Indiana

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Pro-Israel groups target Republican House candidate they deem antisemitic

      by

      Pro-Israel groups are wading into a Republican congressional primary, marking a departure from their recent focus on attacking progressive candidates and offering the latest test of the pro-Israel lobby’s strength as the war in Gaza weighs heavily on voters’ minds.The former Indiana congressman John Hostettler, who served in the House from 1995 to 2007 and will compete in a crowded primary on Tuesday, is looking to return to the chamber to represent the state’s eighth district. Hostettler’s allies praise him as an “America first conservative” who will help terminate financial aid to Ukraine, so his primary will also test Republicans’ embrace of isolationism, which has gained popularity in the party amid the rise of Donald Trump. But Jewish groups have criticized some of his past comments about the start of the Iraq war as antisemitic.Hostettler’s victory is far from assured, as seven other Republicans have launched primary bids and outside groups have already poured millions of dollars into the race.According to documents filed with the Federal Election Commission, the United Democracy Project (UDP) Super Pac, which is affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, has spent $1.2m against Hostettler. The Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) Victory Fund has also spent about $950,000 supporting one of Hostettler’s top rivals, the Indiana state senate majority leader, Mark Messmer.Those figures dwarf Hostettler’s own fundraising numbers, as his campaign has reported bringing in $40,635 in donations across the election cycle to date. Messmer brought in nearly 20 times as much, reporting $763,290 in contributions so far.The UDP ad attacks Hostettler as “one of the most anti-Israel politicians in America”, excoriating his past voting record in the House. Both the UDP and the RJC have specifically criticized Hostettler for his vote opposing a resolution expressing solidarity with Israel in 2000, after the start of the second intifada, as well as the comments he has made about the origins of the Iraq war.In his self-published book, Nothing for the Nation: Who Got What Out of Iraq, Hostettler criticized former president George W Bush for relying on foreign policy advisers “with Jewish backgrounds” in the lead-up to the war, arguing those officials were too focused on the fate of Israel. One review, published by the Jewish Standard in 2008, accused Hostettler of perpetuating “age-old slanders of Jewish disloyalty to their countries”.“We are deeply troubled by John Hostettler’s past record, and RJC is committed to ensuring he does not get back to Congress,” the group’s CEO, Matt Brooks, said last month. “Hostettler has consistently opposed vital aid to Israel, trafficked antisemitic conspiracy theories and voted against a 2000 resolution which supported Israel.”The UDP’s investment in Hostettler’s race marks a notable shift in its spending this election cycle, as the group has largely focused on Democratic primaries so far. In California’s 47th congressional district, the UDP spent $4.6m opposing the Democratic candidate Dave Min, who ultimately advanced to the general election. The group has also spent $2.4m backing the Democrat Sarah Elfreth in the third district of Maryland, which will hold its primaries later this month.The UDP ad against Hostettler also differs from those against progressive candidates such as Min, as it focuses on Hostettler’s approach to Israel. In Democratic primaries, UDP ads have largely highlighted progressive candidates’ personal weaknesses, such as Min’s drunk-driving arrest last year.The choice to highlight Hostettler’s voting record on Israel reflects how Republican voters generally view the Netanyahu government in a more favorable manner than Democrats and independents do. A Guardian review of the statements of members of Congress after the start of the war found that every Republican in Congress was supportive of Israel. According to one Gallup poll conducted in March, 64% of Republicans approve of Israel’s military actions in Gaza, compared with 18% of Democrats and 29% of independents who said the same.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAlthough Hostettler faces an onslaught of spending from pro-Israel groups, other outside organizations have come to his aid in the primary. Two Super Pacs – the American Leadership Pac and the Protect Freedom Pac – have spent more than $790,000 combined to promote Hostettler’s candidacy.But other outside groups have rallied around his opponent Mesmer; the America Leads Action Super Pac has spent roughly $2m opposing Hostettler and more than $100,000 supporting Mesmer. A campaign ad from America Leads Action accuses Hostettler of advancing reckless fiscal policies during his time in Congress.America Leads Action is backed by the wealthy conservative donors Jay Faison and Rob Walton, who is a son of the Walmart founder, Sam Walton. The group has previously spent millions opposing other Republican primary candidates viewed as potential liabilities in a general election, such as Mark Harris of North Carolina and Brandon Gill of Texas.Both Harris and Gill went on to win their primaries anyway. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      More Than 170 Protesters Arrested at Northeastern and Arizona State University

      by

      The police made arrests at Northeastern University, Arizona State and Indiana University on Saturday, as more schools move in on encampments protesting the war in Gaza.Nearly 200 protesters were arrested on Saturday at Northeastern University, Arizona State University and Indiana University, according to officials, as colleges across the country struggle to quell growing pro-Palestinian demonstrations and encampments on campus.More than 700 protesters have been arrested on U.S. campuses since April 18, when Columbia University had the New York Police Department clear a protest encampment there. In several cases, most of those who were arrested have been released. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Talk of an Immigrant ‘Invasion’ Grows in Republican Ads and Speech

      by

      Once relegated to the margins of the national debate, the word is now part of the party’s mainstream message on immigration.A campaign ad from a Republican congressional candidate from Indiana sums up the arrival of migrants at the border with one word. He doesn’t call it a problem or a crisis.He calls it an “invasion.”The word invasion also appears in ads for two Republicans competing for a Senate seat in Michigan. And it shows up in an ad for a Republican congresswoman seeking re-election in central New York, and in one for a Missouri lieutenant governor running for the state’s governorship. In West Virginia, ads for a Republican representative facing an uphill climb for the Senate say President Biden “created this invasion” of migrants.It was not so long ago that the term invasion had been mostly relegated to the margins of the national immigration debate. Many candidates and political figures tended to avoid the word, which echoed demagoguery in previous centuries targeting Asian, Latino and European immigrants. Few mainstream Republicans dared use it.But now, the word has become a staple of Republican immigration rhetoric. Use of the term in television campaign ads in the current election cycle has already eclipsed the total from the previous one, data show, and the word appears in speeches, TV interviews and even in legislation proposed in Congress.The resurgence of the term exemplifies the shift in Republican rhetoric in the era of former President Donald J. Trump and his right-wing supporters. Language once considered hostile has become common, sometimes precisely because it runs counter to politically correct sensibilities. Immigration has also become more divisive, with even Democratic mayors complaining about the number of migrants in their cities.Democrats and advocates for migrants denounce the word and its recent turn from being taboo. Historians and analysts who study political rhetoric have long warned that the term dehumanizes those to whom it refers and could stoke violence, noting that it appeared in writings by perpetrators of deadly mass shootings in Pittsburgh, Pa.; El Paso, Texas; and Buffalo, N.Y., in recent years.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

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Indiana Law Requires Professors to Promote ‘Intellectual Diversity’ or Face Penalties

      by

      Faculty members in public universities could be disciplined or fired, even those with tenure, if they are found to fall short of the new requirements.A new law in Indiana requires professors in public universities to foster a culture of “intellectual diversity” or face disciplinary actions, including termination for even those with tenure, the latest in an effort by Republicans to assert more control over what is taught in classrooms.The law connects the job status of faculty members, regardless of whether they are tenured, to whether, in the eyes of a university’s board of trustees, they promote “free inquiry” and “free expression.” State Senator Spencer Deery, who sponsored the bill, made clear in a statement that this would entail the inclusion of more conservative viewpoints on campus.The backlash to the legislation, which Gov. Eric Holcomb, a Republican, signed March 13, has been substantial. Hundreds wrote letters or testified at hearings, and faculty senates at multiple institutions had urged the legislature to reject the bill, condemning it as government overreach and a blow to academic free speech.“The whole point of tenure is to protect academic freedom,” said Irene Mulvey, the president of the American Association of University Professors, who described the law as “thought policing.”Colleges nationwide have been buffeted by debates about academic freedom in recent years. Several states, including Florida, Texas and Nebraska, have proposed bills limiting tenure, some of which have passed. More broadly, Republican-led states have targeted diversity programs in universities; those bills, which have restricted or eliminated those programs, have had more success becoming law, with such measures in place in at least a half-dozen states.Under the Indiana law, which goes into effect in July, university trustees may not grant tenure or a promotion to faculty members who are deemed “unlikely” to promote “intellectual diversity” or to expose students to works from a range of political views. Trustees also may withhold tenure or promotion from those who are found “likely” to bring unrelated political views into the courses they are teaching.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

    • 63 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Severe Weather Tears Through Midwest

      by

      A storm, believed to be a tornado, ripped through a mobile home community in eastern Indiana. Ohio and Kentucky were also hit.Tornadoes were reported as storms tore through Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio on Thursday, according to news reports.Local officials believe a tornado hit a trailer park in Winchester, in eastern Indiana, according to 13 WTHR, an NBC News affiliate. However, meteorologists said they were still working to confirm that a tornado had touched down there.Tornadoes in the MidwestLocations of tornado sightings or damage reported by trained spotters. More

    • 175 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Will Shortz, New York Times Crossword Editor, Says He Is Recovering From a Stroke

      by

      Mr. Shortz, who has been with The Times for three decades and also hosts NPR’s “Sunday Puzzle,” said on Sunday that he had a stroke in February but was recovering.Will Shortz, crossword editor of The New York Times and the host of NPR’s “Sunday Puzzle,” is recovering from a stroke, he said on Sunday.Mr. Shortz, who is 71 and has been with The Times for three decades, shared the health update in a recorded message that aired on Sunday at the end of the puzzle quiz segment during the NPR program “Weekend Edition Sunday.”“Hey guys, this is Will Shortz. Sorry I’ve been out the last few weeks. I had a stroke on February 4, and have been in rehabilitation since then, but I am making progress,” he said in the message. “I’m looking forward to being back with new puzzles soon.”Ayesha Rascoe, the host of “Weekend Edition Sunday,” wished Mr. Shortz a speedy recovery.“We here at ‘Weekend Edition,’ we love Will and I know that everybody at home does too and we are rooting for him and we are so hopeful and know that he will feel better soon,” she said during the segment.Mr. Shortz, who last year celebrated his 30th anniversary as crossword editor at The Times, also founded the American Crossword Puzzle Tournament, spent 15 years as the editor of Games magazine, and has appeared weekly as the puzzle master on “Weekend Edition Sunday.”“When I was a kid, I imagined a life where I’d be sitting in an attic somewhere, making my little puzzles for $15 each, somehow surviving,” he said in a 2017 interview with The Times. “I actually wrote a paper in eighth grade about what I wanted to do with my life, and it was to be a professional puzzle maker.”Despite skepticism from his middle school teacher about that dream, Mr. Shortz went on to self-design a degree at Indiana University in enigmatology — the scientific study of puzzles as it is related to semiotics, culture and cognition. He also studied law.In 1993, Mr. Shortz became the Times’s fourth puzzle editor, and, in an interview last year, he recalled telling his hiring editor at the time that he hoped to “maintain the quality and intellectual rigor of the Crossword” while bringing in young contributors, fresh themes and modern vocabulary.The content of the crosswords, he said, should have lasting cultural impact, which he defined as “at least five to 10 years.”Mr. Shortz could not be immediately reached on Sunday for further comment about his recovery, and when he might return to work.Jordan Cohen, a spokesman for The New York Times, said in an email that the newspaper had been in “regular contact” with Mr. Shortz and wished him “the best on his path to what is expected to be a full recovery.” Mr. Cohen added, “We look forward to having him back at work when he is ready.”A spokeswoman from NPR shared Mr. Shortz’s aired statement by email on Sunday, but did not immediately respond to questions about when he might return to work. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Appeals Court Allows Indiana Ban on Transition Care for Minors to Take Effect

      by

      A lower court had mostly blocked enforcement of a state law that banned gender-transition care for minors, but a federal appellate court lifted that injunction on Tuesday.Indiana’s ban on hormone treatments and puberty blockers for transgender minors can go into effect, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday, undoing a lower court decision last year that had largely blocked the law.The three-paragraph ruling by a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, based in Chicago, said it was staying a preliminary injunction that the district court had issued in June, just before the law was scheduled to take effect last summer.The appellate judges did not explain their reasoning but simply said that a full opinion on the case would be issued in the future.The decision further unsettles the national legal landscape around transgender care for minors, with bans blocked in some states but not others, and it could lead to abrupt changes in treatment for young people in Indiana.“This ruling is beyond disappointing and a heartbreaking development for thousands of transgender youth, their doctors and their families,” the American Civil Liberties Union and the A.C.L.U. of Indiana, which brought the lawsuit challenging the ban, said in a statement. “As we and our clients consider our next steps, we want all the transgender youth of Indiana to know this fight is far from over,” the statement added.The Indiana attorney general, Todd Rokita, whose office defended the law in court, said on social media that “we are proud to win this fight.”“Our common-sense state law, banning dangerous and irreversible gender-transition procedures for minors, is now enforceable,” said Mr. Rokita, a Republican. Republican-led states have raced to ban gender-transition care for minors in recent years, leading to a series of lawsuits in federal and state courts that so far have had mixed results. Many legal experts on both sides of the issue expect the legality of the bans to ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.The Indiana ban passed the Republican-controlled legislature last spring by large margins and was signed into law by Gov. Eric Holcomb, a Republican. Supporters of the law claimed they were seeking to protect young people from making life-altering decisions that they might later regret.Families of transgender children sued to block the law, saying that it would put transgender youths at immediate risk of unwanted changes to their bodies, which would have lifelong consequences.A federal district judge, James Patrick Hanlon, who was appointed by President Donald J. Trump, temporarily blocked portions of the law banning hormone treatments and puberty blockers for minors while the lawsuit proceeded. He allowed a ban on gender-transition surgeries for minors to take effect as scheduled.But after hearing arguments this month, a three-judge panel from the Seventh Circuit, made up of two judges appointed by Republican presidents and one appointed by a Democratic president, lifted Judge Hanlon’s injunction. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US supreme court won’t hear case over bathrooms for transgender students

      by

      The US supreme court has decided it will not hear a case centering on the debate over bathrooms for transgender students.The decision came on Tuesday despite an appeal from Indiana’s metropolitan school district of Martinsville.Martinsville school district officials hoped the nation’s highest court would not require allowing transgender students to use the bathrooms of their choosing.But the supreme court rejected the case without comment.Federal appeals courts are divided over whether school policies enforcing restrictions on which bathrooms transgender students can use violate federal law or the US constitution.In the 2023 case court brought by the Martinsville metropolitan school district, the Chicago-based US seventh circuit court of appeals ruled in favor of transgender boys, granting them access to the boys’ bathroom.The seventh circuit’s opinion, written by judge Diane Wood, said that she expected the nation’s highest court to eventually be involved.Wood wrote: “Litigation over transgender rights is occurring all over the country, and we assume that at some point the supreme court will step in with more guidance than it has furnished so far.”The federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia, also has ruled to allow transgender students to use the gendered bathroom with which they identify. But the US appellate court based in Atlanta ruled against granting that legal ability.Court battles over transgender rights are ongoing across the country. And at least nine states are restricting transgender students to bathrooms that match the sex they were assigned at birth.Some claim it’s a move in violation of Title IX, the US civil rights law passed in 1972 which prohibits sex discrimination at educational institutions that receive federal funding.In 2021, the supreme court rejected hearing a similar case involving a Virginia school, upholding a lower court’s ruling that the Gloucester county school board’s decision to prohibit a transgender boy from using the boy’s restroom was unlawful.Battles over transgender students’ right to play for their preferred sports teams are also taking place.Last year, supreme court justices decided against taking up a case that started after a West Virginia school district banned a transgender girl, Becky Pepper-Jackson, from competing for a girls’ track and cross-country teams. The decision upheld a lower court’s ruling that Pepper-Jackson could compete for the girls’ teams if she wanted.The Joe Biden administration last year weighed in on the debate, proposing that schools may block some transgender athletes from competing on sports teams that match their gender identities under certain circumstances while arguing against blanket bans.The Department of Education wrote in April 2023: “The proposed rule would establish that policies violate Title IX when they categorically ban transgender students from participating on sports teams consistent with their gender identity just because of who they are.“The proposed rule also recognizes that in some instances, particularly in competitive high school and college athletic environments, some schools may adopt policies that limit transgender students’ participation.”
      The Associated Press contributed to this report More