Today is Monday, October seventh, the 281st day of 2024. There are 85 days left within the yr.

Today in history:

On October 7, 2003, California voters recalled Governor Gray Davis and elected Arnold Schwarzenegger as their recent governor.

Also on this date:

In 1765, the Stamp Act Congress met in New York to draft colonial grievances against England.

In 1916, probably the most lopsided victory in college football history, Georgia Tech defeated Cumberland University in Atlanta 222-0.

In 1985, armed Palestinians hijacked the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro (ah-KEE'-leh LOW'-roh) within the Mediterranean. The hijackers shot Leon Klinghoffer, a Jewish-American tourist in a wheelchair, and pushed him overboard before surrendering on October 9.

In 1992, trade representatives from the United States, Canada, and Mexico initialed the North American Free Trade Agreement during a ceremony in San Antonio, Texas, attended by President George H. W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, and Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari.

In 1998, Matthew Shepard, a gay college student, was beaten and left tied to a picket fence post outside Laramie, Wyoming; he died five days later. Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney are serving life sentences for Shepard's murder.

In 2001, the war in Afghanistan began when the United States and Britain launched airstrikes on military targets and Osama bin Laden's training camps following the September 11 attacks.

In 2023, Hamas launched air and ground attacks on Israel, killing nearly 1,200 people and taking greater than 250 hostage. The attacks, followed hours later by Israeli counterattacks, marked the start of the present Israel-Hamas war.

Today's birthdays:

• Author Thomas Keneally is 89.
• Comedian and talk show host Joy Behar is 82.
• Singer John Mellencamp is 73.
• Rock musician Tico Torres (Bon Jovi) is 71.
• Cellist Yo-Yo Ma is 69.
• The production manager and TV personality Simon Cowell is 65.
• Singer and actor Toni Braxton is 57.
• The rock singer and musician Thom Yorke (Radiohead) is 56.
• Actress Nicole Ari Parker is 54.
• Football Hall of Famer Charles Woodson is 48.
• Singer Taylor Hicks is 48.
• Actor Omar Miller is 46.
• MLB outfielder Mookie Betts is 32.

In an announcement on behalf of the panel, Supervisor Ray Mueller said he learned late this afternoon that Sheriff Christina Corpus had fired Deputy Sheriff Ryan Monaghan. The termination, he noted, got here after Monaghan was interviewed by LaDoris Cordell, a former judge who was appointed to steer the investigation.

“The timing of the sheriff's intervention and the information provided by Assistant Sheriff Monaghan indicate possible retaliation against Assistant Sheriff Monaghan for his participation in Judge Cordell's independent investigation,” the statement said.

Corpus dismissed Mueller's testimony as “totally inappropriate” and “pure speculation.”

“He should know the facts before speaking out on such an important issue,” Corpus said in an announcement. “It seems like he is just trying to get attention, and this behavior is inappropriate, unprofessional and must stop.”

“When the people of San Mateo County elected me sheriff, they trusted me to decide who to put on my leadership staff,” Corpus said. “The coach puts the team together. Period.”

According to Mueller's testimony, Cordell was asked to research whether Monaghan was retaliated against.

“The San Mateo County District Attorney's Office is reviewing the case and the Board of Supervisors is prepared to take any legal action necessary to preserve the integrity of the independent investigation and protect other witnesses interviewed by Judge Cordell,” Mueller said. “The investigation will continue and will not be obstructed.”

Last week, the board announced it had authorized an independent investigation into “several personnel allegations” related to the sheriff's office. County officials declined to release details in regards to the investigation.

Meanwhile, unions representing local deputies and sergeants have publicly accused the sheriff's office leadership of making a toxic work environment and refusing to barter staffing increases and extra time requirements.

Union leaders say the blame lies largely with Corpus' chief of staff, Victor Aenlle. They claim Aenlle repeatedly verbally abused and demeaned union members and exceeded his civilian role by making decisions in regards to the duties of sworn employees.

Last week, 306 union members voted in favor of a vote of no confidence within the chief of staff, while 12 voted against. The sheriff's office has about 800 cops.

Corpus said in an announcement last week that the vote was “nothing more than a political ploy” by special interests to undermine its leadership and pressure it into personnel changes.

“It has no legal implications and changes nothing,” Corpus said. “I appointed my chief of staff and he will remain in that position.”

Fundamental changes unlikely?

MARTINEZ — It is undisputed that three members of the Antioch City Council met at the least twice in private, without informing or inviting the general public.

It stays unclear whether official government matters were discussed at these secret meetings in 2021 and 2022 and whether the elected politicians influenced their decisions on hiring, internal procedures or the reorganization of constituencies in the following discussions.

Last 12 months, corruption watchdogs in Contra Costa County received recommendations on potentially confidential conversations between Antioch Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe and council members Tamisha Torres-Walker and Monica Wilson – allegations that, if true, could be blatant violations of California's open meetings law. The meetings allegedly covered the hiring of former city manager Cornelius Johnson, the restructuring of the constructing department, the hiring of a city engineer and the reapportionment of city council districts.

But two independent investigations led by the Contra Costa District Attorney and Grand Civil Jury of the County This 12 months, it couldn’t be proven beyond doubt that the town administration had violated state law.

“The grand jury found evidence that the meetings alleged by the district attorney took place … (but) the grand jury was unable to independently confirm the content of those meetings,” the 19-page Grand Jury report published on Tuesday, it said.

Despite interviews with several unnamed witnesses and native government experts, the report said there was insufficient evidence to substantiate allegations of intentional illegal conduct. But each district attorneys and volunteer jurors agreed that the likelihood that Hernandez-Thorpe, Torres-Walker and Wilson discussed city matters behind closed doors was enough to lift “serious concerns” that the three Antioch officials didn’t fully comply with the Brown Act.

The grand jury report was based on a letter signed in January by Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton, which stressed the importance of complying with the state's public assembly law – even when no specific charges of wrongdoing were brought.

Signed in 1953, the Brown Act was designed to be certain that government business was handled publicly and without undue influence. It provides a blueprint for a way local government officials should conduct themselves. One of a very powerful provisions is that a majority of an elected government body cannot meet to rearrange a closed-door vote. However, for this to be considered a criminal offense, there have to be sufficient evidence that a confidential meeting was held, municipal business was discussed, and a collective motion was taken with the intent to withhold information from the general public.

“Any similar meeting on matters affecting the city could subject council members to criminal prosecution,” the attorney general's letter to Antioch's acting city manager Kwame Reed said. “As the Brown Act makes clear, the deliberations and actions of our government officials must be open and subject to public scrutiny.”

In a phone conversation Wednesday, Hernandez-Thorpe said that “the (grand jury report) speaks for itself,” no matter how someone “tries to use this as an opportunity for political machinations.”

“I and Councilmembers Torres-Walker and Wilson were elected as progressive Democrats,” Hernandez-Thorpe said. “We think alike, we agree on many things, and we don't need secret meetings to understand what we believe in.”

He added: “These investigations continue to show that we did nothing.”

But David Snyder, executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, disagreed, saying the work of the prosecutor and grand jury was in vain. Even with no “clear conclusion” concerning the conduct of Antioch's council members, Snyder said, the following investigations were enough to wreck public trust in elected politicians and the fundamental principles of democracy.

“It's a public service to bring these facts to light,” Snyder said, adding that secret meetings are inherently difficult to prove. “It helps to put public agencies on notice that they are being watched and that they need to be accountable and follow these government transparency laws.”

Shortly after the grand jury report was released, Antioch City Councilman Mike Barbanica called on Hernandez-Thorpe, Torres-Walker and Wilson to “do the right thing” and resign from their positions.

Barbanica, who’s currently vying for the county supervisor seat for Contra Costa County's fifth District, said the evidence supporting the allegations of secret meetings was enough to wreck city operations.

“This is not how cities should operate – this should be public, fair and transparent,” Barbanica said in a YouTube video on Tuesday. “I call on District Attorney Diana Becton to reopen criminal proceedings and investigate this matter to the fullest extent of the law.”

Staff author Nate Gartrell contributed to this report.

State Supreme Court race have turn out to be crucial in current legal disputes on topics similar to: Abortion, voting, education, environment and LGBTQ rights. With greater than 80 seats on the state Supreme Court is up for election this yr In 33 states, voters have the potential to shape the longer term of their states for years to come back.

That is, in the event that they can actually determine who joins the court.

Our research shows that in two states with judicial elections—Georgia and Minnesota—nearly every state Supreme Court justice resigns midterm, allowing the governor to appoint a successor reasonably than the state holding an open election for a brand new justice. This practice can sometimes cause conflict between the governor and voters. It also incentivizes governors, judges, and other state officials to control the judicial selection process to the party's advantage.

Governor's election or election?

The Mechanisms of Selecting State Supreme Court Justices vary across the country.

In the early days all states used Appointments by the governor or legislature to pick out judges.

Elected judges, including in Georgia and Minnesota, emerged largely within the nineteenth century in response to concerns about appointed judges who serve the interests of the governors and legislatures who appointed them as a substitute of the interests of the people. Later innovations included using nominating commissions, which recruit and vet candidates, and ballot elections, through which voters are asked to vote “yes” or “no” in an uncontested election on whether a judge should remain in office should.

Today, 21 states First, Supreme Court justices are chosen through popular elections. Another 26 states Select judges through appointments, all with some type of control over the appointing power—either through a nominating commission, a confirmation vote by one other elected body, or each.

New Mexico used a hybrid system through which the governor appoints judges who then run in partisan elections, while South Carolina and Virginia select judges through general elections.

The constitutions of Georgia and Minnesota provide for nonpartisan elections to pick out and serve judges. But in practice there are judges in each states have long been chosen primarily by appointment by the governor.

Since 1980, for instance, all but three of the 25 judges have the Supreme Court of Georgia were appointed reasonably than elected, as were all but one in every of the 30 judges added the Minnesota Supreme Court. Eight of Georgia's nine current judges were appointedand all seven of Minnesota's current judges have been appointed.

Continuing this tradition, this yr there are two judges from Minnesota resign – one voluntarily, the opposite as a consequence of compulsory retirement. This will allow Democratic, farm and labor-friendly Gov. Tim Walz to appoint her successors. Walz' Appointments Elections are scheduled for the primary time in 2026.

Once appointed, they stay

Although candidates in Minnesota and Georgia face elections for extra terms, in practice they continue to be in office until they determine to go away office or retire. No sitting judge in Minnesota has lost an election since 1946, and no sitting judge in Georgia has lost an election within the court's nearly 180-year history.

This ability of appointees to prevail in elections is a key consider states' high appointment rates. In contrast, in states like Ohio, where incumbents lose more often, or within the two states of Louisiana and Arkansas, where appointed candidates cannot run for extra terms, more judges are elected to the bench.

In addition to the winning odds of those appointed, there are numerous complex and interrelated aspects They influence the appointment rate in states with judicial elections, which doesn’t fully explain the practice in Georgia or Minnesota.

Are these dates an issue?

As noted, many other states initially select their judges by appointment. and a few scientists and policymakers argue that appointments are a greater judicial selection method than elections.

However, this practice may cause conflict between the governor and voters. For example, Alan Page overwhelmingly won election to the Minnesota Supreme Court in 1992. Write history as the primary black judge. But his victory got here only after two governors opposed his candidacy and tried to cancel elections that might have featured page. Page successfully overcame the second governor's efforts to turn out to be the one justice elected to the state Supreme Court since 1967.

Another concern is that, unlike other states that require selection by appointment, Georgia and Minnesota shouldn’t have explicit controls on the governor's power to make interim appointments. Neither state requires a confirmation vote for appointees. And although several governors in each states Nomination of commissionsthey’re not required to appoint someone advisable by the Commission.

Moreover, as scholar Stephen Ware has written, using a nominating commission is “all or mostly appointed by the governor.” serves little as a check on the governor.”

In fact, similar concerns exist even in some states where the governor's appointment powers are expressly limited. In FloridaFor example, the governor has consolidated his power over the state's nominating commission, reducing its effectiveness as a check.

It is notable, nevertheless, that no state today has intentionally adopted a system of completely uncontrolled gubernatorial appointments, similar to the de facto systems that Georgia and Minnesota have adopted. This raises the query of whether voters in Minnesota and Georgia would have adopted this method into their respective constitutions in the event that they had been asked.

Such unfettered power also can contribute to partisan gamesmanship. In 2020, Republicans appointed Keith Blackwell to the judgeship resigned from the Supreme Court of Georgia shortly before the top of his term, allowing Republican Gov. Brian Kemp to appoint his successor. At the time, the Republican Secretary of State the election that had already been scheduled was canceled for Blackwell's seat, prompting one commenter Describe these events as a “plan to keep Blackwell’s seat in Republican hands.”

As state supreme courts have the ultimate say in increasingly more high-profile disputes, this practice of replacing elections with gubernatorial appointments is becoming increasingly consequential. With increased expenses When it involves gubernatorial elections aimed toward influencing judicial appointments in any respect levels, it’s unclear whether other states will follow the lead of Georgia and Minnesota and move to a de facto appointment system or, conversely, whether they may play a bigger role for The voice of the people shall be retained.

Vaughan Gething is the brand new First Minister of Wales after winning the Welsh Labor leadership election. Gething narrowly defeated his opponent Jeremy Miles with 51.7% of the vote, becoming the primary black leader of a European nation.

Gething was elected by the Senedd (Welsh Parliament), replacing Mark Drakeford, who had been First Minister since 2018.

The leadership race itself was not characterised by differing political visions or ideologically charged debates. Both candidates are lawyers by occupation, somewhat centrist of their rhetoric and political commitment and without striking contrasts of their manifestos.

Gething was born in Zambia in 1974 to a Welsh father and a Zambian mother. They moved to Britain when he was 4 and he attended universities in Aberystwyth and Cardiff before continuing his legal profession. He was first elected to the Senedd in 2011, representing the Cardiff South and Penarth constituencies. He then rose up the ministerial ladder.

Gething shall be the fifth first minister since Welsh devolution in 1999. He takes over a Labor party that has won every election in Wales overall since 1922. Yet there’s something more to it than that, suggesting that the longer term of Welsh Labor could also be less straightforward than Gething or his party may need hoped.

This is partly as a result of the issues faced by the Welsh Labor Party towards the top of its term Drakeford. There are ongoing controversy Speed ​​limits of over 20 miles per hour in Wales and a UK COVID Inquiry This has drawn our attention to Welsh Labor's enthusiasm to avoid a Wales-specific inquiry.

Meanwhile, farmers are protesting against the Welsh Government's proposed plan to switch the EU's Common Agricultural Policy.

While Drakeford has been probably the most criticized on these matters, Gething has not been in a position to avoid a number of the consequences of the pandemic. He recently had a difficult time with the COVID investigation when he authorized All his WhatsApp messages related to the pandemic were gone after his official phone was wiped. Gething described it as “a really embarrassing affair”.

Be Leadership offer He was also hit by scandal when it was revealed he had received a £200,000 donation to his election campaign from an organization run by a person twice convicted of environmental crimes. In 2016, he asked Natural Resources Wales (the federal government agency accountable for environmental issues) to ease restrictions on the corporate in query.

Both Plaid Cymru and the Conservatives have called on Gething to return the cash, but he has to this point rejected those demands.

Jeremy Miles too criticized the best way Wales's largest union declared its support for Gething through the leadership contest. Unite had determined that Miles was not eligible for support because he had not been a lay union official. This was seen as a “controversy” by Miles' supporters and Gething must extend an olive branch to them as he begins his recent role.

Assuming Gething is in a position to navigate these choppy waters as his leadership sets sail, a Labor victory at the following Westminster general election is unlikely to ease the pressure. Given Gething's centrism, he’ll likely be perceived as someone willing to deliver Starmer is gone.

Gething can have additional challenges to beat beyond its immediate needs appease those on the losing side of the competition. In particular, his approach to the inner differences within the Welsh workplace shall be essential. As with many successful parties, there are elements of a coalition that sustain it and Gething must make sure that balance.

He must grapple with the cultural boundaries between the more Anglicized and concrete south and east and the more Welsh-speaking and infrequently rural areas to the west and north. While the latter areas don’t provide core votes for Labour, its support in these areas helps maintain its dominance through the Senedd's partial proportional representation system.

An additional layer of complexity has emerged during the last five years as independence has grow to be a concrete concern in Welsh politics. Somewhat surprisingly for a unionist party, there’s kind of one Divided 50:50 amongst Labor voters on this issue. Drakeford was in a position to argue either side of the argument. He was clear in its fundamental unionism, but additionally expressed doubts about its longevity. How Gething negotiates the query may very well be revealing.

There is currently little question that the Welsh Labor brand has been damaged. Gething's actions aren’t isolated, but somewhat a consequence of a celebration culture of permissiveness. Now that light has been shed on their inner workings, they risk losing the moral high ground that’s so often used to steer Welsh voters to support them and protect them from the Tories.

Gething is in some ways an experienced operator who has overcome significant hurdles almost masterfully and achieved his goal. Now he faces completely different challenges.