More stories

  • in

    Justices’ ‘Disturbing’ Ruling in South Carolina Gerrymandering Case

    More from our inbox:Questions for RepublicansThe Case Against the PurebredChatbot TherapyCriticism of Israel Caroline Gutman for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “In Top Court, G.O.P. Prevails on Voting Map” (front page, May 24):The action of the conservative wing of the Supreme Court, anchoring the 6-to-3 decision to allow the South Carolina Legislature to go forward with redistricting plans that clearly marginalize African American representation in the state — and after a meticulous review by an appellate court to preclude the plan — is disturbing.The persistent erosion of voting rights and apparent denial that racism is still part of the fabric of American society are troubling.Surely there can be deference to decisions made by states; concocting “intent” to deny true representative justice in an apparent quest to return to the “Ozzie and Harriet” days of the 1950s seems too transparent an attempt to “keep America white again” — as they may perceive the challenge of changing demographics.This particular ruling cries out for the need to expand court membership.Raymond ColemanPotomac, Md.To the Editor:Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito presumes the South Carolina lawmakers acted “in good faith” in gerrymandering the voting district map for the purpose of favoring the Republicans, and not for racial reasons, an improbable rationale on its face.Astoundingly, he further reasons that the gerrymander is acceptable because it was for partisan rather than race-based reasons (acknowledging that redistricting based on race “may be held unconstitutional.”)We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    From Majesty to Frailty: Why Are So Many Horses Breaking Down?

    ‘Broken Horses’Producers/Reporters Joe Drape and Melissa HoppertSupervising Producer Liz HodesWatch our new documentary on FX and Hulu starting Friday, April 26, at 10 p.m. Eastern.When horse racing fans arrive at Churchill Downs in Louisville, Ky., next week for the 150th running of the Kentucky Derby, some might be watching with unease. On the same track last year, seven horses died before the showpiece event even started. In the days after, five more died.Two other events in the sport’s Triple Crown series — the Preakness Stakes in May and the Belmont Stakes in June — and the signature meet at the historic Saratoga Race Course were also marred by deaths, horrifying spectators and intensifying pressure on racing officials to, finally, reckon with the problem.“Horses dying in clusters is not a new phenomenon,” Joe Drape, a New York Times reporter, says in the new documentary “Broken Horses.” “It’s just now people are paying attention and want to know why.”Drape and Melissa Hoppert, who have covered the horse racing industry for decades, were part of a team that investigated the fateful period last year that threw the sport into crisis and left fans wondering why so many horses, supposedly in peak physical condition, were breaking down so frequently. Horses racing at Churchill Downs in 2023.Left Right Productions/The New York Times/Hulu Originals/FX NetworksWith confidential documents, recordings and exclusive interviews, “Broken Horses” provides a vivid tour of the business and political forces that control the Sport of Kings and resist measures to implement changes that could decrease horse deaths. It is a story of reckless breeding and doping, of compromised veterinarians and trainers, and of fans who are drawn to the sport’s beauty and pageantry but increasingly wonder how long one of America’s oldest sports can continue to have its social license renewed.“A racehorse is the only animal that can take a thousand people for a ride at once,” Hoppert says in the film, quoting a saying among the sport’s devotees. In 2023, a troubling number of those rides ended calamitously. “Broken Horses” attempts to show viewers the underbelly of the sport, so they can begin to understand why.Producer Luke KoremCo-Producer Leah VarjacquesProducers/Reporters Liz Day and Rachel AbramsStory Producer Alexander BaertlDirector of Photography Jarred AltermanVideo Editors Patrick Berry and Charlotte Stobbs“The New York Times Presents” is a series of documentaries representing the unparalleled journalism and insight of The New York Times, bringing viewers close to the essential stories of our time. More

  • in

    Pet Shop That Sold Sick and Hurt Puppies Will Repay Nearly 200 Customers

    Shake A Paw agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by New York’s attorney general after investigators found that the Long Island business was selling puppies from so-called puppy mills.The owners of a Long Island pet store accused of knowingly selling hundreds of sick and injured puppies, including some that died days after being bought, will pay $300,000 to about 200 customers under a settlement announced by New York’s attorney general on Friday.The settlement resolves a lawsuit filed by the attorney general, Letitia James, in December 2021 after an investigation by her office determined that the store, Shake A Paw, was acquiring and selling puppies from so-called puppy mills, large-scale commercial breeders with reputations for abuse, inbreeding and filthy conditions.Ms. James’s inquiry also found that the store and its owners, Marc Jacobs and Gerard O’Sullivan, had failed to disclose animals’ serious medical conditions and had illegally refused to reimburse customers for veterinary bills incurred after they had been sold sick pets, according to court documents.In addition to repaying the $300,000, Mr. Jacobs and Mr. O’Sullivan agreed to stop misleading advertising including claims that puppies sold by Shake A Paw were the “healthiest” and from the “most trusted breeders”; to buy animals only from reputable breeders; and to provide customers with disclosures certifying the health of their puppies, according to court documents.All pet stores in New York will be prohibited from selling dogs, cats and rabbits starting in December under a law passed in 2022.Richard Hamburger, a lawyer for Shake A Paw, declined to comment late Friday. Erin Laxton, who bought her Chihuahua-dachshund mix, Merlin, at Shake A Paw in 2020, described the settlement as a “huge relief.” Ms. Laxton said Merlin had begun coughing the day she brought him home from Shake A Paw and had died of respiratory illnesses five weeks later, according to court documents.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Lab-Made Meat? Florida Lawmakers Don’t Like the Sound of It.

    Legislators there and in several other states want to restrict the manufacture or sale of meat made in a laboratory, even though it barely exists. The space industry disagrees.Lab grown meat.It sounds like a plotline from a sci-fi movie about test-tube chicken fingers, but it’s a real thing.Start-up companies around the world are competing to develop technologies for producing chicken, beef, salmon and other options without the need to raise and slaughter animals. China has made the development of the industry a priority. In the United States, the Department of Agriculture has given initial blessings to two producers.Now, a measure in Florida that would ban sales of laboratory-grown meat has gained widespread attention beyond state borders. The bill, which is advancing through the Florida Legislature, would make the sale or manufacture of lab-grown meat a misdemeanor with a fine of $1,000. It’s one of a half-dozen similar measures in Arizona, Tennessee, West Virginia and elsewhere.Opponents of lab-grown meat include beef and poultry associations worried that laboratory-made hamburgers or chicken nuggets could cut into their business.Supporters include environmentalists who say it would reduce animal cruelty and potentially help slow climate change. Meat and dairy together account for about 14.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the United Nations.Other backers of the industry include advocates for space exploration, a subject particularly relevant to Florida, which is home to the Kennedy Space Center and the site of countless launches to the moon and beyond. Elon Musk, whose company SpaceX has its own outer space ambitions, has partnered with Israel-based Aleph Farms to research lab-grown meat on a Space X flight to the International Space Station that launched from Florida.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    More Than 100 Animals Seized From Long Island Home

    Animal welfare authorities say the animals were being illegally held and included a South American ostrich, a giant African snail, two prairie dogs and an endangered tiger salamander.Animal welfare authorities seized more than 100 animals from a Long Island home this week — including a South American ostrich, a giant African snail, two prairie dogs and an endangered tiger salamander — after a tip they received about exotic animals led them to their owner’s doorstep.“He was running a pop-up circus,” said Detective Matt Roper, director of law enforcement for the Nassau County SPCA. “Bringing these animals out in public and letting children play with these animals.”Detective Roper said the animals’ owner was given court summonses for several state and local violations, including endangering the public and housing and possessing endangered species. Federal authorities are also investigating, he said.Detective Roper emphasized that there were no signs that the animals had been abused or neglected.“They were all cared for,” Detective Roper said. “They were just in violation of being held or kept as either pets or for exhibition purposes.”Detective Roper, who declined to name the animals’ owner because the investigation is continuing, said that on Tuesday the authorities took 104 animals from the basement and backyard of the house, which is in North Bellmore.Humane Long Island, an animal advocacy organization that took custody of dozens of the animals that were seized, identified their owner as Matthew Spohrer, 32. He was issued 30 violations relating to illegal possession of animals, the group said in a news release.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?  More

  • in

    Should Iowa or South Carolina Go First?

    More from our inbox:Humans and Wildlife: The Messages Are MixedThe Decades-Long Struggle for Affordable Child Care Antonio Giovanni PinnaTo the Editor:Re “Democrats to Iowa: Get Lost!,” by Art Cullen (Opinion guest essay, Dec. 12):Maybe, just maybe, Mr. Cullen is revealing more about the problem with Iowa than anything about the Democratic Party when he complains that the Democrats’ proposed new primary schedule is set up to “dump the Iowa caucuses into the ditch.”It does no such thing, of course; it merely deprives the Hawkeye State of its guaranteed gatekeeper status at the head of the line. Mr. Cullen’s self-righteous huffing that “discarding Iowa is not a great way to mend fences in rural America” seems to suggest that he feels that somehow his state is read out of the Union if it isn’t allowed to speak first when presidential primary season rolls around.New Hampshire, which holds the first actual primaries, has a similar attitude. Neither state’s position on the electoral calendar was inscribed in stone, but you’d never know it from their champions’ zealotry on this issue.Personally, I’d prefer to see the order of the primaries and caucuses reshuffled before every presidential election. That way, at least Iowa would be at or near the front at least some of the time, but one of the smaller, whitest states in the nation wouldn’t get to fire the race’s starting gun every time. Surely Iowans can find something else about their state to be proud of.Eric B. LippsStaten IslandTo the Editor:Art Cullen’s critique of the Democratic National Committee’s proposal to put South Carolina ahead of Iowa on the nominating calendar is misguided. Democrats haven’t dumped “the Iowa caucuses into a ditch.” Rather, they’re considering leading with a state with voter rolls that better represent Democratic voters and the country as a whole.Mr. Cullen argues that diversity has a chance in Iowa, citing Barack Obama’s victory over Hillary Clinton at the caucus. But an overwhelmingly white electorate choosing a diverse candidate is not the same as a diverse electorate having its say in the process.Rural states like Iowa have challenges, but they don’t need symbolic support like keeping the Iowa caucus first. Instead, they need real solutions, such as the Inflation Reduction Act, which provides subsidies for renewable energy projects that will bring economic vitality to rural areas.John HorschOakland, Calif.To the Editor:Art Cullen’s essay was remarkably self-serving. Iowa goes first by tradition, which gives a rural, largely white state outsized importance.I get that Iowans want to hold onto their position, but why should the rest of the nation take cues from this one state? It is time to hold national primaries, all on the same day. Let everyone in the nation vote, at the same time. This has the side benefit of shortening the ridiculously long primary season.Katherine Jo GlavesSeattleHumans and Wildlife: The Messages Are Mixed Tom KrawczykTo the Editor:Re “My Mother Has Two Sons: Me and a Squirrel” (Op-Doc, nytimes.com, Dec. 5):What a joy to wake up to such a tender video of a woman responding to an abandoned newborn creature in her yard. Her son, Tom Krawczyk, is a gifted videographer whose obvious professionalism captured both his mother’s humanity and her concern for a wild animal’s future.At this time of year, especially this year, it is a balm to witness such a poignant gem as this, reminding me of all that is fresh and good in the world and that this sort of intimate connection, wherever we find it, is the ultimate healing.Marjorie HermanHamilton, N.J.To the Editor:I was frustrated by the mixed messaging in The Times about how to best care for wildlife. The Dec. 5 Op-Doc about a woman raising a newborn squirrel as a family member is heartwarming, but unfortunately has the potential to seriously mislead viewers.It counters the excellent advice found in a piece by Margaret Renkl (“Wildlife Rescue Heals the Human Heart,” Opinion guest essay, Dec. 7) about the importance of wildlife rehabilitation centers.The responsible — and legal — thing to do when encountering orphaned or injured wildlife is to place the animal with a certified wildlife rehabilitator.Home-raised animals can suffer from nutritional deficiencies or simply may not survive a well-meaning amateur’s aid. Animals that become acclimated to humans have been known to attack their caregivers or strangers who don’t understand their natural behaviors.Their instinctual response to potential predators might also be compromised. (In this video, the squirrel was friends with a cat.) The most compassionate response is to put an animal’s care into the hands of someone who has the educational training to best support their survival.Kim BaileyNashvilleThe writer is a retired metro parks naturalist.To the Editor:Re “Wildlife Rescue Heals the Human Heart”:Although it was heartwarming to read about the often heroic efforts of wildlife rehabilitators in helping injured and orphaned animals, I can’t help thinking about all the ways that other, less compassionate humans deliberately inflict harm and torture on our wildlife.The indiscriminate trapping and snaring of wolves, the barbaric wildlife-killing contests that still take place in many states and all forms of recreational trophy hunting reflect an indifference to the suffering of our nonhuman kinfolk, who like us value their lives, strive to take care of their families and have every right to share this earth with us.Mary Anne EricsonPortland, Ore.The Decades-Long Struggle for Affordable Child Care Eleanor DavisTo the Editor:Re “The Child Care Crisis Has Been ‘Urgent’ Since ’86. Just Ask Cosmo,” by Jessica Grose (Opinion, nytimes.com, Dec. 7):I read Ms. Grose’s excellent article with a sense of déjà vu — the more things change, the more they stay the same.In 1982, a group of friends and I started a day care center on the Upper West Side because there were few options for full-time working parents.We managed to receive support from a private foundation to help us set up the little center, secured space in a rundown synagogue, and founded one of the first Jewish all-day child care centers in New York City. We named it Yaldaynu, Hebrew for “our children.” (I am pleased to say it is still operating.)It is sad that 40 years later, my daughter, one of those first children, and now a mother, still does not have quality, affordable day care options for her daughter.When will the U.S. do what most of the rest of the West does and provide quality affordable child care for their citizens? Why is this not even on the agenda of urgent our country is facing?Now is the time for Cosmo, which ran a cover story on this issue in 1986, to put it back on the cover, and for politicians, corporations and nonprofits to take action.Jeanne B. KesAlbuquerque More

  • in

    Horse Carriage Ban in New York? De Blasio Wants to Try Again.

    As he enters his final weeks in office, Mayor Bill de Blasio is resurrecting an old campaign promise to ban horse-drawn carriages in New York City.When Bill de Blasio first ran for mayor of New York City, he promised to ban horse-drawn carriages “on Day 1.”Eight years later, with just six weeks left in office, Mr. de Blasio is trying one last time to fulfill that pledge.His administration is developing legislation that would phase out the use of the carriages in Central Park and replace them with “show cars,” according to a series of internal City Hall emails marked “confidential” that were sent between late October and last week and reviewed by The New York Times.The promise to ban horse-drawn carriages, along with an ultimately successful plan to implement universal prekindergarten, was among a handful of major proposals that animated Mr. de Blasio’s successful mayoral bid. Mr. de Blasio and some advocates argue that it is inhumane to use horses for transportation in a modern city filled with cars.Now, as the mayor contemplates a run for governor next year, he has returned to his core campaign issues: In an appearance on MSNBC on Thursday morning, he proposed statewide, year-round, all-day school, a vision that he said would “revolutionize education in the State of New York.”Mr. de Blasio has yet to announce his plan to ban horse-drawn carriages, which would require approval by the City Council, but it has been quietly moving forward. In the emails, city officials said they were aiming to have the legislation ready by Dec. 16, when the City Council is expected to hold its last full meeting of the year.Danielle Filson, a spokeswoman for the mayor, said he had always wanted to ban horse-drawn carriages, and that he hoped the City Council would again consider it.The mayor’s office has directed the Economic Development Corporation to contract with a consulting firm, Langan Engineering, to conduct an analysis of the proposal, with a focus on its environmental, transportation, and socioeconomic impacts, according to the emails. The firm’s managing principal did not respond to requests for comment.It remains unclear if there is any appetite in the City Council to ban horse-drawn carriages. “The Council has not received a proposal from the mayor,” Shirley Limongi, a spokeswoman for the Council, said in a statement. “We will review anything we do receive.”The City Hall emails do not define “show cars,” but proponents of banning the carriages have previously pushed to replace them with electric-powered vehicles resembling old-time carriages.In 2018, Appaloosa Management Charitable Foundation, named for a horse breed and run by the billionaire hedge fund manager David Tepper, retained lobbyists to push for such a plan, according to city records and a city official, who was not authorized to speak publicly. Little came of the effort.This April, New Yorkers for Clean, Livable, and Safe Streets, the leading advocates for the ban, retained the lobbying firm Blue Suit Strategies to push Mr. de Blasio to pursue a similar plan, city lobbying records indicate. The organization is paying the firm $7,000 per month.The group, known as NYCLASS, helped fund a campaign to topple the 2013 mayoral candidacy of Christine Quinn, then the City Council speaker and Mr. de Blasio’s rival, in part because she did not support a ban on horse carriages. The campaign was credited with helping to undermine the candidacy of Ms. Quinn, who was considered the early front-runner.In the ensuing years, NYCLASS pushed Mr. de Blasio to fulfill his promise. But efforts to pass legislation went nowhere, including in 2016, when the mayor failed to push through a bill that would have reduced the number of horses on city streets and confined them to Central Park.The group has gotten involved in more recent political efforts. This year, it supported a super PAC that ran ads targeting Andrew Yang’s mayoral campaign after Mr. Yang responded “no” to a questionnaire asking if he supported efforts “to strengthen welfare protections and increase the standards of care for New York City’s carriage horses.”And in October, after a grisly collision between a horse and a car, NYCLASS ran roughly $200,000 worth of TV and digital ads calling for the elimination of the industry.Steve Nislick, the group’s co-founder, said that New York should follow the example of Guadalajara, Mexico, which replaced horse-drawn carriages with electric vehicles.Takeaways From the 2021 ElectionsCard 1 of 5A G.O.P. pathway in Virginia. More

  • in

    Curtis Sliwa, Who Owns 16 Cats, Focuses on Animal Welfare

    In the final week of the mayoral campaign, Curtis Sliwa is courting Republicans, Democrats and animal lovers.His dedication to animal welfare is personal. Mr. Sliwa has given numerous media tours to introduce New Yorkers to the 16 cats living inside his 320-square-foot studio apartment.His feline collection began six years ago when he moved in with his fourth wife, Nancy Sliwa, in her apartment near Central Park. They took in rescue cats that were sick or abandoned.Now Mr. Sliwa is making animal welfare a central part of his campaign. He released a “13-Point Animal Welfare Plan” last week that includes creating a “no-kill” shelter system and ending the horse carriage industry.His first television ad featured him holding one of his cats, Tuna, and promising “compassionate solutions” as mayor.During a reporter’s visit to his home over the summer, the cats climbed onto the dining table, walked across a photographer’s lap and gathered in a front window to watch pigeons. The apartment did not smell bad.“You change the litter three times a day,” Mr. Sliwa said. More