Archives, Room Use Only - HE243.M55 1924

"At the end of the day, you want to pick the best position and hopefully it's a good sign that people are starting to value the linebacker position."

It is a case of trying to understand the society around us through experiential knowledge transfer

Astronomers at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics have found that six percent of red dwarf stars have habitable, Earth-sized planets and the closest could be just 13 light-years away!

The post Earth-like planets discovered right next door to Earth appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

The black-headed paradise-flycatcher of western and central Africa is a small colorful forest bird that thrives on the flying insects it chases down by swooping, […]

The post These mites should make birds quiver right down to their quills appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

A new water frog from the Pacific slopes of the Andes in central Peru has been described and named in the open access journal ZooKeys. Telmatobius […]

The post New species of bright-yellow water frog discovered in Peru appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

Meet Scorpaenodes barrybrowni is a scorpionfish species newly discovered by Smithsonian scientists using a manned submersible in the deep-reef waters of the Caribbean island of Curaçao. It […]

The post New bright orange-red scorpionfish discovered deep in Caribbean appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

In the first volume of the Secret Smithsonian Adventures graphic-novel series from Smithsonian Books, The Wrong Wrights, four middle-school kids visit the Smithsonian’s National Air […]

The post ‘The Wrong Wrights’: A Graphic Novel from Smithsonian Books appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

Click photo to take a tour of the 1903 Wright Flyer with Smithsonian X 3D Explorer. The Smithsonian X 3D Collection features objects from the […]

The post Take a 3D tour of the 1903 Wright Flyer! appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

Skinny lines of ants snake through the rainforest carrying leaves and flowers above their heads—fertilizer for industrial-scale, underground fungus farms. Soon after the dinosaur extinctions […]

The post Some ants still trying to get crop domestication right appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

The Smithsonian is celebrating Earth Day this month by hosting the first Earth Optimism Summit from April 21 to 23 in Washington, D.C. Its goal […]

The post The Smithsonian’s history is right in line with Earth Optimism appeared first on Smithsonian Insider.

In just a few years, digital technologies have allowed faster mobilization in response to humanitarian crises, better documentation of war crimes in conflict zones like Syria and Yemen, and more accessible platforms for organizing peaceful demonstrations around the world.

President Trump speaks in the Oval Office Wednesday.; Credit: Evan Vucci/AP

In a whistleblower complaint filed this week, top federal scientist Rick Bright alleges he was removed from his post for failing to go along with the president's push to promote a drug as a cure for COVID-19.

On Wednesday, Trump dismissed the complaint, telling reporters Bright "seems like a disgruntled employee who's trying to help the Democrats win an election."

"I never met him, I know nothing about him," Trump said, adding that he didn't think "disgruntled people" should work for his administration.

Trump also observed that Bright is being represented by a legal team that represented "other people" – seemingly an allusion to lawyer Debra Katz's representation of Christine Blasey Ford, who testified against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation.

Bright's legal team declined to comment.

Bright says he was ousted from his position as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority because he wanted to spend money on safe and vetted treatments for COVID-19 — not hydroxychloroquine. The president has called that common anti-malaria drug a possible "game-changer," but there is no proof that it works for COVID patients, and it has side effects. The Food and Drug Administration ultimately warned against using the drug to treat COVID-19 without "strict medical supervision."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

US Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos.; Credit: BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

The U.S. Education Department on Wednesday finalized campus sexual assault rules that bolster the rights of the accused, reduce legal liabilities for schools and colleges, and narrow the scope of cases schools will be required to investigate.  

The change announced by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos reshapes the way the nation’s schools respond to complaints of sexual misconduct. It is meant to replace policies from the Obama administration that DeVos previously revoked, saying they pressured schools to deny the rights of accused students. “Today we release a final rule that recognizes we can continue to combat sexual misconduct without abandoning our core values of fairness, presumption of innocence and due process," she said. "This empowers survivors with more tools than ever before." Democrats and education groups had asked DeVos to delay any changes until after the coronavirus pandemic, saying colleges don’t have time to implement new federal rules while they respond to the crisis.

The new rules appear to be consistent with much of what was originally proposed in 2018, but also set a more specific definition of what constitutes sexual assault and require that colleges and universities hold live hearings during which the victim and defendant would be allowed to cross-examine one another. K-12 schools have the option to hold live hearings as well, though it is not required. In order for a school to be found legally liable under the new rules, there would need to be evidence that the school was “deliberately indifferent” in following directives for providing resources for the victim and investigating the complaint fairly. 

Today on AirTalk, we’ll debate the finalized rules and talk about the practical and legal implications for students, schools and administrators.

With files from the Associated Press

Guests:

Jenna Parker, partner at Hathaway Parker based in Los Angeles; she specializes in Title IX cases and has represented  students and others accused of sexual misconduct

Michele Dauber, professor of Law and Sociology at Stanford University; chair of the “Enough is Enough Voter Project,” a political action committee that advocates for making violence against women a voting issue; she helped revise Stanford’s policy on sexual assault; she tweets @mldauber

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

; Credit: J. Scott Applewhite/AP

What does the right to a unanimous jury verdict have to do with abortion, or school prayer, or federal environmental regulations? Stay tuned.

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday struck down state laws in Louisiana and Oregon that allowed people accused of serious crimes to be convicted by a non-unanimous jury vote. The 6-to-3 decision overturned a longstanding prior ruling from 1972, which had upheld such non-unanimous verdicts in state courts.

And these days, any decision to overturn a longstanding precedent rings the alarm bells in the Supreme Court.

In the short run, Monday's decision was a victory for Evangelisto Ramos, who in 2016 was convicted of second-degree murder by a jury vote of 10-to-2 in Louisiana.

Only two states--Louisiana and Oregon--had provisions allowing non-unanimous verdicts, and Louisiana just recently changed its law to be like those in 48 other states and the federal government.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, laid out the history behind the laws in both states. Gorsuch noted that the measure was first added to the Louisiana state constitution in 1898, after the Supreme Court ruled that racial minorities could not be barred from juries; that same year, Louisiana added the non-unanimous jury provision to its state constitution as part of a package of amendments that deliberately made it difficult for black citizens to vote or otherwise participate meaningfully in the state's governance. Specifically, Gorsuch said, the non-unanimous jury provision was a way to ensure that even if one or two African Americans made it on to a jury, their participation would be "meaningless."

The adoption of the non-unanimous jury rule in Oregon, Gorsuch wrote, "can similarly be traced to the rise of the Ku Klux Klan and efforts to dilute the influence of racial and ethnic and religious minorities on Oregon juries."

Despite these state provisions, there has never been any dispute that the unanimous jury requirement applies to the federal government. The question in this case was whether that aspect of the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial applied to the states as well.

Over the last 75 years or so, the court has applied just about every other provision of the Bill of Rights to the states, but in 1972 it deviated from that practice, declining to apply the unanimous jury requirement in a similar fashion.

On Monday, however, the 1972 decision came tumbling down. The six-justice court majority — composed of conservatives and liberals — said the earlier ruling was a mistake.

The decision, written by the conservative Gorsuch, was joined in whole or in part by liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Justice Clarence Thomas, another conservative, agreed with the result, but on entirely different grounds.

Writing for the dissenters, Justice Samuel Alito — joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and for the most part, Justice Elena Kagan — maintained that the principle of adhering to precedent should be followed in this case because to do otherwise would require "a potentially crushing" number of new trials for people currently imprisoned under the old rule.

"Where is the justice in that?" replied Justice Gorsuch. "Not a single member of this court" is prepared to say that the 1972 decision was correct, he noted. "Every judge must learn to live with the fact that he or she will make mistakes ... But it is something else entirely to perpetuate" a wrong "only because we fear the consequences of being right."

The consequences of Monday's decision will likely be felt more in Louisiana, which allowed non-unanimous verdicts for more serious crimes than Oregon. The court's decision will require retrials for any prisoner who still has appeals pending.

There are about 100 of those cases in Louisiana, says Jamila Johnson, the managing attorney at the Promise of Justice Initiative, which represented Ramos. But there are also at least 1,700 prisoners in the state who might qualify for a new trial if the court eventually holds that Monday's decision is retroactive.

The high court left that question open for another day.

Altogether the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions totaled a whopping 86 pages and reflected an important subtext--divergent views about when the court should follow its usual rule of adhering to precedent and when it should not.

It's important because, the new ultra-conservative court majority has very different views than the courts of the last 75 years on topics as diverse as abortion, voting rights, federal regulation, and the clash between religious views and generally applicable laws.

"The court's views about when it's OK to overrule prior precedent have always been more about the eye of the beholder than they have been about a rule that is easy or straightforward to apply," says Deborah Pearlstein, professor and co-director of the Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy at Cardozo School of Law. Ultimately, she said, "all of these major questions that are coming before the court are going to be fought along these lines."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Embattled Korean Resource Center board president DJ Yoon takes interviews in a photo dated February 2014. ( ; Credit: Korean Resource Center via Flickr

In Los Angeles, another Asian American civil rights organization is in upheaval. A month after major layoffs at Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Los Angeles, the Korean Resource Center has lost more than half of its staff.  

The Korean Resource Center  is a leading advocate for low-income and undocumented Koreans. Its organizers worked on flipping Orange County from red to blue. Its legal staff provides free aid to immigrants. But 18 people have left in recent weeks, many upset with board president DJ Yoon and his management style. 

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Rick Bright, former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, is seen here in 2018.; Credit: Toya Sarno Jordan/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Updated at 6:14 p.m. ET

The federal scientist who was ousted from his role as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority has filed a whistleblower complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.

Rick Bright was a high-ranking federal scientist focused on vaccine development and a deputy assistant secretary with the Department of Health and Human Services. Last month, Bright said he was transferred to a "less impactful position" at the National Institutes of Health after he was reluctant to promote the use of drugs such as hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients.

In the complaint, Bright alleges a range of government wrongdoing by Dr. Robert Kadlec, the assistant secretary of preparedness and response at the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and others. Bright's boss was Kadlec, who in turn reported to HHS Secretary Alex Azar.

At the time of his removal, Bright said he had been ousted because of his "insistence" that the government spend funds on "safe and scientifically vetted solutions" to address the coronavirus crisis and not on "drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit."

Bright says in the complaint that he raised concerns about the need to prepare for the coronavirus in January but encountered opposition from Trump administration officials. He says he was transferred out of BARDA in retaliation.

According to the complaint, relations between Bright and Kadlec had been strained since 2018 or so, when Bright began "raising repeated objections to the outsized role Dr. Kadlec allowed industry consultants to play in securing contracts that Dr. Bright and other scientists and subject matter experts determined were not meritorious."

"Once the COVID-19 pandemic hit, however, Dr. Bright became even more alarmed about the pressure that Dr. Kadlec and other government officials were exerting on BARDA to invest in drugs, vaccines, and other technologies without proper scientific vetting or that lacked scientific merit," the complaint continues. "Dr. Bright objected to these efforts and made clear that BARDA would only invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the COVID-19 pandemic in safe and scientifically vetted solutions and it would not succumb to the pressure of politics or cronyism."

The complaint alleges that Bright made repeated efforts to get the U.S. government to make adequate preparations for coronavirus, but was stymied by political appointees leading the HHS, including Azar.

HHS did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment.

Bright says that in an effort to get the word out to the public about the risks associated with hydroxychloroquine, he shared with a reporter nonclassified emails between HHS officials that "discussed the drug's potential toxicity and demonstrated the political pressure to rush these drugs from Pakistan and India to American households." He says Azar and Kadlec removed him from his post within days of publication of an article about chloroquine because they suspected he was the article's source.

Bright says he stopped receiving a paycheck on April 20 and has not been assigned any further duties.

News of the whistleblower complaint was made public by his attorney on Tuesday.

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Students walk outside Detroit's Pershing High School in 2017. A lawsuit claims the state of Michigan failed to provide the city's students with the most fundamental of skills: the ability to read.; Credit: Carlos Osorio/AP

In a landmark decision, a federal appeals court has ruled that children have a constitutional right to literacy, dealing a remarkable victory to students.

The ruling comes in response to a lawsuit brought by students of five Detroit schools, claiming that because of deteriorating buildings, teacher shortages and inadequate textbooks, the state of Michigan failed to provide them with the most fundamental of skills: the ability to read.

For decades, civil rights lawyers have tried to help students and families in underfunded schools by arguing that the U.S. Constitution guarantees children at least a basic education. Federal courts have consistently disagreed. Until now.

The ability to read and write is "essential" for a citizen to participate in American democracy, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday. One cannot effectively vote, answer a jury summons, pay taxes or even read a road sign if illiterate, wrote Judge Eric Clay, and so where "a group of children is relegated to a school system that does not provide even a plausible chance to attain literacy, we hold that the Constitution provides them with a remedy."

"Like a daycare"

The 2016 complaint alleges that Michigan's then-Gov. Rick Snyder and the state's board of education denied Detroit students their fundamental right to literacy. It cites textbooks that were tattered, outdated and in such short supply that teachers could not send work home. The suit also describes school buildings that were in shocking disrepair: broken toilets and water fountains, leaking ceilings, shattered windows.

In warmer months, the complaint says, a lack of air-conditioning caused some students to faint; in winter, students regularly wore hats, coats and scarves to class. Students became accustomed to seeing cockroaches, mice or rats scurrying across the floor.

"You're sitting down in the classroom, and you see rodents in a corner. Or you can hear things crawling in the books," says Jamarria Hall, a plaintiff in the class-action suit, who graduated in 2017. "But the saddest thing of all was really the resources that they had, like, being in a class where there's 34 students, but there's only six textbooks."

Given these conditions, the five K-12 schools named in the complaint also struggled to retain teachers. Many classes were taught by paraprofessionals or inexperienced teachers placed through the Teach For America program. Often, Hall says, when teachers quit suddenly or didn't show up, students would simply be sent to the gym.

"For days on end — weeks on end — if the school didn't have a substitute or couldn't fill that gap, the gym was basically the go-to place. Or they would set students down in the classroom and really put on a movie, like Frozen... like a daycare," Hall remembers.

At one school, the complaint says, a math teacher quit soon after the school year began "due to frustration with large class sizes and lack of support. ... Eventually, the highest performing eighth grade student was asked to take over teaching both seventh and eighth grade math. This student taught both math classes for a month."

The complaint delivers a crushing assessment of these schools' failure to educate students: Proficiency rates "hover near zero in nearly all subject areas," it says.

"Illiteracy is the norm."

Previous legal efforts to argue that families in low-income, underfunded schools deserve better have run headlong into the U.S. Constitution, which makes no mention of the word "education," let alone a right to it.

One of the most famous cases, San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, made it all the way to the Supreme Court before the justices, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that families in poorer districts have no federal right to the same levels of funding as wealthier districts. They essentially said: The system isn't fair, but the U.S. government has no obligation to make it so.

In fact, the first judge to hear the current, Detroit case came to much the same conclusion.

U.S. District Judge Stephen Murphy dismissed the Michigan suit in 2018, writing that, yes, "literacy — and the opportunity to obtain it — is of incalculable importance," but not necessarily a fundamental right.

The students' lawyers disputed Murphy's reasoning and appealed his ruling, and, on Thursday, two of three judges took their side.

"We're not asking for a Cadillac"

In the past, many of the arguments used to pursue educational equity in the courts have been inherently comparative. Using the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, lawyers have focused on disparity — how one school or one district's resources compare to another's.

"This [case] is different," says Tacy Flint, a partner at Sidley Austin LLP and a lawyer for the plaintiffs. "It's not comparative. It's not a question of some people being treated worse than others. This fundamental right to a basic minimum education is a right that every child has."

Flint and her co-counsel focused more on a different pillar of the 14th Amendment, the Due Process Clause, saying the Constitution protects essential rights that "you can't imagine our constitutional democracy or our political life functioning without." And, Flint says, "access to literacy clearly fits that description."

Put simply: The plaintiffs' lawyers did not set out to level the playing field for all students. Instead, they attempted to use the appalling conditions of five Detroit schools to establish a floor.

"This case focuses squarely on literacy as the irreducible minimum," says Kristine Bowman, professor of law and education policy at Michigan State University.

And that minimum is pretty minimal.

"We're not asking for a Cadillac, or even a used, low-end Kia. We're asking for something more than the Flintstones' car," says co-counsel Evan Caminker, a former dean of the University of Michigan Law School.

In his dissent to Thursday's decision, Circuit Judge Eric Murphy argued that accepting literacy as a constitutional right would open a Pandora's box for states, and force federal courts to wrestle with questions beyond their purview: "May they compel states to raise their taxes to generate the needed [school] funds? Or order states to give parents vouchers so that they may choose different schools? How old may textbooks be before they become constitutionally outdated? What minimum amount of training must teachers receive? Which HVAC systems must public schools use?"

Murphy wrote that history, and legal precedent, are on his side: "The Supreme Court has refused to treat education as a fundamental right every time a party has asked it to do so."

After all, the judge reasoned, food, housing and medical care are also "critical for human flourishing and for the exercise of constitutional rights," but the Constitution "does not compel states to spend funds on these necessities of life." Why should education be any different?

A spokesperson for Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer says her office is reviewing the court's decision before it decides what to do next. Whitmer's office also said in a statement that "the governor has a strong record on education and has always believed we have a responsibility to teach every child to read."

While the ruling is historic, it comes with several caveats. Basic literacy is a remarkably low standard to set for schools. As such, legal experts say, this ruling won't have an immediate impact on children in underfunded schools.

"We're not talking about the court having to recognize a broad-based, free-floating, generalized right to education," says Michelle Adams, a professor at Cardozo School of Law in New York City. This will not "open the floodgates of litigation. We're talking about a situation where students are being warehoused and required to be in school and yet they literally cannot read."

The case is also relatively young. The court's decision could be reviewed by the full 6th Circuit, appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, or returned to play out in District Court. Whitmer's office has not yet indicated how the state will respond.

"The fight is not done yet," says Jamarria Hall, who is now living in Tallahassee, Fla., and taking classes at a community college. "We were fighting just to get into the ring. Now we're in the ring. Now the fight really starts."

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Patt's outfit for April 12, 2013.; Credit: Michelle Lanz/KPCC

You don’t believe it looking out your windows in Southern California today, but spring it is. Perhaps I am forcing the spring by wearing bouquets on my stems – I think I can identify ranunculus, poppies, dianthus, and maybe roses?

I don’t know how authentically botanical fabric print designers think they ought to be, but I have an unshakable childhood recall of a bedroom in my great-grandmother’s house wallpapers in blue roses, and I was for years thereafter convinced that I could grow myself some blue roses.

And is there a happier color than this jacket’s coral/peach, or a springier fabric than the cotton-blend pique? It’s not as strenuous a shade as it would be in its brightness equivalent elsewhere on the color wheel, like electric blue or acid green. [And if it were, well, I’d wear it anyway!]

But the cloche hat – Daisy Buchanan, eat your platinum heart out. The ruched ombre silk ribbon on the crown and the minute bits of bent and curled ostrich feathers, like hatchlings on the hat! [I like saying that even more than I like writing it: "ruched ombre." It sounds like a fantastical concoction of molecular gastronomy: "the rambutan brûlée this evening is topped with ruched ombre."?     

Any bets on whether the May release of "The Great Gatsby" will revive 1920s chic? Who’s ready for dropped waistlines, lower heels and  long sautoir necklaces?

This content is from Southern California Public Radio. View the original story at SCPR.org.

Here’s how you can greatly improve your Zoom privacy and security in a few simple steps

The post Zoom security: Getting the settings right appeared first on WeLiveSecurity

The new agreement and its potential impact on Point Loma Resources are discussed in a Mackie Research Capital Corp. report.

An overview of research into ‘nudge’ theory and practices has recently been presented. While there is much evidence to show how humans make decisions, translating these psychological and economic insights into viable policy instruments that encourage behavioural change remains challenging, the authors conclude.

A human rights ‘protection gap’ exists for people forced to migrate by environmental stress and climate change, according to researchers. The lack of a legal framework and practices to protect ‘environmental refugees’ stems from the historic and political context of migration issues — and land access rights more broadly — the researchers say in a recently published paper.

Industry has traditionally claimed that strict environmental regulation has a negative effect on its competitiveness. However, a recent theory proposes it may actually increase productivity and innovation. This study used a large database of inter-sectoral transactions to investigate the effect of environmental taxation on manufacturing businesses across Europe. The findings show that environmental regulation can increase innovation and productivity.

IIF urged that the hearing should specially involve medical health professionals, academics from IITs and digital rights and public policy experts to provide inputs.

IIF urged that the hearing should specially involve medical health professionals, academics from IITs and digital rights and public policy experts to provide inputs.

A review of a decade of environmental citizen science ??? where the general public are involved in science as researchers ??? concludes that its benefits to science and society far outweigh concerns over data quality. Challenges can be overcome through volunteer training and should not be used to devalue citizen science programmes, say the researchers.

Two metrics for informing farmers about the biodiversity on their land are presented in a recent Swiss study: average species richness and farm ‘uniqueness’. These are both easy to understand and comparable between farms, the researchers say.

Brighton and Hove Albion chief executive Paul Barber insists it is not just clubs fighting for Premier League survival who oppose the completion of the season at neutral venues.

The merger of Wintershall and DEA came at exactly the right time, according to the chairman of the board of executive directors at Wintershall Dea.

Exposing and discussing harassment is a way to send the message that it's not OK.

Right-of-way farming now joins solar car charging and pollinator-friendly landscaping along the Ray C. Anderson Memorial Highway in Troup County.

Although Venus is very bright, it is also very low in the sky, so you'll want to find a low southwestern horizon for the best view.

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in two gay marriage cases, it's easy to forget how far opinions have moved on the issue.

The flower flower motif-stamped Los Angeles masterpiece is set to reopen as a museum following renovations.

The R.W. Lindholm Residence is the newest, but certainly not the first, Wright-designed structure to be relocated in its entirety.

The United Nations General Assembly has officially recognized access to safe, clean drinking water as a basic human right.

Earth has never hosted 7 billion people all at once before, but according to the U.N., it may reach that spooky milestone by the end of this month.

The era of ersatz Eames chairs and knockoff Noguchi coffee tables comes to an end.

Marrying ultra-efficiency, altruism and, most importantly, affordability, Green Planet Group and GE break ground on Eco Village at Dunedin, a net-zero energy to

Yoga teachers vary in style and substance. Here's how to find the right teacher for your level and personality, by answering questions about your best learning

Has eLearning gone from the boardroom to the yoga mat? Here's what to consider if you're thinking of ditching the studio to practice at home.

Reduced stress and increased self-awareness are just two benefits of starting prenatal yoga, or maintaining an existing practice.

By learning about the many different types, you can get the benefits of meditation in a way that works for you.