California Black Media

Report: States Must Ban Guns at Places Where People Vote

Voting and elections have become the targets of threats and intimidation as the nation faces a proliferation of guns, more frequent gun violence, and fewer legal protections, noted Brennan Center for Justice and the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in a report released this week.

Published

1 year ago

October 4, 2023

Oakland Post

The U.S. Supreme Court does stipulate that gun restrictions are allowed in what are deemed ‘sensitive’ places, like schools, government buildings and polling places, many states have not confirmed the protection by law. Shutterstock photo.

By Sunita Sohrabji, EMS
Special California Black Media

The proliferation of guns in American homes has increased dramatically since 2008, when the Supreme Court ruled for the first time that the Second Amendment allows U.S. residents to possess an operable handgun in the home for self-defense.

“This was a considerable change from what the court had long held, which was that possessing a firearm had to be related to militia service,” Robyn Sanders, counsel for the Voting Rights and Election Reform Democracy Project at the Brennan Center, told Ethnic Media Services.

The Supreme Court did caution that the rights secured by the Second Amendment are not unlimited; it identified laws that would forbid firearms in sensitive places, such as schools and government buildings. “And so there, while the Supreme Court handed down what was a dramatic decision at that time, it did specify that regulations are still permissible in places that are sensitive,” said Sanders, who co-authored the report.

But the Supreme Court further weakened gun restrictions last year in its ruling on the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. vs. Bruen case. The opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, stated that the American public has the right to carry guns in public for self-defense, and that states cannot require applicants to demonstrate a need for owning a gun.

“The decision in Bruen has invited more legal challenges to gun regulations. But the court also explicitly states that sensitive places are places where states can regulate where guns can be carried, and they were unequivocal about polling locations being one of those,” said Sanders.

In a Sept. 20 interview with EMS, Sanders discussed the threat gun violence poses for U.S. elections. “We believe this report served a significant purpose in alerting states that there are ways that they could help to maintain the confidence that voters historically had in our elections as being safe and secure from violence and intimidation,” she said.

Excerpts of Conversation with Sanders:

What types of justifications are states using to allow concealed guns at polling sites and drop-off boxes?

The Supreme Court was unequivocal in its decision in Bruen that prohibiting firearms in polling places is constitutional. And so, while I can’t speak for why states have not filled the voids that we recognize in our report, what I can say is that we are offering policy proposals for states to enact laws that would better protect voters and election officials and workers from threats and help voters and the public remain confident that our elections will continue to be by and large peaceful.

Older adults traditionally account for the majority of election workers. Have you seen a drop-off of older adults choosing to work at the polls, given the uncertainty of protection from violence at those sites?

We were experiencing a global pandemic in 2020. And so there was a downturn in retired or elderly folks serving as election workers due to the vulnerabilities related with COVID -19.

Compared to anything prior, there was dramatically more harassment and threats lodged at election officials and poll workers over the last two election cycles. Poll workers have reported experiences of harassment and threats of abuse in recent years.

Are election workers of color more likely to face harassment, violence and intimidation?

We found that election officials serving what’s known as majority minority jurisdictions were more likely than election officials overall to report having been threatened, having been harassed or abused because of their job. And they were also considerably more likely to be concerned about being assaulted.

This is alarming, it’s concerning, and it’s unacceptable in a democracy.

One out of every 3 election workers have reported harassment or threats, according to the report.

As a result of the shifts in how our electoral process was being carried out, we started to observe trends in elected leaders and others who were spreading disinformation and misinformation about our elections as it relates to various methods of voting, including voting by mail and the use of drop boxes as a result of the uptick in mail voting.

And so based on that climate, we started to see an increase in threats and intimidation and threats of violence being lodged at election workers and officials.

Could you talk about some of your policy recommendations?

One of the key findings in our report is that only 12 states and Washington, D.C. have laws prohibiting open carry and concealed carry at polling places. And even fewer states have laws that prohibit guns where other sensitive election activity occurs drop boxes as well as places like election counting facilities.

And while it is illegal to intimidate voters in all 50 states, neither federal law nor any state law explicitly acknowledges that guns in or around places where people are engaged in voting or conducting election activity can constitute illegal intimidation.

In our report, we offer two main policy proposals. One: we recommend that states enact laws to prohibit guns at and around all sites of voting and vote counting. And we recommend that states strengthen their laws, protecting voters and election workers and officials from intimidation and violence, but explicitly addressing the void that is currently present and addressing the intimidating effect of guns.

I would reiterate to voters that — because our elections have remained by and large peaceful — the proposals that we offer in our report are simply action items that states can take to further strengthen legal protections that are already in place.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

Black Woman Gains Post as Senate Staff Director

Don't Miss

State Assembly’s Black Caucus Played Key Role in Brokering $20-Per-Hour Fast Food Worker Pay Deal

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of October 30 – November 5, 2024

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of October 30 – November 5, 2024

Published

1 day ago

November 1, 2024

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

California Black Media

Ahead of Nov. Election, Event to Check Pulse of California’s Political Landscape

The Public Policy Institute of California is hosting a “2024 Speaker Series on California’s Future,” a preview event outlining the political landscape of the state and the nation ahead of the upcoming November elections. The event, which will be held Sept. 26 from 12 noon to 1 p.m., will include a panel of prominent political journalists who will assess the mood of the electorate and discuss themes and issues that are likely to shape the election outcome in November.

Published

4 days ago

October 29, 2024

Oakland Post

PPIC

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media

The Public Policy Institute of California is hosting a “2024 Speaker Series on California’s Future,” a preview event outlining the political landscape of the state and the nation ahead of the upcoming November elections.

The event, which will be held Sept. 26 from 12 noon to 1 p.m., will include a panel of prominent political journalists who will assess the mood of the electorate and discuss themes and issues that are likely to shape the election outcome in November.

The welcome and opening remarks of the event will be led by Tani Cantil-Sakauye, the president and chief executive officer of the PPIC. The discussion will be moderated by FOX 11 news anchor Elex Michaelson, journalists joining the conversation include senior political writer Joe Garofoli of the San Francisco Chronicle, national politics reporter Astead Herndon of the The New York Times, political correspondent for KQED Marisa Lagos, and senior political reporter POLITICO Melanie Mason.

A statewide survey by the PPIC revealed key findings that highlighted people’s concerns regarding candidates of choice for the 2024 presidential election, the 10 state propositions on the ballot, and the financial direction of the state in the next 12 months.

Since Vice President Kamala Harris replaced President Joe Biden as the Democratic Party standard bearer, 6 in 10 California likely voters support the Democratic presidential ticket compared to the Republican party and other candidates.

“Californians’ support for the Democratic presidential candidate — and partisans’ overwhelming preference for their party’s candidates — were the consistent trends before Harris replaced Biden,” the survey report stated.

Among the 10 ballot measures, approximately 71% of voters are expected to vote yes on Proposition 36, allowing felony charges and increased sentences for some drug and theft crimes.

According to the survey, the majority of voters, “think it is a good thing that a majority of voters can make laws and change public policies by passing initiatives.” Voters agree that initiatives on the ballot, “bring up important public policy issues that the Governor and Legislature have not adequately addressed.”

The survey also revealed that nearly half of voters think the state and country are headed in the wrong direction and expect financial struggles in the next 12 months.

The event will be held at the Sheraton Grand Hotel in Sacramento.

The PPIC Speaker Series on California’s Future invites thought leaders and changemakers to address challenges in the state. Residents can visit the PPIC website for more information and register for the event available online and in person.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

California Black Media

Not So Sweet: California State Health Campaign Highlights Dangers of Sugary Drinks

The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and CalFresh Healthy Living, the state’s nutrition assistance program, recently launched a health campaign to illuminate the risks of drinking sugar-sweetened beverages and the health benefits of hydrating with water. The “Not So Sweet Side” initiative encourages families to make informed decisions about the drinks they choose and to be aware of the sugar content present in them.

Published

4 days ago

October 29, 2024

Oakland Post

iStock Photo

By Edward Henderson, California Black Media

The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and CalFresh Healthy Living, the state’s nutrition assistance program, recently launched a health campaign to illuminate the risks of drinking sugar-sweetened beverages and the health benefits of hydrating with water.

The “Not So Sweet Side” initiative encourages families to make informed decisions about the drinks they choose and to be aware of the sugar content present in them.

According to the campaign, consuming too much sugar has been associated with an increase in chronic conditions and diseases such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease and tooth decay. African Americans face a higher risk of developing diabetes mellitus, heart disease and tooth decay.

Dr. Redieat Assefa is a pediatrician at Riverside University Health Systems. She spoke at a webinar hosted by California Black Media introducing the campaign to ethnic media publishers across California.

Assefa underscored the importance of reading labels on sugary drinks you may consume and how to identify drinks that contain too much.

“When reading a nutrition label, there are a few key components that I would like us to consider. The first thing is the serving size of your sugary drinks. Is it one can? Is it one bottle? Then you go down to your total carbohydrates, which can be broken down to your fibers and sugary, added sugars or non-added sugars.”

To simplify the process, compare the grams of sugar in a box of Apple Juice with preservatives that could be around 40 grams of sugar and that of natural juice which averages around 6 grams.

Assefa also added that research indicates that African American women who drink one to two sugary beverages daily have an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Sugary drinks can lead to high blood pressure, hype, and hypertension, contributing to a greater risk of heart disease among African American young adult men who, on average, consume sugary beverages at a higher level than other groups.

Assefa pointed out that there are about 10 teaspoons of sugar in a single can of soda.

Dr. Maxmillian Chambers, a dental professional and public health advocate, also spoke on the panel promoting the campaign highlighting the impact sugary drinks can have on dental health.

“As we continue this dialogue, it’s crucial to turn our focus to oral health, a key component of our overall well-being that doesn’t often receive the attention it deserves. Sugary drinks are a significant contributor to tooth decay. Research shows that drinking more than two eight-ounce servings of sugary beverages per week can drastically increase the risk of cavities. And for our youth, particularly those aged 9 to 18, sugary drinks are primary sources of added sugar in their diets.”

Lakeysha Sowunmi, a mom and public health advocate who has worked to influence state policy and mobilize communities, including churches, around health issues, said, “I work with families on a budget, for example, and help them understand CalFresh and the resources that are available. We talk about portion control. We talk about feeding big families.”

The CalFresh Healthy Living Program is led by CDPH’s Nutrition and Physical Activity Branch. To explore recipes, resources, and tips for making healthier beverage choices, visit http://uncoverhealthyhabits.com/