Massachusetts lawmakers in Congress have reintroduced legislation which would allow people to sue police officers and other state and local government officials.
The Ending Qualified Immunity Act would eliminate the doctrine created by the Supreme Court, which protects police officers from individual liability for violating a person's constitutional rights.
Rep. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., said the bill ensures police, and all officials, are held accountable for their actions.
"It makes no sense that the very people responsible for enforcing the law face no consequences for breaking it," Pressley contended.
The bill was first introduced in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, and Pressley argued it provides the families of those abused by police with the healing they deserve. Supporters of qualified immunity said officers should not have to fear lawsuits when dealing with potentially dangerous suspects.
More than 1,000 people in the U.S. were killed by police last year, a record high, according to the nonprofit Mapping Police Violence.
Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said for decades, qualified immunity has shielded officers who use excessive force, far too often suffered by Black and brown Americans.
"There will be no true justice until there is racial justice," Markey asserted. "And there will be no racial justice until we end qualified immunity."
Markey added victims and their families are due their day in court against those officials who violate their civil rights. At least forty lawmakers have signed on as co-sponsors of the bill.
get more stories like this via email
Progressive groups are speaking out against the idea of a constitutional convention, warning it could be used to impose conservative policies on things such as civil rights, guns, voting rights and abortion.
Right-wing groups such as the Federalist Society have said they want to require a balanced budget and limit the power to tax, moves critics say would lead to huge cuts in Medicare, Social Security, education, Medicaid, and environmental protection.
Nancy MacLean, professor of history and public policy at Duke University, noted Article Five of the Constitution requires consent from just 34 states to call for a convention.
"The organizers of the convention effort have made clear the votes taken would not be based on population but on one vote per state, so as to grossly underrepresent the majority of Americans," MacLean pointed out.
It would give outsize influence to states with tiny populations such as Wyoming at the expense of huge states such as California. Over the years, many states have called for a constitutional convention on specific topics. Golden State lawmakers just called for one on gun control. Conservative groups argued the requests could be aggregated to reach the 34-state threshold and force a convention.
Russ Feingold, president of the American Constitution Society and a former U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, just wrote a book, warning a convention is likely if Republicans win full control of Congress next year.
"They're asserting that you can just mix and match these and that meets the constitutional requirements," Feingold emphasized. "It's not right. And the Supreme Court doesn't appear to have the authority to step in and stop it."
Jonathan Mehta Stein, executive director of California Common Cause, said the risk of a runaway convention is too great, because there are very few rules in place.
"We would have no idea who's seeking to influence the members of the constitutional Convention," Stein pointed out. "What lobbying would be happening behind the scenes? Would there be public-records requirements? Would there be transparency requirements? We just have no idea."
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
The youngest North Carolina voters could end up shifting the political landscape of the state in the not-too-distant future.
New data from the Brookings Institution indicates that together, people under age 45 -- the Millennials and Gen Z -- make up the largest generation and tend to lean toward the Democratic Party.
Michael Hais, former vice president of the research-based consulting firm Frank N. Magid Associates, believes the generation's diversity could be the driving force behind changes in politics over the next few years.
"Those under 45 are very distinctively different in their demographic composition, their partisanship, their political attitudes, and their media usage than voters who are over 45," Hais explained.
Research also revealed Millennials and Gen Z will be a majority of potential voters by 2028, and will represent more than 60% of potential U.S. voters by 2036. It also highlighted if Democrats do not run campaigns focused on younger voters, they could jeopardize the allegiance of the growing majority.
Dakota Hall, executive director of the Alliance for Youth Action, said another shift is young voters demand significant change and will not settle for minimal reform.
"These are folks who went to high school and witnessed nothing but 'on' news coverage on their different social media feeds, of Trump, of dysfunction, of government shutdowns and then a global pandemic," Hall pointed out. "They've seen the worst of what this country can be, and I think they want to push us forward."
According to research from the Alliance, young Democratic voters prioritize protecting abortion access and other issues - like democracy reform, voting rights, affordable health care, and stopping gun violence and climate change. Young Republicans are more concerned about the economy and inflation.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
Georgia's young people could shift the political landscape of the state in the near future.
New data from the Brookings Institution indicates that millennials and Generation Z make up the largest generation and tend to favor the Democratic Party.
Michael Hais, former vice president of the research-based consulting firm Frank N. Magid Associates, believes this generation's diversity could be the driving force behind changes in politics over the next few years.
"Those under 45 are very distinctively different in their demographic composition, their partisanship, their political attitudes, and their media usage than voters who are over 45, who are primarily members of Generation X, the Baby Boom generation, and the Silent Generation," Hais outlined.
Research also revealed millennials and 'Gen Z' will make up the majority of potential voters by 2028, and they will represent more than 60% of potential U.S. voters by 2036. It also highlights that if Democrats don't run campaigns to focus on younger voters, they could jeopardize the allegiance of the growing majority.
Dakota Hall, executive director of the Alliance for Youth Action, said another shift is young voters demand significant change and will not settle for minimal reform.
"These are folks who went to high school and witnessed nothing but 'on' news coverage on their different social media feeds -- of Trump, of dysfunction, of government shutdowns and then a global pandemic," Hall pointed out. "They've seen the worst of what this country can be, and I think they want to push us forward."
According to research from the Alliance, a majority of young Democratic voters prioritize protecting abortion access and other key issues like democracy reform, voting rights, affordable health care, gun violence and climate change, while young Republicans are more concerned about the economy and inflation.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.
get more stories like this via email
Contact
