“The Alabama Department of Corrections has a history of denying and bending the truth about its execution failures, and it cannot be trusted to meaningfully investigate its own incompetence and wrongdoing”
Union mine workers in Alabama are taking part in a historic strike, the first of its kind in four decades, accusing Warrior Met Coal of first exploiting its workers and now inspiring violence against them on the picket line. Freelance journalists are on the ground and local news has been covering the story from the start -- yet more than three months into the strike, the historic labor action has not received so much as a single mention from CNN, Fox News, or MSNBC.
The strike gained coverage from larger print publications like The Guardian and The Nation in June, but even after protesters faced arrest and targeted acts of violence, cable news still did not deem it newsworthy. (For comparison: Fox News, an outlet that has consistently claimed it cares about coal jobs, devoted 1 hour and 18 minutes over just five days that month to covering a school district in New Jersey that changed references to holidays on its academic calendar to simply “days off.”) When the miners took their efforts to New York City to protest the hedge funds that backed Warrior Met -- including its largest stakeholder, BlackRock -- the biggest names in news remained silent.
The Alabama Attorney General’s Office is using the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down Roe v. Wade to defend a ban on medical treatments considered life-saving by transgender individuals and physicians.
In a 76-page brief filed with the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, the state invoked or referenced the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization at least nine times, invoking Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion that said the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not protect any right “not deeply rooted in the nation’s history and traditions.”
“The Legislature determined that transitioning treatments in particular are too risky to authorize, so it is those treatments Plaintiffs must show the Constitution protects,” the brief says. “But no one — adult or child — has a right to transitioning treatments that is deeply rooted in our nation’s history and tradition. The State can thus regulate or prohibit those interventions for children, even if an adult wants the drugs for his child.”
“Because no adult or child has a fundamental right to transitioning treatments, it necessarily follows that no parent has a right to those treatments for his child.”