- Republicans proposed a measure dubbed the “Save Chick-fil-A” bill after San Antonio refused to let a Chick-fil-A open in the city’s airport because of its support of anti-LGBT groups.
- The bill says that the government cannot take adverse action against a person or company based on their religious beliefs.
- It passed through Texas’ Senate last week and passed in the House on Monday.
- Democrats fear that the move will allow for discrimination against the LGBTQ community.
What Started the Bill?
The Texas House passed a piece of legislation on Monday dubbed the “Save Chick-fil-A” bill.
The bill was created after the San Antonio City Council voted to block a Chick-fil-A from opening in the city’s airport. City Councilman Roberto Treviño released a statement saying that San Antonio does “not have room in our public facilities for a business with a legacy of anti-LGBTQ behavior.”
The anti-LGBTQ behavior he referred to includes Chick-fil-A’s reputation for donating to groups with anti-LGBTQ agendas. According to ThinkProgress, the company gave $1.8 million to a variety of charities known to promote anti-LBGTQ messaging in 2017. One of the charities, The Fellowship of Christian Athletes, received $1.6 million dollars, and bars employees from participating in “homosexual acts.”
What Does the Bill Say?
Texas Republicans disagreed with San Antonio’s vote. Attorney General Ken Paxton opened an investigation into whether or not this violated the first amendment, while members of State Congress started drafting a controversial piece of legislation.
Their bill says that the government cannot take any “adverse action” against a person or company based on their “sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction.”
Getting the bill to this point was not easy for Texas politicians. A version drafted by the House was killed by Democrats earlier in the month. The state’s Senate then pushed its own version though, which passed on Thursday with a vote of 19-12.
According to NBC News, the vote was held without prior notification, meaning that the public did not have the opportunity to provide their take on the bill before the vote took place.
On Monday, the bill then passed in the House with a vote of 79-62, with only one Republican voting against it. The House ended up making some changes to the legislation before giving it their okay. Their amendment removed a section that gave the state’s attorney general the right to bring forward lawsuits against cities to “enforce compliance.”
Democrats Fear LGBTQ Discrimination
Democrats fear that this bill will allow for discrimination against the LGBTQ community in the state. Texas’ LGBTQ Caucus fought against the bill, which was debated for two hours on the house floor on Monday.
During the debate, a member of the caucus, Rep. Erin Zwiener, said that the bill would be an attack on LGBTQ Texans.
“Members, this bill is here, being debated on the floor today, to make LGBTQ Texans feel less than, to make us feel attacked by our government,” she said.
Rep. Julie Johnson, an out lesbian and one of the founders of the LGBTQ caucus also spoke out against the bill. Johnson told NBC News it was a “concerted effort to violate the constitutional protections that we’ve had for centuries with the separation of church and state.”
However, Republicans maintain that the bill is about protecting religious freedoms and companies like Chick-fil-A. Rep. Matt Krause, who sponsored the bill, said that it does not discriminate.
“Look at the language in this bill,” he said. “There is nothing discriminatory in the language. … There is nothing discriminatory in the intent.”
What Comes Next
The House is expected to toss the bill back to the Senate on Tuesday for final approval of the changes. Once the Senate approves the House’s changes, it gets sent over to Gov. Greg Abbott’s desk.
Abbott has already indicated his support for the bill. On Monday he tweeted he would let us know if he would sign the bill after eating dinner, along with a photo of a Chick-fil-A cup on his desk.
However, even if he passes it, some think it will see blocks in court.
“I have no doubt that if passed, SB 1978 will be fought in the courts at every level and at great expense to the taxpayers.” Rep. Johnson said. “To vote yes today is to put your signature on that invoice.”
See what others are saying: (NBC News) (Texas Tribune) (San Antonio Express)
Scott Peterson’s Murder Convictions To Be Re-examined
- Scott Peterson was convicted in 2004 of murdering his wife, Laci, and their unborn child.
- He was sentenced to death for the crimes, but the California Supreme Court overturned the death sentence in August of this year after finding that the trial court improperly dismissed potential jurors. The court did, however, uphold the convictions.
- Now, the CA Supreme Court has ordered the San Mateo County Superior Court to review the convictions and determine whether Peterson should be given a new trial on the grounds that one juror “committed prejudicial misconduct by not disclosing her prior involvement with other legal proceedings.”
- That juror had not disclosed the fact that she was granted a restraining order in 2000 against her boyfriend’s ex-girlfriend for harassing her when she was pregnant.
Peterson’s Death Sentence Was Previously Overturned
The California Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered a review of Scott Peterson’s 2004 convictions for murdering his wife, Laci, and their unborn son.
Peterson was sentenced to death by lethal injection for those crimes in 2005, but in August of this year, the California Supreme Court overturned his death sentence.
“We reject Peterson’s claim that he received an unfair trial as to guilt and thus affirm his convictions for murder,“ the court said at the time. “But before the trial began, the trial court made a series of clear and significant errors in jury selection.”
As far as what errors the court is talking about, it said the trial judge wrongly discharged prospective jurors who expressed opposition to capital punishment but said they would be willing to impose it.
Court to Decide on Potential New Trial
Now, weeks later, the California Supreme Court has ordered that the case return to the San Mateo County Superior Court to determine whether Peterson should be given a new trial on the ground that a juror “committed prejudicial misconduct by not disclosing her prior involvement with other legal proceedings, including but not limited to being the victim of a crime.”
According to the Los Angeles Times, that juror had not shared the fact that she was granted a restraining order in 2000 against her boyfriend’s ex-girlfriend for harassing her when she was pregnant.
Peterson’s lawyers even say that when all potential jurors were asked whether they had ever been a victim of a crime or involved in a lawsuit, the juror said no to both questions.
They also say she was one of the two holdouts for convicting Peterson of first-degree murder for killing his unborn child, with the jury ultimately convicting Peterson of the first-degree murder of Laci and the second-degree murder of the unborn child.
For now, it’s up to the San Mateo Court to decide what happens next, but the California Supreme Court did say that prosecutors could again seek the death penalty for Peterson at a new hearing.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (Los Angeles Times) (NBC News)
CDC Warns Household Gatherings Are Driving Coronavirus Spread as U.S. Cases Increase
- Coronavirus cases are on the rise in the United States, and the country could be on track to climb to a third peak.
- Nearly 60,000 new cases were reported on Wednesday. The daily average of reported cases has gone up 23% compared to two weeks ago, according to data from the New York Times.
- The CDC is warning that small household gatherings are contributing to the spread of COVID-19 and that people should be extra vigilant heading into the holidays.
- Superspreading events in New York, New Jersey, and elsewhere have also led to dozens of cases. Some of these events were held at colleges, while another was at a sweet 16 where people opted to not wear masks.
Small Gatherings Linked to COVID-19 Spread
Coronavirus cases are on the increase in many areas of the United States and could even be climbing towards a potential third peak. With this, experts are warning that household gatherings could be driving the spread.
The U.S. as a whole reported nearly 60,000 new cases on Wednesday. The daily average of reported cases has gone up 23% compared to two weeks ago, according to data from the New York Times. Cases are especially on the incline in the midwest.
While cases are not as high as they were in July, when the country saw its peak in infections, the upward trend is still troubling. Health leaders are warning that gatherings are playing a role in transmission and that people should be hyper-aware as the holidays roll around.
“In the public square, we’re seeing a higher degree of vigilance and mitigation steps in many jurisdictions,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield said in a phone call obtained by CNN. “But what we’re seeing as the increasing threat right now is actually acquisition of infection through small household gatherings. Particularly with Thanksgiving coming up, we think it’s really important to stress the vigilance of these continued mitigation steps in the household setting.”
In the last few weeks, gatherings leading to superspreading events have been making headlines. The most famous of which is the White House outbreak that started in the Rose Garden during Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court. This resulted in the President, First Lady, and numerous other White House officials becoming infected with COVID-19.
Superspreading events are happening all around the country, though. 37 coronavirus cases are now connected to a sweet 16 party that was held in Long Island at the end of September. That party violated emergency health codes by hosting 81 people, according to NBC News. Local guidelines state that gatherings cannot exceed 50 people or 50% of a venue’s capacity, whichever is smaller.
Reports indicate that social distancing and mask-wearing were nonexistent at the event. The party was held at a local hotel which is now facing two fines. One comes from the state of New York for $10,000 and the other is a $2,000 fine from Suffolk County.
In New Rochelle, New York an outbreak among athletes at Iona College has caused classes to move online. The school released a statement on Sunday explaining that the outbreak is tied to a single isolated event. Local reports indicate that this event has gotten as many as 65 people on the school’s campus sick.
In New Jersey, an event has led to 125 coronavirus cases at Monmouth University. The school released a statement Friday explaining that the campus had a notable increase in cases, warranting thorough contact tracing.
“It appears that this increase in cases among students was tied to an off-campus event hosted two weeks ago,” the school said. “An overwhelming majority of the recent cases we have seen can be traced back to this isolated super-spreader event.”
Monmouth University will now be increasing test efforts as a result.
See what others are saying: (New York Times) (ABC News) (The Hill)
Early Voting Sees Record-Breaking Turnouts, Some States Already Surpass 2016 Numbers
- Early voting turnout for the 2020 Presidential Election, both by mail and in-person, has broken records across multiple states.
- California and Texas, for example, have each surpassed 1 million votes cast, smashing previous records at this point in an election.
- Battleground states have been particularly affected, with many having either surpassed their 2016 early voting numbers or are on the verge of doing soon.
Record Breaking Turnout
The 2020 Presidential Election has set records with its early-voting turnout in multiple states and is on track to do the same in nearly all of the 39 states where early voting has started.
Likely fueling this trend is the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, which has prompted states to expand mail-in voting efforts to accommodate those who wish to lower their chance of exposure.
California, for instance, reported that as of Thursday, over 1.7 million ballots have already been cast for 2020 Presidential election. That’s the most number of confirmed ballots collected at this point in any state election. Around 435,000 of those ballots are from Los Angeles county alone, so that number may skyrocket as the other populous areas of the state start having their ballots collected.
It’s possible that this election will have the highest voter turnout in the state because California still has 20 million more ballots to go.
Early Voting in General
Outside of California, there’s been historic early voting numbers. While not every state has sent mail-in ballots to all voters, many have opened up for early voting by mail or in-person. Texas, for example, opened up early in-person voting Wednesday while mail-in voting has been happening for about a month now. As of Wednesday, about 649,000 ballots have been cast either by mail or in-person in the state’s 10 largest counties.
Those counties represent 57% of registered voters. To put that in perspective, as of the first day of in-person voting in 2016, only about 497,000 ballots were cast in those same counties. Across the entire state, over 1 million votes have been cast so far.
Democrats are hoping that these historic numbers are a good sign for them; Texas Democratic Party chairman Gilberto Hinojosa said in a statement, “Texas Democrats are rising. After the first day of early voting, it’s clear that energy is on our side and Texans are ready to turn our state blue.”
“With the energy seen among Texas Democrats, we will win the White House, take our John Cornyn, flip several Congressional seats, break the supermajority in the Texas Senate, flip the Texas House, and win hundreds of local elections across the state.”
Republicans weren’t too worried, saying that these numbers seemed to be on-par with a competitive election. Their voter-data expert told the Texas Tribune, “Right now all we have is one day of early voting under our belts, and we have many more to go, so I’d equate it to a horse race. The Democrats got a good start out the gate, but we’ve still got a whole race to run.”
While Texas is unlikely to flip, there are some important battleground states that have seen huge early-voting numbers. Take Pennsylvania, which has seen more early voters this election than in the entirety of 2016.
Other battleground states, such as Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Florida, and Michigan are also on par to pass their 2016 early-voting numbers according to local election data.
In Florida, this is particularly notable because so far the state has only had absentee voting. In-person early voting doesn’t begin until October 19.