Greene County Democrat

Tag: African

  • Newswire : Favoring Trump, SCOTUS majority undermines Federal Court Judges 

    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent

    By Anoa Changa, NewsOne

     

    Closing out another term, the right-wing Supreme Court majority gave the Constitution and the Rule of Law the finger in Trump v. CASA, limiting the ability of federal courts to serve as a check on extreme executive action. In its 6-3 opinion in CASA, the right-wing majority sidesteps the issue of birthright citizenship and positions itself as reigning in the power of the federal courts instead of the increasingly out-of-pocket executive branch. 
    At issue were federal court injunctions that prevented Trump’s January 20 executive order restricting birthright citizenship for babies born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents. The majority in CASA essentially hides behind its interpretation that a federal court does not have the authority to issue a nationwide injunction for arguably unconstitutional actions of the Trump administration that impact the entire country. This would force impacted individuals to sue in every single jurisdiction to have their rights enforced and could create disparate application of the Constitution based on where a person was living. 
    Writing another formidable dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pulled no punches, rebuking her colleagues and the Trump administration’s erosion of the Constitution. 
    “This perverse burden shifting cannot coexist with the rule of law,” wrote Jackson. “As a result, the Judiciary–the one institution that is solely responsible for ensuring our Republic endures as a Nation of laws–has put both our legal system, and our system of government, in grave jeopardy.”  
    The shrug and wink happening between the right-wing majority on SCOTUS and in the other two branches of the federal government should be alarming. As Elie Mystal wrote for The Nation, SCOTUS just made it difficult for federal courts to stop Trump from exceeding his authority to end constitutionally protected birthright citizenship. 
    “It’s a distinction, one that lawyers will try to exploit for an entire rearguard action to defend citizenship in this country, but one that’s unlikely to make much of a difference if you happen to be born on the Republican side of the tracks,” wrote Mystal. “Once you read the fine print, it becomes clear that this decision is a historic, five-alarm catastrophe.”
    Immigrant Rights’ Coalition Immediately Files Class-Action 
    Testing the limits of the majority’s opinion in CASA, a coalition representing immigrant rights advocates, filed a nationwide class-action lawsuit challenging the executive order restricting birthright citizenship. The legal coalition behind the class-action, including the ACLU and the Legal Defense Fund, still have a separate case making its way through the federal courts that was not considered in Friday’s SCOTUS opinion. 
    “The Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship, and no procedural ruling will stop us from fighting to uphold that promise,” said Tianna Mays, legal director for Democracy Defenders Fund. “Our plaintiffs, and millions of families across this country, deserve clarity, stability, and justice. We look forward to making our case in court again.” 
    On its face, the majority opinion in CASA appears to be a mixed bag. Still, it gave Trump enough leeway to feel vindicated in his erosion of the Constitution, a cornerstone of American democracy. Unambiguously affirmed in the 14th Amendment, Birthright citizenship has been widely recognized for generations.  
    “Citizenship is a right afforded to us by birth, not by privilege,” said Karla McKanders, director of the Legal Defense Fund’s Thurgood Marshall Institute. “The Trump administration’s executive order is an unlawful attempt to entrench racial hierarchies and establish a second class of citizens in the United States. We will continue working to ensure that birthright citizenship — a right granted by the U.S. Constitution — is protected, and that families are not torn apart because of this executive order.”
    As SCOTUS cannot invalidate the amendment itself outright, it distorts legal analysis to help the Trump administration subvert over 150 years of legal precedent. Judith Browne Dianis, executive director of the Advancement Project, called the decision “one of the most dangerous and blatantly unconstitutional attacks on immigrant communities and the rule of law in modern history.” 
    “Through its restrictions on universal injunctions, the Court is placing limits on who could be protected from this executive order, which means to strip U.S.-born children of non-citizen parents of their birthright citizenship in a direct assault on the 14th Amendment,” Dianis said. “As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson points out, today’s ruling is an existential threat to the rule of law because it allows the Trump Administration to apply the executive order to many newborns who are guaranteed citizenship under the 14th Amendment but have not yet filed a lawsuit in federal court.”
    While this decision may not directly impact Black Americans, the expansion of authoritarian power granted to the Trump administration will certainly find its way to our doorstep. One of three Reconstruction Era amendments, the 14th Amendment has served as a launch pad for ensuring equal protection and due process, and various civil and human rights. 
    “To challenge it erases a core American promise and serves as a calculated step toward authoritarianism,” Dianis said. “This reckless and racially motivated executive action is a transparent attempt to silence and disempower communities of color, particularly Latine, AAPI, African, and Caribbean immigrant families.  And it comes alongside a barrage of executive orders that attempt to dismantle racial equity, voting rights, and immigration protections, each designed to chip away at our collective power.”

  • The Panama Papers’ growing impact on Africa

    Panama papers
    While no African official has yet resigned as a result of the Panama Papers, African journalists involved in the investigation say they have given Africans a wake up call and could even lead to government action.
    The twin sister of DRC’s leader Joseph Kabila, the nephew of South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma and business people allegedly linked to Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe are all named in the Panama Papers.  The Mossack Fonseca leak – the biggest data leak ever – have revealed the names and alleged financial affairs of top officials from at least 15 different sub-Saharan African countries or people linked to them have been named.
    While the practice of keeping money abroad is not illegal, the revelations by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists’ (ICIJ) team of about 400 journalists have made global headlines. African Union chairwoman Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma said the African money kept in foreign banks should be repatriated to the continent.
    At a conference last year, former South African president Thabo Mbeki noted that a report commissioned by the AU had found that Africa was losing $50 billion(43 billion euros) a year through illicit cash flows – money that could go into education, health care or investments on the continent. A report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) even puts the amount at $150 billion.
    Several African governments have either remained silent or maintained that the officials were acting within their legal rights when confronted with the disclosure. African journalists who worked on the investigation believe that the Panama Papers will have a strong impact:

  • What difference will Obama’s plan to bring power to Africa make?

    By: BBC Africa News

    Obama at solar expo

    President Obama talks with African solar AFP

    In February US President Barack Obama signed an agreement to bring electricity to 50 million people in sub-Saharan Africa by 2020. Neil Ford asks, even if this is possible, how many will still be left in the dark?
    Perhaps the most remarkable things about the Electrify Africa Act of 2015 are that it commits the US to increased foreign aid at a time of economic uncertainty and cuts through sharp political divisions.The Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ed Royce, worked with Democrat Eliot Engel for two years to drive the bill through Congress.
    The act commits the US government to supporting President Obama’s Power Africa initiative. Although headlined as a $50bn scheme, the US authorities will contribute just $7bn.
    Other governments, development agencies and private sector companies are expected to provide the remainder in public-private partnerships.This will be difficult to achieve during a global economic downturn.
    Even if it succeeds in its aim of bringing electricity to 50 million Africans by 2020, more than 10 times that number will still be without power.
    So the Power Africa initiative is not a magic bullet, but it has at least highlighted Africa’s power supply problems.
    It is easy to take electricity for granted. Most African homes lack fridges and electric cookers but even a single electric light bulb can bring security and allow children to do their homework after dark.
    Mobile phones encourage economic growth but the lack of electricity makes recharging them yet another hurdle to be cleared.
    According to the latest World Bank data, 35% of sub-Saharan Africans have no access to electricity.
    This is a far lower figure than in any other region.
    The next lowest rate is 22% for South Asia, while all five North African countries claim 100% coverage.
    Most Africans use wood and kerosene for fuel, causing deforestation and thousands of fatal accidents every year.
    The 35% figure masks huge variations, with electrification rates ranging from 5% in South Sudan up to 100% in Mauritius.
    Connection rates in rural areas are typically worse than 10%. Most of those with electricity at home live in cities, supplied by grids that were developed in colonial times but which have failed to expand with urban growth.
    Even many of those connected to the grid suffer from unreliable supplies. So those who can afford them, buy their own expensive diesel fired generators.
    While South Africa relies on coal-fired plants, most African countries depend on large hydro schemes to generate electricity.
    Yet unreliable rainfall means that hydroelectric production varies even during a good year and is even worse – as at present – during an El Nino event.
    The main problem is a lack of revenue. Most consumers are unable to afford to pay a commercial rate for electricity.
    This prevents power utilities from earning enough money to pay for new generation, transmission and distribution infrastructure; generation capacity to produce electricity; transmission to move it across big distances; and distribution to get it into people’s homes and businesses.
    Either people need to become richer, or power needs to be cheaper.
    Luckily, a solution may be at hand. The price of photovoltaic (PV) solar power panels is falling, while solar cells are becoming more efficient, so PV is becoming a cost-effective option. Such off-grid solutions avoid the need for expensive transmission and distribution infrastructure.
    Power Africa is already supporting very small-scale solar PV. It has awarded part-funding to 28 off-grid projects, along with the technical support that small-scale developers often lack. Many more will now follow suit.
    Most of these projects involve solar PV or biomass, which involves using agricultural waste as a power generation feedstock.
    Power Africa describes the first kWh people gain access to as the “the most valuable” because it provides at least a single source of electric light and the ability to charge mobile phones and radios.
    With its commitment to providing “cleaner power generation”, many of the on-grid ventures backed by Power Africa also involve renewable energy.
    In some cases, it is directly funding generation projects, such as the 152 MW Sarreole wind farm in Senegal. More often, it will supply technical support and dedicated advisors.
    It has already helped Ghana to tap its newly discovered gas reserves for thermal power production by providing regulatory advice.
    New projects will be identified as more of the funding is made available.
    It may be that a single grand scheme cannot solve Africa’s power problems but Power Africa can help provide local solutions, one at a time.