Mediaboss Marketing

Al Cross| Opinion contributor

Permanent federal approval for one coronavirus vaccine Monday should have eliminated the arguments of some sadly misled, vaccine-hesitant Americans that Operation Warp Speed is just one big experiment.

But as Kentucky deals with another deadly surge of the coronavirus, it has started a heavily fraught experiment involving all three branches of its government, one that will likely affect the course of the pandemic and the lives of many Kentuckians.

For almost 18 months, Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear has been a pandemic czar, under a state of emergency he declared under a law the last completely Democratic legislature passed for a Democratic governor in 1998. This year, the firmly Republican legislature put a strict 30-day time limit on governors emergency orders, and last Saturday the state Supreme Court unanimously upheld it, pending arguments that the idea that 30 days is unconstitutionally short.

Beshear said he was surprised by the decision, since the high court had unanimously upheld his use of emergency powers. But the state constitution makes clear that the General Assembly is the main policy-making branch of government; it writes laws and can limit governors emergency powers.

Beshear should know that; he was attorney general before he was governor. His remark may reflect the warped sense of reality you can develop when you are a czar, issuing orders and mandates that affect personal behavior while winning approval in public-opinion polls.

More: 5 takeaways from the Kentucky Supreme Court ruling on Gov. Andy Beshear's power

Most Kentuckians seem to take the pandemic seriously, but not enough to keep the state from having the nations fifth highest infection rate when this column was written Wednesday morning. Thats largely because we rank 28th in vaccinations, with only 48% of us fully vaccinated the only figure that counts against the highly contagious delta variant.

Too many Kentuckians take cues from irresponsible politicians like U.S. Sen. Rand Paul and Rep. Thomas Massie, who have repeatedly cast doubt on the need to get vaccinated and mask up; and from their allies in partisan media and echo chambers on social media, who make villains of public-health experts who deserve our respect.

Most Republicans who lead the General Assembly have been more responsible, focusing their criticism of Beshear on his unwillingness to work with them and, more recently, their preference for local and parental decision-making on the issue of masks in schools.

Beshear did himself no favors when he rebuffed Republicans offer of help early in the pandemic. He could have brought them at least partially into his tent, perhaps co-opting them but also learning from them, and about them. He has yet to develop a real working relationship with them, almost 21 months into his 48-month term. Now he must, and so must they.

Related: Will Gov. Andy Beshear call a special legislative session for COVID? Here's what to know

It may not be easy. Republican leaders are saddled with the consequences of their national partisan allies politicization of the pandemic, which has made much of their voter base resistant to vaccination and masking, the two main preventive measures we need.

That showed in Senate President Robert Stivers quick rejection of a mask mandate for all indoor public spaces, something Beshear would be reviving shortly if not for the Supreme Court. Stivers signaled Republicans preferred approach by announcing a pro-vaccination campaign in his home Clay County, which has the states highest infection rate. Shots will be given at schools, which will compete for prizes, and the vaccinated will get coupons for free pizza.

The incentive approach seems likelier to work on the local level, with local influentials delivering the messages, than the vaccine lotteries being used by Beshear and some other governors. More incentives are needed.

House Speaker David Osborne of Prospect has a district with one of the states lowest infection rates, but his job is more difficult because all his members are up for reelection next year, and some are outspoken firebrands who are indirectly damaging public health, like Paul and Massie.

Joe Gerth: Senate Republicans wait 18 months to tell us their COVID-19 plan ... and it's pizza

Osborne already had a big member-management problem. Republicans face the challenge of drawing new House districts to conform to the 2020 census, which will surely pit some of them against each other because rural areas have lost population. Republicans would rather put off redistricting until after the 2022 elections, but courts are unlikely to allow that.

Osborne told me in an email, Our caucus is going to continue to be deliberate and intentional in how we approach this pandemic. ... It is our intent to work closely with the administration, hear their recommendations, and work with them as well as other stakeholders to set the policies.

Before long, Osborne, Stivers and other legislative leaders will hear recommendations that will be politically unpopular. We can only hope that their judgments wont be determined by politics, and if that requires risking their own leadership positions by going against the political grain, they will show courage for the greater good.

Al Cross, a former Courier Journal political writer, is professor and director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky. He writes this column for theKentucky Center for Public Service Journalism. Reach him on Twitter@ruralj.

Read more:
Kentucky GOP lawmakers get the power they wanted. Now they must use it wisely, show courage - Courier Journal

From the right: Biden Needs To Show Strength

President Bidens withdrawal from Afghanistan has been compared to our 1975 Vietnam withdrawal, but its more like Beirut, 1983, when terrorists killed 241 US service members and President Ronald Reagan cut and run, emboldening Osama bin Laden, contends Marc Thiessen at The Washington Post. The 9/11 mastermind predicted wed retreat from Afghanistan, too, and now Bidens fulfilling bin Ladens prophecy. Instead, he should show strength, tell the Taliban theyre responsible for Thursdays attack and thus were not leaving on Aug. 31 but only when every American and our allies are out. He should also say were establishing our own secure perimeter around the airport and reclaiming the Bagram air base. When the United States runs after a terrorist attack, the result is not safety and security, it is even more terrorism.

Woke watch: Theyve Got Rocks in Their Heads

The University of Wisconsins decision to remove a campus boulder because of what some writer said one day during the Coolidge administration (using the N-word to describe the rock) infuriates The New York Times John McWhorter. The students who demanded the move are fashioning their take on the rock as a kind of sophistication or higher awareness. But what they are really demanding is that we all dumb ourselves down. They essentially demanded that an irrational, prescientific kind of fear that a person can be meaningfully injured by the dead be accepted as insight, implying that the rocks denotation of racism is akin to a Confederate statues denotation of the same. This is Kabuki as civil rights its fake, its self-involved, and it helps no one.

Conservative: Liberalism Failed in Afghanistan

Twenty years after 9/11, the War on Terror has come full circle, writes Daniel McCarthy at Spectator World. Everyone expected the Taliban to surge back to power as soon as American forces left Afghanistan. Instead, the surge began while Americas embassy in Kabul was still open. Simply put: Terrorism won, nation-building lost. The Washington foreign-policy community believed the absence of liberalism and democracy was the root cause of terrorism, and its cure was therefore the promotion of liberal democracy through regime-change and nation-building. Yet liberalism cannot bind people together in conditions of profound insecurity, as religion and tribalism do. Nor does liberalism provide such compelling reasons to kill or die. A man will die for heaven or kill for his brother. No man will die for liberalism.

Natl-security beat: Sack Austin and Milley

After Kabul fell, neither Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin nor Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley appeared publicly for three days to explain what happened or why we appeared so ill-prepared to extract our citizens, sighs Ray McCoy at American Greatness. When they did appear, Austin claimed he didnt have the capability to collect large numbers of people. And this was supposed to be the team that returned competence to Washington, the experts that Joe Biden said he would trust. The president now has a chance to do some good by sacking Milley and Austin, as well as the mediocrities running his national security policy. If everyone from Tony Blair to Rand Paul is trashing this performance, we might as well start from scratch.

Libertarian: SCOTUS Soundly Slaps Eviction Ban

By 6-3, the Supreme Court ruled that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lack the authority to promulgate and extend the eviction moratorium, Elizabeth Nolan Brown cheers at Reason. The ruling notes that the downstream connection between eviction and the interstate spread of disease is markedly different from the direct targeting of disease that characterizes the measures identified in the Public Health Service Act. This, she notes, is also an important affirmation that private property rights still exist in this country and a good stand for the separation of powers since Congress can still pass a law extending the eviction moratorium but its unconstitutional for the executive branch to unilaterally make this decision.

Compiled by The Post Editorial Board

Go here to see the original:
Biden needs to show strength and other commentary - New York Post

The director of the National Institutes of Health said Monday it appears Covid-19 originated from an animal, but he didn't rule out the possibility that scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were secretly studying it and that it could have leaked out from there.

It's still unknown if the virus leaked out of a Wuhan lab, NIH director Dr. Francis Collins said Monday in an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box," adding that the World Health Organization's investigation into the origin of the coronavirus has gone "backwards."

"The vast evidence from other perspectives says no, this was a naturally occurring virus," Collins said. "Not to say that it could not have been under study secretly at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and got out of there, we don't know about that. But the virus itself does not have the earmarks of having been created intentionally by human work."

The WHO investigation has been made harder by China's refusal to participate, says Collins.

"I think China basically refused to consider another WHO investigation and just said 'nope not interested'," Collins told CNBC's Squawk Box.

"Wouldn't it be good if they'd actually open up their lab books and let us know what they were actually doing there and find out more about those cases of people who got sick in November of 2019 about which we really don't know enough," Collins said.

U.S. intelligence reports first reported by the Wall Street Journal indicated that in November 2019, three workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell ill with symptoms similar to those seen in Covid-19 infections, a report that China said was "completely untrue."

About three months ago, President Joe Biden initiated an investigation of his own and gave his intelligence community 90 days to further the investigation the virus' origins and report the findings. The deadline is Tuesday.

"It will be an interesting week because tomorrow is the day of the 90-day deadline that President Biden set for the intelligence community to do all their poking around that they could to see if they could come up with anymore insight as to how this virus got started in China," Collins said.

Most of the information gathered will likely remain classified, but some information from the report will be released, according to Collins.

"We don't know what they're going to come up with either, but we're intensely interested," Collins said.

Collins also weighed in on the debate over whether or not the U.S. funded so-called gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, a debate that Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and medical advisor to the president, Dr. Anthony Fauci, have engaged in time and time again. Gain-of-function research is when scientists take a pathogen and make it more contagious, deadly or both to study how to combat it.

"The kind of gain-of-function research that's under very careful scrutiny is when you take a pathogen for humans, and you do something with it that would enhance its virulence or its transmissibility," Collins said. "They were not studying a pathogen that was a pathogen for humans, these are bat viruses."

Some of the research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that was funded, in part, by the NIH through a grant to non-profit EcoHealth Alliance studied how bat viruses could infect humans.

"So by the strict definition, and this was look at exquisitely carefully by all the reviewers of that research in anticipation that this might come up, was that this did not meet the official description of what's called gain-of-function research that requires oversight," Collins said. "I know this has gotten lots of attention, but I think it's way out of place."

Read more:
NIH director says Covid likely came from nature, but doesn't rule out it could have escaped from lab - CNBC

Video: Buncombe County school board meeting sees anti-mask protesters

Buncombe County resident Stephanie Parsons protests during a meeting with the Buncombe County Board of Education on Thursday, August 5, 2021.

Maya Carter, Asheville Citizen Times

Todays batch of burning questions, my smart-aleck answers and the real deal:

Question:In Buncombe County's recent mask mandate order and the city's, too it gives an exemption for First Amendment rights. What does that mean? It seems kind of nebulous...

My answer: Who doesn't like a nice splash of nebulousness in their mask mandate? I just wish they would've added some language along the lines of, "The mandate also does not apply to those wishing to remain in touch with their inner child, hoping not to inhibit the free flow of chi or just wanting to ride free and not be hassled by the man."

Real answer: The county and city recently did pass mask mandates for public places. The city order essentially mirrored the county's, which did offer mask exemptions for several activities. It reads:

Worship, religious, and spiritual gatherings, funeral ceremonies, wedding ceremonies, and other activities constituting the exercise of First Amendment rights are exempt from all the requirements of this order.

More: Protesters object to Buncombe County Schools' mask mandate, attempt to 'overthrow' board

This being the land of the free, I can see where some folks, whether they're customers, employees, or just folks trying to ditch the mask because it "inhibits their free speech," may try to take advantage here. The mandate is meant to be pretty narrow, though.

"This language is straight out of language used in the Governor's Executive Orders," Buncombe County spokeswoman Lillian Govus said via email. "The language in the Executive Orders speaks primarily to mass gatherings, and specifically exempts fundamental First Amendment rights. The U.S. District Court essentially held that the state cannot restrict religious gatherings of 10 or more people."

More: Asheville City Schools clarifies COVID-19 protocols ahead of first day of school

The county's new order "simply requires face covering in public spaces and does not prohibit or define gatherings," Govus said. It implements public health officials' recommendation to require people to wear face coverings indoors in public in communities with substantial or high transmission.

Buncombe County, like many other counties nationwide, has seen COVID-19 cases surge in recent weeks as the delta variant spreads.Health officials told county leaders last week the rate of COVID-19 infections have increased six-fold, or 500% in a month's time.

In mid-July, the county was seeing 34 cases per 100,000. Last week the number had skyrocketed to 261 per 100,000, a rise attributed tothe coronavirus' highly contagious delta variant, which some data showcauses more severe illness than earlier strains.

TheCDC also strongly encourages social distancing again.

"When preparing the order, we felt it was important to clearly indicate that there is no intention to abridge the First Amendment rights of persons by implementing this new local order requiring face coverings in public spaces," Govus said.

By way of review, here's what the First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

For Asheville, City AttorneyBrad Branham responded, first noting the city wanted to maintain consistency with the county by mirroring the county directives. The First Amendment exception "is intended to be very limited in nature," Branham said.

The city believes strongly in the need for the most recent mask mandate, but while also safeguarding the constitutional rights of our residents and visitors," Branham said via email. "We do not consider the mere act of mandatorily wearing a mask to infringe upon a persons freedom of speech.Therefore, this exception would be limited to circumstances in which a person was prevented from fully exercising their free speech rights because of the mask.

I can imagine anti-maskers trying to fall back on all sorts of "free speech" arguments to shed their masks, but Branham said the exemptionis meant to be very narrow in scope.

"We can envision very few, if any, circumstances in which this would arise, but wanted to ensure that recognition of personal freedoms be included in the document," Branham said. "To reiterate, this language should absolutely not be read to mean that disagreement with the mask mandate gives someone the right to refuse to wear a mask under the guise of the First Amendment.

Judging by the lack of masks I saw at the Arden Walmart Saturday evening, I'd say folks are doing just fine in finding plenty of ways around the mask mandate. I suspect most folks would just claim a "medical exemption," if asked.

But honestly, I don't think stores, restaurants, bars or other establishments really want to fight the mask fight anymore. I'm still wearing a mask indoors, because it's the right thing to do to beat down the delta variant, but I'm probably in the minority these days.

It's a sad statement about society, folks. For nearly all of us, wearing a mask is a minor inconvenience.

Please, just do it.

This is the opinion of John Boyle. To submit a question, contact him at 232-5847 or jboyle@citizen-times.com

See original here:
Answer Man: In mask mandate, what's the meaning of 'First Amendment rights?' - Citizen Times

Petitions of the week ByAndrew Hamm on Aug 27, 2021 at 9:12 pm

This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider, among other things, how the First Amendment constrains taxes on billboard owners, whether the mailbox rule applies to prisoners represented by counsel, and the scope of district courts jurisdiction over expungement motions.

In November, the court will hear argument in City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising of Texas, a First Amendment challenge to an Austin regulation that bars some digitized billboards but allows others depending on the billboards location. A new petition asks the court to take up another challenge to a city policy that involves differential treatment of signs.

The city of Baltimore taxes the owners of displays that advertise services that occur in a different location, meaning many billboards but not other types of signs. One of the countrys largest billboard-advertising companies challenged the tax under the First Amendment. Applying a relaxed standard, Marylands highest court upheld the tax as rationally related to the citys legitimate interest in raising public revenue. In its petition, the billboard owner, one of four such companies in Baltimore, argues that a heightened standard should apply. The company also argues that Baltimores distinction between on-premises signs and off-premises signs is even more problematic than the one presented in Austin. The case is Clear Channel Outdoor, LLC v. Raymond.

Under the mailbox rule, a prisoners filing is timely if mailed by the due date, even if it arrives late to the court. In Cretacci v. Call, Blake Cretacci argues that a circuit split has arisen as to whether the rule applies to prisoners represented by counsel. Cretacci, a pre-trial detainee, submitted to the inmate mail system a civil complaint before the statutory deadline on his claims, but the pleading arrived at the district court too late. Although a lawyer had helped Cretacci to prepare the complaint, Cretacci had filed pro se (representing himself) because the lawyer was not a member of the relevant bar. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit denied Cretacci the benefit of the mailbox rule on the ground that he was sufficiently represented by counsel. Cretacci asks the justices to review and reverse this holding.

Valueland Auto Sales, Inc. v. United States concerns the scope of jurisdiction in federal criminal cases. In 2013, the federal government indicted Ron Benit and Valueland Auto Sales on charges that they structured cash deposits at banks to avoid filing required reports, and it seized over $70,000 of their funds. The government later dismissed all charges and returned all the funds. Benit and Valueland then moved to expunge the records of their indictment. However, the district court determined that it did not have any jurisdiction over the expungement motions because the charges had been dropped, a ruling that the 6th Circuit affirmed. Arguing that a circuit split exists over this issue that is important and recurring, Benit and Valueland ask the Supreme Court to reverse the 6th Circuits decision.

These and otherpetitions of the weekare below:

Mohamud v. Weyker21-187Issue: Whether a constitutional remedy is available against federal officers for individual instances of law enforcement overreach in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Valueland Auto Sales, Inc. v. United States21-211Issue: Whether, when the district court dismisses all criminal charges against a defendant, that court has jurisdiction over a motion to expunge the records relating to those charges, as held by the U.S Courts of Appeals for the 2nd, 10th and D.C. Circuits, or whether the district court lacks jurisdiction over such motions, as held by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 11th Circuits.

Clear Channel Outdoor, LLC v. Raymond21-219Issue: Whether a tax singling out off-premises billboards is subject to heightened scrutiny under the First Amendment.

Cretacci v. Call21-221Issue: Whether a prisoner who submits a filing through the prison mail system loses the benefit of the mailbox rule if he has counsel.

Excerpt from:
Billboard taxes, the mailbox rule and expungement jurisdiction - SCOTUSblog