Protesters around the world seem to know what too many Americans have forgotten: that the American flag is the greatest symbol of independence and liberty that has ever been known.
That is exactly why a number of Cubans continue to wave and march with American flags in their hands as they protest the failing communist regime on the island.
Thousands of protesters in over 40 cities have now taken to the streets in Cuba to declare their desire for freedom and voice their frustrations with their communist authoritarian government. This is no small thing. Never before have we seen in Cuba protests of this scale.
These are people who know the potential cost of their actions. Their public opposition to the regime could mean their death. Already, over 100 people have gone missing. Dozens have been arrested. Protesters have been beaten by security forces. Cuba’s president has labeled protesters “counter-revolutionaries” and has called for force against them.
For over 60 years, dictators have run Cuba, oppressing the people and stifling growth and prosperity. While the people starve, party elites have sucked up power and wealth. While housing crumbles, new hotels and resorts are built to bring money to the government. While the communists declare liberation, they silence and crush the freedoms of the people.
In order to stifle the protests and the transmission of videos highlighting government violence, the Cuban government shut down internet on the island. This was a blatant attempt to block communications amongst the grassroots organizers of this tremendous display of opposition.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis even called on Florida-based companies to attempt to provide internet access to the people of Cuba during this time. He noted in a press conference that communist regime leaders “don’t want the truth to be out, they don’t want people to be able to communicate.”
Just 90 miles away from American shores, many of the Cuban people look to our nation for hope. Thousands of Americans themselves have experienced the horrors of the Cuban regime or have relatives that are still there, which makes this moment all the more important.
Every American should seek to support the Cuban people and denounce the communist government. After 60 years, a nation stands stuck in the past, clinging to a broken economic and political system that has left far too many in poverty. Our political leaders should be held to account and we ought to demand the utmost clarity in their condemnations of the Cuban regime.
The failures of the Cuban government are a stark reminder to those who call for socialism and communism to be implemented in the United States. Those political ideologies have failed in both a spectacular and consistent manner. They have failed systematically across cultures and continents. The loud cries of the Cuban people should be a chilling wake-up call to all those who advocate for or tolerate these vicious ideologies in Mississippi and the rest of the United States.
On March 3, 2020, New York’s legislature authorized Governor Cuomo to unilaterally suspend any law or issue any directive that was necessary to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. Importantly, that authorization expired a year later, on April 30, 2021. Law-abiding gun owners in New York should probably be thankful for that expiration clause, since Governor Cuomo has since become the first Governor in the nation to declare a “gun violence disaster emergency” in the state on July 6, 2021.
Because the broad COVID-19 emergency authorization has expired, Governor Cuomo is relying instead on a more limited state law that allows him to temporarily suspend other laws, if doing so would help him address a disaster declared by the state. Importantly, this authority comes with more limits than the COVID-19 authorization. While the Governor may temporarily suspend laws, he may not issue directives. Additionally, the suspension of any laws must be more targeted to safeguard the health and welfare of the public, and impose less of a deviation from existing law than was required under the COVID-19 authorization.
Perhaps these limitations are why Governor Cuomo’s executive order does not impose any new restrictions on gun owners in the state. Rather, the executive order suspends certain restrictions in the state’s finance laws in order to allow the Governor to direct money towards community efforts to reduce gun violence, and to enter into contracts and other written agreements meant to address gun violence.
Funding freed up under the executive order will be used to fund a variety of efforts. These efforts include community activity and summer jobs programs for at-risk youths, programs to track and provide resources to emerging gun violence hot spots, and a new state police unit to stop guns coming in from other states that are illegal under New York law. There are also initiatives meant to strengthen relationships between police and the communities they serve.
While Governor Cuomo is clearly proud of the boldness of his executive order, which he described as “the first-in-the-nation gun violence disaster emergency," it does not come anywhere close to the brazen willingness to flout clearly established law that was exhibited by a gun-related executive order issued by Jackson Mayor Lumumba on April 25, 2020.
Mayor Lumumba’s order purported to “suspend” the right to openly carry a firearm in the City of Jackson, despite the fact that the Mississippi Constitution explicitly protects the right to open carry, and declares that the right to openly carry cannot even be regulated in our state. While the executive order invoked the COVID-19 pandemic as its justification, it did not claim that the order would reduce the transmission of COVID-19 or that gun violence that had occurred during the pandemic was caused by people exercising their right to openly carry firearms.
MCPP’s legal arm, the Mississippi Justice Institute, filed a lawsuit against Mayor Lumumba two days after he issued the executive order. The lawsuit argued that Mayor Lumumba’s order violated the Mississippi Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, and various state laws. Six weeks later, a federal court entered an order which permanently banned the City of Jackson or any of its officials from ever again issuing an order restricting the right to openly carry firearms, and provided for contempt of court proceedings against any city officials who violate the court order.
Regardless of the differences between the executive orders in New York and Jackson, one thing is clear: our executive branch officials need to stop governing by emergency. Routine public policy issues should not be decided unilaterally by dressing them up as “emergencies.” Whether emergency powers are invoked to build a border wall that Congress will not fund, or to ban guns in a state committed to gun rights, those actions erode the Rule of Law and eliminate the normal give and take that is supposed to occur in a democratic republic made up of a diverse people with many different priorities, beliefs, and values.
Even if those lofty ideals were not enough, practical concerns should dictate the same response. If we cheer on government officials who exceed their legitimate power to pursue our preferred policy outcomes, we have no recourse when other officials similarly abuse their powers for ends we disapprove of. The only way to prevent such abuses is to limit government power, no matter who is currently in charge.
Some claim that we are too polarized to govern effectively using our normal democratic processes, but our country has been through worse. We experienced deep divisions during the eras of the Founding, Reconstruction, McCarthyism, Civil Rights, and the Vietnam War, just to name a few. That we are experiencing deep divisions again today is no reason to throw away our precious inheritance of constitutionally limited government.
With new COVID cases remaining persistently low and multiple vaccines available to all adults, Mississippi appears to have fully returned to “normal.”
Employers navigating this return have adopted a wide range of policies, from requiring masks for non-vaccinated employees to requiring most employees to get vaccinated. Are these policies legal?
Yes, with very few exceptions.
First, remember that Mississippi is an “at will” employment state. That means an employee can quit his or her job for any reason or no reason at all. Likewise, an employer can fire an employee for any reason (as long as it would not violate discrimination laws covering protected classes) or no reason at all.
This means that employers have a very wide scope in setting the rules that employees must follow. After all, it’s their business. And if an employee doesn’t like the employer’s policies (like a mask or vaccine policy), they can quit the job if they so choose.
Some employees mistakenly believe that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) prevents their employer from asking about their vaccine status. HIPAA prevents certain covered entities which have sensitive patient health information from sharing it with others without the patient’s consent. It does not prevent employers – or anyone else for that matter – from asking anyone about their health information.
Some of this confusion may stem from the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prevents employers from asking job candidates if they have a disability before making a job offer and requires employers to maintain the confidentiality of any employee medical information obtained after hiring. But nothing in the ADA prevents an employer from asking employees about their vaccine status during a pandemic or requiring vaccinations for employees.
The ADA does require employers to make reasonable accommodations for employees who cannot get vaccinated due to a disability or sincerely held religious belief. However, such an accommodation is not required if it would pose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer’s business.
Another source of confusion seems to be a section of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act which prevents the government from mandating vaccines that have only received an emergency use authorization from the FDA. But that law does not prevent private employers from requiring their employees to receive such vaccines as a condition of employment.
The best advice for employees is to ignore any claims they see on social media regarding their employer’s rights or responsibilities. If an employer adopts policies that concern you, talk to them about your concerns. If a compromise cannot be reached, and if the issue is important enough to you, then it’s ultimately up to you to decide if you want to continue your employment relationship. It’s a free country after all.
The U.S. Supreme Court recently agreed to hear a case involving the right to carry firearms outside the home. The case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Corlett, is the first Second Amendment case the high court has taken in more than a decade.
The case involves a legal challenge to a New York law which prohibits the concealed carry of handguns in public. The plaintiffs applied for a concealed-carry license from the state of New York but their applications were rejected.
New York state law requires applicants to show that they have a “special need” and “proper cause” to qualify to hold firearms under state law, and the state decided the plaintiffs did not meet that standard. New York usually grants concealed carry licenses only to security professionals or others who can demonstrate that they face grave threats due to their occupation or public identity.
The applicants who were denied a permit argue that the state’s limits on concealed carry violate the Second Amendment, since New York does not allow the open carry of firearms, and the law makes it virtually impossible for the ordinary law-abiding citizen to obtain a license to carry a concealed firearm either.
The Supreme Court’s ruling on the dispute could be a watershed moment for the Second Amendment. The Court hasn’t made a substantive ruling on the scope of the Second Amendment since 2008, when it held in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Amendment protects the right of individuals to keep arms in their home (and not just those Americans who were members of a “militia”).
Two years later, the Court ruled in another case, McDonald v. City of Chicago, which didn’t break new ground on the Second Amendment but did clarify that the individual right articulated in Heller did not just protect Americans from federal gun laws that would seek to deny them the right keep arms in their homes, but from similar laws passed by state and local governments as well.
While the individual right to keep arms in the home articulated in Heller was an important development, it did nothing to answer questions about the legality of many other gun laws. And since Heller and McDonald, the Supreme Court has gone out of its way to avoid ruling on any Second Amendment cases, rejecting numerous challenges to other gun regulations.
Here in our state, the Mississippi Justice Institute filed a constitutional challenge last year to an executive order that banned the open carry of firearms in the City of Jackson, ostensibly due to Covid-19. That lawsuit relied in part on the Mississippi Constitution, which explicitly protects the open carry of firearms. But the lawsuit also alleged that the executive order violated the Second Amendment, and thus could have resulted in precedent that the Second Amendment protects the right to bear arms outside the home. However, the case never got that far, as the city ultimately conceded the lawsuit and a consent decree was entered by the Court which ordered the City of Jackson to never again ban the open carry of firearms.
Who would have thought that in 2021, nearly 230 years after the Second Amendment was ratified, that we still wouldn’t have firm precedent on whether Americans have a right to bear arms outside of their home? That question will likely soon be answered.
“People overestimate what they can accomplish in one legislative session and underestimate what they can accomplish in ten.”
In this series, we are conducting a review of all Mississippi lawmakers have accomplished over the last 10 years. Again, the list provided here is not comprehensive, and we feature only the policies we like, some of which were initiated by MCPP (marked by an *asterisk* below).
Conservative lawmakers are often criticized for using “God and Gun” policies to distract voters from what are suggested by some to be more important issues. We see no reason why lawmakers need to choose between broad civil liberty protections and economic liberty. In the last few weeks, we have highlighted legislative accomplishments in three areas: religious liberty protections, pro-life protections, and Second Amendment (and Other) protections.
Here are Mississippi’s best-in-the-nation religious liberty laws:
In 2013, the Legislature passed the Mississippi Student Religious Liberties Act (SB 2633), sponsored by Senator Chris McDaniel. The law protects the free speech and freedom of assembly rights of students wishing to pray or express a religious viewpoint in a public-school setting.
In 2014, Mississippi joined 19 other states in enacting state-level RFRA protections (SB 2681), sponsored by Senator Phillip Gandy. RFRA stands for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It requires that the state of Mississippi not enact policies that would “substantially burden” the free exercise of religion. The federal “Equality Act,” which has already passed the U.S. House, specifically overrides federal RFRA protections.*
In 2016, the Mississippi Legislature passed the “Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act,” sponsored by Speaker Philip Gunn (HB 1523). This law prevents the state government from enforcing discriminatory policies against those with strongly held beliefs related to the proper ordering of marriage and human sexuality. The law protects adoption agencies, businesses, and churches, among others. It is the strongest law of its kind in the country. The law has been upheld by the federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.*
“People overestimate what they can accomplish in one legislative session and underestimate what they can accomplish in ten.”
In this series, we are conducting a review of what Mississippi lawmakers have accomplished over the last 10 years. The list provided here is not comprehensive, and we feature only the policies we like, some of which were initiated by MCPP (marked by an *asterisk* below).
Over the past 10 years, Mississippi has gone from the middle-of-the-pack on gun rights to near the top. Below is a review of just some of the Second Amendment protections passed by the Legislature.
Before we get to the gun bills, however, worth mentioning is an important law MCPP worked on (typically, we have left the Second Amendment fights to other groups).
In 2016, Mississippi lawmakers had a great deal of discussion about eliminating the problematic practice of civil asset forfeiture. Rep. Chris Brown succeeded in passing a transparency law (HB 1410) to better track such forfeitures and institute some accountability.*
In 2019, an effort led by MCPP’s Mississippi Justice Institute defeated an attempt to revive the practice of administrative forfeiture.*
Second Amendment Protections
In 2011, the Legislature (HB 506) allowed gun owners who had completed special training to carry their weapon in a courthouse (NOT the same as a courtroom).
In 2013, HB 2, sponsored by Rep. Andy Gipson, confirmed the right to open carry, clarifying that a visibly holstered gun is not a concealed weapon.
That same year, HB 485, sponsored by Rep. Mark Baker, protected concealed-carry permit holders from having their names released via a public records request.
In 2014, the Legislature passed HB 314, sponsored by Rep. Gipson. This law creates a complaint procedure that allows citizens to challenge policies and ordinances that restrict gun ownership.
In 2014, the Legislature also created a Second Amendment Tax Free Weekend with SB 2425.
In 2015, SB 2619 recognized military and law enforcement training as meeting state enhanced concealed carry requirements.
Also in 2015, the Legislature passed SB 2394, which waived concealed carry licensing requirements “for a loaded or unloaded pistol or revolver carried in a purse, handbag, satchel, other similar bag or briefcase or fully enclosed case.”
In 2016, Rep. Andy Gipson sponsored the Mississippi Church Protection Act (HB 786), which provides legislative guidance for churches wishing to set up a security team for the protection of their congregation.
Finally, 2016 saw the passage of “constitutional carry,” contained in HB 786. Constitutional carry stipulates that people may carry a gun, whether concealed or not, without a government-issued license. Mississippi was the 9th state to pass this protection.
Also embedded in HB 786 is a codification of the well-established “Anti-Commandeering Doctrine.” Thanks to now Agricultural Commissioner Andy Gipson, Mississippi law states: “No federal executive order, agency order, law not enrolled by the United States Congress and signed by the President of the United States, rule, regulation or administrative interpretation of a law or statute issued, enacted or promulgated after July 1, 2016, that violates the United States Constitution or the Mississippi Constitution of 1890 shall be enforced or ordered to be enforced by any official, agent or employee of this state or a political subdivision thereof.”*
Douglas Carswell, President of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, joined Ben Shapiro on The Ben Shapiro Show for a wide-ranging discussion on the state of America and what can be done to improve our nation.
The Ben Shapiro Show is syndicated to networks around the country. Ben Shapiro has emerged as a leading conservative voice in today’s age. His site, The Daily Wire, is one of the most popular conservative news outlets in the nation and is regularly read by millions of people.
The full video conversation can be watched here.
Ben and Douglas discussed a plethora of issues including American culture, national spending, the global economy, and more.
Here are some of my personal favorite quotes from the conversation:
Ben Shapiro: “Welcome to our shores. I’ve got to say, it feels like you’re arriving at a rather inauspicious time in American history. While the economy seems to be finally recovering as COVID lets up, that is not stopping the current government from blowing out spending to an unprecedented extent and radically shifting the thinking of how government and the individual ought to interact.”
Douglas Carswell: “The United States has been the world’s number one power for 120 years and it’s been, by and large, an extraordinary 120 years, the best in human existence.”
Douglas: “If America becomes just another country, the lights would go out not just in America, the lights would go out on the world.”
Ben: “Europe had the privilege of having the United States basically hold up the world economy and much of their defense budget for half a century. Nobody’s going to be holding up the foundations here if the United States goes.”
Douglas: “The essence of modernity, the essence of civilization, is that we judge people not on the basis of immutable characteristics.”
Douglas: “If America was built on hatred and racism then why is it that people from every color, and every creed, and every culture want to come here?”
Senator Jeremy England gave a vigorous defense of a piece of legislation that he has authored in a post published to Facebook. Senate Bill 2342 would exempt certain beauty services from licensing and registration requirements, thus reducing the stranglehold that the Board of Cosmetology has over these workers.
Many have called into question the need for hundreds of hours and potentially thousands of dollars spent on training that often does not even apply to an individual’s chosen profession. For example, while an EMT needs 150 class hours, an eyebrow threader in Mississippi must take 600 expensive class hours and not a single moment of these lessons focuses on eyebrow threading.
The fact is that rules like this one are often focused not on health and safety, but on producing a barrier to entry. Thus, obstacles are developed that help to ensure that less people try to join the industry and less competition exists for current providers.
In August 2019, Aaron Rice, Director of the Mississippi Justice Institute, the legal arm of MCPP, filed a lawsuit on behalf of Dipa Bhattarai in a federal district court. The lawsuit was filed against the Cosmetology Board.
Eyebrow threading is a safe and simple technique that uses just a single strand of cotton thread to remove unwanted hair. It does not involve skin-to-skin contact between the threading artist and customer, does not reuse the same tools on different customers, and does not involve the use of sharp implements, harsh chemicals, or heat.
Regarding this legislation from Senator England, MJI Director Aaron Rice stated, “[w]e have been fighting in court for years to protect the rights of niche beauty service providers to earn an honest living without burdensome and irrelevant licensing requirements.”
Rice continued, “[t]his legislation would solve that problem and allow more Mississippians to use their skills and abilities to provide for themselves and their families.”
In his Facebook post, Senator England noted, “[t]he Cosmetology Board in Mississippi is one of many, many departments and agencies we have in this state that requires licenses to perform certain tasks legally. In other words, if you want to do a job in Mississippi that you may be capable of doing and talented enough to earn a living doing, the Board will not give you a license unless and until you pay for a huge amount of training hours and schooling. This is VERY restrictive. I'm not saying it is not helpful, and I'm not saying that those hours in a classroom learning how to perform certain tasks aren't valuable.”
“But in a state like Mississippi, where we have a very low labor market participation rate and have a large population of individuals that feel stuck in a job with low pay, we have to reverse course on restricting people from doing jobs. It has to start somewhere - and the Board of Cosmetology is that start for me.”
“I want you to be able to earn a living and embark on the American Dream of starting a business where you have a chance to succeed (or fail). I want to help you support your family on your own, which may also help you get off and away from government assistance.”
“I don't want a Board that will require a large number of hours in a classroom learning things that have nothing to do with your selected trade, and I don't want you to be forced to take out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans in the process. That hurts people right where it counts, and it keeps them from succeeding. I am and will always be against this practice.”
“I want people to be able to work, and I don't want a government agency putting up roadblocks to prevent them from working. This is my belief as a conservative - and it is a big reason why I am here in Jackson. I am a small government guy. Deregulation is a major part of the foundation of small government, conservative principles. I ran on these principles, and I promised to be faithful to them.”
Senator Jeremy England has stepped up to the plate to support Mississippi entrepreneurs. His passionate defense of the American dream and an individual’s right to work without a government agency getting in his or her way is worth highlighting and supporting.
The Mississippi Center for Public Policy has appointed Hunter Estes as the Director of Communications. In his new role, Estes will oversee and coordinate all marketing and outreach efforts for the organization including social media output, press relations, video production, and more.
Regarding the appointment, Estes stated, “I am incredibly excited to take on this new role. It has become increasingly important to elevate a rejuvenated and vigorous defense of the freedoms that bind us as Mississippians. In order to successfully push for liberty-minded policies that advance prosperity for our state, we must win the battle of ideas and that all starts with effective communications strategies.”
MCPP President Douglas Carswell noted, “Hunter understands how communication has changed and is brilliant at getting our message out to a mass audience. We are honored to have him leading our outreach efforts.”
Carswell continued, “For our organization, outreach means having a hearts and minds strategy. To move the dial in Mississippi, we need to reach out and make the moral case for free markets and limited government to the rising generation. With Hunter in this role, we will.”
Estes has served as the development manager for the organization since January of 2019. In this role, he coordinated all fundraising efforts by communicating with donors, working with foundation partners, and developing a range of new programs including the expansion of digital donation opportunities and the launch of the 1798 Society, our major donors club.
Estes also serves as a community leader on the board of the Jackson chapter of America’s Future (previously America’s Future Foundation), a networking organization for liberty-minded young professionals. Furthermore, Estes joined the Mississippi Army National Guard in October of 2020.
Before moving to Mississippi, Estes worked as an intern under former Speaker Paul Ryan, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senator Ted Cruz, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Chamber of Commerce Foundation.
He holds his Bachelor of Science in International Relations from Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.
For comments or questions about the appointment, please reach out to Hunter Estes at [email protected].