In 1925, a group of mothers came together, committed to commemorating their sons who had tragically been lost in the blood bath that was World War I. To this end, they organized the community, fundraised, and erected the “Peace Cross” in Bladensburg, Maryland with the assistance of the, non-religious, American Legion.
Today, nearly 95 years later, some are claiming that this cross cannot remain on public land, as it represents an establishment of religion by the state. On February 27, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case of The American Legion v. The American Humanist Association. The Court will soon release its important decision, which may set a precedent for the future existence of memorials around the United States.
It is worth noting that the land and statue were initially owned and cared for by the American Legion, before being taken over by the state. Since 1961, the state of Maryland has cared for the statue and land. Thus, the interpretation of the Establishment Clause pushed forward by the American Humanist Association is ahistorical and fails to account for the precedent of Supreme Court cases, which have previously granted the continued existence of similar memorials. This includes Thomas Van Orden v. Rick Perry. First, the state did not originally erect the memorial, and second, the intention of the memorializers was to put up a symbol of peace, in the way they best knew, and so they turned to the cross.
The American conception of the First Amendment does not necessitate societal freedom from religion, but rather freedom of religion. What makes America unique is that, unlike many European societies, the United States has consistently reestablished not only the freedom to private conscience, but the freedom of public expression of one’s faith.
In this guarantee, our Constitution ensures that the American people are allowed to publicly display their religious beliefs. The mothers of Bladensburg and the American Legion practiced this public expression in their establishment of this monument to the 49 fallen soldiers. And in entrusting this monument to the state, did not intend for the state to make a public establishment of the Christian religion, but rather intended for the enduring memorialization of America’s involvement in World War I, and the citizens that it lost in that war.
The implications of this case are significant, and will have a wide ranging impact on the state of memorialization and religious expression in the United States.
Where will the line will be drawn in regards to monuments and memorials if the Supreme Court takes the side of the Humanist Association? If one takes a walk through Arlington National Cemetery, a number of monuments will be seen that bear the shape of crosses, and the Star of David. All around the country there are crosses that adorn battlefields and town squares. Will all these be torn down?
Far from state establishment of religion, these markers commemorate those who have given their lives for this country, citizens who gave all in defense of the rights and liberties every American should retain.
How confused is a citizenry that insists the memorials of yesterday must be torn from the ground and uprooted?
If nothing else, we ought to respect the dead, and especially those who served the nation in combat and died in battle, enough to commemorate them in the way chosen by the families of the fallen. That is a fundamental American liberty, the right of religious freedom, and it is enshrined in our Constitution. Let’s hope the U.S. Supreme Court does not let The American Humanist Association put that asunder.
Tuesday was the third big deadline in the Mississippi legislature for general, non-revenue, bills to be approved by committees from the opposite chamber.
Not a single bill that authorized a cigarette tax survived Tuesday’s deadline.
The next deadline is March 13, the last day for floor action on general bills originating from the other chamber.
Here are the some of the bills that survived and others that died:
Still alive
House Bill 1352 is sponsored by state Rep. Jason White (R-West) and is known as the Criminal Justice Reform Act. The bill would clear obstacles for the formerly incarcerated to find work, prevents driver’s license suspensions for controlled substance violations and unpaid legal fees and fines, and updates drug court laws to allow for additional types of what are known as problem solving courts.
The bill was passed by the Senate Judiciary A Committee Tuesday before the deadline and is headed to the Senate floor for a vote.
SB 2781, known as Mississippi Fresh Start Act, is sponsored by state Sen. John Polk (R-Hattiesburg). This bill would eliminate the practice of “good character” or “moral turpitude” clauses from occupational licensing regulations, which prohibit ex-offenders from receiving an occupational license and starting a new post-incarceration career.
The bill was amended with a strike-all that made it identical to the original House bill. It was then approved by the House Judiciary A Committee.
HB 1268 would clarify state law regarding constitutional challenges to local ordinances. With local circuit courts acting as both the appellate body for appeals on specific decisions (such as bid disputes) and the court of original jurisdiction, there’s been confusion among judges regarding the law that governs challenges of local decisions, which are required within 10 days.
City and county attorneys have used this 10-day requirement on decisions to get new constitutional challenges — which are new lawsuits and not appeals of decisions — thrown out of circuit courts. This law would add language that would prevent application of the 10-day requirement to constitutional challenges.
The bill was sponsored by state Rep. Dana Criswell (R-Southaven). It was passed out of the Senate Judiciary A Committee Tuesday.
SB 2901, known as the Landowner Protection Act, would exempt property owners and their employees from civil liability if a third party injures someone else on their property.
The bill is sponsored by state Sen. Josh Harkins (R-Flowood) and the amended bill been sent back to the Senate for concurrence. If the Senate doesn’t concur with the changes by the House, the two sides will have to settle their differences with the bill in a conference committee.
HB 702 would allow cottage food operators to increase their maximum sales to $35,000 and advertise their products on the web. The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Casey Eure (R-Saucier), passed the House by a 117-0 margin. It’s been passed out of the Public Health and Welfare Committee in the Senate.
SB 2603 would reauthorize motion picture and television production incentives for out-of-state firms that expired in 2017. Unlike the previous incentives, both bills would cap them at $10 million.
The bill sponsored by state Sen. Joey Fillingane (R-Sumrall) and been passed out of the House Ways and Means Committee. It’s already on the House calendar and will likely get a floor vote this week.
HB 1612 would authorize municipalities to create special improvement assessment districts that would be authorized to levy up to 6 mills of property tax (the amount per $1,000 of assessed value of the property) to fund parks, sidewalks, streets, planting, lighting, fountains, security enhancements and even private security services. The tax would require the approval of 60 percent of property owners in the district.
The bill is sponsored by state Rep. Mark Baker (R-Brandon) and passed the House 93-22 Thursday after failing to get a two-thirds majority on its first pass on the floor. It’s been referred to the Senate Finance Committee.
The deadline for floor action on appropriations and revenue bills from the other chamber is March 19.
HB 1204 would allow a municipality or county to execute the winning bid in a sealed bidding process if a judge hasn’t ruled on a protection request for bids within 90 days. The bill is sponsored by state Rep. Jerry Turner (R-Baldwyn) and was passed out of the Senate Accountability, Efficiency, Transparency Committee.
More dead than the Macarena
SB 2675 would’ve reauthorized the Education Scholarship Account program until 2024 and was sponsored by state Sen. Gray Tollison (R-Oxford). The original bill that authorized the ESA program has a repealer that will end the program if not reauthorized on July 1, 2020.
The bill was allowed to die on the calendar by the House Education Committee.
HB 623 would’ve exempted school districts with A and B accountability ratings from the Mississippi Department of Education from certain mandates, including grade reporting and annual auditing of the district’s official discipline plan and code of student conduct.
The bill was killed by the Senate Education Committee before making it to the floor for a vote.
HB 98 would prohibit the use of fishing nets for the taking of finfish or speckled trout within a half mile of the shoreline of Cat Island in the Mississippi Sound. It was allowed to die by the Senate Ports and Marine Resources Committee.
HB 1499 would’ve increased the excise tax on non-cigarette tobacco products such as cigars and chewing tobacco from 15 percent to 22.5 percent, while HB 1500 would’ve raised the per-pack cigarette tax rate from 68 cents to $1.18. Both were sponsored by state Rep. Bob Evans (D-Monticello). It died in committee.
SB 2665 would’ve increased the per-pack tax on cigarettes to $2.18 and was sponsored by state Sen. Willie Simmons (D-Cleveland). It died in committee.
HB 1573 was sponsored by state Rep. Jeff Smith (R-Columbus) and would’ve increased the tax on a pack of cigarettes to $1.68. It also didn’t make it out of committee.
SB 2563 was authored by state Sen. Brice Wiggins (R-Pascagoula) and would’ve hiked the per-pack levy to $2.18. It died in committee.
HB 60 was sponsored by state Rep. Earl Banks (D-Jackson) and would’ve authorized $2 million in bond funds for the Jackson Zoo for capital improvements.
HB 67 was sponsored by state Rep. Ashley Henley (R-Southaven) and would’ve eliminated the state sales tax on food and increased the diversion of sales tax revenue to municipalities from 18.5 to 20 percent.
Mississippi lost 700 jobs over the previous month while the unemployment rate in January remained unchanged for the eighth consecutive month at 4.7 percent.
According to the Mississippi Department of Employment Security, this represents the lowest rate since the Bureau of Labor Statistics began calculating state unemployment data in 1976. But Mississippi still has among the highest unemployment rates in the country. The national unemployment rate is 4.0, up slightly from 3.9 percent in December.
But these numbers vary greatly depending on what part of the state you are in.
In the Jackson metro area, Rankin (3.7 percent) and Madison (3.9 percent) counties posted unemployment rates lower than the national average. Hinds county, however, had a rate of 4.8 percent.
In the Pine Belt, Lamar county had an unemployment rate of 3.9 percent. Forrest county, though, was higher at 4.7 percent.
Desoto county had an unemployment rate of 4.1 percent, while Lafayette county had a rate of 4.3 percent. Union, Pontotoc, and Lee counties boated unemployment rates of 3.9 percent, 4.1 percent, and 4.1 percent, respectively.
But on the Coast, unemployment rates were above state and national averages. Harrison county had the lowest rate at 4.8 percent, while it was 5.8 percent in Hancock county and 6 percent in Jackson county. The Gulfport-Biloxi-Pascagoula MSA had an unemployment rate of 5.4 percent, about a point higher than the Hattiesburg MSA (4.5 percent) and the Jackson MSA (4.4 percent).
The Delta and Southwest Mississippi continue to post the highest unemployment rates in the state. This includes 14.1 percent in Jefferson county, 12.7 percent in Issaquena county, 10.2 percent in Humphreys county, and 10 percent in Holmes and Wilkinson counties.
Among cities, Moss Point had the highest unemployment rate at 7.7 percent, followed by 7.1 percent in Greenville, and 6.4 percent in Vicksburg. On the other end of the spectrum, Madison had an unemployment rate of 3.3 percent, while both Clinton and Southaven posted unemployment rates of 3.6 percent.
A bill in the Mississippi legislature could give a homeowner’s association the right to levy property taxes on the residents that live there.
House Bill 1612 would authorize municipalities to create special improvement assessment districts in areas administered by home owner associations.
These 501(c)(3) organizations would be authorized to levy up to 6 mills of property tax (the amount per $1,000 of assessed value of the property) to fund parks, sidewalks, streets, landscaping, lighting, fountains, security enhancements such as gates and cameras, and even the hiring of private security services.
In Mississippi, ad valorem tax is assessed at 10 percent of the value of real property.
For example, on a house with an assessed value of $250,000 in the city of Jackson, six mills of additional tax could add up to an additional $145.50 annually in property tax.
The HOA that seeks taxing authority would have to hold a public hearing with two weeks’ notice that would be advertised in a newspaper that circulates in the area.
The tax would require a referendum of the affected property owners and would require 60 percent approval by them before the district could be authorized.
The governing authority of the municipality where the district is located could dissolve it via a resolution if all activities for which the district was created were complete and no debts were outstanding in connection with the improvements.
The bill is sponsored by state Rep. Mark Baker (R-Brandon) and passed the House 93-22 on February 28 after failing to get a two-thirds majority on its first pass on the floor.
It hasn’t yet been referred to a Senate committee, but as a revenue bill, it is on a later calendar than a general bill. The deadline for floor action on appropriations and revenue bills passed out of the other chamber is March 19.
A similar bill that would only apply to HOAs in the Jackson city limits is active in the House and is similar to bills that have been killed in each of the last four legislative sessions. State Rep. Credell Calhoun (D-Jackson) is the sponsor of HB 1157, which is a local and private bill.
The old law that authorized the creation of these special improvement districts was repealed in 2001.
Criminal justice reform and another bill that would bring clarification to constitutional questions raised regarding actions by cities and counties passed Tuesday out of the Senate Judiciary A Committee.
Tuesday was the deadline for general bills passed by the other chamber to be reported on by committees.
House Bill 1352— also known as the Criminal Justice Reform Act — passed out of the committee with considerable discussion about possible impacts to the state highway funding and other issues.
Mississippi Department of Transportation Executive Director Melinda McGrath and her legal team told the committee that two components of the reform package could put the state in jeopardy of being in non-compliance with federal law. One of those involves the suspension of driver’s licenses for controlled substance violations that were non-moving ones. Another was the expunging of controlled substance violations after a few years in order to allow ex-offenders to obtain commercial driver’s licenses.
McGrath said doing so would put the state at risk for losing millions in federal funding.
Federal law requires at least a six month suspension for any controlled substance violation and changing these requirements could cost the state $36.5 million a year in highway funds for regular driver’s licenses. The part in the bill about CDLs could result in a $14 million funding decrease the first year and $28 million each succeeding year.
State Sen. David Parker (R-Olive Branch) had problems with the legislation over whether it would create loopholes for habitual offenders. He gave the example of an eight-time DUI offender as someone who could use some of the bill’s language as a way to escape prison time. Parker was the lone no vote against the bill.
The Criminal Justice Reform Act is sponsored by state Rep. Jason White (R-West) and would clear obstacles for the formerly incarcerated to find work, prevents driver’s license suspensions for not only non-moving controlled substance violations, but also unpaid legal fees and fines.
The bill would also update drug court laws to allow for additional types of what are known as problem solving courts.
HB 1352 is now headed to the full Senate for a vote. If the bill is amended in the Senate before passage, the differences will have to be settled between the House and Senate in a conference committee.
One bill that didn’t receive a lot of controversy was HB 1268, which would clarify state law regarding constitutional challenges to local ordinances. The bill passed the committee without a single vote against.
With local circuit courts acting as both the appellate body for appeals on specific decisions (such as bid disputes) and the court of original jurisdiction, there’s been a lot of confusion among judges regarding the law that governs challenges of local decisions, which are required within 10 days.
For years, city and county attorneys have used this 10-day requirement on decisions to get new constitutional challenges — which are new lawsuits and not appeals — thrown out of circuit courts.
This law would add language that would prevent application of the 10-day requirement to constitutional challenges, which are new lawsuits and not challenges to decisions.
March 13 is the next deadline for floor action on general bills that originated in the other chamber.
Among neighboring states, Mississippi is the only one that has not passed a resolution to call for a Convention of the States under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. That’s something organizers from the Convention of the States organization seek to change.
Senate Concurrent Resolution 596, if passed, would make Mississippi the 14th state legislature to pass a resolution asking for an Article V Convention of the States.
Article V gives state legislatures the power to call a convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. It takes 34 states to call the convention and 38 to ratify any proposed amendment.
Lt. Col. Allen West (ret.) paid a visit to the state capitol as part of the conservative grassroots group Convention of States Action last week to encourage legislators to approve the resolution.
“The brilliance and prescience of our founding fathers, they knew if they didn’t have those righteous men and women serving in the federal government that the balance would get out of skew,” West said. “They made sure that those powers that aren’t enumerated to the federal government are retained by the states and by the people. That’s why they put Article V in there.”
The amendments brought in this convention would place fiscal restraints on Congress and mandate term limits for both representatives and senators. Any amendments passed in such a convention would require at least approval of two thirds of the nation’s state legislatures to become law.
The nation has more than $22 trillion in debt and another $122 trillion in unfunded liabilities for Medicaid and other entitlements. Mark Meckler, president of Convention of States Action, says that a constitutional amendment that forces fiscal responsibility on the federal government is needed to address this issue.
“Nobody’s even talking about debt and deficits and that is eventually going to crush our country,” said Mark Meckler. “We can impose a balanced budget amendment on the federal government and force them to live like your state and other states that live within their means.
He also said that the federal government needs to utilize generally-accepted accounting practices.
“I call it the unicorn and rainbow system. It is fantasy and you’d go to jail if you accounted that way,” Meckler said. “We could put in tax caps, spending caps, all kinds of things you can do to rein them in.”
Meckler said that criticism of a possible runaway convention was unfounded since only those specific amendments that would limit the power of the federal government would be addressed.
The states that have approved similar Article V resolutions include: Georgia, Florida, Alaska, Alabama, Tennessee, Indiana, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Texas, Missouri, North Dakota, Arizona and Arkansas.
Mississippi lawmakers have tried to pass a similar resolution in previous years.
A similar resolution passed the House 76-42 last year and it died in the Senate without making it out of committee.
Three resolutions that would have called for an Article V convention died in the 2017 session and three more perished in the 2016 session as well.
President Donald Trump announced over the weekend that he will soon be signing an executive order requiring colleges and universities to support free speech in exchange for federal funding.
Trump made the announcement to an audience of conservative activists at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference gathering outside of Washington, D.C.
“We reject oppressive speech codes, censorship, political correctness, and every other attempt by the hard left to stop people from challenging ridiculous and dangerous ideas. These ideas are dangerous,” Trump said. “Instead, we believe in free speech. Including online and including on campus.”
Campus free speech have been born out of recent examples of speakers being disinvited because of campus protests, the creation of small “free speech zones,” and/ or restrictive speech codes.
Legislation has been moving at the state level for several years, and to date 10 states have adopted some form of campus free speech protections. This includes two of Mississippi’s neighbors, Louisiana and Tennessee.
Similar legislation was introduced in both the House and the Senate, but both of those bills died early in the session without a vote.
Still, such legislation is widely popular in Mississippi. According to new polling from Mason-Dixon Polling & Strategy, 83 percent of Mississippi voters support a law that “would protect speech for all college students, even if others disagree with their point of view.”
This law has broad public support in every corner of the state. Seventy-eight percent of Democrats, 88 percent of Republicans, and 80 percent of independents support the law.
The United States Senate blocked the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act on Monday. All but three Senate Democrats voted against the measure, preventing its passage with 53 in favor and 44 opposed. The Act needed 60 votes to proceed.
The bill would have punished doctors who failed to provide medical care to infants accidently born alive in failed abortion attempts. Late term abortions are committed in at least 7 states across America. Recently, New York became one of the most radical pro-abortion states in the US.
Upon learning of this legislation, many wonder what is so controversial about protecting the lives of babies born alive in a medical setting.
Senate Democrats and the abortion lobby contend that the Act is simply a ploy to shame women seeking third trimester abortions. President of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Leana Wen, said in her statement, “This legislation is based on lies and a misinformation campaign, aimed at shaming women and criminalizing doctors for a practice that doesn’t exist in medicine or reality.”
For people like Melissa Ohden and Gianna Jessen, surviving failed abortion attempts is a reality. In Melissa’s case, she was left to die by medical staff and only spared because of the actions of kind NICU nurses. Recently, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam advocated for babies accidently born alive to be “kept comfortable” while they await their death. To be clear, babies left to die after failed abortions die of starvation, cold body temperatures, and oxygen deprivation.
Doctors who violate the Hippocratic Oath by not caring for born alive babies must be held accountable. As the left argues that infanticide is already illegal, they seem to be confusing themselves on whether or not leaving babies to die is infanticide or not. Bill author Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) argues that we need to make the penalty for this circumstance that doesoccur in reality abundantly clear for the medical community.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) called the proposed legislation “clearly anti-doctor, anti-woman and anti-family.” If outlining the punishment for neglecting infants born alive is anti-doctor, anti-woman, and anti-family, America should buckle its bootstraps in preparation for more horrific and backwards abortion legislation.
The truth is, many on the left do not value any unwanted human being if it can be called reproductive rights and gleaned for political points. Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) exposes their actual thought process for blocking the act: “…Women, in consultation with their families and doctors, are in the best position to determine their best course of care.” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D- NH) claimed the legislation “would interfere with the doctor–patient relationship and impose new obstacles to a woman’s constitutionally protected right to make her own decisions about her reproductive health.”
Their statements have pointed out that they actually do approve of post-birth infanticide if it is “neatly” decided between a woman and her doctor.
Dressing up infanticide with political buzzwords and phrases doesn’t change what it is—a doctor’s approval and aid in facilitating the death of a newborn child.