Dear Commons Community,

The parents of Ethan Crumbley, accused of killing four students in a shooting at a Michigan high school, were arrested yesterday and charged with involuntary manslaughter.

James and Jennifer Crumbley were captured in a commercial building in Detroit that housed artwork, Detroit Police Chief James E. White told a news conference. White said the couple “were aided in getting into the building,” and that a person who helped them may also face charges.  As reported by the Associated Press.

A Detroit business owner spotted a car tied to the Crumbleys in his parking lot late Friday, Oakland County Undersheriff Michael McCabe said in a statement. A woman seen near the vehicle ran away when the business owner called 911, McCabe said. The couple was later located and arrested by Detroit police.

A prosecutor filed involuntary manslaughter charges against the Crumbleys on Friday, accusing them of failing to intervene on the day of the tragedy despite being confronted with a drawing and chilling message — “blood everywhere” — that was found at the boy’s desk.

The Crumbleys committed “egregious” acts, from buying a gun on Black Friday and making it available to Ethan Crumbley to resisting his removal from school when they were summoned a few hours before the shooting, Oakland County prosecutor Karen McDonald said.

Authorities had been looking for the couple since Friday afternoon. Late Friday, U.S. Marshals announced a reward of up to $10,000 each for information leading to their arrests.

The Crumbley’s attorney, Shannon Smith, said the pair had left town earlier in the week “for their own safety.” Smith told The Associated Press they would be returning to Oxford to be arraigned.

However, White said the Crumbleys “appeared to be hiding” in the building where they were found. He added that the parents appeared to be “distressed” when they were captured.

“Head down… just very upset,” he said of one of the parents.

The couple was expected to be booked into the Oakland County Jail, McCabe said.

Earlier, the prosecutor offered the most precise account so far of the events that led to the shooting at Oxford High School, roughly 30 miles (50 kilometers) north of Detroit.

Ethan Crumbley, 15, emerged from a bathroom with a gun, shooting students in the hallway, investigators said. He’s charged as an adult with murder, terrorism and other crimes.

Under Michigan law, the involuntary manslaughter charge filed against the parents can be pursued if authorities believe someone contributed to a situation where there was a high chance of harm or death.

Parents in the U.S. are rarely charged in school shootings involving their children, even as most minors get guns from a parent or relative’s house, according to experts.

School officials became concerned about the younger Crumbley on Monday, a day before the shooting, when a teacher saw him searching for ammunition on his phone, McDonald said.

Jennifer Crumbley was contacted and subsequently told her son in a text message: “Lol. I’m not mad at you. You have to learn not to get caught,” according to the prosecutor.

On Tuesday, a teacher found a note on Ethan’s desk and took a photo. It was a drawing of a gun pointing at the words, “The thoughts won’t stop. Help me,” McDonald said.

There also was a drawing of a bullet, she said, with words above it: “Blood everywhere.”

Between the gun and the bullet was a person who appeared to have been shot twice and is bleeding. He also wrote, “My life is useless” and “The world is dead,” according to the prosecutor.

The school quickly had a meeting with Ethan and his parents, who were told to get him into counseling within 48 hours, McDonald said.

The Crumbleys failed to ask their son about the gun or check his backpack and “resisted the idea of their son leaving the school at that time,” McDonald said.

Instead, the teen returned to class and the shooting subsequently occurred.

“The notion that a parent could read those words and also know that their son had access to a deadly weapon that they gave him is unconscionable — it’s criminal,” the prosecutor said.

Jennifer Crumbley texted her son after the shooting, saying, “Ethan, don’t do it,” McDonald said.

James Crumbley called 911 to say that a gun was missing from their home and that Ethan might be the shooter. The gun had been kept in an unlocked drawer in the parents’ bedroom, McDonald said.

Ethan accompanied his father for the gun purchase on Nov. 26 and posted photos of the firearm on social media, saying, “Just got my new beauty today,” McDonald said.

Over the long Thanksgiving weekend, Jennifer Crumbley wrote on social media that it is a “mom and son day testing out his new Christmas present,” the prosecutor said.

Asked at a news conference if the father could be charged for purchasing the gun for the son, McDonald said that would be the decision of federal authorities.

It appears that these parents warranted being charged and arrested.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Ellen Stofan, Undersecretary for Science and Research at the Smithsonian Institute, has an editorial in today’s Science, on the the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) scheduled to launch on December 22nd.  She lauds JWST for what it will do for humankind in exploring the origins of the universe, galaxies and blackholes (see video above). 

Stofan’s editorial is below.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Wednesday in a case that threatens to overturn the constitutional right to access safe and legal abortion across the country. The immediate and overall consensus after the arguments came to a close in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization: Roe v. Wade is in serious danger.  Here  is a recap courtesy of several new media outlets.

The conservative majority on the Supreme Court appeared largely supportive of a 2018 Mississippi law that seeks to ban abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The law directly contradicts Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that protects a person’s right to abortion. The decision made it a constitutional right to access safe and legal abortion until a fetus’s viability, which is around 24 weeks. Mississippi’s 15-week restriction is attempting to cut that almost in half.

Conservative justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch openly suggested that the current viability line under Roe is arbitrary and can be moved, which would effectively overturn the high court precedent. Chief Justice John Roberts along with the two newest members of the court, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, were less vocal. All three, however, seemed to be open to tinkering with the gestational limits on abortion, which would also effectively overturn Roe as it stands now.

Although they were in the minority, justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan were vehement in their support for abortion as a constitutional right. All three continually pushed back against the argument made by Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart that Roe is not settled law. Each reiterated the far-reaching implications for women and birthing people if the decision were to be overturned.

Sotomayor had, by far, the most scathing questions about Stewart’s argument that moving the viability line from 24 weeks to 15 weeks would have zero impact on women across the country. She pointed out that the simple fact the court was hearing these arguments in Mississippi’s attempt to ban abortion after 15 weeks would tarnish the nonpartisan reputation the Supreme Court has worked to uphold for hundreds of years.

“There has been some difference of opinion with respect to undue burden, but the right of a woman to choose, the right to control her own body has been clearly set since Casey and never challenged,” Sotomayor said of the 1992 Supreme Court ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which ruled states were legally allowed to restrict abortion access as long as it did not impose “an undue burden” on patients.

“You want us to reject that line of viability and adopt something different. Fifteen justices over 30 years, since Casey, have reaffirmed that basic viability line. Four have said no, two of them members of this court, but 15 justices have said yes, of varying political backgrounds,” she continued. “Now, the sponsors of this bill, the House bill in Mississippi, said, ‘We’re doing it because we have new justices.’ … Will this institution survive the stench that this creates in the public perception that the Constitution and its reading are just political acts? I don’t see how it is possible.”

The Supreme Court could strike down the Mississippi law, which would mean Roe remains the law of the land. Or the court could uphold the law, which would effectively overturn Roe and allow states to set their own standards ― even perhaps allowing them to ban it outright. If that happens, it would trigger bans or constitutional amendments in several states that would immediately outlaw abortion.

The Supreme Court isn’t expected to decide the Mississippi case until spring 2022.

The case centers on the Jackson Women’s Health Organization because it’s the last abortion clinic in Mississippi. It’s been open since 1995 and provides care to around 3,000 patients a year. The majority of the clinic’s patients are Black women, poor women and teenagers.

Although Mississippi currently allows abortions up to 20 weeks, JWHO only has the resources to provide abortions up to 16 weeks. Anything beyond that requires a dilation and evacuation procedure, known as D&E, which brings more costs and paperwork that the clinic simply doesn’t have the resources for.

Shannon Brewer, JWHO’s director, told reporters last month that the 15-week limit would have severe consequences for the clinic’s patients. JWHO sees about 15 to 20 people a month who are 15 weeks pregnant or more. Additionally, any other clinic that would open in Mississippi in the future would lose a five-week window to perform the procedure.

Political partisanship and the legitimacy of the high court was a main theme discussed by a few justices, including Breyer and Kavanaugh. The topic came up again and again with respect to the legal term “stare decisis,” which refers to whether the court should respect its own precedent. In this case, the justices discussed whether pre-viability bans on abortion are unconstitutional and states should be free to regulate abortion prior to 24 weeks of pregnancy.

“This has huge implications for the legitimacy and existence of the Supreme Court in its ability to adjudicate cases and make these constitutional claims,” said Grace Howard, an assistant professor of justice studies at San Jose State University who is writing a book titled “The Pregnancy Police: Conceiving Crime, Arresting Personhood.”

“If the court gets rid of Roe ― gets rid of that viability standard that we’ve been following for so long ― it very much looks like the court is a political body,” added Howard. “The legitimacy of the court is based on the idea that they will be objective interpreters of the Constitution. So if having more conservative court members is the thing that can undo it, it’s clear that it’s a political body, and that’s not good for the Supreme Court.”

When Kavanaugh brought up the appearance of bias on the court, it was under a very different pretense. The justice, who was appointed in 2018, suggested that overturning Roe and Casey would be a “return to the position of neutrality” on abortion, which Stewart, the attorney for Mississippi, agreed with.

Although some believe Kavanaugh may be the deciding vote on this case, Howard believes it will be Barrett. While Barrett was less outspoken during the arguments, one of her comments made it fairly obvious where she stands. Barrett brought up safe-haven laws, which allow a parent to relinquish a child anonymously within the first 24 to 48 hours after giving birth. This suggests that the new justice believes adoption is a fair alternative to abortion and limiting abortion at 15 weeks would not be an undue burden to birthing people ― a direct violation of Roe and Casey.

Advocates of abortion rights have routinely debunked adoption as a substitute for abortion because it ignores the health impacts of pregnancy and birth. In Mississippi, it’s currently 75 times more deadly to carry a pregnancy to term than to get an abortion due to the abysmal maternal mortality rates in the state.

Stewart concluded his arguments on Wednesday by comparing the decision in Roe to the “egregiously wrong” Supreme Court decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, an 1896 ruling that upheld race-based segregation. The ruling wasn’t overturned until 1954 in the landmark high court decision Brown v. Board of Education.

“I resent the comparison between the right to terminate a pregnancy versus mass oppression against an entire group of people based on race,” said Howard. “But also, we’re talking about the directional approach of trying to limit people’s rights or take them away. In so many of these big watershed cases, we have been trying to expand rights. We’re willing to overturn these past precedents because they limited people’s rights. This would be a big watershed case where we are taking away what was once considered a fundamental right for roughly 50% of the population.”

Ahead of the oral arguments, both pro-abortion and anti-abortion rights advocates rallied in front of the steps of the high court. Several members of Congress, including Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), spoke in favor of abortion rights.

“I am also one of the one in four women in America who have had an abortion. For me, terminating my pregnancy was not an easy choice but it was my choice,” Jayapal told a crowd of supporters.

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, also spoke at the rally. “This issue is about racial equity, equality and justice. This is about the freedom to make your own decisions over your own body. That’s what this is about,” she said. “So, make no mistake, the right to abortion is not real if only some people can access it.”

As Democratic lawmakers took the stage to speak at the rally, anti-abortion protesters could be heard in the background yelling, “We will overturn Roe!”

Some lawmakers in support of abortion rights were later arrested at the rally as the oral arguments began inside the court.

Julie Rikelman, an attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights who argued the case before the justices, was confident that she and U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar made a strong case.

“We really were able to put all of the key issues in front of the court and those key issues are, of course, 50 years of precedent that support this right and the fact that Mississippi has not made any argument for taking this right away 50 years later, and especially hasn’t made any argument that the court hasn’t already considered and rejected before in the other times it was asked to take this right away,” said Rikelman.

“We also just focused on how important this right is for women and their families. Both for their autonomy, their ability to control their bodies and their lives but also for their equal status in society. I think we were able to powerfully present those arguments, and right now it’s in the court’s hands.”

Tony

Senators Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell

Dear Commons Community,

Despite threats to hold out on their approval over federal mandates on vaccines, Republicans joined  Democrats in  the U.S. Senate to pass a stopgap spending bill yesterday that avoids a short-term shutdown and funds the federal government through Feb. 18.  The measure now goes to President Joe Biden to be signed into law.

The bill keeps the government running for 11 more weeks, generally at current spending levels, while adding $7 billion to aid Afghanistan evacuees.

“I am glad that in the end, cooler heads prevailed. The government will stay open and I thank the members of this chamber for walking us back from the brink of an avoidable, needless and costly shutdown,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

The Senate approved the measure by a vote of 69-28.  As reported by the Associated Press.

The Democratic-led House passed the measure by a 221-212 vote. The Republican leadership urged members to vote no; the lone GOP vote for the bill came from Illinois Rep. Adam Kinzinger.

Lawmakers bemoaned the short-term fix and blamed the opposing party for the lack of progress on this year’s spending bills. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, said the measure would, however, allow for negotiations on a package covering the full budget year through September.

Some Republicans opposed to Biden’s vaccine rules wanted Congress to take a hard stand against the mandated shots for workers at larger businesses, even if that meant shutting down federal offices over the weekend by blocking a request that would expedite a final vote on the spending bill.

It was just the latest instance of the brinkmanship around government funding that has triggered several costly shutdowns and partial closures over the past two decades. The longest shutdown in history happened under President Donald Trump — 35 days stretching into January 2019, when Democrats refused to approve money for his U.S-Mexico border wall. Both parties agree the stoppages are irresponsible, yet few deadlines pass without a late scramble to avoid them.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, said Democrats knew last month that several Republicans would use all means at their disposal to oppose legislation that funds or allows the enforcement of the employer vaccine mandate. He blamed Schumer for not negotiating and for ignoring their position.

If the choice is between “suspending nonessential functions” or standing idle while Americans lose their ability to work, “I’ll stand with American workers every time,” Lee said.

Lee and Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., authored an amendment that prohibited federal dollars being spent to implement and enforce a series of vaccine mandates put in place by the Biden administration. The amendment went down to defeat with 48 yes votes and 50 no votes. But having the vote opened the door to taking up the full spending bill immediately.

Lee said millions were being forced to choose between an unwanted medical procedure and losing their job.

“Their jobs are being threatened by their own government,” Lee said.

“Let’s give employers certainty and employees peace of mind that they will still have a job this new year,” Marshall urged before the vote.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., countered that the federal government should be using every tool to keep Americans safe and that is why the Biden administration has taken steps to urge employers to make sure their workers are fully vaccinated or test negative before they come to the workplace.

“No one wants to go to work and be worried they might come home to their family with a deadly virus,” Murray said.

The White House sees the vaccinations as the quickest way to end a pandemic that has killed more than 780,000 people in the United States and is still evolving, as seen Wednesday with the country’s first detected case of a troubling new variant.

Courts have knocked back against the mandates, including a ruling this week blocking enforcement of a requirement for some health care workers.

For some Republicans, the court cases and lawmakers’ fears about a potentially disruptive shutdown were factors against engaging in a high-stakes shutdown.

“One of the things I’m a little concerned about is: Why would we make ourselves the object of public attention by creating the specter of a government shutdown?” said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, a GOP leader.

The administration has pursued vaccine requirements for several groups of workers, but the effort is facing legal setbacks.

A federal judge this week blocked the administration from enforcing a vaccine mandate on thousands of health care workers in 10 states. Earlier, a federal appeals court temporarily halted the OSHA requirement affecting employers with 100 or more workers.

The administration has also put in place policies requiring millions of federal employees and federal contractors, including military troops, to be fully vaccinated. Those efforts are also under challenge.

Polling from The Associated Press shows Americans are divided over Biden’s effort to vaccinate workers, with Democrats overwhelmingly for it while most Republicans are against.

Let’s keep government  workers employed and receiving a paycheck!

Tony

The Rockefeller Center Christmas tree stands lit at Rockefeller Center. (AP Photo/John Minchillo)

Dear Commons Community,

The holly, jolly, best time of the year got a light-filled launch last night, when the towering Christmas tree at Rockefeller Center was officially turned on.

The 79-foot (24-meter) Norway spruce, covered with more than 50,000 lights in a rainbow of colors and bearing a crystal-covered, 900-pound (400-kilogram) star, was lit in a midtown Manhattan ceremony again open to the public, in contrast with last year’s virus-impacted event.

The lighting was televised on NBC and hosted by NBC “Today” anchors Al Roker, Savannah Guthrie, Hoda Kotb and Craig Melvin. Among the musical performances were Harry Connick Jr., Norah Jones, Brad Paisley and Alessia Cara. The high-kicking Radio City Rockettes were also part of the celebration.

This year’s tree came from Elkton, Maryland, where it stood for more than 80 years outside a family home.

The first Christmas tree was placed in Rockefeller Center by men, mostly immigrants,  working there in 1931 during the Great Depression.

As far as New Yorkers are concerned, Christmas is here!

Tony

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DspYoBElGC8

Dear Commons Community,

Voting rights advocate Stacey Abrams said yesterday that she plans to run for governor of Georgia in 2022, and will likely face current Republican governor, Brian Kemp.

Abrams announced the news with a two-and-a-half minute campaign video (see above) titled “One Georgia,” in which she touts her history as an activist in the state.

“Opportunity and success in Georgia shouldn’t be determined by your zip code, background or access to power,” Abrams said in a tweet. “For the past four years, when the hardest times hit us all, I’ve worked to do my part to help families make it through. My job has been to just put my head down and keep working — toward One Georgia.”

If Abrams wins, she’d be Georgia’s first Black governor and the first Black woman elected governor in U.S. history, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution noted.

Abrams previously ran for governor in 2018, narrowly losing to Kemp by less than 1.4 percentage points in an election that was plagued with voting difficulties that especially impacted people of color.

After the loss, Abrams responded by spearheading an ambitious voter registration effort. The organizing paid dividends in 2020 as the state flipped blue, sending Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock to the Senate and contributing to Joe Biden’s presidential victory.

Georgia Republicans, led by Kemp, reacted by passing a sweeping bill in 2021 making it much harder to vote in the state. In a statement at the time, Rep. Nikema Williams (D), chair of the Georgia Democratic Party, called the measure the “most flagrantly racist, partisan power grab of elections in modern Georgia history.”

We wish Ms. Abrams good luck.

She would make an excellent governor!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

On Tuesday, Dr. Mehmet Oz launched his campaign for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. Hours later, Dr. Oz appeared on Hannity, where he discussed his campaign and the criticism he has received for not actually living in Pennsylvania.

Dr. Oz grew up in Wilmington, Del. For the past two decades he has lived and worked in Cliffside Park, N.J. However, the talk-show host explained that he has a personal connection to the state.

“I grew up just across the border south of Philadelphia,” Dr. Oz said. “I went to medical school in Philadelphia, went to business school in Philadelphia, met and married my wife, which was the best thing I ever did, 36 years ago in Philadelphia, and she bore two children in Philadelphia. I came home a year ago. It feels good to be back. I love the state and I will represent it honorably.”

According to an Associated Press report, “[Dr. Oz] began voting in Pennsylvania’s elections this year by absentee ballot, registered to his in-laws’ address in suburban Philadelphia.”

The 61-year-old Oz will join a Republican primary field that already includes Philadelphia-area businessman (and 2018 lieutenant governor nominee) Jeff Bartos and Carla Sands, who served as US ambassador to Denmark in the Trump administration. Another potential Republican candidate is David McCormick, a former official in the Treasury Department under President George W. Bush.  Of them, none has won elective office, and only Bartos has run statewide in Pennsylvania, as lieutenant governor on the GOP’s losing gubernatorial ticket in 2018.

The Democratic field has been stable since August, featuring candidates with far more electoral experience — although far less personal wealth — than the Republican field. Best-known are John Fetterman, the state’s lieutenant governor, and U.S. Rep. Conor Lamb of suburban Pittsburgh.

Dr. Oz’s opponents will have a field day commenting on his residency!

Tony

Andrew and Chris Cuomo

Dear Commons Community,

CNN suspended host Chris Cuomo yesterday, a day after the New York attorney general’s office released documents that showed the journalist was more deeply involved than previously known in helping his brother, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D), respond to allegations of sexual harassment.

The news network said his suspension would be indefinite.   As reported by various news media.

“The documents, which we were not privy to before their public release, raise serious questions,” the network said in a statement. “When Chris admitted to us that he had offered advice to his brother’s staff, he broke our rules and we acknowledged that publicly. But we also appreciated the unique position he was in and understood his need to put family first and job second.”

“However, these documents point to a greater level of involvement in his brother’s efforts than we previously knew,” CNN added. “As a result, we have suspended Chris indefinitely, pending further evaluation.”

The suspension comes amid the release of a trove of exhibits as part of Attorney General Letitia James’ inquiry into Andrew Cuomo’s behavior while governor. He resigned in August after James released a damning report detailing claims by 11 women who said he acted inappropriately while in office.

The attorney general on Monday published text messages and emails as well as transcripts of Chris Cuomo’s testimony, which showed the “Cuomo Prime Time” host was regularly in touch with some of his brother’s closest aides in March, when the scandal first emerged. The revelations prompted scrutiny over Chris Cuomo’s use of his role as a journalist to help his brother fend off an avalanche of allegations.

“Please let me help with prep,” Chris Cuomo texted his brother’s top aide, Melissa DeRosa, in early March. Days later, after The New York Times published a story detailing a woman’s accusation that the governor tried to give her an unwanted kiss at a wedding, DeRosa asked the CNN host to leverage his journalistic connections to uncover details about her.

“On it,” Chris Cuomo replied at the time. He said in another message that he had “a lead on the wedding girl.”

The CNN host acknowledged earlier this year that he had helped his brother but added that he urged him to step down as the revelations poured in.

“Obviously, I am aware of what is going on with my brother,” he told viewers on March 1, when a third accuser came forward. “And obviously I cannot cover it because he is my brother. Now, of course CNN has to cover it. They have covered it extensively, and they will continue to do so. I have always cared very deeply about these issues, and profoundly so. I just want to tell you that.”

In the published interview with investigators from July, Chris Cuomo rejected an assertion that he attempted to influence any stories or journalists while he was supporting his brother, adding that if he had done so, “people would know.”

“I just know that as the situation started to accelerate, my brother asked me to be in the loop,” Chris Cuomo told investigators in July. 

Sad situation for both Cuomos!

Tony

Lauren Boebert and Ilhan Omar

Dear Commons Community,

Yesterday, the Denver Post editorial board did what Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) has so far refused to do and offered a sincere apology to Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).

The newspaper has “mostly tried to ignore” conspiracy theory-endorsing Boebert’s antics since she was elected to Congress in 2020 because “they add little to the public discourse,” it wrote in a stinging editorial Monday.

But the Donald Trump acolyte’s recent Islamophobic attacks on Omar — and her subsequent non-apology to her fellow congresswoman — had “crossed a line,” it said. The board was “embarrassed a Colorado representative is engaged in widening” divisions in the country.

Omar “deserved nothing short of a full apology” but Boebert “is clearly incapable of remorse or reflection, so as her fellow Coloradans — a beautiful place of tolerance and respect, diversity and freedom — we will help her, the board wrote.

“We apologize to the Congresswoman and to the Muslim community for Boebert’s insensitive remarks,” it added. “Such remarks, no matter how innocently intended, have no place in American discourse.”

Below is the entire editorial.

Tony

———————————————————————————————————–

Editorial: Since Boebert seems incapable, we’ll apologize to Omar for her

By The Denver Post Editorial Board |

PUBLISHED: November 29, 2021 at 3:21 p.m. | UPDATED: November 30, 2021 at 2:20 p.m.

The Denver Post editorial board has mostly tried to ignore U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert’s antics because they add so little to the public discourse. Since the Western Slope representative was elected in November 2020, we’ve published two editorials about her. The first urged an investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol and whether her words and actions helped former President Donald Trump spark the insurrection; the other editorial defended Boebert from sexist and elitist attacks targeting her on social media for her physical appearance and her lack of a college education.

But last week, Boebert crossed a line and now we must stand up for common decency. Boebert is intentionally using her platform to peddle a gross and false narrative about Muslim Americans. We cannot fathom what evil intent drives this behavior, but after first apologizing, Boebert now has made matters worse.

In a video that was circulated widely last week after being tweeted out by Patriot Takes — a group that describes its mission as “to research, monitor and expose the extremism and radicalization of the far-right across the darkest parts of the Internet” — Boebert told supporters a story about getting on an elevator and seeing a security guard rush toward her as the doors were closing:

“I look to my left and there she is: Ilhan Omar. And I said, ‘Well, she doesn’t have a backpack. We should be fine,’” Boebert said in the video to cheers from the audience. “I looked over and I said, ‘Oh look, the jihad squad decided to show up for work today.’ ”

Making a joke about suicide bombers and suggesting that a congresswoman is a threat to safety and security because she is a Muslim is both racist and a form of religious bigotry. Boebert did apologize to “anyone in the Muslim community I offended with my comment about Rep. Omar,” and she pledged to call Omar directly, however, Boebert reported in a strange video on Monday that that phone call went poorly, and it’s no wonder given that she prefaces the conversation by once again raising the specter of concern about Omar and threats to American security.

“Make no mistake. I will continue to fearlessly put America first. Never sympathizing with terrorists. Unfortunately, Ilhan can’t say the same thing, and our country is worse off for it,” she said.

Rep. Ilhan Omar deserved nothing short of a full apology. Instead, Boebert used the phone call as a publicity stunt and further insulted Omar. Boebert is clearly incapable of remorse or reflection, so as her fellow Coloradans — a beautiful place of tolerance and respect, diversity and freedom — we will help her.

We apologize to the Congresswoman and to the Muslim community for Boebert’s insensitive remarks. Such remarks, no matter how innocently intended, have no place in American discourse. Boebert should not have fabricated an encounter with the Congresswoman and she most certainly should not have suggested she or any Muslim should be suspected of terrorism based on their religion. It is incumbent on Colorado’s representatives to treat all Americans with respect and dignity regardless of differences of opinion. We know we cannot bridge the deep rifts causing Americans to distrust one another through hateful language. We are embarrassed a Colorado representative is engaged in widening this divide, and we are sorry we didn’t call her out the first time she used a derogatory reference toward you and other members of Congress who are women and minorities.

May Lauren Boebert never face this kind of anger, discrimination or bigotry. We stood up for her once when others crossed the line and now we stand up to her and ask her to stop spewing her hatred across this great nation.