17 Burst results for "Emily Basilan"
"emily basilan" Discussed on Slate's Political Gabfest
"Quite extraordinary. Well it does give you the sense if all of this is true even if it's only like sixty percent true that as you were pointing out in all these different parts of the government this system held but like it all right oh. My god did shook and rattled the last bolt in the basement and it might not again. Let us go to cocktail chatter when you're sitting having a bolt in the basement. Bolt in the basement is just a shot of whiskey with another shot of whiskey on top hat on top of a hat. What are you going to be chatting about emily. My chatter this week is about a story in the wall street journal about facebook and instagram. Which should be jaw-dropping. Except that is also just part of such a pattern at this point so the story is called. facebook knows. Instagram is toxic for teen girls company documents. Show it's by georgia wells. Jeff horowitz and deepa setha rahman and what this shows is that facebook has had research for a while showing that the way in which girls in particular feel like have to live up to other people's expectations about how they look has had a real effect on their depression anxiety levels. And you know. When i was writing about bullying for the book i published in two thousand ten this whole question of teenager. Self image the dilatot that social media can have on kids loomed so large and when i went and spent a day at facebook at that point they were not in total denial about this but really dismissive that they had a real role to play in preventing these kinds of ill-effects. And i think what you see over and over again is that they dismissed the problems that they are very much. A part of and you know when mark zuckerberg. The ceo of facebook was asked about children and mental health. This is at a congressional hearing in march. Twenty twenty one. He said the research that facebook has seen shows that people can have positive mental health benefits in connection with social media. And we've just seen this pattern where facebook finds out from its own internal researchers because there are some people there who are concerned about what the company is doing that there are these problems and then the company walk away or tries to bury that research. Because it's not in line with its own public image and it's it's an alarming pattern. Emily can you just spell what some people might say. Which is oh well. This is what glamour and cosmopolitan did you know for girls. Growing up in the seventies and eighties. Just explain why. This is so very different. So you know. I think about my own growing up because i grew up in the seventies and eighties and it was totally true that you would look at magazine images and realize that they had nothing to do with your own body and your own face. That was you noticed. But the idea that it's girls themselves posing and being so just having this feeling that they're comparing themselves to their peers that they're not measuring up that they're supposed to be creating this perfectly curated set of images about themselves and presenting their lives in this romanticized way. I just think it would have crushed crushed me. This isn't this isn't just about girls. I mean i can see how it plays out in the teenagers. i'm adjacent to. And i know how it would have destroyed me which is not about necessarily body image but about foam. Oh and about you know the whole process of growing up is the messy creation curation of your own life you you wanna make sure you have lots of weird clumsy messy identities so you can figure out which is the right one and a half no one emerges into adolescence perfectly formed so it's always going to be fraught with all of this imperfection and to create a thing that injects you with doubt about your imperfection on a minute by minute basis at this time when you are both sensitive and need to be experimenting with your identity and i by which i mean everything from. Mis comic book person or like a star. Wars person or like math geek. Or whatever i wanna be. And think i am or like generous person who donates my time at the church. All of that gets ruined by this injection of doubt at just the wrong time and it's all or at least on instagram. I think in particular it so much about physical appearance and like who you're socializing with not about like all the other attributes of your development your brain your accomplishments your interests that you were just talking about mean obviously social media can feed those things too but this particular aspect of it. It just seems wholly unsurprising that it's having a toxic effect and and the facebook doesn't care very well said emily. I see this weirdly. There are some adults who behave like teenagers on instagram. And it's so alarming to see people who are leading these lives with their which the so manicured and curated and where they're they're posing if you know anything about their own actual life and you realize like this is not. This is not really connected to who you actually are. What you're unhappy family. Life is actually like what are you doing with this. It's really sad. And i looked at that way for adults. Imagine what it is for sixteen. Look i know. You don't think i'm out clubbing every night but in fact that is the new lifestyle we have bridged. Somebody's impersonating me on instagram. They're not causing any terrible problems. Or just like posting as me. And i filed a complaint instagram like a year ago. And they've never gotten back to me. So i just literally can't get onto instagram. Like it's just not a thing in my life. Because i can't have my own account back and so i literally unless i'm leaving my husband just is something guys. I'm sure there are people who listen to this show who work for facebook or instagram. You just her. Emily basilan like literally one of the leading journalists. The united states complained a year ago to you..
"emily basilan" Discussed on Fresh Air
"So i was thinking about that. I mean it's hugely important for you to get his freedom back and the judge was giving it to him but the state was also really leaving him to fend for itself. Even as the judge was admitting that what had happened to him was deeply unfair. Emily basilan it's great to have you back on the show again. And congratulations on helping to rescue a life. Thank you so much terry. I really appreciate it. Emily basilan writes about criminal justice and as a staff writer at the new york times magazine. Her article. About utica briley titled. Can you please help me get out of prison. Is the cover story of this week's magazine. Utica briley will join us after we take a short break. This is fresh air. This message comes from. Npr sponsor hulu presenting the new hulu original series mccartney three to one in the six part documentary series. Paul mccartney sits down with legendary music producer. Rick rubin for a rare in-depth conversation to discuss his groundbreaking work with the beatles wings and his fifty years and counting as a solo artist. Don't miss this historic event featuring all your favorite songs in a way you've never heard them before stream all episodes of mccartney three to one on july sixteenth only on hulu. My guest is utica. Briley whose case i just discussed with emily basil on a journalist who covers the criminal justice system. He's the subject of her article. Titled can you please help me get out of prison. Which is the cover story of this week's new york times magazine. Bradley was sentenced to sixty years in prison for an armed robbery in new orleans. Twenty twelve that. He said he didn't commit basil. On was one of dozens of people. He wrote to from prison asking for help to prove his innocence but no one was interested except basilan after corresponding with him. She thought historian was an example of the inequality of mass incarceration basilan described the case to her sister. Laura brazilan a lawyer. Who's a professor at the university of san francisco school of law where she directs a criminal. Justice clinic decided to represent briley and one is a po and his exoneration. He was released in march now at the age of twenty eight briley starting a new life and facing the difficulties so many people face after being released from prison. He's joining us from his home. In new orleans utica riley welcome to fresh air. Congratulations on being on the outside on getting out My first question is a question that you could probably talk about for hours or maybe for years and it's a really big question and i apologize if it's too big but what did it feel like when you were in prison serving a sixty year sentence and you heard served seven years of this before emily basilan reached out to you after you reached out to her So what was it.
"emily basilan" Discussed on Slate's Political Gabfest
"Are researchers bridget. Dunlap gabriel roth editorial director of slate audio. June thomas making producer at least montgomery is executive producer of podcasts. Please follow us on twitter at lake past and tweet your chatter to us. They are for emily basilan and john. Dickerson i'm david plots. Thanks for listening. We'll talk to you next week. Actually i won't because i'm going to be in new mexico with my kids and maybe john is also invocation. Emily will be there will be. Emily will be telling a have a single devoted entirely to fantasies about justice prior and his post supreme court life. Really that will be memorable by hello slate. Plus how are you. Emily set us up. So i wanna do a segment about ordinary things in our lives that have vastly improved since childhood. We last week were being about the things we miss now. I want to celebrate the things that like truly have improved and just gotten much more varied an interesting. And i am going to start with ice cream. I know there was good ice cream when we were little loving the peppermint. Stick ice cream at howard. Johnson's on i'm sure people made amazing homemade ice cream however now you can get like amazing ice cream at your supermarket at like at the gas station. A couple of blocks from me they carry ben and jerry's and ben and jerry's isn't even my favorite ice cream by any means anymore. I just think we're in like ice cream. Mecca right now and it's true about a bunch of other things too like lettuce for example which used to be like iceberg like a on frozen ice for most of the year now is so much better and what are the other things like that. Are you thinking of things that you as a kid particularly like things that are good for kids or just. Don't think lettuce was my favorite thing as head. Things that have improved since nineteen seventies. Yeah like really improved in a way that measurably creates more joy and pleasure on people's less modem speeds there what we're know modems when we were little though. Do you remember that there was no internet. It's not true. I mean how little do you have to be. I'm talking seventh grade okay. Fast food as much better. I don't really eat fast food. But there are a variety of things that are are encompassed in fast food like chipotle say or kava about fast casual as fast casual truth fast food. Oh my god fast casual. She's breaking out the marketing lingo ladder up too fast casual fast. Casual is is a convention of fast food to get people like me to go eat fast food. But i don't know what the difference is and mcdonald's except that price maybe a little bit price a little bit. They're slightly more expensive but it's really good and it's available. It's cheap and by the way if they really wanted to make it fast they loaded into a cannon because it's perfectly shaped like my god the burrito you could then it would be really fast food not yet the andy rooney job sixty minutes and they fired auditioned for the andy rooney job.
"emily basilan" Discussed on Here & Now
"From npr and wbz. I'm robin young. And i'm tanya moseley. It's here now and we start with two high profile decisions today. From the supreme court the affordable care act will stay in place and religious freedom prevails in a case out of philadelphia. The court ruled in favor of a catholic foster agency that turned away gay and lesbian couples. Who want it to be foster care. Parents let's bring in. Emily basil on to break down the significance of these rulings. She's a senior research scholar at yale. Law school hi. Emily hey tanya hey let's start with the case of the aca california versus texas justice alito. Refer to this case as the quote. Third instalment in an epic affordable care trilogy referring to this being the third time the court has actually taken this up. How how did they rule this time. Well this time. There were seven justices rejecting the challenge to the affordable. Care act from The republican plaintiffs and they said effectively that the plaintiffs did not have standing did not have an adequate legal reason to be bringing the law suit in the first place because they hadn't suffered the kind of direct injury that a lawsuit is supposed to address. Is it a surprise. They wrote this way. I don't think it's a surprise that they rejected this challenge to obamacare and the seven to two vote. I think shows that as this trilogy of challenges has continued the legal arguments for striking down. The law have gone weaker and weaker. The idea that there was no standing to sue. That wasn't clearly the reason there were other problems. I think with this challenge. So i was surprised a little bit by the standing reason that the court gave but i think the rejection of the challenge overall was pretty much expected. Emily does this mean that. It's the end of the line specifically for conservative challenges to the i mean i think so. It's hard to say for sure. What else someone. Who didn't like this law could come up with. But i think what we are seeing is the supreme court saying look. If you don't like this law there are plenty of policy. Reasons disagree with it but that really is something to be worked out in the political arena. Not through the courts okay. Let's go to this. Next big case fulton vs philadelphia. The court said a catholic foster care agency was exempt from from local laws prohibiting discrimination against same sex couples just chief justice john roberts wrote the opinion. What was his reasoning. So this is a case in which the city of philadelphia said catholic social services agency. That if you refuse to approve any Same sex couples as foster care parents. We don't want to contract with you anymore. Because that violates our protections against discrimination for lgbt people and normally when you have a law that incidentally burdens religion as this one does for catholic social services you're allowed to continue upholding that law as long as it's neutral and it's generally applicable in other words. The law doesn't target a religious group and it applies to everybody. So what we see. Here is chief justice roberts the majority giving. What's really a very technical reason for his claim that philadelphia's antidiscrimination rule is not generally applicable. And he's looking at this language in the ordinance which says that the city hypothetically at least could allow an exception to its policies for someone and so roberts is saying well if the if the city allows exceptions for any reason then. The law doesn't generally apply and so in this particular case. Lgbt people lose the protection of this antidiscrimination ordinance does this case have broader implications for free speech and religious rights or or was this opinion written more narrowly. It's quite a narrow opinion. And i think what we see here is similar to what. The supreme court did a couple of years ago in a case called masterpiece cake shop which was about whether a baker had to bake a cake for a same sex wedding And in both of these instances you see the court say well people are not going to get the benefit of this Protection against discrimination in this particular case. But we're also knocking to throw open the doors to you. Know discrimination runamuck everywhere. We're going to say that based in this very particular way in which in this case a city. Ordinance is written this. This protection doesn't apply one thing that was striking to me. Is at the end of his opinion. Roberts just dismisses philadelphia's interest in new treatment for lgbt foster parents. He really doesn't give any reason other than the existence of this exception and it's just hard to imagine that kind of language in supreme court opinion about any other form of discrimination so that was striking to me. I have less than thirty seconds with you. But any insights you're gleaning from how the justices aligned the. Lgbt case was really surprising to me that all three liberal justices joined roberts's opinion. And i think what we may be seeing here is the justices on the liberal side of the core trying to ward off what they saw as far worse result in justice. A lido's concurrence in which he's really trying to change the law to make it much much harder to prevent religious groups from discriminating. Emily basilan is a senior research scholar at yale law. School as always thank you so much. Thanks for having me well for more on the ruling today. Upholding the aca. We're joined by connecticut democrat rosa delauro chair of the house appropriations committee congresswoman briefly. Your thoughts when you heard that ruling i really. It's really very very exciting. Because decision is another victory for the affordable care act and having been here for the passage of the affordable care act. I know how transformative has been in people's lives because this is what my district tells me every single day And it's really been transformative for the american people a landmark victory for democratic efforts to protect people with preexisting conditions. I have a pre existing condition. I'm a survivor of ovarian cancer. And while i may have been able to get insurance it would have been absolutely Out of sight in terms of cost but now they can't discriminate against me and i it's really protecting folks from the republicans relentless assault on these protections And particularly in the middle of a pandemic. Let's remind people you know because there's a nettie history here. Republicans were always against the mandate that people buy insurance or pay a fee in twenty twelve. The supreme court upheld that fears attacks in two thousand seventeen..
"emily basilan" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Mean, Don't we? When deciding whether Trump's Behavior incited the riding a January 6 don't we have to look at the political context and what politicians were doing in order to incite the kind of behavior that we saw? Over the summer with burning buildings and organizing, you know, rallies to raise money? And if you if you get in trouble with the law will bail you out. What could be more insightful than that? We're seeing on the press. We seen burning buildings within cops being dragged down the street. We see precinct being ransacked and politicians saying this is free speech in action, And yet yet and if they arrest you, well, yeah. Who isn't helping we possibly I analyze what words did with a wink wink and a nod and throw him out of office in the platform and and and and And silence him and call him a Honey, go ahead. No, I said and prevent him from running again, which is largely what's at stake and prevent him from running again. I mean, there has to be a larger context here. How can you just ignore the context from just a few months ago? Right. That's a great point. And when we've been talking about on the show and on other segments, I've played exactly some of the historical clips that you refer to on. We don't even have to go back as far Emily But but it's useful to as the first trump campaign where, like J says he would tell people you know if you see hecklers Rough him up and I'll pay him legal bills or, you know, however, he exactly put it. But then, even in interviews in the run up to this election, he would be asked. By Chris Wallace on Fox, for example. And others. Do you promise? I think it was Chris Wallace in the debate, one of the debates against Biden Do you promise a peaceful transfer of power? If you're declared the loser, and he wouldn't promise it so even by hedging In that context, he's nodding and winking to people that he would condone violence so that becomes evidence as well agree. Well, that's a really interesting question. How much you kind of hold the speaker responsible for things they've said previously, and I think we struggle with this like we all make these connections. I completely understand what You're talking about and what your collar brought up. But if you're talking about, you know, legally actually convicting someone either of impeachment or in a criminal court. How much do you want those previous instances to come in how direct a connection do you want there to be? What kind of proof? Do you want that his followers were responding to these kinds of messages. I actually think in President Trump's case. There's a lot of evidence and like it's pretty clear, but I am wary of make of allowing for two loose a set of Letting in this kind of evidence because again, like most of the time, the people who are accused of inciting violence or not the powerful former president, they're dissidents. You know they're demonstrators, and you just want to be Careful about what kind of precedent or set When we continue in a minute. We'll take more calls and also want to ask you to go deeper on something You said a few minutes ago, basically suggesting that this might boomerang and hurt progressives and people of color. As much or more as the president over time, So stay with us. Brian where with Emily Basilan on W. N Y C. I'm goalie, chef.
"emily basilan" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Cavanaugh's threat a few weeks ago in the Pennsylvania case, they were gonna You visit whether the votes that were segregated after the election day based on somebody's lawsuit, I guess it was Trump's or someone that Pennsylvania Supreme Court interpreted the election law in Pennsylvania and on its own said we can accept. Votes after Election Day. Is that still relevant? Is that mood or do you know what I'm talking about? And that's a relatively relatively small number of votes. That wouldn't flip the results in Pennsylvania, not nearly on that issue that was much in the news For those of you who need reminding of whether Absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day could be received up to three days past election day and still be counted as Pennsylvania policy had it. So Emily Yeah, so the Supreme Court is still considering whether toe rule in that case and yesterday I believe the secretary of State in Pennsylvania filed a petition or emotion wherever we are in this procedure, saying, Please don't you don't need to rule in this case. It's a relevant for the reason that Bryant just gave their fewer than 10,000 ballots, an issue. Really no need to wait in here and I would expect the Supreme Court not to step in. It's a really interesting issue about whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court under the Pennsylvania Constitution had the power to extend the deadline for returning mail in ballots from Election Day to November, 6th. Normally we think of state courts is having a lot of power under their own laws and constitutions to make rules. The Supreme Court you're right Justice cabin on other conservatives were, um, expressing some skepticism in this case, but It's a tricky issue, and it's very pandemic specific. This idea of extending deadlines, and so I would not think the Supreme Court would pick this case to weigh in. You know, the Supreme Court is so conservative at this point, including You know you watch much closer than I do. So you can tell me if this is a fair characterization, but angry, aggrieved justices like with the opinions that Sam Alito expressed in a public speech recently. With an aggrieved tone in the grief town that justices Thomas and Cavanaugh have been known to take in public. I don't know yet about Amy Cockney Baron and amount sure if Gorsuch is in that camp or not. Can you see it least some of them identifying just emotionally with aggrieved Republicans who Trump is stoking and saying Structurally these elections disenfranchised people who voted in person. By letting all these creaky absentee ballot rules exist this year. I just don't think so. It would be so at odds with so much law. I mean, think of it is like there's this mountain of precedent and actual legislation. And state court and lower court decisions that you would have to face down. It would just be incredibly dramatic from any kind of legal point of view. And I just don't think like Why would the Supreme Court justices go to that length for President Trump? They don't you know there they think of themselves as doing something different called law than politics. Whether that's true or not the notion that they would interview so wildly on behalf of one president, it just seems really unlikely to me. All right. The Supreme Court heard a case yesterday simply called Trump versus New York. As I said at the top of the segment that could be the title of a book about his entire presidency. Trump versus New York. But this Trump versus New York is a specific case about Trump wanting to exclude many New Yorkers. And people from every state from the census count based on their immigration status, even after they've submitted their census forms who's arguing What in Trump versus New York? Trump is arguing that he has the right as president to strip undocumented immigrants from the census count that determines apportionment. Which means you know the balance of power in the House of Representatives, and the clear result here would be to increase the number of likely Republican seats in the U. S House. This is something no president has ever tried to do before the Supreme Court seemed quite skeptical that the president could do this. In fact, Amy Cockney, Barrett said, What you're proposing is at odds with lots of history and precedent. All the history and precedent and the Trump Administration has another big problem, which is the Census Bureau has said we need more time to prepare these results were not gonna even Have complete census and this undocumented immigrant estimate you want in time for the end of your term. And so there was also this frustration on the part of Justice Alito yesterday at the Trump administration saying, Well, wait a second if you don't even have the state of what are we doing here? So it sounds like they were skeptical, skeptical to begin with even the conservative justices on the court, But also I think I hear you saying assuming Biden is inaugurated on January 20th. The new administration could cancel this case by just reversing the policy and counting everybody in the census. Yes, exactly, but I think what the court recognized, actually, Chief Justice, Roberts said. This is that If the Trump administration goes forward and Rams through, this would be potentially a quite flawed census count and strips undocumented immigrants from the apportionment and then the Biden administration tries to undo it. Roberts called that unscrambling the egg, and so there is something that still at stake here. It just is very uncertain whether the Trump administration even has the data to try to pull this off. Emily Basilan. New York Times Magazine. Supreme Court watcher Slate political Gap. Fast politics watcher Truman Capote fellow for creative writing, but don't get too creative and the law at Yale and author of Charge the new Movement to transform American Prosecution and and Mass Incarceration. Thank you for so much clarity. Thanks, Emily. Thanks so much for having me brain there and W N Y C much more to come..
"emily basilan" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Can you talk about the difference between what happens when rudy. Giuliani the former mayor of new york. And now the trump attorney when he goes into the court and says actually he's not alleging fraud and then walks out of the court and in this. I mean what will go down in history of this bizarre news conference with the person that was described as trump's lawyer as well sydney powell where she said the entire election should be thrown out. Because it's a conspiracy between who chavez who years ago the communists and tika george soros and A german voting in the country of germany. I mean the counting of the votes in germany that the entire election in this country should be thrown out now. giuliani distancing himself and his makeup a leaking down his face this bizarre moment but what he says outside and what he says inside for lay people who don't really get the difference right so when you're inside a courtroom you have to provide some proof especially if you're asking a judge to do something incredibly dramatic like overturned the results of an election right. That's not lightly undertaken because millions of people had voted and so i think what you see here is kind of indication of desperation on the part of giuliani and these other lawyers if they had real proof of fraud of some theory. That could really Make it possible that they could get their wish in court. They would be clearly stating that in court. They did not do that. And so instead you take to the airwaves. Where is not necessarily asking hard questions and you can make whatever allegations you want but the mitch mash mismatch shows that you just don't have the goods to win your lawsuit. I wanna turn to governor. Chris christie the former governor of new jersey. There've been a lot of questions about why more republicans aren't speaking out He denounced the lack of evidence and trump's election lawsuits as a quote national embarrassment. He was speaking on. Abc's this week on sunday. What's happened here is quite frankly. The conduct of the president's legal team has been a national embarrassment. They alleged fraud outside the courtroom but when they go inside the courtroom. They don't plead fraud and they don't argue fraud. This is what. I was concerned about at two thirty in the morning on wednesday night listen. I've been a supporter of the president's. I voted for him twice but elections have consequences and we cannot continue to act as if something happened here. That didn't happen. So that is chris. Christie the former governor of new jersey. Can you talk. Emily pass along about the lack of republican voices. That are astounding in the face of all of this. I mean if these elections were overturned many republicans would also have their elections invalidated way. Although the trump campaign conveniently does not argue that court but logically speaking. Of course you're cracked. I think what we're seeing here is a lot of enabling and we have seen now for years elected republican politicians unwilling to challenge president trump. When he says things that simply aren't true and now it's really going to quite an extreme where a basic statement elections have. And when you lose you have to leave. Office turns into a kind of dramatic active heroism. I think the republicans have a problem and collectively and so when they challenged president trump one by one then he gets mad at them on twitter and they worry that they are losing support. Their voters chris. Christie doesn't have to worry about that because he's still in office but i think a lot of current politicians care about their political futures and feel beholden to trump's base are just afraid challenge him and the thing is you're not going to win unless you all get together and say your time in court is over. The results of the election are clear. President elect joe biden is going to be the next president and they have not made that kind of collective statement. Let's turn to what's happening in michigan right now. I mean you have the president of bringing in the heads of the state legislature the house and the senate. I want to turn to last tuesday election officials and the state's largest county certifying. Joe biden's victory after a dramatic reversal. We're going to talk with the head of the nwa c. P. in detroit about this but if you can talk about what's happened right now With one of the two state board canvassers saying that they're going to vote against certifying the vote they're only two republicans in to democrats talk about the significance of this. And what will happen. Well this is a very odd situation. The state canvassing board clearly has what's called a ministerial duty. And that means that the board once it is satisfied that the votes have been tabulated and the counties have certified their results which did happen last week in every county once the state board sees that they are supposed to sign off. It's not a choice. The statute says shell and so when you have that kind of function set up for you. You are not supposed to be deciding that because you have your own suspicions. You're supposed to call for an investigation. Maybe you just prefer president trump to to president-elect biden. That's not your job. And so i think there is going to be a real tension here between the clear duty of these canvassing board members to sign off and certified the election and this kind of heart is unbiased or these based suspicions of fraud that keeps simmering even though no actual fraud has surfaced and i should also mention there were more than six hundred seventy thousand votes cast in wayne county which includes detroit and there were questions about hundred and fifty of them a tiny percentage and cases. It was pretty easy to explain what had happened. It's it's a regular event in elections for the belt books not to perfectly balanced right. You can have someone who gets in line and gets marked is about to vote who then change their mind. Leaves their innocent explanations for you can have very small irregularities and the notion that because of this all of detroit's vote should be thrown out as one of the county board members suggested that is just really not how election law works and it is telling when you decide not to count the votes of the mostly black city in your state. It suggests that there was something else going on here. We're going to go to break. And i'm going to ask you to stay with us. We're going to seek with the head of the nwa p. in detroit. And i wanna get your comments on that as well. Emily basilan is staff writer with the new york times magazine lecturer and senior research fellow at yale law school and author of charged the new movement to transform american prosecution and end mass incarceration. We'll be back with her in the head of the nwa cpa in detroit in a moment.
"emily basilan" Discussed on Democracy Now! Audio
"Well I think. In this instance president trump was very straightforward. He opposes mail ballot because he thinks Republicans will lose seats not only is it reprehensible to politics above. Americans help enforce Americans into unhealthy boating. Having a really crowded polling locations not enough polling locations A bad in itself but on top of it. It's just untrue. Colorado shows that Republicans can win in mail ballot systems a US. Senator has won. Many statewide officials have one on the Republican side under our system so the claim that it benefits one side more than the other justice and true and at the end of the day if this nation does not act we will see Republicans Democrats and independents all deciding whether to sit out the November election. That's not good for our democracy and frankly that's not good for president trump either And I wish he could recognize that. Emily Basilan if you could also respond to this point. He's making that. Republicans will lose if more people vote yet. It's really interesting because the research shows what Secretary Griswald was pointing to. Which is that voting by. Mail does not actually have a partisan effect it's neutral it doesn't help. Democrats it doesn't help. Republicans what it does do is boost turnout and so there is this assumption that president trump and some other republicans make this assumption as well that if more people vote they are more likely to lose. I wanted to ask about the repeated attacks on vote by mail by people of course either then by president trump publicans claiming to be attacking voter fraud in Georgia. The new secretary of State Brad. Raffin Burger a Republican has announced an absentee ballot fraud task force to investigate signature mismatches and other issues in your New York Times magazine piece. Eupol Lauren grow war. Go a fair fight action. Who says the task force is a submission to the trump voter suppression machine? Explain so yes in Georgia. I think the concern of voting rights advocates like Lauren. Grow War go is that people will hear. They're going to be investigated if they vote by mail and they'll get nervous about it and that will intimidate them in a way. That will discourage voting. I think it's also important to connect this to a longtime voter suppression tactic among conservatives. So you go back to the sixties. You had poll taxes literacy tests to try to prevent African Americans from voting and the voting rights act becomes illegal to do things like that. But you start to see a push for voter identification at the polls and the justification for voter ID. Laws was preventing fraud so it turns out. There's almost no fraud at the polls. If you think about it be really hard to turn an election by having people show up and vote twice. You'd need a lot of people to do that and get away with it. It just isn't really a problem and so that does not stop conservatives and a lot of Republicans however from making this charge over and over again. We're seeing now with a complaint about voting by mail. Even those states like secretary griswald with a really good track record and practically universal voting by mail have very low levels of fraud and you also see it with something called purging. Which is this idea of cleaning up the voter rolls by cutting people off of them if they haven't voted for a while or if their names don't exactly match in other databases and similarly the rationale given for purging. The rules is to prevent fraud but the the reality of fraud is just smaller. Really tiny compared to the amount of people who end up with barriers to voting for these reasons family basil on the trump campaign spending. It's election money. On efforts to limit voting by now there is at least ten. I think now it's up to twenty million dollars that the Republican National Committee has set aside for lawsuits relating to the election. No this is perfectly normal. The Democrats are spending money lawsuits too but the Republicans are doing things like challenging an all vote by mail primary in New Mexico as Conservative group challenging a similar effort in Nevada and then we also are seeing the Republicans just gear up for election monitoring for their efforts on the day of the election for the people who voted the polls. You know perhaps to interfere with their right to vote. That is something that has happened in the past. They've been blocked from doing what's called ballot security for many years because of a consent decree they agreed to in the nineteen eighties but that content to create will be gone for the first presidential election in forty years. So that's another potential for spending this kind of money on the military has been doing mail and voting for what two hundred years? Well yeah it started in the civil war you're right that's where we get The idea of absentee balloting from there was actually a struggle through World War One and World War Two over how much absentee balloting soldiers would be able to do but yes they have been doing it this way for a long time so let me conclude where we started with the title of Your New York Times piece. Can Democracy survive the pandemic well. It certainly can. South Korea just had a completely calm and orderly election people voted by mail. They also socially distanced at the polls. It went fine. There's no reason why America can't do this and we still have time but it's an urgent task to get everything ready and because Congress hasn't passed the funds to make that easily possible. I think this is the time for kind of concern and paying a lot of attention to this issue. What would it cost? Well the estimates from the Brennan Center for Justice are four billion dollars that would include all the primary elections as well as the general election in November so far Congress has pledged only four hundred million. So you see. There's a really big gap there and that has really hamstringing some of the states. I want to thank you both for being with us. Emily Basilan staff writer at the New York Times magazine. We will link to your cover story. Can Democracy survive the pandemic and I WANNA thank Colorado Secretary of State Jenna griswold joining us from Denver? And that does it for our broadcast. The amazing democracy now team is working with as few people as possible on site the majority of our team working from home special. Thanks to our general manager. Julie crosby democracy now is produced with Rene felts my birthday and it goes libby rainy shape Carla Wills Tummy Warren off during the Dura. Sam Alcohol Tamer Jew John Hamilton Rob Karen Honey Masud. Adriano contrasts and Maria. Tara CENA special thanks to Miriam. Barnard dentist hand. Paul Powell I mean Goodman. Thanks so much for joining us..
"emily basilan" Discussed on We The People
"S. prisons and jails and many countries have in total including populous countries like Japan South Korea Ukraine and Pakistan. Do you agree or not with those who said what's happening in. Us corrections is a massive tragedy and in addition to all we've discussed. What more should we be doing to deal with it? Well I mean I certainly agree that one hundred and thirty people dying is a huge tragedy. I would also note that when jail turned into a real hot spot for the virus. Which we've seen. There's a huge danger to the community because staff correctional officers who work in the jail or prison are also infected and then can bring that unwittingly home to their families and their towns. So it's not only for the sake of the people inside on that we should be worrying and thinking about this and I think that Thinking about the public safety calculus in somewhat different terms because of the virus makes a lot of sense. You know one of the hardest questions always is well if you know one more. Violent crime occurs does that throw a wrench into any efforts to let people out. And you know it's an impossible task if that is the standard but it has been one that's imposed because I think a lot of times when you hear one terrible story of someone getting killed. It seems like there's no way to justify that cost. I was writing about this very issue a couple months ago because Dan Sarrebourg the DA. We've been talking about in. Seattle advocated for the release of a few dozen lifers in Washington. And I was about to write this up and then I was looking doing some research and I realized that one of the people who'd released had killed someone afterward and I thought to myself lake will that must be the end of this effort. That Sarrebourg is making but I want to call and see what he has to say L. He said was look like that was a terrible tragedy that happened. Of course I regret that but when I look at this group of people who were released as a whole they actually have a lower rate of re offending than other longtime offenders. And so no. I'm not deterred. I'm going to keep moving in this direction And I just put that out there as trying to give a different way of thinking about this question that allows us to take into account other kinds of values and other kinds of ways of valuing life and thinking about communities. It's very hard to ever justify someone else's death but there are lots of factors that contribute to the crime rate and we need to sometimes look beyond these kind of cause and effect mechanisms. Sometimes they're not really clear at all and there are larger ways in which the cost of incarcerating people is something that we also need to be keeping in the front of our minds. Paul does the Constitution or the legal system how to way of evaluating how many cases is too many in how many people should be released. Many lists were struck to learn that Iran has temporarily freed more than eighty five thousand prisoners. The with more than two million inmates the prison population in the world including more than five hundred and forty thousand incarcerated people who have been convicted or sentenced but remained in detention. And how as a legal matter do you make sense of these numbers and have a sense of whether or not they're acceptable so that's obviously a very challenging question and one that courts a wrestling with all over this country and you point out even all over the world. What does the constitution have to say about this again? I I use the word earlier but I think it's fair to say our constitution is Kapatid's enough to deal with those kinds of challenges. The cruel and unusual punishment clause doesn't tell us exactly what the cost benefit equation is the due process. Clause doesn't tell US exactly. How many lives on one side or the other of the equation that we have to accept instead? We've created a system where we have judges pointed in both federal and state system designed to be wise people publicly accountable in some indirect way but at the same time having the freedom and flexibility to make the right decisions and they're going to have to consider both sides of the equation. I don't think that this is a unique problem to criminal justice right. I mean our country is in the grips of a huge debate. Right now about. Are We shutting down too many businesses at in order to preserve the lives? That might be taken from exposure to the virus. And I and I will say though that I've tried to be sort of encouraging on a lot of the things we've talked about. I don't think that our country is very good at those kinds of cost benefit analyses. I think emily was making a good point there. I'm sure that the governor in Washington if that's the right place is running into a lot of people that are are saying. Wait a minute even one life loss from a release too many. I don't subscribe to that point of view but on the other hand. I think that you have to give very significant way to the fact that someone lost their life as a result of a change in criminal justice policy. So I guess the best I know I have an answer to your question directly other than to say. The debate will continue. The discussion will continue. I do think that this is probably a point where emily and I think are probably strongly align. These are ultimately empirical questions. I mean how many people died. Did anybody diets the result of these greater releases. Maybe the answer is zero and we can all be happy. I suspected won't be zero. Though there will be some additional homicides some additional sexual assaults and other serious crimes. And then we're going to have to grapple with with both sides of the equation. I do think she's right in suggesting that. Look just because you can point to one. Horror stories should mean the end of any reform effort. That cannot be the the standard that we measure these reform efforts by but at the same time. It can't be the case that those costs are swept under the rug. And we say well everything's Hunky Dory because buying large most of the folks did well. We we know these are dangerous populations that are that are behind bars at least to some degree and and so that has to be factored into the cost benefit calculation. Emily the last word is to you in this fascinating and rich discussion. What reforms do you hope will emerge from this crisis constitutionally legally as a policy matter? What are you looking for in the US and globally? And what do you hope? We'll see in the criminal justice system at the end of the crisis. I hope that we'll see the eighth amendment. Have more heft to it when there are dangerous conditions in prison often. Prison officials get wide difference from judges and it's hard to meet the standard of deliberate indifference but Terrible things happen to people in prison and so creating a body of law. That's more responsive to that. I think would be really An amazing gain. I think being really wise about how we spend our money to lock people up when they're charged with minor crimes in particular but also thinking about the length of sentences for people charged with violent crimes. That's harder ask but one we should be considering right now. And some of the Compassionate release cases speak to that issue And then I think we want to also As voters as the American public have a better sense of what we want from the people we elect as our criminal justice ambassadors so to speak so talking about district attorney elections in some states. People elected judges thinking about these questions of justice and mercy and Careful stewarding of public funds when you are at the ballot box and you're facing these choices. That is a really important aspect of American democracy. Thank you so much. Emily Basilan and Polka sell for rich informed and luminated discussion of the criminal justice system and the corona virus. Emily Paul thank you so much for joining thank you. Thanks very.
"emily basilan" Discussed on KCRW
"Afford to pay or not, there's just something so fundamentally on fair about Emily Basilan is here to talk about her new book, charged, and another Emily, Emily Vanda were the TV critic, formerly known as Todd talks about her transition in the context of the Handmaid's tale. It's all coming up first this news. Live from NPR news in Washington, I'm Lakshmi Singh. Tariffs are set as President Trump and former vice president, Joe Biden campaign in Iowa today in Tomo one of the three stops Biden scheduled to make the democratic primary candidate railed against a set of policies that he argues. Don't her Trump. A do hurt everyday Americans farmer, Chevron crushed by his tear forward, China, and no one knows better than the folks in Iowa. He thinks being tough is great. Well, it's really tough. When someone else absorbs the pain, formers manufactures automobile industry, but President Trump declares. He is the best thing that ever happened to farmers. He scheduled to tour renewable fuel facility and promote his administration's new policy lifting. Restrictions on gasoline with higher blends of corn based ethanol Iwa public radio's Klay masters reports. Another of Trump's democratic right? Levels also toward an Iowa. Ethanol plant this week, President Trump lifted summertime restrictions on selling gasoline blended with fifteen percent. Ethanol called e fifteen he's touting it as a way to prop up corn prices for farmers hurt by tariffs. After touring, an Iowa ethanol plant democratic presidential candidate and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren says she supports the policy, but I hope while.
"emily basilan" Discussed on Longform Podcast
"We talked about that as well. And was one. If you want the kind of like back story of how Emily basil became a reporter useless to the first step aside with her. It's a good one did is, is the podcast like the same as the book or is it a second book. It's a second that. It's one of the things we talked about, is that she had to get another character for the podcast after spending a lot of time with different stories for the book, she had to then find another one for the podcast. So really added a to the workload of the project. You know, if you're already doing a buck, you're early doing podcast. Why not adds a mailing list to the mix? It's the way to get the word out and bring the attention to the book and the pied cast, which are about different stories. There's no better way to do it than with Mel, chimp Melchett makes it really easy to keep track of people. Let's say you got like a project or one things coming out. And then something else is coming out. Great. You sign people up on the first one then. Boom bang bang. It's all good melts him. Van veins. Here's Evan with Emily Basilan. Emily welcome back to the podcast. Thanks so much for having me. I'm so glad to be here last time we talked, we ended I sort of said, you know what are you what are you gonna work on next? And you said why'd love to do another book, but I don't really know when that's in the cards and that was five years ago. So here we are have your book how much of that time was taken up by this book. I had the idea for the book. I think around the end of twenty fifteen and I wrote a proposal for it. That was all about the power of prosecutors and really about abuse of power and the ways in which prosecutors were driving mass incarceration, and now remained important to the book. But while it was reporting something totally welcome. And for me exciting happened, the story change nationally, I wasn't expecting that, but people around the country in twenty sixteen started trying to elect reformers to the district attorney's office in a whole bunch of American cities and. And a lot of those people got elected, so like November twenty sixteen many of us were distracted by the result of the presidential election. But one site. But once I kind of woke up and started paying attention to these local DA races. I realized I could compare an old school prosecutor to someone who is planning to do it differently. And that seemed really interesting to me to look at to Justice systems that were one of which was trying to fundamentally change the way it was oriented to let step back again. Give people little context for the book of they haven't read it, first of all you were when we talked last time you were doing sort of double time, sleet, and near tons magazine. Yeah. No. You are. Stafford than your wings after technically know what the diff what exactly that constitutes. AM like one staff at the New York Times. It has in that sense. It has advantages to being a freelancer were you also still do the gabfest. Yeah, so I still do the slight political gap vest, this weekly podcast, I've been doing forever with David plots and John Dickerson true. So when you say you came up with the book idea and twenty fifteen was that based out of reporting, you were doing for magazine story or was it just something that was in the air that you just kind of gravitated towards outside of that? It was in the air, and then I pitched a magazine story that let me explain for one side of the book. So I started working on a story about a woman named Nora Jackson, when she was eighteen her mother was brutally stabbed to death in the middle of the night in Memphis is the kind of crime. There's a lot of pressure to solve Nores mom is a white family, and like an upper middle class neighborhood and the prosecutor in Norris case had become the elected d a and Memphis, even though after nor was convicted the Tennessee..
"emily basilan" Discussed on Here & Now
"That means the lawyer did such a bad job that Hassan Bennett got a new trial. And when you see that there's really no excuse for it lawyers are not supposed to take cases where they can't do an adequate job of representation, and so while it's really important to understand the burdens on the system and the idea that we should provide more money for it also. True that lawyers have illegal obliga- Shen to go through all the evidence and make sure they are representing their clients properly. And, of course, as we mentioned the homicide detective in this case, who was accused of coursing witnesses and other cases as well has been relegated to desk duty. So that's been acknowledged the one about someone successfully defending themselves with just a high school education. How often does that happen? That's very unusual. And it seems like Hassan Bennett was incredibly determined and confident in a way that was persuasive to the jury, I love the story because it's about someone teaching himself law with the help of someone else in prison, who was what's known as a jailhouse lawyer someone who is able to self educate himself. And, you know, we used to have more of a tradition of this in this country, where people used to go to night school to learn to practice law, and they used to be able to become lawyers with more apprentice themselves as opposed to formal education. Now, it's really unusual. But Assan Bennett obvious. We knew the facts of his own case, incredibly well, and it sounds like he was able to boil down the key issues here in a simple vivid way that really convince the jury, Emily Basilan her book on the Justice system. Greed is charged Emily, thank you. Thanks so much for having me. There's a new troubling warning about climate change. A new study shows world sea levels could rise, six feet by the end of the century. If emissions, go unchecked, that's double the earlier estimate from the UN climate science panel. The research is published in the proceedings of the US National Academy of sciences. And joining us now is professor Jonathan Bamber of the university of Bristol in the UK..
"emily basilan" Discussed on Here & Now
"No, I gotta educate people with what they should know they basic rights, how to protect themselves because without knowing they're vulnerable, well, it's probably very small solace. One of about to say uh thirteen years. I mean and you know, you're twenties and thirties. But maybe you could look at it as a very long time in law school about it. And I gotta do even longer in law school. Yeah. Now, your masters. I'm trying to I'm trying to right now. I'm working on a program. That's entertaining. But it's also educational see when you look at Sesame Street, Sesame Street was entertaining. But it also educated the youth. I'm working on a program that's entertaining ended also will educate you in the field law. And I wanna put that in certain schools in so people will not law because, as citizens if you live in this country, if you walk this land, and you don't know, the privilege, your rights are the privilege, you have as a citizen, if you don't know, your rights than when you walk this land, all you're doing is living under fear. And that's not how should be I sound. I'd be remiss if I didn't ask as you will know, divan English is family. The victim's family still thinks you are guilty. They were able to hang their sorrow on you. Now. Where do they put it? Do you have some simp-? Pathy for them. Because in fact, they were glad I was talking to somebody today. Another friend of mine, and we were talking about that issue how they were denied Justice is getting lost a person died in this. I know people praise me utilit- you did it you learn the law, but somebody died in his manner. Somebody Nineteen-year-old losses life. He could have been married. He coulda did anything. He could have went to school. We could have had kids. He could have been a productive member. He could have been just as relevant, as anyone of us around here, but he was denied and a family. They have an absolute right to be upset. They had somebody tell them for thirteen years that I did a crime. But they also have to review the evidence. They were only called the hearings that the prosecution wanted them to see when it was relevant for a jury sympathy. The prosecution called them to the courtroom when I was going through my pill phases. And it came out the. The prosecution withheld evidence and it came out that I had ineffective counsel that the family was not notified. So the family didn't see the progress in case if they was eat a whole trial. It will understand that I'm not the person guilty is crime description at shoot. It was five nine hundred sixty five pounds at the time on my arrest. I was five six hundred twenty five pounds. So when they're looking at it, they're not looking at it from the evidence. They're looking at it from the people that they supposed to trust. The prosecution is supposed to represent the state as supposed to represent the people. So when you have somebody suppose represent people telling you that this person did it to your trust is in them, 'cause you are looking at them to seek Justice, so they, they have a right to be angry. But the anger shitting fall on me. As a matter of fact, I was talking this morning, and I said, we should do something for Devon who should base the foundation for Devon. Let us know when you do a sound Bennett, the Philadelphia man who acted as own internally, and just acquitted himself of murder after thirteen years in jail us on thanks very much. Thank you, to what we've heard from many listeners, asking, how can Hassan story be? Let's just touch base with Emily Basilan journalist, and Yale lecturer, and will link you to our conversation about her new book charged at here now dot org. And so Emily accord appointed. Attorney doesn't submit evidence like phone records a homicide detective courses witnesses..
"emily basilan" Discussed on Slate's Political Gabfest
"The party. I don't know that the lane model works as much, but there does seem to be a warrant brand. Now, that's distinct around around public policy. Do you think? Yeah. That is it gets passed the sort of not great poll numbers and not amazing fundraising numbers. Yes. I think that is definitely how she's trying to position herself. And and the impeachment point you may John is a good one too. It's another way of kind of standing out in like, the fuselage of ideas. Right. If you're the one taking that position. But also, I think she just is like really interested in into all this stuff. And it's a way of influencing the race, whether you become the nominee or not, right? You've kind of laid the groundwork for a big discussion about policy, and you know, one thing she also keeps talking about is how this wealth tax. She's. Proposed. It's going to pay for things. So you've also pegged policy proposals that involve spending the notion that you're supposed to demonstrate how you can pay for them. I wonder if you could imagine happening what happen to John Edwards in two thousand and eight which was he was the ideal candidate. He has a lovechild it. He he was he talked about the poor and the and and and basically Barack Obama came along and people fought, oh, I like him. We swoon for him. And we'll just take averages policies, you know, staple them onto him because policies are fungible. But what I like about this other? So it seems to me you have at least four things that any of these candidates. We don't know which of these four will matter and sometimes so you've policy electability swoon factor. And then you have the attributes, you know, are they gonna be able to handle the job when they get to it, which comes across in all kinds of different ways. And it'll be interesting to see a which of those rules or be which of those become just a stalking horse for some other feelings. So in other words, I really. Swooned for this candidate. But because I can't say that out loud. I'll go and talk about likability. She remains. My my leader in the clubhouse. But I guess clearly not. Well, maybe so we don't know let's go to cocktail chatter. So over years on this show over many, many years, we have recommended so many things in cocktail chatter, so many. Cool useful weird articles books films. TV shows podcasts products, you name it. We've recommended it. And a lot of other shows have done that too. And now slate has gone, and collected all those recommendations that we've given and put them into a searchable database called the slate podcast endorse Matic, everything we have ever chattered in place, and you go to accomplish -dorsements. I like shudder to think of all my boring legal enduro K. So all right. So for example, one categories locations. Emily Basilan has recommended to locations over the years. I just looked it up. Cared. A carry guests on either of them. Emily. No, I refuse one was Grand Canyon National park. The second original the second one is Connecticut state Burbank. Oh, that's not really a location. It's an organization, but I like idea that's John Dickerson. Let's see what John what locations John is recommended. John recommended do wanna care to guess any of your locations done. Now. I have no idea the historic cow palace. Oh, yeah. Chicago Chicago architectural tour the book that was great. Oh, the book launcher World War Two memorial sculptures in the former Yugoslavia. Oh, well, that's those pictures. Yeah. And exhibit of handmade guitars at the New York City's Metropolitan Museum of art. Oh, I forgot about that. Last one. That's recommended locations on commended. Who I recommended way too? Many forget mine I have like a billion. Okay. Anyway, it's fantastic feature. You can look by location, article music, audiobook, podcast TV show, book, play links and memes. Video topics clothing food poem. Comedy. It's just amazing. What foods of I've recommended the greatest white bread in.
"emily basilan" Discussed on KQED Radio
"It can be very difficult to return to your old environment and become a changed person and not and make curfew, and and not get into trouble the person who you write about who was caught with a gun that he said wasn't his. I mean the gun was in the apartment that he was in. But he said the gun wasn't his. So he he had to like meet the curfew. Stay out of trouble spend time with the social worker at cetera. What were some of the problems he run into staying out of trouble for the mandated period of time? Yeah. So you're talking about the character in my book, I called Kevin that's a pseudonym. I wanted to make sure to protect his privacy. So one of the problems he had one night. He was out in the neighborhood. And there was a dice game going on. He knew he wasn't supposed to play dice because one of the rules of the diversion program is no police contact. So he was standing there smoking a cigarette. Some other people were smoking marijuana playing dice the cops came over everybody scattered because they're not supposed to be doing that the park at night marijuana, by the way is basically decriminalized in Brooklyn, but not entirely they're still arresting some people for it. So everybody ran but Kevin was standing there smelling cigarettes. So he didn't run and the cops picked him up anyway and brought him down to the station and arrested him and he thought oh my God. Like, I am going to end up in prison because I've violated the terms of this diversion program. But all I was doing was like standing around at night smoke. Taking a cigarette. So he did a smart thing he called his social worker from the diversion program. And let him know what had happened as a way of explaining and because of that that really built trust with the social worker, and then the social worker went to bat for him when this came up in court, and he did not end up in prison. And was this time he had to take a urine drug test came back positive, and he said that's impossible because I haven't smoked anything and they did a second test and it came up negative. Yes. That also happened in that had such a random quality to it. At least for me exactly as you said Kevin took the Strug test came back positive for marijuana again, violating the rules of the program never mind that marijuana's mostly decriminalized in Brooklyn. And he said his social worker like, I know I haven't been smoking. This has got to be wrong and the social worker because he trusted Kevin Kevin into the bath. Room and gave them another drug test, and it was negative. So I really confronted over and over again this sense that there was this these arbitrary moments in people's lives where they could go one way or the other. Let's talk about bail new points out that the US and the Philippines are the only court systems that allow four profit bail companies to operate so. I think a lot of us don't really understand how Bill works and where the profit comes in for the bail bondsman. So can you explain that a little bit? I will try I will say that all of my assumptions about bail turned out to be wrong as I did my reporting. I realized that I didn't know how this worked at all. So here's how for profit cash bail works in New York, you go in front of a judge say he sets bail at fifteen thousand dollars, that's like standard for a gun offense. You then can pay it at that moment. If you have the cash, but of course, most people don't have that amount of cash sitting around. And so then they have to go to a bail bondsman, usually you work out a deal where you pay the bondsman ten percent. And then the bondsman doesn't actually pay the court anything they just go to to the court and say we'll guarantee that if this person flees, we will pay that amount at the end of the case, if you have come to you all your court appearances is almost everyone does you're supposed to get your money back at the end. But I did not see people getting any more than sixty. Fifty bucks back when they completed this process and all of this Liles tremendous profits for the bail industry, which is the bonds are underwritten by giant multinational corporations, we're not talking about mom and pop shops. They are making about two billion dollars a year. That's the estimate and all this is supposed to be necessary. It's supposed to be the only way that we can ensure that people come back to court you put money down that means that you won't flee. But in fact, we know from Washington C, which has been doing it differently for years from the state of Kentucky, which has a different system. The cash Bill is not necessary to bring most people back to court. Most people you just ask them politely to come back to court. You send them reminders you connect them with support services if necessary and they'll come back because they know it's going to be bad for them to have a warrant out there for their arrest. So this cash bell system really just was completely different than than I thought. When I started my work for this book. My guest is Emily Basilan author of the new book, charged the new movement to transform American prosecution and end mass incarceration. We'll talk more after a break and just in Changle review, the new movie her smell starring Elizabeth moss as an out of control punk rocker. I'm Terry gross. And.
"emily basilan" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"Carefully. Either. The asking yourselves. Every sensor of proceedings. Plus is what we actually times. What is best for this? Brooklyn attorney district attorney Eric on Hollis about thirty million Americans live in a city or county with a district attorney who could be referred to as a reformer, and that's new most of the so-called progressive prosecutors, meaning they look for creative ways to offer less jail. Time have been in office for less than one or two years. But it's a movement that's growing and becoming more popular with voters a lot of the as like on dollars or elected. So with me now, Emily Basilan who has written a whole book on the subject, Emily, as you may know is a staff writer for the New York Times magazine. Call host of slates political gabfest podcast and the Truman Capote fellow for creative writing and law at the AL law school, her new book is charged the new movement to transform American prosecution and end mass incarceration. Hanley welcome back to WNYC. Thank you so much for having me what exactly is a progressive prosecutor. And where did the term come from? That's a great question. In a progressive. Prosecutor right now if someone who is really working to reduce mass incarceration and trying to compensate for forty years in which prosecutors have been a driving engine of putting more and more people in prison. So it's really reversing that dynamic and their whole host of interventions that go along with this like treating kids kids making sure we're not prosecuting juveniles teenagers, I should say in adult court unless that's absolutely necessary trying to spare immigrants from deportation by reducing charges against them. If possible dealing with substance abuse problems and mental illness not through the criminal Justice system, which is not a good place for addressing those kinds of issues than you right in the last thirty years the role of the judge and the prosecutor have switched places in terms of who has power. That's fascinating. What change? Yeah. So I think we all imagine a American Justice system in which you have the prosecutor and the defense lawyer on an even playing field. Imagine them. Like the bottom two points of a triangle, and then at the top of the triangle, you have a judge, and that's the neutral referee, and that's the way it's supposed to be. But in fact, starting in the eighties. When lawmakers were concerned about a rise in crime, we had this real turn toward mandatory sentences, and when you have mandatory sentences the decision at charging and it plea bargaining which are prosecutors decisions. Those are the key elements that determine the outcome of a case. And so it without recognizing it or talking about it. We changed the system to give prosecutors much more thority and really to put them at the top of this trying. He'll mandatory minimum sentencing gives prosecutors more discretion than judges. When in the public's mind. It's the judges who really have discretion. Yeah. Absolutely. So I was reporting in Brooklyn one day, I was in this specialized gun court that's just for gun possession charges and in New York, if you get caught with a gun, it can be a serious felony or can go all the way down to a misty. Meaner? So the prosecutor has an enormous discretion. And I was watching this young defendant name's Amir. He was nineteen the gun the cops had found a gun in his grandmother's apartment. It was. Unloaded. So it wasn't the most serious charge. But he was still facing a felony charge now in the year since he'd been charged because the main tactic defense lawyers having cases like this is delay. So in that year that had passed he had gone to a pipe fitting, and plumbing course, you've gotten certified he was doing other diversion educational programs to kind of prove he didn't need need to go to jail or prison. So he shows up for the end of the case. And the judge turns the prosecutor and says basically, I don't want to send this guy to jail or prison. Can you drop the charge? The prosecutor said no and Zamira went to prison went to jail for thirty days and said to me, you know, I can't do the trade I've trained for now. My life is really ruined. So a prosecutor with more discretion than a judge you describe two types of innovative DA's, and you compare them the consent. Sus builder in Brooklyn of Eric on solace and the barn burner in Philadelphia of Larry Kramer. What's the difference? Yeah. Crasner said, Larry, Kramer, he somebody else. He is someone else. So crasner Gonzalez are very different in their backgrounds and their style. Eric Zala career prosecutor born and bred in Brooklyn, Puerto Rican single mom comes into the DA's office because he sees the discretionary power of prosecutors kind of crazy thing about Arkansas the thing that inspired him to become an assistant DA was reading bonfire of the vanities, which is a book in which prosecutors abused their power. I would argue, but Eric Gonzalez saw all this power that they had he wasn't attracted by the corruption part of it. So he comes into office, and then rises through the ranks Larry crasner spent his whole career suing the Philadelphia police department. He was a civil rights attorney. But Philadelphia had a kind of vacancy for DA because the previous day was indicted, and then convicted on corruption on bribery charges and so- crasner becomes part of this movement. Really local organizers build up his campaign. They put him in. Office exactly to transform the district attorney's office. And if possible the Justice system in Philadelphia, so we're seeing a real experiment in different styles of D here listeners. Mike us is Emily Basilan whose new book is charged the new movement to transform American prosecution and end mass incarceration, and we can take some phone calls for her two one two four three three WNYC dig untolerable. Welcome to call in or anyone else to one two four three three nine six nine two. We'll get some other Legal Affairs issues in the news. And you might even be able to guess what they are with Emily Basilan as we go because on the topic of her book, especially welcome to one two four three three nine six nine two. Here's one that. Actually, I'm going to relate in a follow up question to the Muller investigation. But you're right that there's the mindset of a prosecutor, which is prone to conviction psychology. Use that term conviction psychology, and that becomes more ingrained the longer they're on the job talk about that term in how you're defining. Well, what I mean here is there are a lot of incentives for prosecutors to increase their their numbers their rates of conviction in theory and supposedly practice prosecutors have to responsibilities they're supposed to win convictions. They're also supposed to be ministers of Justice. But that second goal is pretty abstract. And so when it's intention with winning. I think you can see prosecutors driving toward that goal. And in some ways, we're asking a lot of them to have these dual responsibilities that our intention both and on their shoulders. So for you as a critic of prosecutors the world is stood on its head by the Russia investigation. Right. The Trump people are saying the same things that the advocates you write about say in defense of poor people of color in Brooklyn. Prosecutors have too much power to investigate and indict who they want and why they want can we have it both ways. As elevate defense attorneys here, but you know, not for the power of the FBI. That is clinic criticized prosecutors on the ground, but not criticize them, not even ask the question without being called self interested in in the case of the FBI investigating a politician who just one presidency of the United States. I mean, look a lot of my concern about the criminal Justice system is that the people who are subject to it lack power so utterly. They tend to be unfortunate. They tend to be disadvantaged the president of the United States who in fact points, the attorney general runs the Justice department is in a very different position vis-a-vis the system. So in critiquing prosecutors I do not mean to suggest that we don't need rules law or that prosecutors don't have important jobs to do. And I do know that you know, when you see this concern for well off wealthy powerful. Defendants. It can be very selective people can wring their hands over those. People's faith without expressing a lot of concern for poor people, Patty and Princeton junction, you're on WNYC with Emily basil on hi, Patty. Hi, brian. Thanks for taking my call. My question is this about the yardstick assume ably used to measure come ahead as record as a prosecutor questioning whether she's progressive enough in my the New York Times of detail look at the voters versus democratic leaning top on Twitter and social media what the New York Times found is that that is more much more progressivism and yardstick measuring on social media than actual democratic voters. Right. So I get your point on that. The activist community is very present on social media may or may not be reflective of the democratic primary electorate as a whole and this and one of the topics of discussion as you know, Emily on activist. Social media is is comma has progressive enough for this nomination because of her record as a prosecutor, do you have an opinion on her? Well, I wrote a profile of karma hearts a couple of years ago. So I looked at her record as a prosecutor pretty closely. And you know, she predates this euro, we're seeing now so she did some things when she was in San Francisco that four their time were pretty forward thinking the movement has moved along way since then I don't think it's fair to say that to to imagine she should be then where we are now. But I do think that she made a mistake by calling herself up progressive prosecutor because we want that label to mean something. More than what she did at the time. I also think that in this criticism of Harris, it's important to remember. There are other candidates like Joe Biden who of a much shake your record, I suppose by still hasn't announced. But potential candidates like Joe Biden, I mean, you look back at binds record in the eighties nineties with the crime Bill that he backed the stanzas he talk it's much more troubling from a progressive point of view than harasses even have one local activist think tweet at us a few weeks ago. There's no such thing as a progressive prosecutor. Have you heard that? Yeah. Absolutely. You know, people who want to burn presents to the ground think that prosecutors are going to prosecute. And there's no way to salvage that, you know, I think my answer to that would be that if you're a pragmatist, and you see the vitally powerful role. These folks play then you want people in these offices who share at least some of your values and goals, even if they're never gonna live up to all your expectations, but continue in a minute with Emily basil on if your calls from your book is charged the new movement to trans. Form American prosecution and mass incarceration. Stay.
"emily basilan" Discussed on WNYC 93.9 FM
"New York, Sheldon, you're on WNYC. Where's the Ruka farms? It's located in Canada Hari New York for ninety west about forty miles west of Albany. Thank you for calling in. What would you like to add? Yes. I wanted to discuss the current legislation with, you know, recreational use on New York state, then I mean concern is like a lot of times. I'm just hearing this Barrett of about people of color, not being able to raise funds and have money to compete in the industry, and I think that's just entirely false. There's plenty of successful people of color that kick it involved in this industry, and you know, rival others in the industry, and you know, it should be up to us to reach down and help our own community. So you don't want the government that narrative is actually coming from. That's not the narrative that I expose what I explosives that. You cannot give all the licenses to someone who is outside of the community. You have to provide an opportunity for so many people who are in the community to have access to those license. I agree people colored some a lot of people have money. In fact, we will be. Successful. If we're able to bring the two billion dollar underground market above ground day to day one best to go to we're trying to reach better than mean. People don't have access to resources, but it does mean that they couldn't need to have some training some business training, they need maybe know, how to write a business plan. They even know how to get support in figuring out how to apply for the state's licenses. There are a number of ways that you can set up operations to assist people in moving themselves into legal business. That's what we're talking about. We're not suggesting that the government should set up opportunities to hand out money to people to start a business. That's the wrong narrative. And quite frankly, I take offense that whoever said it and so Commissioner title for Massachusetts. What would you add to this piece of the conversation given that in Massachusetts so far? The stat you cited was that of a hundred thirty eight licenses for marijuana related businesses. So far only three have gone to people of color. Well, it's twenty nine hundred and we need to have minority owned businesses women owned businesses. I don't own businesses and farmer owned businesses. That's just part of the strength in the vibrancy of the industry. But I would say also I completely agree with the majority leader in that one of the goals here is to take that vibrancy and innovation and resourcefulness that we see in disproportionately harm communities and add training as necessary. So that they can be successful. In other words to make it fair. If my parents was incarcerated for a drug offense. And you're a parent has a trust fund. Let's balance it out. So that if we have equal skills and ambition that it's fair to both of us in ocean port on WNYC. Hi, diane. Diane. We have you. Diane delay have your location. Right. Are you an ocean port New Jersey? I guess we don't have Diane. Let's try try one more time. Hi, Diane, man. Maybe we have you there. Hi did offer speakerphone if you would. Okay. So we can hear you. Well, pick up your set. And then everybody will be able to hear you. We're here. Diane give it a shot. All right. I don't know what the problem is. We'll try to get back to her. She going to apologize as well. We're in the middle of session and do a couple of votes on the floor that I personally need to go take. So I'm going away off. And thank you very much for the opportunity. Nice to hear your voice. Again tile. It's been awhile since we first minute. The first hearing New York hailed some years ago. So you all have a great day. And thank you for your conversation on this, very important topic. Thank you very much for being part of it. And let's go to our next caller as we continue with the Massachusetts marijuana control Commissioner Shalini title and see what we can learn I should say cannabis control commission and Kellyanne Putnam valley, New York WNYC. Hi, kelly. Hi, brian. Thanks for having me on. I'm so sorry that Senator people Stokes had to get off before my call someone by we do, you know, I I work for Sam New York. I'm a field organizer here in New York. And we're very concerned about what Hoyle man river do as negligible consequences of commercial legalisation. I think that needs to be taken much more seriously when you look at the data from other states about the negative consequences of commercialization. It's it's not negligible. So listeners know that acronym that used which is Sam that's smart approaches to marijuana right? And you're gonna meet Kevin tomorrow. I understand which is fantastic. And I and there's people up in buffalo who are trying to get with Senator people Stokes and try to educate her on on this matter, and we fully understand the need for decriminalization. And and that's what we support commercial legalisation is not going to give her what she wants. I think it's naive. And I think our guest from Massachusetts can support that in a way that there's big money behind this and to compete in that kind of industry requires loans and startup funds that minority communities don't necessarily have. But here's the other piece of this that we want to you know, kinda hammer home is that these communities. Also, you know have the most to lose when it comes in adding adding another addictive substance into the world. And you know, we'll Jones is is a wonderful person. To talk about it. I don't wanna turn this debate over legalization versus decriminalization. Which is in fact, exactly what we're going to have with your colleague on Friday. But but Kelly, I I appreciate your call. And and why if you're worried about the money behind the lobbyists for the big marijuana industry companies? Why would you not be as worried about the black market with you know, the violence in the black market from decriminalization? Right. Well, see, here's the thing is, you know, it doesn't it doesn't change the black market continues to thrive in states that have legalized. Okay. And there's reasons for that. So when you look at the data on what's what's happening in Oregon, Colorado and these other states on California and the black market. It's not good commercial legalisation is not fixing that problem. As a matter of fact, it's making it worse than we're gonna. Again, I'm going to leave it there. And we will pick that up and explore that further on Friday, we're when we're going to have debate and the green space, in fact between legalization advocate and decriminalization advocate on exactly the lines that Kelly Putnam valley was just calling about so Kelly. Thank you very much Commissioner, let me let me ask you for some background politically on the process of getting to legalization in Massachusetts. What New York and New Jersey? Might do which I don't know if it's been done anywhere before is actually have the legislatures pass a law, Massachusetts like the state out west had a referendum, right? Right. We had a referendum in two thousand sixteen. But then the legislature actually rewrote it the following summer creating the commission and strengthening many of the equity provisions I actually like to address one of the points from the previous call quickly. So the idea of adding another addictive substance is very disingenuous in Massachusetts baseline data shows that one in five adults use cannabis before legalization. I'm sure the statistics are similar in New York. We're not adding a substance the idea of regulating is to allow consumers to have tested product from a regulated store by do. Find it interesting. No matter how you feel about legalisation people tend to agree that we don't want to see an industry that's dominated by a few big exploitation of players. So I think that's something that we all have in common. We had the. The just finish that point or further that point a little bit. We had a guest last week who said he favors decriminalization as opposed to legalization because what he doesn't want is another legal industry like the alcohol industry pushing an addictive substance on people getting out there with advocating and saying use this use this use more of this use are one of this because that's going to create more harm than the current black market. But let it be decriminalised. So absolutely nobody wants to see another big alcohol. Nobody wants to see another big tobacco. That's why we have very strict advertising regulations inventory tracking testing regulations. The idea that the way to address that is through decriminalization and no regulation whatsoever. Is completely contradictory to the goal last question. And it's another social Justice question. How far has Massachusetts come on expunge mint or the ceiling of records of people who've had marijuana conviction in the past? So we do have expunge -ment for cannabis convictions. It's not automatic. But it's allowed the repetition. I recently wrote a recommendation of ten equity must have in any Bill, and I included automatic expunge, man. I think it needs to be done in the same lie at the same time as legalization. So that people with past convictions can move forward in their life without having held against them. My guest has been selene title Commissioner of the Massachusetts cannabis control commission, and we heard earlier from crystal peoples Stokes democratic majority leader of the New York state assembly. Thanks so much Commissioner for joining us. We we learned a lot from you today. And we'll see how much the experience of Massachusetts. So far can inform the debate still to come in new New York, New jersey. Thank you very much. Thank you for having me Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Emily Basilan next.