Featured

Featured posts

Showing: 1961 - 1970 of 3,551 Articles

Justice For Tommie: Virginia GA Passes Bill Imposing Felonies On Animal Abusers

Working to send a message to would-be animal abusers, the Virginia General Assembly is set to institute a new law that would make abusing a family pet a felony, regardless of whether the animal lives or dies, and implement stricter punishments for animal abuse. The news comes just days after a young pit bull named Tommie was tortured and gruesomely killed in the state capital of Richmond.

Currently, the only way to charge someone with a felony for abusing a dog or cat in the Commonwealth is if the animal in question dies from its injuries.

S.B. 1604, patroned by State Senator Bill DeSteph (R-Virginia Beach), dictates that someone could be charged with a Class 6 felony – up from a Class 1 misdemeanor – for “cruelly and unnecessarily beating, maiming, mutilating, or killing a dog or cat.”

The bill passed through the House of Delegates during the Wednesday session with a 99-0 vote after sailing through the State Senate with a 40-0 vote in early February.

If enacted, when one abuses a cat or dog they could be charged and receive up to five years in prison. Also in the bill, crimes that would be punishable as Class 1 misdemeanors include “depriving any animal of necessary food, drink, shelter, or emergency veterinary treatment, willfully inflicting inhumane injury to any animal, and soring an equine for any purpose,” the impact statement shows.

On his Facebook page, Senator DeSteph said, “We are thankful for the overwhelming support for SB 1604, my Animal Cruelty bill seeking felony charges against those who maliciously wound an animal.”

“We have heard from folks all over the Commonwealth who share our belief that anyone who intentionally tortures a dog or cat is a threat to public safety, and should be dealt with severely,” he added. “We were so saddened by the stories of Tommie, the pit bull who recently died after being set on fire, and Sugar, who was viciously attacked with a machete, but are grateful that their stories helped propel this important legislation forward.”

The bill, which awaits the governor’s signature, passed just as Richmond mourns the death of Tommie, a dog that gripped animal lovers across the nation after it was tied to a pole at Abner Clay Park, doused in accelerant, and set on fire on February 10.

Tommie suffered severe burns over 40 percent of his body, and just days after Richmond Animal Care and Control (RACC) began nursing him back to health, he passed away.

“He had just finished having his bandages changed and stopped breathing; his body simply gave out,” RACC said in a report from WTVR. “Tommie was pain free and surrounded by people that loved him when he passed. Needless to say, we are all devastated and angry and sad and terribly disappointed.”

A $25,000 reward is now being offered for information leading to an arrest of the person or persons that committed the heinous crime.

Initially, RACC planned to hold a public funeral for Tommie, but the response was so massive, a five-day memorial service has been commissioned that ends February 23 at the RACC building located at 1600 Chamberlayne Avenue in Richmond. According to the Facebook event page, over 6,000 people have indicated their interest in attending.

Former Gov. McAuliffe Quiets Calls For Resignations In Virginia’s Executive Branch

As all three political leaders of Virginia’s Democrat-led executive branch have dealt with racial and sexual scandals over the past two weeks, it seems that not only Attorney General Mark Herring (D), but also Governor Ralph Northam (D) may get off scot-free for appearing in racist photos. After a week of rapprochement of protests in front of the Executive Mansion in downtown Richmond and universal calls from his own party for his resignation, former Governor Terry McAuliffe (D) is also backing down his charge for Northam to leave office.

McAuliffe, a presumed 2020 Democratic presidential contender, appeared on CBS‘s “Face the Nation” to speak about the controversies in the Commonwealth, meanwhile peddling his new book “Beyond Charlottesville: Taking a Stand Against White Nationalism,” which is about how “Virginia and the country continue to deal with racism.”

While hitting off the segment with his new book, McAuliffe did not say a word about resignations, seemingly accepting Northam’s extraordinarily vague plan to redeem his image and his governorship with a “focus on race and equity.”

“I think he’s made a decision he’s going to stay in,” McAuliffe said of Northam, who was his own lieutenant governor while he was in charge of the Commonwealth until January 2018. McAuliffe added, “but the way that Ralph survives and brings Virginia back together, he’s got to lean in on these very important issues.”

Nevertheless, as Northam launches his “listening tour” throughout the Commonwealth to learn more about “race, history, and white privilege,” and other obvious things he apparently never knew, Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax (D) is also dealing with a deepening sexual assault scandal that has his staffers jumping ship and his part-time law firm employer suspending him.

Currently, Fairfax is battling back against two accusers, one who said he sexually assaulted her in 2004, and one who said he raped her while in college in 2000.

Dr. Vanessa Tyson, a Scripps College professor, has alleged that Fairfax sexually assaulted her at the 2004 Boston Democratic National Convention. In her statement published by the New York Times, Dr. Tyson said she came forward after the news of Fairfax’s likely elevation to the top political position in Virginia as the governor is embroiled in racial controversy, because it “flooded” her with “painful memories, bringing back feelings of grief, shame, and anger that stemmed from an incident with Mr. Fairfax.”

Meredith Wilson, a student at Duke University in 2000, while Fairfax also attended the North Carolina college, came forth days later with allegations that she was raped by Fairfax in a “premeditated and aggressive” fashion.

Fairfax has called the accusations “false and unsubstantiated,” a “totally fabricated story,” and “demonstrably false.” The lieutenant governor has also accused staffers of embattled Governor Northam for leaking the sexual assault allegations and engaging in a “vicious and coordinated smear campaign” to derail his pathway to the governor’s office.

When news of the second sexual assault allegation broke, McAuliffe wasted no time in calling for Fairfax’s “immediate” resignation on Twitter.

“The allegations against Justin Fairfax are serious and credible. It is clear to me that he can no longer effectively serve the people of Virginia as Lieutenant Governor. I call for his immediate resignation,” he said.

However, McAuliffe is now quieting his own requests and demanding an investigation into the allegations.

Commenting on the situation, McAuliffe said, “Very serious allegations have been made. They need to be investigated…So we will go through that process.”

Showing a willingness to investigate the alleged crimes, Virginia House of Delegates Speaker Kirk Cox (R-Colonial Heights) has said any inquiry must be bipartisan and “very deliberate.” However, House Democrats have blocked any probe by the General Assembly from moving forward, scuttling last week’s impeachment push by Delegate Patrick Hope (D-Arlington).

Regardless, McAuliffe’s remarks on Sunday suggest that Democratic leaders are coming around to accepting the scandalous status quo in Richmond. It could be that the party faithful have realized that a Republican would be in line for the governorship if all three in the executive branch resigned, or that, considering they came out and denounced Northam, Fairfax, and Herring, they feel they can remain in a position of moral high ground on issues of race, gender, and social justice.

Despite the situation looking more and more like a political double standard, Virginia’s top-three elected Democrats may end up holding on to their positions for the time being. Whether any of the three can go on to win higher offices still remains to be seen.

The other lurking question facing Virginia Democrats is whether the tainted triumvirate hurts the party as it looks to take control of both houses of the General Assembly in November’s elections, following its 15-seat gain in the House of Delegates in 2017. With a one-member majority in both the House and Senate, the longer the scandals roll on, the more dissatisfied the Democratic base could become, losing excitement at the ballot box.

Republican Derails Democrat’s Raucous Racism Rant Over Sanctuary Cities Bill

A bill banning sanctuary cities in Virginia caused fireworks on the floor of the House of Delegates today after a Democratic lawmaker charged the GOP-led bill’s directives as “dog whistle politics.” The contention led to a top Republican legislator unequivocally charging the Democratic Caucus to “clean up their own house first” if they “want to talk about racism.”

The situation comes as both Governor Ralph Northam (D) and Attorney General Mark Herring (D) are battling against calls for their resignation after appearing in “blackface” decades ago.

The legislation taken up during Tuesday’s session involved S.B. 1156, patroned by State Senator Dick Black (R-Loudoun), which would prohibit any locality from adopting any ordinance, procedure, or policy that restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The measure, which would outlaw the establishment of sanctuary cities in the Commonwealth, is identical to last year’s H.B. 1257, which failed to become law.

Black’s bill passed the House with a 51-47 vote, but its fate remains uncertain after Governor Northam vetoed the similar measure after the end of the 2018 General Assembly session.

Though, the legislation is not the highlight of this story.

Delegate Alfonso Lopez (D-Arlington) rose to make a point about the bill banning sanctuary cities.

“Let’s be clear. Let’s be very clear,” he said shakily. “This bill is really about dog whistle politics, created to stoke fear of ‘the other.'”

Delegate Lopez said the Republican legislation would “send the worst kind of message about Virginia.”

Responding to the seemingly-uncalled-for remarks, House Majority Leader Todd Gilbert (R-Shenandoah) spoke to the implication that he said “many of us have grown tired of.”

“Just because we favor something as simple and clear as the rule of law – that we are racist – that was just what was uttered on this floor with the term ‘dog whistle politics,'” he said.

“For the last week,” Gilbert continued, “we have heard, by implication, suggestions that [Republicans] are racist, in some respect or another, and I am tired of it.”

Pointing to the left-leaning side of the aisle, the majority leader charged, “If our friends in the Democratic Caucus want to talk about racism, they need to clean up their own house first…and we’re waiting for you to do that.”

Proposed House Rules Change is ‘Proxy Fight for Unrestricted Access to Abortion’ Says Del. Scott Garrett

With a rules fight looming in Virginia’s House of Delegates, one lawmaker took to the floor on Monday to push back against an effort which he called a “proxy fight for unrestricted access to abortion.”

Delegate Scott Garrett (R-Lynchburg), rose against a Friday effort championed by colleague Hala Ayala (D-Woodbridge) to change chamber rules and revive a failed measure hailed by abortion advocates to require taxpayer funding for unrestricted access to taxpayer funded abortion.

Ayala’s effort to suspend the rules and advance the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the floor, following its repeated failures in committee, would constitute an unprecedented effort to discharge the committee system under which the chamber operates, targeted towards one specific measure.

We already know, Mr. Speaker, that the 14th Amendment the United States Constitution applies the equal protection of the laws to all people regardless of sex,” said Garrett. “What could this additional amendment really be about, Mr. Speaker?”

The next few days will give us the opportunity to answer that question by saying out loud what this has been about all along: a proxy fight on unrestricted access to abortion. I think we’re all well aware of the shock and outrage that emerged not only across the Commonwealth but across the country, after the details of House bill 2491 became widely known. That legislation, Mr. Speaker, erased all meaningful restrictions on late term abortion, allowing abortion up to the moment of birth for the most tenuous of reasons.”

Referencing HB2491, the controversial 40 week abortion bill filed by Delegate Kathy Tran (D-Springfield), which ultimately failed, Garrett warned that the provisions of the bill could be mandated by the courts if the ERA were to be enacted.

Garrett cited three court cases where state-level provisions similar to the ERA were used by courts to overturn abortion restrictions.

In a case out of Texas from 2001, Art. I, § 3a of the state’s constitution was used to overturn restrictions on taxpayer funding for abortion. Previously, Texas law limited state funded abortion services to cases involving rape, incest, or a threat to the life of the mother. Under this language, courts ruled that restriction, one supported by most Americans, to be invalid.

Garrett also cited a case from Connecticut, in which Art. I, § 20 of the state’s constitution was as the basis for ruling state restrictions on abortion invalid.

In a third case he referenced, from New Mexico, N.M. Right to Choose/NARAL, Abortion & Reprod. Health Servs., Planned Parenthood of the Rio Grande v. Johnson (126 N. M. 788), the Supreme Court of New Mexico ruled that the state constitution required taxpayer funding for elective abortion, on account of language nearly identical to the proposed ERA (Art. II, § 18).

“Based on the independent grounds provided by the Equal Rights Amendment to Article II, Section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution, we affirm the district court’s orders granting Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, permanently enjoining the Department from enforcing its May 1995 revision of Rule 766, and awarding costs to Plaintiffs,” ruled the court.

These cases predate a ruling handed down in Alaska this week following a similar pattern.

“Brought by Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, the lawsuit argued that the regulations violated the equal protection clause of Alaska’s constitution by discriminating against women choosing to have an abortion,” reported Jurist.org, a legal research collaboration affiliated with the University of Pittsburgh.

“Under the contested law, abortions would only be covered under Medicaid though additional requirements. The 2013 regulation, 7 AAC 160.900(d)(30), required a physician to certify an abortion only for circumstances permitted under the Hyde Amendment or if deemed medically necessary. The Hyde Amendment only allows federal funding for an abortion when the mother’s life is endangered by a full-term pregnancy term or the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.”

Ayala’s rules change effort comes on the heels of a Democratic push to loosen restrictions on abortion as a major plank of the party’s campaign efforts for the fall elections.

Abortion first became an issue in the 2019 campaign cycle when Democratic leaders, including Governor Ralph Northam, Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax, and Attorney General Mark Herring held a press conference with over a dozen lawmakers, announcing that Tran’s Repeal Act would be a “priority” on the campaign trail.

In that announcement, Northam and other Democrats looked forward to a Democratic majority in the House of Delegates and the Senate of Virginia which would pass the legislation and send it to his desk for approval.

“So when can’t change peoples minds, we need to change seats,” said Northam.

“We need a pro-choice majority in the General Assembly,” added Herring.

That event, held on January 17th, predated Tran’s now-infamous committee testimony by eleven days.

The Repeal Act enjoys strong support from Democratic lawmakers, having received the sponsorship of a majority of Democratic members in the General Assembly.

When introduced, 54% of them signed on as sponsors, though that number fell to 51% after Delegate Dawn Adams (D-Henrico) withdrew her sponsorship following the backlash, telling constituents in an email that she failed to read the bill.

Last Friday, the deadline for withdrawing sponsorship passed. 34 Democrats remained active sponsors of the failed legislation.

With abortion now a top issue for the fall, Ayala’s unprecedented push to bypass the House’s committee system through a rules change represents the last opportunity for Democrats to deliver a legislative victory for pro-abortion voters.

Republicans have pledged to fight the attempt, disagreeing both with the underlying policy and what they called an “affront” to the rules targeted at one specific legislative measure.

In closing, Garrett remarked that everyone in the chamber would support ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment were it not for the provision expanding taxpayer funded late term abortion.

So in in closing, Mr. Speaker, let me be clear on one thing: if this amendment before us were just about equality, and its advocates could prove that it would not do exactly what the courts have already found it does, then I would be the first person to vote for it because I have a wife and a daughter, and I believe they deserve the same rights and respect that all people should receive,” he said. “And I believe you would not find a single dissenting vote in this house were that the case.”

“But Mr. Speaker, I wholeheartedly believe that this is not what this amendment is about.”

Garrett concluded by urging the measure’s defeat.