Politics and Current
Abortion Rights on the Ballot: Seven States Vote to Expand Access, Three Maintain Restrictions – The Gist
Hannah Beier/GETTY
Measures to protect access to abortion they passed the test in seven states but failed in three where it was on the ballot on this election, marking a key moment in the ongoing national debate on reproductive rights.
Arizona, Colorado, New York, Maryland, Missouri, Montana and Nevada voted to protect a lady’s right to select. However, the states of Florida, South Dakota and Nebraska have decided to maintain or impose more stringent restrictions on abortion access. The results highlight a growing patchwork of abortion policies, with some states expanding access while others seek to limit or outright limit it.
This wave of ballot initiatives follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which ended federal abortion protections and left regulation up to individual states. In response, abortion rights advocates are increasingly turning to ballot initiatives, allowing voters to have a direct say on the issue and bypass legislative hurdles. This approach reflects a shift toward grassroots efforts to secure or restore access to abortion in an evolving and polarized legal landscape.
Here’s how voters took the reins on this critical issue while it was on the page voting in 10 states.
New York
New York voters expressed strong support for measures to protect abortion access by approving amendments to the state structure. One such means Proposal 1appeared on the ballot without directly mentioning abortion, however it effectively secured the right to abortion. Abortion stays legal in New York until the twenty fourth week of pregnancy.
Arizona
In Arizona, voters passed a bill that might repeal the state’s current ban on abortion after the fifteenth week of pregnancy. The move significantly expands reproductive rights, marking a fundamental shift in the abortion landscape in the state. The measure, a victory for abortion rights supporters in the presidential battleground state, establishes a “fundamental right” to abortion in the Arizona structure. It prohibits the state from restricting or prohibiting abortion before fetal viability, normally around 24 weeks of pregnancy. Until now, Arizona law prohibited abortion after the fifteenth week of pregnancy.
Colorado
Colorado voters approved a move to strengthen existing abortion rights, continuing the state’s history of supporting reproductive access. Because abortion is already legal to the point where it is possible, the amendment secures existing protections and strengthens Colorado’s position on reproductive rights. Moreover, this solution repeals the constitutional provision that previously prohibited public financing of abortion. Colorado stays without restrictions on access to abortion while pregnant.
Maryland
Maryland voters approved a constitutional amendment protecting access to abortion and affirming the right to reproductive freedom. The solution preserves existing abortion rights, including the ability to make decisions about pregnancy, and embeds these protections in the state structure. Maryland has no restrictions on abortion while pregnant, strengthening reproductive rights in the state.
Montana
Montana voters approved a measure protecting abortion access, strengthening the state’s existing reproductive rights. The amendment guarantees the right to make decisions regarding pregnancy, including abortion, up to the viability of the fetus and beyond, so as to protect the life or health of the patient. Abortion has been legal in Montana since a 1999 state Supreme Court ruling.
Nevada
Nevada voters passed a measure protecting abortion rights, ensuring the state’s legal framework continues to support reproductive access. The amendment to the Nevada state structure guarantees the right to abortion until the viability of the fetus and thereafter when it’s essential to protect the health or lifetime of the patient. Although the amendment has already been approved, it can require voter approval again in 2026 to fully amend the state structure.
Missouri
Missouri voters overturned the state’s nearly complete ban on abortion, significantly expanding access to abortion. Abortion is currently banned in Missouri, with no exceptions for rape and incest. The newly approved amendment is a fundamental change in state policy that is predicted to significantly expand access to abortion services.
Florida
Florida voters rejected a measure to enshrine abortion rights in the state structure, a setback for supporters who want to restore broader access. The proposal, which might allow abortion until viability, received 57% of the vote but fell wanting the 60% threshold required for approval. Florida currently bans most abortions after six weeks. The defeat ends a string of victories for abortion rights groups in state elections since the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision that overturned Roe v. Wade.
South Dakota
South Dakota voters rejected an initiative that might have legalized abortion with provisions applicable during the first and second trimesters of pregnancy. As a result, the almost complete ban on abortion, which allows for exceptions only to save the lifetime of the mother, will remain in force. The proposal, which included exceptions for rape and incest, was narrowly defeated, reflecting the divided and sophisticated position of voters.
Nebraska
Nebraska voters faced two competing votes on abortion. One, which was not adopted, sought to guarantee the right to abortion up to the viability of the fetus. The second, which passed, upheld the state’s 12-week abortion ban, allowing exceptions for sexual assault, incest and medical emergencies. If each solutions were adopted, the one which received the most votes would change into effective. Nebraska law currently allows abortions up to 12 weeks.
The results mark the end of a winning streak for abortion rights supporters, underscoring that reproductive health stays a key issue for voters. According to Press Associationin a survey of greater than 110,000 voters nationwide, a few quarter of respondents said abortion policy was the most significant think about their vote, while almost half considered it essential but not the most significant factor. Just over 1 in 10 people said it was a secondary factor.
Politics and Current
Social media reacts to video of Susan Smith’s tearful plea for parole 30 years after she killed her two sons and blamed their disappearance on a black man
Parole was denied Wednesday for notorious South Carolina mother Susan Smith, who drowned her two young children after initially claiming a black man had kidnapped them.
“I wish I could take it back, I really do,” Smith, now 53, said. “I didn’t lie to get away with it. … I used to be just afraid. I didn’t know the way to tell the individuals who loved them that they might never see them again.
Smith said she found peace because of her Christian faith. God is a vital part of her life testified on Wednesday, “and I know he has forgiven me.”
It was her first appearance before the state parole board, which voted unanimously to keep her in prison for the remaining of her life. After serving 30 years, Smith is eligible for parole every two years.
“I know what I did was terrible,” she said in her testimony given via Zoom. “And I would give anything if I could go back and change it.”
“I love Michael and Alex with all my heart,” she said openly, crying and wiping away tears.
The disappearance of 3-year-old Michael and 14-month-old Alex made national headlines after their mother told the chilling story of how a black man stopped her automotive and took her children. She appeared incessantly on television, playing every bit the role of a distraught mother, and the search for her boys lasted nine grueling days.
Susan Smith, a South Carolina woman who pleaded guilty to killing her 3-year-old and 14-month-old sons in 1994, speaks at her parole hearing.
Smith initially lied to police, saying that a black man had kidnapped her and kidnapped her sons. pic.twitter.com/oppN49EvWj
— ABC News Live (@ABCNewsLive) November 20, 2024
It was then that Susan Smith, questioned by police who began to doubt her story, truthfully confessed what really happened on October 25, 1994.
Smith, then 23, strapped her sons into their automotive seats and drove the automotive into a lake near her home in Union, South Carolina.
Smith’s pleas fell on the ears of not only the parole board but in addition many on social media. As videos of her interrogation began circulating online, a whole bunch of comments condemned the mother for not seeming sufficiently remorseful about her actions.
“☠️MONSTERS should be kept in CAGES☠️”, one person wrote on Xformerly Twitter.
Another added: “I remember it when it happened. She claimed that her children were kidnapped by black people. And people believed her, unfortunately. She should be sentenced to death. He must remain behind bars until the very end.”
“I’m sure her children, strapped in their automotive seats, screamed and cried as they drowned in their own mother’s hands for her lustful pleasures. Shameful,” – wrote one other commentator.
Sixteenth Judicial District Solicitor Kevin Brackett recalled pulling Susan Smith’s automotive out of the water with her children inside. She added that these crimes shocked not only the family but your complete country.
“On behalf of the community I now represent, I do not believe she should ever be released from prison until the last living person who remembers Michael and Alex dies, and that will not happen in her lifetime. She should never have been released,” Brackett said Wednesday.
Defense lawyer Susan Smith argued that she planned to die with her sons, but jumped out of the automotive on the last minute.
Lead prosecutor Tommy Pope noted that Smith was not wet or injured when she ran for help after the automotive disappeared beneath the lake.
“God is an important part of my life and I know he has forgiven me… I just ask that you show the same kind of mercy.”
Killer mother Susan Smith applies for release 30 years after drowning her two young sons at her first parole hearing. The Parole Board unanimously rejected… pic.twitter.com/0jR88Mkuzo
— Fox News (@FoxNews) November 20, 2024
“Susan’s focus was always on Susan,” said Pope, who presented evidence during Smith’s murder trial that she was distraught over her breakup with one other man. Prosecutors say the connection ended because Smith had children.
“Susan made a terrible, terrible decision, choosing a man over her family,” Pope said. “If she could have put David in the car, he would have been there too.”
David Smith, Michael and Alexander’s father, who was captured entering the constructing, told the board that his ex-wife had never shown any remorse for their murder.
David Smith has just arrived at Susan Smith’s parole hearing.
He is her ex-husband and the daddy of the boys she murdered.
He wanted the death penalty, and now 30 years later he must face it again when it asks the South Carolina Parole Board to release her. pic.twitter.com/2WdqXjwQxM— Brian Entin (@BrianEntin) November 20, 2024
“It wasn’t a tragic mistake. (…) She deliberately wanted to end their lives,” he said.
David Smith testified that his grief over the loss of his sons “came close to taking my own life.”
His current wife, Tiffany Smith, says there are still days when her husband cannot get out of bed because of the pain.
“Michael and Alex didn’t get a chance at life,” she said. “They were given the death penalty.”
He said his ex-wife served just 15 years for each child. “It’s just not enough.”
Susan Smith’s attorney, Tommy Thomas, told the parole board his client’s case shows “the dangers of untreated mental health.” He said Susan Smith was not diagnosed with depression after the birth of her second child.
Her stepfather testified that he had sexually abused her for years.
Susan Smith was not a model prisoner. She was convicted multiple times, once for sex with a prison officer and one other time for drug possession. She was also threatened with punishment for providing documents with her ex-husband’s contact details.
Her lawyer said that if she was released on parole, she would live with her brother.
David Smith said if his wife applied for parole again, he could be there for the sake of his sons.
(*30*) he told the board.
Politics and Current
The Congressional Black Caucus is ready to take on Trump and Republicans, says presumptive Republican chairwoman Yvette Clarke
U.S. Rep. Yvette D. Clarke (D-N.Y.) is set to turn out to be the subsequent chair of the Congressional Black Caucus throughout the next session of Congress, marking a pivotal moment for the longtime New York congresswoman and the 53-year-old caucus.
When the subsequent session of Congress is sworn in on January 3, Clarke – who is unopposed as the present first vice chairman – might be ready to lead the CBC at its peak. This comes as Democrats come face to face with a Republican troika in full control of Congress and a White House stuffed with President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming administration.
While Congresswoman Clarke admits she and her colleagues within the Congressional Black Caucus are “extremely disappointed” in Vice President Kamala Harris’ defeat, she believes the caucus can effectively stand between Republicans and policies that would harm Black communities.
The congresswoman noted some vivid spots within the 2024 CBC elections, similar to expanding the caucus and winning more “non-traditional” seats, like Rep.-elect Janelle Bynum’s flipping of Oregon’s fifth Congressional District. The congresswoman also highlighted the historic victories of Senator-elect Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland and Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware – each Black women – bringing the overall variety of CBC members within the U.S. Senate to 4, probably the most within the club’s history.
“We will have members on every committee of jurisdiction, which puts us in a good place in terms of … advancing legislation that will advance the benefits of Black communities across the country,” Clarke said.
She added: “…in addition, we are positioned to combat disinformation and disinformation regarding any suggestions made by colleagues that are not in the best interests of the Black community.”
Clarke said the CBC have to be “vigilant” now greater than ever because it serves as “the vanguard of the Black community across the country.” Even though Republicans can have full control of federal power in Washington, Congresswoman Clarke said caucus members will proceed to focus next 12 months on reintroducing key laws to improve voting rights protections, combat police brutality, and delineate path forward for renovation.
“We will continue to be the conscience of Congress and advance legislation that will greatly benefit Black communities,” the hopeful CBC president promised.
Democrats are already preparing for a controversial 4 years of the second Trump administration. The president-elect has nominated several controversial nominees to his Cabinet, including former congressman Matt Gaetz as attorney general, Fox News host Pete Hegseth as defense secretary and, most recently, wrestling entertainment mogul Linda McMahon as education secretary.
Clarke said she’s not surprised by what many see as Trump’s several unqualified picks or the shortage of diversity within the proposed administration up to now. The congresswoman argued that the selections prove that Trump intends to implement the controversial Project 2025, which he claimed he had no idea about throughout the campaign.
“It is abundantly clear to me and members of the Congressional Black Caucus that planning around Project 2025 puts Black communities in the crosshairs of mistreatment and retaliation,” Clarke said.
The congresswoman expressed particular concern about Trump’s plan for the “largest” mass deportation within the country’s history, which she described as “unknown territory.”
While the problem of immigration and conversations about deportation largely focus on Mexican and Latin American immigrants, Clarke said she is equally concerned about black immigrants.
“We live in a society that has stigmatized people of African descent from the beginning,” she explained. “So when you think about the terrible disinformation campaign being waged against Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, you get the idea of the kind of justification and targeting of people of African descent in this mass deportation.”
While Democrats and members of the Congressional Black Caucus will definitely use their positions to oppose what they see as harmful policies from the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress, additionally they hope there could also be pockets of bipartisanship.
Rep. Clarke said she would love to see the favored Child Tax Credit, which expired in 2021, restored and laws to higher improve privacy regulations within the tech space, particularly on social media. However, the congresswoman admits that she is unsure whether such cross-party cooperation might be possible at the subsequent Congress.
“The body has changed quite a bit in terms of membership, and with that comes a change in GOP chemistry and strategy,” she said. “It’s much more magnetized… so hopefully there will be places where we can connect.”
Politics and Current
The cruise line is offering a 4-year cruise to escape the Trump presidency
People upset by the red wave can say goodbye to their problems. The cruise line is offering four-year cruises to people wanting to leave the United States during Donald Trump’s second presidency.
Willa Vie Residences might be allow this bored with America’s future temporarily leaving the country by boat. As a part of the Tour La Vie program, the Florida-based company will take travelers on a four-year journey to over 140 countries.
For those that don’t need to spend 4 years at sea, Tour La Vie offers a number of packages. There’s a one-year “Escape from Reality” cruise, a two-year “Mid-Term Selection” cruise, a three-year “Everywhere But Home” option and a four-year “Skip Forward” version that takes one away from the potential dangers of Trump’s policies.
However, Villa Vie’s general manager, Mikael Petterson, he got here with this concept even before Trump won a second term, saying it was a plan for any group dissatisfied with the election results. He emphasized that the company has no political preferences.
Costs range from just below $40,000 per 12 months, with a full course starting at $256,000. However, one can have all food and beverages provided, in addition to Wi-Fi and medical appointments. In addition, travelers can have the opportunity to see two wonders of the world and cultural experiences akin to the Rio Carnival and a visit to the Panama Canal.
U.S. residents who still wish to exercise their civic duty and who might be sailing during the 2026 and 2028 elections will give you the option to vote via mail-in ballots brought on board the ship.
The embarked ship Villa Vie Odyssey can accommodate up to 600 guests. Petterson has already noticed an “increase” in interest since the cruise was announced on Nov. 7, two days after Election Day.
-
Press Release8 months ago
CEO of 360WiSE Launches Mentorship Program in Overtown Miami FL
-
Business and Finance6 months ago
The Importance of Owning Your Distribution Media Platform
-
Press Release7 months ago
U.S.-Africa Chamber of Commerce Appoints Robert Alexander of 360WiseMedia as Board Director
-
Business and Finance8 months ago
360Wise Media and McDonald’s NY Tri-State Owner Operators Celebrate Success of “Faces of Black History” Campaign with Over 2 Million Event Visits
-
Ben Crump7 months ago
Another lawsuit accuses Google of bias against Black minority employees
-
Fitness7 months ago
Black sportswear brands for your 2024 fitness journey
-
Theater8 months ago
Applications open for the 2020-2021 Soul Producing National Black Theater residency – Black Theater Matters
-
Ben Crump8 months ago
Henrietta Lacks’ family members reach an agreement after her cells undergo advanced medical tests