Connect with us

Politics

Justices Uphold Use of Drug Implicated in Botched Executions

Published

on

This Friday, July 25, 2014 file photo shows bottles of midazolam at a hospital pharmacy in Oklahoma City. On Monday, June 29, 2015, The Supreme Court voted 5-4 in a case from Oklahoma saying that the sedative midazolam can be used in executions without violating the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. (AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki, File)

This Friday, July 25, 2014 file photo shows bottles of midazolam at a hospital pharmacy in Oklahoma City. On Monday, June 29, 2015, The Supreme Court voted 5-4 in a case from Oklahoma saying that the sedative midazolam can be used in executions without violating the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. (AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki, File)

Mark Sherman, ASSOCIATED PRESS

 
WASHINGTON (AP) — A deeply divided Supreme Court upheld the use of a controversial drug in lethal-injection executions Monday, even as two dissenting justices said for the first time they think it’s “highly likely” the death penalty itself is unconstitutional.

The justices voted 5-4 in a case from Oklahoma that the sedative midazolam can be used in executions without violating the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

The drug was used in executions in Arizona, Ohio and Oklahoma in 2014 that took longer than usual and raised concerns that it did not perform its intended task of putting inmates into a coma-like sleep.

Justice Samuel Alito said for a conservative majority that arguments the drug could not be used effectively as a sedative in executions are speculative and he dismissed problems in executions in Arizona and Oklahoma as “having little probative value for present purposes.”

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, “Under the court’s new rule, it would not matter whether the state intended to use midazolam, or instead to have petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake.”

Alito responded, saying “the dissent’s resort to this outlandish rhetoric reveals the weakness of its legal arguments.”

In a separate dissent, Justice Stephen Breyer said the time has come for the court to debate whether the death penalty itself is constitutional. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Breyer’s opinion.

“I believe it highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment,” Breyer said, drawing on the cases he has reviewed in more than 20 years on the Supreme Court bench.

More than 100 death row-inmates have been exonerated, showing that the death penalty is unreliable, Breyer said. He said it also is imposed arbitrarily, takes far too long to carry out and has been abandoned by most of the country. Last year, just seven states carried out executions, he said.

In an extremely unusual turn, four justices read their opinions from the bench in the lethal execution case. Justice Antonin Scalia, part of the court’s majority on Monday, read a brief reply to Breyer. “Welcome to Groundhog Day,” Scalia said, noting that the court has repeatedly upheld the use of capital punishment.

The Supreme Court’s involvement in the case began in January with an unusually public disagreement among the justices over executions.

Then, the court refused to block Oklahoma inmate Charles Warner’s execution despite the objection of the four liberal justices. In a strongly worded dissent for the four, Sotomayor said, “The questions before us are especially important now, given states’ increasing reliance on new and scientifically untested methods of execution.”

Eight days later, the justices agreed to hear the case of three other Oklahoma death-row prisoners. It takes just four votes among the nine justices to agree to hear a case, but five votes to place a hold on an execution.

When the case was argued in late April, the justices engaged in combative exchanges about the Oklahoma case and impassioned debate about capital punishment more generally.

Among the conservatives, Alito said death penalty opponents are waging a “guerrilla war” against executions by working to limit the supply of more effective drugs. On the other side, liberal Justice Elena Kagan contended that the way states carry out most executions amounts to having prisoners “burned alive from the inside.”

In 2008, the court upheld Kentucky’s use of a three-drug execution method that employed a barbiturate as the first drug, intended to render the inmate unconscious. But because of problems obtaining drugs, no state uses the precise combination at issue in that earlier Supreme Court case.

Four states have used midazolam in executions: Arizona, Florida, Ohio and Oklahoma. Also, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Virginia allow for midazolam, but they have not used it in executions.

Last April’s execution of Clayton Lockett was the first time Oklahoma used midazolam. Lockett writhed on the gurney, moaned and clenched his teeth for several minutes before prison officials tried to halt the process. Lockett died after 43 minutes.

Executions in Arizona and Ohio that used midazolam also went on longer than expected as the inmates gasped and made other noises before dying.

Meanwhile, the court challenge has prompted Oklahoma to approve nitrogen gas as an alternative death penalty method if lethal injections aren’t possible, either because of a court ruling or a drug shortage.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

###

Activism

Discrimination in City Contracts

The report was made public by Councilmember Carroll Fife, who brought it this week to the Council’s Life Enrichment Committee, which she chairs. Councilmembers, angry at the conditions revealed, unanimously approved the informational report, which is scheduled to go to an upcoming council meeting for discussion and action. The current study covers five years, 2016-2021, roughly overlapping the two tenures of Libby Schaaf, who served as mayor from January 2015 to January 2023.

Published

on

Dr. Eleanor Ramsey (top, left) founder, and CEO of Mason Tillman Associates, which conducted the study revealing contract disparities, was invited by District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife (top center) to a Council committee meeting attended by Oakland entrepreneur Cathy Adams (top right) and (bottom row, left to right) Brenda Harbin-Forte, Carol Wyatt, and councilmembers Charlene Wang and Ken Houston. Courtesy photos.
Dr. Eleanor Ramsey (top, left) founder, and CEO of Mason Tillman Associates, which conducted the study revealing contract disparities, was invited by District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife (top center) to a Council committee meeting attended by Oakland entrepreneur Cathy Adams (top right) and (bottom row, left to right) Brenda Harbin-Forte, Carol Wyatt, and councilmembers Charlene Wang and Ken Houston. Courtesy photos.

Disparity Study Exposes Oakland’s Lack of Race and Equity Inclusion

Part 1

By Ken Epstein

A long-awaited disparity study funded by the City of Oakland shows dramatic evidence that city government is practicing a deeply embedded pattern of systemic discrimination in the spending of public money on outside contracts that excludes minority- and woman-owned businesses, especially African Americans.

Instead, a majority of public money goes to a disproportionate handful of white male-owned companies that are based outside of Oakland, according to the 369-page report produced for the city by Mason Tillman Associates, an Oakland-based firm that performs statistical, legal and economic analyses of contracting and hiring.

The report was made public by Councilmember Carroll Fife, who brought it this week to the Council’s Life Enrichment Committee, which she chairs. Councilmembers, angry at the conditions revealed, unanimously approved the informational report, which is scheduled to go to an upcoming council meeting for discussion and action.

The current study covers five years, 2016-2021, roughly overlapping the two tenures of Libby Schaaf, who served as mayor from January 2015 to January 2023.

The amount of dollars at stake in these contracts was significant in the four areas that were studied, a total of $486.7 million including $214.6 million on construction, $28.6 million on architecture, and engineering, $78.9 million on professional services, and $164.6 million on goods and services.

While the city’s policies are good, “the practices are not consistent with policy,” said Dr. Eleanor Ramsey, founder and CEO of Mason Tillman Associates.

There have been four disparity studies during the last 20 years, all showing a pattern of discrimination against women and minorities, especially African Americans, she said. “You have good procurement policy but poor enforcement.”

“Most minority- and women-owned businesses did not receive their fair share of city-funded contracts,” she continued.  “Over 50% of the city’s prime contract dollars were awarded to white-owned male businesses that controlled most subcontracting awards. And nearly 65% of the city’s prime contracts were awarded to non-Oakland businesses.”

As a result, she said, “there is a direct loss of revenue to Oakland businesses and to business tax in the city…  There is also an indirect loss of sales and property taxes (and) increased commercial office vacancies and empty retail space.”

Much of the discrimination occurs in the methods used by individual city departments when issuing outside contracts. Many departments have found “creative” ways to circumvent policies, including issuing “emergency” contracts for emergencies that do not exist and providing waivers to requirements to contract with women- and minority-owned businesses, Ramsey said.

Many of the smaller contracts – 59% of total contracts issued – never go to the City Council for approval.

Some people argue that the contracts go to a few big companies because small businesses either do not exist or cannot do the work. But the reality is that a majority of city contracts are small, under $100,000, and there are many Black-, woman- and minority-owned companies available in Oakland, said Ramsey.

“Until we address the disparities that we are seeing, not just in this report but with our own eyes, we will be consistently challenged to create safety, to create equity, and to create the city that we all deserve,” said Fife.

A special issue highlighted in the disparity report was the way city departments handled spending of federal money issued in grants through a state agency, Caltrans. Under federal guidelines, 17.06%. of the dollars should go to Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs).

“The fact is that only 2.16% of all the dollars awarded on contracts (went to) DBEs,” Ramsey said.

Speaking at the committee meeting, City Councilmember Ken Houston said, “It’s not fair, it’s not right.  If we had implemented (city policies) 24 years ago, we wouldn’t be sitting here (now) waiving (policies).”

“What about us? We want vacations. We want to have savings for our children. We’re dying out here,” he said.

Councilmember Charlene Wang said that she noticed when reading the report that “two types of business owners that are consistently experiencing the most appalling discrimination” are African Americans and minority females.

“It’s gotten worse” over the past 20 years, she said. “It’s notable that businesses have survived despite the fact that they have not been able to do business with their own city.”

Also speaking at the meeting, Brenda Harbin-Forte, a retired Alameda County Superior Court judge, and chair of the Legal Redress Committee for the Oakland NAACP, said, “I am so glad this disparity study finally was made public. These findings … are not just troubling, they are appalling, that we have let  these things go on in our city.”

“We need action, we need activity,” she said. “We need for the City Council and others to recognize that you must immediately do something to rectify the situation that has been allowed to go on. The report says that the city was an active or inactive or unintentional or whatever participant in what has been going on in the city. We need fairness.”

Cathy Adams, president of the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce, said, “The report in my opinion was very clear. It gave directions, and I feel that we should accept the consultant Dr. Ramsey’s recommendations.

“We understand what the disparities are; it’s going to be upon the city, our councilmembers, and our department heads to just get in alignment,” she said.

Said West Oakland activist Carol Wyatt, “For a diverse city to produce these results is a disgrace. The study shows that roughly 83% of the city contracting dollars went to non-minority white male-owned firms under so-called race neutral policies

These conditions are not “a reflection of a lack of qualified local firms,” she continued. “Oakland does not have a workforce shortage; it has a training, local hire, and capacity-building problem.”

“That failure must be examined and corrected,” she said. “The length of time the study sat without action, only further heightens the need for accountability.”

Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: The National Protest Must Be Accompanied with Our Votes

Just as Trump is gathering election data like having the FBI take all the election data in Georgia from the 2020 election, so must we organize in preparation for the coming primary season to have the right people on ballots in each Republican district, so that we can regain control of the House of Representatives and by doing so, restore the separation of powers and balance that our democracy is being deprived of.

Published

on

Dr. John E. Warren Publisher, San Diego Voice & Viewpoint
Dr. John E. Warren, Publisher San Diego Voice & Viewpoint Newspaper. File photo..

By  Dr. John E. Warren, Publisher San Diego Voice & Viewpoint Newspaper

As thousands of Americans march every week in cities across this great nation, it must be remembered that the protest without the vote is of no concern to Donald Trump and his administration.

In every city, there is a personal connection to the U.S. Congress. In too many cases, the member of Congress representing the people of that city and the congressional district in which it sits, is a Republican. It is the Republicans who are giving silent support to the destructive actions of those persons like the U.S. Attorney General, the Director of Homeland Security, and the National Intelligence Director, who are carrying out the revenge campaign of the President rather than upholding the oath of office each of them took “to Defend The Constitution of the United States.”

Just as Trump is gathering election data like having the FBI take all the election data in Georgia from the 2020 election, so must we organize in preparation for the coming primary season to have the right people on ballots in each Republican district, so that we can regain control of the House of Representatives and by doing so, restore the separation of powers and balance that our democracy is being deprived of.

In California, the primary comes in June 2026. The congressional races must be a priority just as much as the local election of people has been so important in keeping ICE from acquiring facilities to build more prisons around the country.

“We the People” are winning this battle, even though it might not look like it. Each of us must get involved now, right where we are.

In this Black History month, it is important to remember that all we have accomplished in this nation has been “in spite of” and not “because of.” Frederick Douglas said, “Power concedes nothing without a struggle.”

Today, the struggle is to maintain our very institutions and history. Our strength in this struggle rests in our “collectiveness.” Our newspapers and journalists are at the greatest risk. We must not personally add to the attack by ignoring those who have been our very foundation, our Black press.

Are you spending your dollars this Black History Month with those who salute and honor contributions by supporting those who tell our stories? Remember that silence is the same as consent and support for the opposition. Where do you stand and where will your dollars go?

Continue Reading

Activism

Congresswoman Simon Votes Against Department of Homeland Security, ICE Funding

“They need accountability. Republicans already gave these agencies an unprecedented $170 billion for immigration enforcement, funding they have used to conduct raids at schools, separate families, and deploy a masked paramilitary who refuse to identify themselves on American streets. This bill gives them more funding without a single reform to stop unconstitutional, immoral abuses,” she said.

Published

on

Congresswoman Lateefah Simon (D-CA-12). File photo.
Congresswoman Lateefah Simon (D-CA-12). File photo.

By Post Staff

Congresswoman Lateefah Simon (D-CA-12) released a statement after voting against legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which supports Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB).

“Today, I voted NO on legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security through Feb. 13, 2026.

“ICE and CBP do not need more funding to terrorize communities or kill more people,” she said in the media release.

They need accountability. Republicans already gave these agencies an unprecedented $170 billion for immigration enforcement, funding they have used to conduct raids at schools, separate families, and deploy a masked paramilitary who refuse to identify themselves on American streets. This bill gives them more funding without a single reform to stop unconstitutional, immoral abuses,” she said.

“The American people are demanding change. Poll after poll of Americans’ opinions show overwhelming support for requiring ICE agents to wear body cameras and prohibiting them from hiding their faces during enforcement actions. This is the bare minimum transparency standard, and this funding legislation does not even meet this low bar,” Simon said.

“Republicans in Congress are not serious about reining in these lawless agencies. Their refusal to make meaningful changes to the DHS funding bill has consequences that go beyond immigration enforcement. TSA agents who keep our airports safe and FEMA workers who help our communities recover from disasters are stuck in limbo due to Republican inaction.

“The Constitution does not have an exception for immigrants. Every person on American soil has rights, and federal agencies must respect them. The East Bay has made clear at the Alameda County and city level that we will hold the line against a violent ICE force and support our immigrant communities – I will continue to hold the line and our values with my votes in Congress.”

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.