The
Dismantling of America
By Hank
Silverberg
It has been
one of those weeks that makes me worry about the future of the United States as
we know it.
In
Bridgeport, Connecticut this past week, a reporter named Tara O’Neill was
arrested while covering a protest. The protest was like many we have seen over
the last few years, local citizens outraged over the handling of an officer-involved shooting of a 15-year- old. It's been two years since Jayson Negron was killed. O’Neill, who works for Hearst Connecticut
Media, had been covering the story since the beginning. She tweeted this out after she was released from custody.
I was released after being handcuffed, put in the back of a cop car and taken to booking. The officer who arrested me profusely apologized and said he didn’t know I was the media. I was not charged. I was not put into a holding cell. Others arrested were. #Bridgeport
The
Middletown Press reports she was not a stranger to police and she was wearing
her media credentials at the time. It was like other such events across the
country in the last few years. Someone through a bottle, police moved in to
make arrests and O’Neill was on the protest side of the police line and therefore
subject to harassment. She was handcuffed, put in a patrol car and taken to the
police station and briefly held. She writes in the Connecticut Post
that she as “not officially arrested” but was “bruised around the wrists” by
the cuffs.
https://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Hearst-reporter-detained-by-Bridgeport-cops-while-13834244.php
The incident sparked a great deal of protest within the community of journalists.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O’Neill’s
story is not unique. In Denver last year, a reporter was arrested for simply
taking video of police making an arrest on a public street.
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/02/05/denver-police-offers-discipline-handcuffing-journalist/During President Trump’s inauguration in Washington D.C. in 2016, nine reporters were arrested for being on the street and watching as some protestors smashed store windows and set a limousine on fire. Most were let go shortly after they were taken into custody, but it was more than a year before the charges were dropped against one of them, Free Lance Journalist Aaron Cantu, who at one point was threatened with a lengthy prison term.
https://www.sfreporter.com/news/2018/07/06/journalists-charges-dropped/
All of this is a form of intimidation. It’s an effort to control the message, stifle the free press and keep you from finding out what the police are doing on your streets. All of these cases would probably be thrown out of court as unconstitutional, but most never get that far. Police nationwide have stepped up the use of this tactic. They continually use such intimidating methods, and then apologize for it later. Such incidents are increasing. They have been fed by the President's constant attack on the media as "enemies of the people," and a general suspicion among the police and politicians that somehow the press is out to make them look bad. (That always backfires because arresting reporters or attacking them verbally makes the police or politicians look like they have something to hide.)
The Third
branch of government is the Legislature. And there too basic human decency is
being challenged. Not by
Congress this time, but by the State Legislatures. More than 250 anti-abortion bills have been introduced by state lawmakers across the country in the last year. In 1973, in Roe vs Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed the right of a woman to have an abortion. It’s the law of
the land. Ever since that landmark decision, those opposed to abortion, usually
on religious grounds, have looked for ways to undermine it.
I
have no problem with someone’s religious beliefs. If you believe abortion
violates your faith, then fine, you can make your personal decisions based
on that. But you should not be able to impose that belief on the rest of us,
especially when it conflicts with science or someone else’s religious convictions.
In Alabama,
the House passed a law that bans ALL abortions and would send any doctor who
performs one to prison for 99 years. Added to that is actual language in the bill
that compares abortion to the Holocaust, a comparison which has offended Jews. The bill
also does NOT exempt victims of rape or incest, which means they are forcing a victim to
have their rapist’s child.
Georgia took
a slightly different track, passing legislation that bans abortions after a heartbeat is detected, which is about six
weeks into a pregnancy. Critics point out that’s before most women even know they
are pregnant, so the bill basically bans abortion. Both bills
are likely to be challenged in the courts, and that may be exactly why they
were proposed—so that the newly conservative Supreme Court can revisit Roe vs Wade.
Abortion has been and always will be controversial. But I find it very hypocritical that many of
those who oppose it, who claim to be conservatives, will tolerate the ultimate
government intrusion into our personal lives.
Where are
these same people when legislation is proposed for an increase in funding for
foster care, child care, prenatal care for unwed mothers, or stricter penalties
for deadbeat dads? They run and hide or talk about the "nuclear family."
The courts are also a major protector of our freedom. But they, too, are under attack. The Trump Administration is looking for the right case to challenge long-standing procedural precedent that allows lower courts to impose nationwide injunctions against a particular policy. That would include things like the travel ban Mr. Trump imposed early in his presidency, or those abortion bills moving through the state's mentioned above.
Such injunctions enable people opposed to any policy to have its implementation delayed until the full case can be heard in the U.S. Supreme Court. It has always been used by groups or individuals to challenge the constitutionality of a policy BEFORE it is imposed.
There are
many of you who might read this and say these issues do not directly affect you personally. But they do.
Restricting
the press in any way, infringes on your right to know and thereby make informed decisions.
Restricting
the courts prevents you from petitioning your government to redress grievances or to prevent unjust or overreaching laws.
Restricting
abortion infringes on your right to practice your religion (or no religion at
all), a woman's right to control her own body, and your right to privacy.
Don’t sit by
and let any of these things happen.
Make police accountable to the public, write your legislator about the right of women to choose, and pay attention to attempts to ram unjust legislation past proper judicial review. We can still save the Constitution and the liberties hundreds of thousands have died to protect.
(Your comments and suggestions are welcome)
(Copies of my book are available at Amazon.com, BB.com or hanksilverbergbooks.com or at a reduced price for a signed copy by emailing me at hanksilverberg@gmail.com
Comments
Post a Comment
Reactive comments are welcome. Please keep it civil. Any direct attack on the blogger or those who post is not welcome and will be deleted.