SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
u.s. supreme court
Dem Lawmakers Introduce 'Contraception Begins at Erection' Bills in Multiple States
"If you think it's absurd to regulate men, then you should think it's equally absurd to regulate women," said the author of an Ohio bill, who is also an OB-GYN.
Feb 11, 2025
Faced with relentless Republican attacks on reproductive freedom including efforts to give embryos and fetuses legal rights from the moment of conception, Democratic lawmakers in two states have recently introduced legislation that would ban men from ejaculating for purposes other than making babies, with some exceptions.
Last month, Mississippi state Sen. Bradford Blackmon (D-21) introduced S.B. 2319, the Contraception Begins at Erection Act, which would "make it unlawful for a person to discharge genetic material (sperm) without the intent to fertilize an embryo, effectively criminalizing certain male reproductive behaviors," according to an official artificial intelligence summary of the proposal. The bill—which died in committee last week—contains exceptions for "genetic material donated or sold to a facility for future embryo fertilization, and genetic material discharged using a contraceptive method intended to prevent fertilization."
"If you're going to penalize someone for an unwanted pregnancy, why not penalize the person who is also responsible for the pregnancy?"
"All across the country, especially here in Mississippi, the vast majority of bills relating to contraception and/or abortion focus on the woman's role when men are 50% of the equation," Blackmon explained, according toNBC News. "This bill highlights that fact and brings the man's role into the conversation. People can get up in arms and call it absurd but I can't say that bothers me."
Meanwhile in Ohio, state Reps. Dr. Anita Somani (D-11) and Tristan Rader (D-13) have introduced their own Contraception Begins at Erection Act, which would fine violators $10,000 per unauthorized discharge, with exceptions for when contraception is used during sex, or in cases of masturbation, and sex between members of the LGBTQ+ community.
"If you're going to penalize someone for an unwanted pregnancy, why not penalize the person who is also responsible for the pregnancy?" Somani, who is also a licensed OB-GYN, asked in an Ohio Capital Journal article published Sunday. "You don't get pregnant on your own."
Every Sperm is sacred! #equalrights #reproductiverights
[image or embed]
— Anita Somani District 8 OH ( @anitamd.bsky.social) February 4, 2025 at 5:19 PM
Responding to Republicans who have called her bill "absurd," Somani said, "If you think it's absurd to regulate men, then you should think it's equally absurd to regulate women."
While observers have questioned the seriousness of these bills—and with Somani and others giving nods to a famous number in Monty Python's 1979 black comedy The Life of Brian—they come at a nadir for reproductive freedom in the United States.
Since the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court canceled half a century of federal abortion rights in the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization ruling, a dozen states including Mississippi have also passed near-total abortion bans, while numerous other states have enacted restrictions on the procedure.
Eight states have also enacted or proposed restrictions on access to contraception, according to the Guttmacher Institute. Last year, Senate Republicans blocked consideration of the Right to Contraception Act. Republican President Donald Trump has signaled support for federal restrictions on contraception, and far-right U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has suggested that the tribunal "should reconsider" past rulings upholding the right to birth control.
In Ohio, voters decisively enshrined abortion rights in the state constitution via a 2023 ballot measure. Nevertheless, anti-abortion activists haven't given up—Republican activist Austin Beigel told the Capital Journal that GOP lawmakers are preparing to introduce legislation for a total abortion ban in the coming weeks.
"It just says human life begins at conception," he explained. "Therefore, all the protections that are offered to other people under the state law are also offered to the pre-born."
This isn't the first time that semi-satirical legislation has been introduced to highlight the hypocrisy of banning women from controlling their bodies. In 2019, a Democratic state lawmaker in Georgia introduced a "Testicular Bill of Rights" that would, among other things, have required men to get permission from their sexual partners before obtaining erectile dysfunction medication and enacted a 24-hour "waiting period" for men who want to buy porn or sex toys.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump, Vance, and Musk Have Ushered Us Into Madison’s ‘Very Definition of Tyranny’
American democracy and government—after 240 years—is finally on the verge of collapsing and being replaced by something very much like Vladimir Putin’s Russia or Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.
Feb 10, 2025
So, U.S. Vice President JD Vance is now saying that he and President Donald Trump don’t have to obey federal judges, tweeting, “judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.” This is how autocrats run things; it’s an extraordinarily dangerous moment.
It was Tuesday, July 17, 1787, and the men writing the Constitution had convened in Philadelphia to debate the separation of powers between the Congress, the presidency, and the courts. They drew their inspiration for that day from French philosopher Charles de Montesquieu, whose 1748 book The Spirit of the Laws had taken the New World and the Framers of the Constitution by storm.
In it, Montesquieu pointed out the absolute necessity of having three relatively coequal branches of government, each with separate authorities, to prevent any one branch from seizing too much power and ending a nation’s democracy. In The Spirit of Laws, he laid it out unambiguously:
When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty… Again, there is no liberty, if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive.
As the topic of the separation of powers was being debated at the Constitutional Convention that day 29 years after Montesquieu’s book had been published, “Father of the Constitution” James Madison rose to address the delegates:
If it be essential to the preservation of liberty that the legislative, executive, and judiciary powers be separate, it is essential to a maintenance of the separation, that they should be independent of each other...
In like manner, a dependence of the executive [president] on the legislature would render it the executor as well as the maker of laws; and then, according to the observation of Montesquieu, tyrannical laws may be made that they may be executed in a tyrannical manner.
He [Montesquieu] conceived it to be absolutely necessary to a well-constituted-republic, that the two first should be kept distinct and independent of each other… for guarding against a dangerous union of the legislative and executive departments.
If the president were ever to dictate all terms to the Congress, which then became a compliant rubber stamp regardless of how excessive or even illegal the president’s actions became, that, Madison said, “may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
We’re there now.
In simplified form, the system Madison and his compatriots came up with that summer gave the power to create and fund government agencies (including the federal court system) to Congress (Article I), the first among equals.
The responsibility of the president was to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” (Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution); in other words, to manage the institutions of government envisioned, authorized, and funded by Congress.
And the role of the Article III Courts was to make sure neither overstepped their authority, and independently arbitrate disputes between them. Their decisions must be final for the system to work.
This is more correctly defined as a war against America and our system of government than mere politics.
However, as a result of a 44-year-long effort by morbidly rich American oligarchs to corrupt our government to their own gain (the so-called Reagan Revolution, President George W. Bush, Trump, 1,500 radio stations, three television networks, multiple newspapers and other publications, over 200 television stations, hundreds of billions spent to purchase and then elect politicians), all of this American democracy and government—after 240 years—is finally on the verge of collapsing and being replaced by something very much like Vladimir Putin’s Russia or Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.
The GOP-controlled Congress has, in both houses, become a pathetic rubber stamp for whatever billionaires, Trump, Elon Musk, and industries like fossil fuels, crypto and tech, and banks want.
The president is nakedly breaking laws and daring both Congress and the courts to do anything about it.
And now JD Vance claims Trump can do whatever he wants and ignore the courts. (Only federal marshals can enforce federal court orders, but they work for Attorney-General Pam Bondi and Donald Trump.)
That is the very definition of a constitutional crisis.
And Republicans on the Supreme Court facilitated the entire corrupt deal by legalizing political bribery in 2010 with their billionaire-funded Citizens United decision.
As a result, every Republican and most Democrats are terrified of Elon Musk or some other billionaire destroying them in the next primary election. The result has been legislative gridlock, a paralysis of the legislative branch.
Going a step farther, Trump has authorized a drug-abusing, Putin-conversing, government-contracting billionaire—his single largest donor who probably was responsible for him becoming president—to access the private information of every American citizen and corporation, dismantle entire agencies created and funded by Congress, and stop multiple investigations into his own business practices.
This is more correctly defined as a war against America and our system of government than mere politics.
A war that must be absolutely delighting America’s enemies, particularly Russia’s Putin and China’s Xi Jinping. Especially now that Musk is calling for the shutdown of the Voice of America that both Putin and Xi hate as much as they both hated USAID.
But it even goes beyond that. Trump and Musk are rapidly moving America—with their attacks on the press, voting, and truth itself—toward the kind of authoritarian police state that several of the men Trump appears to love have established.
Further defying the Constitution, Trump has empowered the richest man in the world to attack and possibly destroy multiple federal agencies that were, just coincidentally of course, investigating his businesses:
- The Federal Aviation Administration’s administrator had launched an investigation into SpaceX after a spectacular rocket explosion; he’s now been fired.
- The Department of Justice was looking into possible violations of securities and other laws by Musk and Tesla; it’s probably safe to assume that investigation won’t go any farther.
- The USAID inspector general was investigating how Musk's SpaceX Starlink satellite terminals, purchased with USAID funds, were used in Ukraine’s war to defend itself from Russia.
- The Department of Defense’s inspector general opened a review in 2024 into alleged repeated failures by Musk and SpaceX to properly disclose their contact with foreign leaders; he’s now fired.
- The U.S. Department of Agriculture inspector general's office was investigating alleged animal abuse at Neuralink, Musk’s brain implant company; he’s been fired.
- The National Transportation Safety Board, overseen by the Department of Transportation, had several open probes into Tesla regarding its remote and self-driving vehicles; odds are they’ll be dropped if they haven’t been already.
- The Environmental Protection Agency had settled multiple lawsuits with Tesla in recent years over Clean Air Act and hazardous waste law violations; now that the EPA is being gutted there probably won’t be any more.
- The National Labor Relations Board, overseen by the Department of Labor, had 17 open investigations against Tesla and SpaceX for alleged unfair labor practices, safety violations, and discriminatory work practices that are probably now moot.
- The Federal Communications Commission was carrying out investigations and had issued court orders related to Musk’s businesses.
- The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was overseeing some of Musk’s companies and had a consent decree in place.
- Additionally, the Air Force and the Pentagon’s Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security launched reviews in November 2024 regarding Musk and SpaceX’s compliance with federal reporting requirements.
Musk’s $277 million investment to get Trump elected—legalized by five corrupt Republicans on the Supreme Court—has, so far, paid off well.
Welcome to Madison’s “very definition of tyranny.”
Now that Republicans control Congress and have surrendered their authority to Trump, the last bulwark against the president converting himself into the sort of monarch we fought the Revolutionary War against is the Supreme Court, which will probably begin weighing in over the next few weeks.
And, in the face of this, the vice president is arguing that he and the president should feel free to ignore court orders.
This attack on our republic represents the most dangerous moment America has experienced since the Civil War.
Neither the Supreme Court nor Congress are entirely capable of ignoring public opinion: It’s vital we all reach out to our elected officials (particularly Republicans) to demand they reclaim their rightful role in our republic and speak out against this illegal, unconstitutional power grab.
It’s also crucial to make our opinions known in every way and every venue possible.
If America is to retain any fidelity whatsoever to our Constitution that was written and survived more than two centuries’ investment of blood and treasure, it’s time to raise absolute holy hell.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democrats Are Delusional: Trump Will Try to Stay in Power
I laugh at the thought of him making way for Vice President JD Vance, whom he clearly despises—and often humiliates—let alone a Democrat. No, he won’t make way for anyone.
Feb 02, 2025
Despite everything U.S. President Donald Trump has said and done, Democrats are still delusional.
I keep hearing things like, “He can’t run again.” “We no longer need to [find a way to] beat him.” “Eventually there will be a post-Trump.” Yes. When he dies. If he dies. I’m starting to believe as he probably does: that he’s immortal. That’s probably what keeps him going. Pure will and rage. But until then—his death—he will remain our opponent to beat, the biggest threat to America, to democracy, and to the world order.
I laugh at the thought of him making way for Vice President JD Vance, whom he clearly despises—and often humiliates—let alone a Democrat. No, he won’t make way for anyone. “Over my dead body,” as they say, or if at some point in the near future he’s so demented—he’s not far off—he can no longer pretend to be sane, and can be wheeled out of the White House, a senile Hannibal Lecter, scowl gone, blank stare on his face.
Even if some or all of Trump’s maneuvers are deemed—or indeed are—unconstitutional, will that stop him?
It’ll go a little something like this, and yes, feel free to scoff. I’m but a writer, doing as a writer does: stressing, speculating, imagining worlds and situations that might prove nothing more than pure fiction. I hope so, although so often writers—especially fiction writers—get it right. At the very least, I hope to widen my reader’s eyes, force them to think….
So much of what I’ve feared has already come to pass, and at this point I simply beg that the worst be considered and prepared for. Without a sense of urgency—of terror—the status quo of apathy and acceptance will remain. As William Butler Yeats writes, “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”
In three years time or sooner, when the majority of Americans, including many of Trump’s own voters, are fed up with him; the chaos he has sowed at home and abroad; the broken promises, namely the increased prices of everything, his tariffs and tax cuts a disaster for everyone except the very wealthy; the loss of healthcare; the loss of labor or a loved one or a business or a job or an education to deportation or violence or budget cuts, he will wage a war.
Alongside Israel and similarly-immortal, criminal-in-arms Benjamin Netanyahu, he will wage a war against Iran, hoping Vladimir Putin and Russia will be too caught up in Ukraine, still, to care; see Putin’s failure to help Bashar Al-Assad in Syria.
Perhaps a deal by then will have been made: America will no longer support Ukraine. America, perhaps, will withdraw from NATO, as France did in 1966. Trump hates NATO, as we know. He hates all such international agreements and organizations, already withdrawing—for the second time—from The Paris agreement, as well as from the World Health Organization... A new deal with Iran, meanwhile, would be “nice” Trump said.
The votes necessary for this, both the withdrawal and for war, will come through a dictator’s favorite forms of power: force, coercion, and intimidation. It won’t matter if the midterms bring more Democrats into the mix. I worry they won’t, that billionaires and the disinformation they sow, and exhaustion, and yet more intimidation will keep a blue resurgence in check. It might even get worse, Republicans adding to their numbers.
Trump has his militia after all. At the core of it are the Proud Boys and the J6 Prison Choir, all of whom are deeply indebted to him, still standing by, and will have grown as a force by then. It’ll be easy work; with a few exceptions, Democrats have yet to show any sort of real fight in them, a willingness—the courage—to do anything other than give in. Slink away. Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Merrick Garland… How pathetic, the lot of them. After all the threats they spoke of…
Besides, if a war with Iraq was possible, justified by faulty intelligence and false allegations in the pre-social media age, an age of generally agreed-upon facts, corruption, racism, and hubris all playing their part, with 110 Democrats voting in favor of it, including, unsurprisingly, the soon to be forgotten, aforementioned lame-duck president and similarly spiritless, failed candidate Hillary Clinton—that alone should’ve have disqualified both of them—war with Iran, under these circumstances, most definitely is.
Trump will make a similar deal with Xi Jinping and China: feel free to take Taiwan. Marco Rubio will happily comply, breaking his back once again to change his hawkish approach on China. Maybe he’ll just undulate; at this point, does he even have a back? Spineless, all of Trump’s appointees, appointed for that very purpose: They will do exactly as he says. Pete Hegseth can’t wait.
Trump will become a wartime president. He and Republican governors will simultaneously declare states of emergencies or martial law where they can, citing attacks on home soil, assassinations or suicide bombings by Iranians and Islamic extremists, possibly false-flag operations, the Proud Boys and J6 Prison Choir again called upon; citing massive protests against him, the war, and said governors, violent clashes between all parties, the National Guard called in and ordered to shoot; perhaps he’ll declare martial law in the vein of Abraham Lincoln, who he weirdly admires, a broad one targeting “all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors,” and he will use these various reasons—“peril to life and extensive damage to infrastructure”—to break from precedent, as he and Republicans have a penchant for doing—who cares if this one is 175-years old?—and suspend or simply delay elections indefinitely.
This isn’t impossible. “While the Executive Branch does not currently have this power… Congress may be able to delegate [it] to the Executive Branch by enacting a statute.”
“Foreign interference could, in and of itself, disrupt future elections; could exacerbate other disruptions (e.g., power failures) by spurring doubt about the legitimacy or accuracy of political or voting processes; or both.”
Perhaps another—more successful—elector scheme will surface.
In any case—or in all of them—Congress will again prove compliant; where the mob fails, investigations by Kash Patel and the weaponized justice department will succeed. And even if some or all of Trump’s maneuvers are deemed—or indeed are—unconstitutional, will that stop him? We’ve seen how fragile democracy is. How corrupt the Supreme Court is. They too—the majority—answer to Trump, who knows he can’t be criminally prosecuted even for blatantly illegal acts. And so he presses on, emboldened…
The Constitution is under constant attack. The funding freeze and executive action ending birthright citizenship are more recent examples. But let’s not forget Trump’s total disdain for the separation of powers, consolidating it more every day; let’s not forget the Muslim Ban and various emolument rackets and pay-to-play schemes…
For now the courts are holding relatively strong. The worst of his agenda is being delayed. Will they continue to? I’m starting to seriously doubt it, as others are, and I can’t help but wonder: How much longer will the Constitution as it stands, amendments already being proposed to grant Trump a third term—will democracy—last?
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular