Supreme Court Hands Huge Victory to Families on School Choice

In a 5-4 decision Tuesday, the Supreme Court held that families have a right to seek the best educational opportunities for their children, by preventing states from blocking the participation of religiously affiliated schools in state school choice programs.

In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the court ruled that the application of a “no-aid” provision in Montana’s Constitution violated the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, since it barred state tax credit scholarships from being used at private religious schools.

In a huge win for families, the high court held that states cannot apply the no-aid provision to discriminate against religious schools by excluding them from private school choice programs.

In 2002, the court’s ruling in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris held that the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution did not block parents from choosing schools that are the best fit for their children, including religious schools.

Tuesday’s decision in Espinoza removed the largest state constitutional obstacle by holding that so-called Blaine Amendments cannot be used to deny choice to parents.

Under the U.S. Constitution, states no longer may prevent parents from choosing religious schools if they are participating in a school choice program.

“A state need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools simply because they are religious,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the opinion of the court in Espinoza.

This decision struck a blow to the notoriously anti-Catholic Blaine Amendment in Montana’s Constitution that sanctioned explicit discrimination against religious schools in funding. Montana’s discrimination hurt families who have a wide variety of values and preferences when it comes to their children’s education.

As the Supreme Court had previously noted, Blaine Amendments have an “ignoble” history. The amendments are named after Sen. James G. Blaine of Maine, who in 1875 sought a federal constitutional prohibition of aid to “sectarian” schools.

“Consideration of the amendment arose at a time of pervasive hostility to the Catholic Church and to Catholics in general, and it was an open secret that sectarian was code for Catholic,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court’s Mitchell v. Helms decision in 2000.

As Jarrett Stepman and one of us, Lindsey Burke, wrote previously in the Journal of School Choice:

Catholics sought to establish their own schools, and proposed that funding should follow, as it had to the common school (proto-public schools).

Supporters of the common school movement perceived a threat to its mission in such proposals. … Against this backdrop, Blaine [Amendments] sought to prevent aid to Catholic schooling as part of a wider reaction to increased Catholic immigration.

Blaine’s effort to amend the U.S. Constitution failed in 1875, but his effort still served as a major impediment to school choice, continuing to thwart modern-day school choice programs in the 21st century.

That’s because 37 states went on to adopt similar amendments, sometimes referred to as “baby Blaine Amendments.” Prior to today’s ruling, in states such as Montana, many of these state Blaine Amendments and similar “compelled support” clauses restricted or outright prohibited the use of taxpayer funds at private religious schools.

This timeline shows when states adopted Blaine Amendments and similar “compelled support” clauses.

The Supreme Court made it clear Tuesday that the Free Exercise Clause of the Constitution prohibits discrimination against religious schools on the basis of their religious status—a status that provides families with more education options that best meet the needs of their children.

The high court said that if states create a publicly available benefit, such as a scholarship program, they must allow religious schools to participate. The states that have Blaine Amendments in place are now prohibited from excluding religious school options.

In Mitchell v. Helms, Thomas wrote of Blaine Amendments: “This doctrine, born of bigotry, should be buried now.” On Tuesday, the Supreme Court’s decision in Espinoza took us one step closer to achieving that goal.

Now is the time for states to cast aside these 19th-century rules rooted in prejudice that unfairly punish religious families, students, and schools. The Constitution requires states to provide a level playing field for religious and secular education.

The legal impediment to school choice programs is now gone, and it’s up to state legislatures to move forward advancing education choice.

The court made it clear that policymakers across the country now have the power to enact robust school choice programs. They should do just that. (For more from the author of “Supreme Court Hands Huge Victory to Families on School Choice” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Arizona Goes After Gym That Refused to Shutdown

A luxury gym in Phoenix, Arizona, lost two liquor licenses after defying the order to shut down in order to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.

Life Time Fitness had two liquor licenses suspended by local officials after keeping their gym doors open.

Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey issued an executive order shutting down movie theaters, gyms, bars and other businesses for 30 days on Monday. . .

“The Department took action against the liquor licenses of the two businesses as each presented one of a number of enticements to continue regular operations at Life Time Biltmore,” said John Cocca, the director of the Arizona Dept. of Liquor Licenses and Control.

A spokesman for the governor’s office said that a business could face up to a $2,500 fine for non-compliance with the executive order. (Read more from “Arizona Goes After Gym That Refused to Shutdown” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Kids’ Lives Matter: Stop the National Coronavirus Child Abuse

Haven’t our children suffered enough?

School-age children are quite literally more likely to be struck by lightning than die of COVID-19. And we don’t shut schools during thunderstorm season. Children, including non-school-age infants, are seven times more likely to die of the flu every year than of COVID-19 and 10 times more likely to be hospitalized by the flu. In fact, according to the CDC’s latest COVID-19 surveillance report released last Friday, “For children (0-17 years), cumulative COVID-19 hospitalization rates are much lower than cumulative influenza hospitalization rates at comparable time points during recent influenza seasons.”

Yet, because our government, unlike the Europeans, has failed to come clean on this fact, states continued the school shutdown by shutting down camps in many states. Now some states are continuing this insanity into the fall and plan to traumatize the children by making them wear masks in the September heat all day long in order to attend school. It’s time to draw the line, stand for liberty and science, and demand that the lives of our children finally factor into the decision-making process.

It’s now settled science that children are much less likely to become seriously ill from coronavirus than from the flu, even from the stronger form of COVID-19 this past spring, certainly from the milder form that appears to be spreading in the South. Furthermore, every single country that has studied child transmission has now found no meaningful child-to-adult transmission out of millions of cases. The excuses for treating kids like adults, even as the potency of the virus wanes for adults, have run dry.

Yet, at a time when Canada and Europe are moving away from lockdown and apologizing for shutting schools in the first place, liberals in America are doubling down on child abuse and flat-earth “science.” Schools in Fairfax County, Virginia, are planning only two days per week of in-person schooling. Connecticut is planning long-term trauma mode by mandating little kids wear masks and stay away from each other.

If this is the new threshold to trigger such traumatic upheaval in the lives of our children, then even if this virus became extinct tomorrow, there is quite literally nothing that will stop them from making this the new normal. Any common respiratory infection poses a greater threat to children than this virus that is now spawning policies that cause life-altering trauma to children. I have several children in school, and every flu season there is a week when half the class is absent, and some have fever for more than a week. That is more suffering per capita than anything this virus has caused children at large.

It barely got any media attention, but last week the American Academy of Pediatrics put out a statement “strongly” advocating “that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school.” They noted that not only are children not at risk, but they do not contribute to community spread. “Although children and adolescents play a major role in amplifying influenza outbreaks, to date, this does not appear to be the case with SARS-CoV-2.”

Because wearing masks has become a superstitious religious belief in this country, the AAP hedges and equivocates on it, but other countries have rejected it. Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Norway believe all mask-wearing is worthless and counterproductive because of cross-contamination.

Canada’s government recommends that children not be required to wear masks because “if worn incorrectly, it could lead to increased risk of infection and it is not practical for a child to wear a mask properly for the duration of a school day.” Several European countries, such as Denmark, Switzerland, and the Netherlands have had no problems going back to schools without masks and other draconian measures.

The Canadian government also notes, as the U.S. government did before it became political, that there is no clear evidence that masks stop transmission (viruses are much smaller than the bacteria masks typically keep out). Therefore, Canada recommends that “in general, masks should not be required for school staff if physical distancing is possible and is practiced appropriately” because “facial expression is an important part of communication which children should not be deprived of.”

Also, the countries that are taking a rational and nonpolitical approach to this issue are doing away with the isolation and distancing measures for children. British schools will not require adherence to the mythical 2-meter rule. If we don’t do this for the flu, there is no scientific reason to require this now when dealing with child-to-child interaction.

Overall, we need to ask ourselves, are we willing to trigger an inevitable mental health crisis, not to mention an academic catastrophe, upon our kids so long as the risk of the virus is anything above absolute zero? If so, what else do we refrain from doing in life based on such a low threshold of risk? Over 4,000 children die every year from car accidents, but we never advocate for remote learning in order to mitigate the risk of car fatalities by keeping children off the roads. Close to one thousand children died of drowning in 2016, yet nobody is clamoring for new draconian restrictions on swimming pools this summer. According to the CDC, there have been just 24 deaths among children 5-17. It’s almost certain that they all had serious underlying conditions. Obviously, immunocompromised children can be accommodated without shutting down every school.

There comes a point where protection of children crosses over from an act of love to an act of abuse. We have long since reached that tipping point. (For more from the author of “Kids’ Lives Matter: Stop the National Coronavirus Child Abuse” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Noted Environmentalist Apologizes for ‘Climate Scare’ Foisted on Public for Decades

Michael Shellenberger is no slouch when it comes to environmental issues.

Besides his TED talks garnering more than 5 million views, he’s a Green Book Award Winner, a frequent contributor to publications such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, Scientific American — and he also authored “Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All,” which was released Tuesday by HarperCollins.

But Shellenberger said a Forbes article — “On Behalf of Environmentalists, I Apologize for the Climate Scare” — based on his new book was soon “censored” soon after it went up Sunday. The Daily Wire reported that his piece was taken down from the Forbes website “a few hours” after it was published. The Forbes site on Tuesday showed where Shellenberger’s article should be — but only says it’s “no longer active.”

. . .Here’s how Shellenberger opens his article: “On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.”

He also says he feels “an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.” (Read more from “Noted Environmentalist Apologizes for ‘Climate Scare’ Foisted on Public for Decades” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

John Roberts Screws Protectors of Life Again, Strikes Down Louisiana’s Abortion Law

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down a Louisiana abortion law, handing a win to abortion rights advocates who feared the conservative court would break with past rulings to rein in protections that emerged from the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade.

The justices voted 5-4 to invalidate Louisiana’s admitting-privilege law in the first major abortion ruling of the Trump era, which came after the court struck down a nearly identical Texas restriction four years ago.

The ruling, which underscored the razor-thin voting margin over abortion rights, with Chief Justice John Roberts joining the court’s four liberals, is likely to make future Supreme Court decisions over a woman’s right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy an even more pressing issue in the coming presidential election.

The decision is also the clearest indication yet that the court, which now tilts more conservative with the addition of President Trump’s two nominees, is pursuing a more restrained approach than many abortion rights advocates feared.

In a concurring opinion, Roberts said his vote was guided by deference to prior rulings, particularly the court’s 2016 decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, which struck down a nearly identical Texas law. (Read more from “John Roberts Screws Protectors of Life Again, Strikes Down Louisiana’s Abortion Law” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Amazon to Give HUGE Bonuses to Employees Who Worked During the Coronavirus Pandemic

Amazon will give $500 million in one-time bonuses to qualified front-line, Whole Foods and delivery-service employees for their efforts during the coronavirus pandemic, the company announced Monday.

Senior Vice President Dave Clark told employees in a note that those who worked from June 1 to June 30 are qualified to receive a “thank you bonus,” according to an Amazon statement. The bonuses range from $150 for Amazon Flex drivers who worked more than ten hours, to $3,000 for Amazon‘s delivery-service-partner owners.

“Our front-line operations teams have been on an incredible journey over the last few months, and we want to show our appreciation with a special one-time Thank-You bonus totaling over $500 million,” Clark’s note told employees.

Part-time Amazon, Whole Foods and delivery-service drivers will receive $250 while full-time employees are expected to receive $500. All Whole Foods and front-line Amazon leaders qualify for a $1,000 bonus, and delivery-service partners qualify for the highest bonus, $3,000, Clark’s note told employees.

Amazon previously raised its front-line workers’ wages by two dollars per hour and added 100,000 new employees in March, the Wall Street Journal reported. Amazon’s sales have skyrocketed since coronavirus lock-down measures forced buyers to resort to online shopping. (Read more from “Amazon to Give HUGE Bonuses to Employees Who Worked During the Coronavirus Pandemic” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Private Security Given to Minneapolis City Council Members Who Support Defunding the Police

Minneapolis is spending $4,500 a day on private security for three city council members who support defunding the police after allegedly receiving threats, a local report published Friday showed.

Private security details cost Minneapolis taxpayers roughly $63,000 over the past three weeks, a spokesman for the city said, according to a Fox 9 report. Council members Andrea Jenkins, Phillipe Cunningham and Alondra Cano are outspoken supporters of efforts to defund the Minneapolis Police Department, the report stated. . .

Cunningham did respond to Fox 9’s request for comment, telling the outlet through a text message that, “I don’t feel comfortable publicly discussing the death threats against me or the level of security I currently have protecting me from those threats.” The security detail is temporary, he noted.

Jenkins said she has been asking for security since she became a council member.

“My concern is the large number of white nationalist(s) in our city and other threatening communications I’ve been receiving,” she wrote in an email to FOX 9. (Read more from “Private Security Given to Minneapolis City Council Members Who Support Defunding the Police” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Almost Half of U.S. Coronavirus Deaths Are Linked to Nursing Homes; The Good News About COVID-19 the Corporate Media Keeps Hidden

By New York Times. At least 54,000 residents and workers have died from the coronavirus at nursing homes and other long-term care facilities for older adults in the United States, according to a New York Times database. As of June 26, the virus has infected more than 282,000 people at some 12,000 facilities.

Nursing home populations are at a high risk of being infected by — and dying from — the coronavirus, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, is known to be particularly lethal to adults in their 60s and older who have underlying health conditions. And it can spread more easily through congregate facilities, where many people live in a confined environment and workers move from room to room.

While 11 percent of the country’s cases have occurred in long-term care facilities, deaths related to Covid-19 in these facilities account for more than 43 percent of the country’s pandemic fatalities. (Read more from “Almost Half of U.S. Coronavirus Deaths Are Linked to Nursing Homes” HERE)

_________________________________________________

The Good News About COVID-19 the Corporate Media Keeps Hidden

By PJ Media. As the pandemic panic porn continues because identified cases are rising, Dr. Fauci is back on television, and the media is once again demanding a national response. However, there is news they don’t share with you that could help reduce the already unwarranted levels of fear. Obviously, that doesn’t fit their partisan agenda. . .

A doctor from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center said in a press conference Wednesday that people who are testing positive do not appear to be getting as sick as they did earlier in the pandemic. Dr. Donald Yealy also noted this trend was being seen in the wake of massive protests. . .

Dr. Yealy also noted that the positive case rate was about one in 400, which has remained steady for weeks. He also noted improved treatment protocols and some success with Remdisivir and other medications. Effective treatment is in addition to some success protecting the elderly and a much younger patient load testing positive. . .

Cases with mild or no symptoms are still the population health researchers are trying to get their arms around. However, recent congressional testimony regarding peer-reviewed research on antibody testing caused the CDC to increase the number of infections to 23 million Americans. It estimated that 8.7 million had likely been infected by March using data for flu-like illnesses. For every one person confirmed, serology for antibodies indicated ten had had it. Establishing this infection rate is a game-changing finding. (Read more from “The Good News About COVID-19 the Corporate Media Keeps Hidden” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Father of Teen Murdered by Illegal Alien Says BLM Ignored His Case: ‘I’m Black, Where’s Our Help?’

The father of a black teen murdered by an illegal immigrant in 2008 told “Fox & Friends” on Sunday that because his son’s case was not a matter of police brutality, he received no support from the Black Lives Matter Movement and was forced to mourn on the “sidelines” by African-American leaders.

“It seems like Black Lives Matter only focuses on black people who were murdered by the police,” Jamiel Shaw said. “You know, my son was murdered in 2008, and I reached out to anybody that would listen, especially black people, because I thought for sure I would have a lot of support in the black community.

“But, because of the illegal aliens and the way they get all the support in California, no one would jump on board because they didn’t want to have to, you know, justify the illegal-alien part. So, they just let me go by myself.”

Jamiel Shaw Jr., 17, was shot in March 2008 by illegal alien and gang member Pedro Espinoza, who mistook the high school football player as a member of a rival gang. A jury later convicted Espinoza and sentenced him to death.

“All black people should matter,” Shaw said, alleging a double-standard among the movement at the forefront of the national protests over George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis police custody last month. (Read more from “Father of Teen Murdered by Illegal Alien Says BLM Ignored His Case: ‘I’m Black, Where’s Our Help?'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

2 Teenage Boys Murdered After Asking Man How Tall He Was

Two teenage boys were shot to death after asking the suspect how tall he was when they were buying candy from a store.

The incident occurred at approximately 5 p.m. on Saturday June 20 after three teenage boys went to a store in South Chicago to buy some candy and ended up having a brief encounter with 19-year-old Laroy Battle inside the establishment.

“The victims were walking into the store, they saw Battle, he was standing in line while at the store and the victims commented that Battle, he was quite tall, and they asked him how tall he was and hoped to be that tall someday,” said Deputy Chief of Detectives Brendan Deenihan “Unfortunately, we will never even see the full growth of these poor children.”

The three teenage boys then left the store and proceeded to walk home together when police say that Battle approached them and began shooting.

Jasean Francis, 17, was shot in the back, chest and left hand. Charles Riley, 16, was shot in the back and left leg. The third teen, who was not identified, managed to escape the gunfire. Both of the boys who were shot were taken to University of Chicago Hospital and later died from the injuries they suffered during the shooting. (Read more from “2 Teenage Boys Murdered After Asking Man How Tall He Was” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE