N.R.A., according to a recent report. Stringent gun control standards have not stopped Australia from incubating its own radicalized killers and exporting violence abroad: The gunman in the 2019 Christchurch massacre that left 51 dead was an Australian.


So the Australian experience of gun control resists easy translation to America. But if Australia is to serve as any kind of example, it is for the bravery and principle shown by conservative and rural leaders, often at great cost to their own political fortunes, in making the case for reform to their gun-loving constituents. Character of this caliber may be far harder to extract from the ranks of today’s Republican Party than it was from Australia’s conservatives in the 1990s.