Photo by Art Bicnick

Dear Commons Community,

A volcano near the village of Grindavik  in southwestern Iceland has erupted for the sixth time since December, according to the country’s meteorological office.  The eruption has produced a night show of the volcano’s orange plumes against a backdrop of green Northern Lights (see video below).

Iceland’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs said the eruption did not “present a threat to life” and that the nearby area had been evacuated. “The impact is limited to a localized area near the eruption site”.

Regional police chief Ulfar Ludviksson told Icelandic media that the evacuation of the of Grindavik was going well.

Most of Grindavik’s 4,000 residents had evacuated in November, prior to an eruption in December, and while residents have since been allowed to return in between eruptions, only a few have opted to stay overnight.

Glad no one was hurt.

Nature’s fury and beauty!

Tony

 Dear Commons Community,

The US Army issued a strong rebuke of former President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign over the incident on Monday at Arlington National Cemetery (ANC), saying in a statement on yesterday that participants in the ceremony “were made aware of federal laws” regarding political activity at the cemetery, and “abruptly pushed aside” an employee of the cemetery.   As reported by CNN, The Seattle Times and other media.

“Participants in the August 26th ceremony and the subsequent Section 60 visit were made aware of federal laws, Army regulations and DoD policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds. An ANC employee who attempted to ensure adherence to these rules was abruptly pushed aside,” the Army spokesperson said in the statement on Thursday. Section 60 is an area in the cemetery largely reserved for the graves of those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“This incident was unfortunate, and it is also unfortunate that the ANC employee and her professionalism has been unfairly attacked. ANC is a national shrine to the honored dead of the Armed Forces, and its dedicated staff will continue to ensure public ceremonies are conducted with the dignity and respect the nation’s fallen deserve,” the statement said.

The Army spokesperson said while the incident was reported to the police department at Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, the employee in question “decided not to press charges” so the Army “considers this matter closed.”

The Army’s statement is a rare rebuke from a military service that loathes to get in the middle of highly political issues. It’s also not the first time there has been a controversy involving Trump related to the military as his campaign looks to make the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan under the Biden administration a key election issue.

Trump was visiting the cemetery following a wreath laying to honor 13 US military service members who were killed at Kabul airport’s Abbey Gate in Afghanistan three years go. A video of the visit posted by the Trump campaign on TikTok showed video of the former president walking through Arlington and visiting grave sites, with audio of him criticizing the Biden administration’s “disaster” of the Afghanistan withdrawal.

Accounts of the incident on Monday have varied, with the Trump campaign insisting there were no violations of the law, while cemetery officials have said they were told ahead of time to avoid political activity.

NPR first reported that there had been a “verbal and physical altercation” during the cemetery visit. A source with knowledge of the incident told the outlet that a cemetery official attempted to prevent Trump’s team from photographing and filming in the area where recent US casualties are buried. In response, Trump campaign staff “verbally abused and pushed the official aside,” according to NPR.

Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung disputed claims of a physical altercation, but said an unnamed individual decided to “physically block members of President Trump’s team during a very solemn ceremony.” Cheung suggested that Trump’s team has video to back up the claim, though no video of the incident has been released yet.

Trump campaign manager Chris LaCivita shared a similar account with CNN, saying in a statement that “President Trump was there on the invitation of the Abbey Gate Gold Star Families to honor their loved ones who gave the ultimate sacrifice for their country.”

“For a despicable individual to physically prevent President Trump’s team from accompanying him to this solemn event is a disgrace and does not deserve to represent the hollowed [sic] grounds of Arlington National Cemetery. Whoever this individual is spreading these lies are dishonoring the men and women of our armed forces, and they are disrespecting everyone who paid the price for defending our country,” LaCivita continued.

But according to a statement from Arlington National Cemetery obtained by CNN, federal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities within Army National Military Cemeteries.

The cemetery said it “reinforced and widely shared this law and its prohibitions with all participants,” which includes “photographers, content creators or any other persons attending for purposes, or in direct support of a partisan political candidate’s campaign.”

Trump appeared to suggest the incident stemmed from his campaign’s use of photography, sharing a statement from the family members of the fallen soldiers expressing their approval in a post on Truth Social.

“We had given our approval for President Trump’s official videographer and photographer to attend the event, ensuring these sacred moments of remembrance were respectfully captured and so we can cherish these memories forever,” the families said.

However, it wasn’t just the graves of those killed at Abbey Gate that were featured in photo and video from Trump’s visit. In at least one photo posted online, the grave of an Army Special Forces soldier who died by suicide is also featured; his family has since said they did not give the campaign permission to do so. The grave of Master Sgt. Andrew Marckesano, a Silver Star recipient, sits next to that of Marine Staff Sgt. Darin Taylor Hoover.

A statement from Marckesano’s sister on behalf of their family said that while they supported families of the 13 fallen “in their quest for answers and accountability regarding the Afghanistan withdrawal and the tragedy at Abbey Gate,” the Trump campaign “did not adhere to the rules” of Section 60.

“[A]ccording to our conversation with Arlington National Cemetery, the Trump Campaign staffers did not adhere to the rules that were set in place for this visit to SSGT Hoover’s grave site in Section 60, which lays directly next to my brother’s grave,” the statement from Michele Marckesano said. “We hope that those visiting this sacred site understand that these were real people who sacrificed for our freedom and that they are honored and respected accordingly.”

Some veterans groups have also spoken out about the Trump campaign conducting political activity at Arlington — one of the most sacred burial grounds for US service members.

Allison Jaslow, the CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, said in a statement that there are “plenty of places appropriate for politics — Arlington is not one of them.”

“Any aspiring elected official, especially one who hopes to be Commander in Chief, should not be confused about that fact,” Jaslow said. “Nor should they hide behind members of our community to justify politicking on such sacred ground.

In a post on X, VoteVets, a progressive organization that advocates for issues relating to US troops and veterans, said Trump was using the cemetery “for political purposes.”

“This whole episode is sickening and (an) affront to all those hundreds of thousands of families who never agreed to allow their deceased loved ones to be dragged into politics,” the post said.

The episode was indeed sickening and shows shows how despicable Trump and his handlers can be especially since he has referred to our honored dead as “suckers and losers”.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

I watched last night’s interview of Komala Harris and Tim Walz.  Hosted by CNN’s Dana Bash, it was a congenial discussion of major topics.  There were no fireworks.  I thought Harris answered most of the questions in a straightforward manner with the exception of why she changed her views on banning fracking. She praised Joe Biden and refused to say anything negative about him.  I saw her comments about him as those of a loyal colleague and friend.  Below are takeaways courtesy of The New York Times.

Tony

—————————————————————————————–

The main reason CNN’s interview with Vice President Kamala Harris turned out to be remarkable was that it was the first one she had done since President Biden bowed out and tapped her as his successor.

Seated alongside her running mate, the quietly supportive Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, Ms. Harris parried questions from Dana Bash on Thursday without causing herself political harm or providing herself a significant boost.

She was methodical and risk-averse in the 27-minute interview, performing like a top seed in the early rounds of the U.S. Open tennis tournament trying to hold serve, survive and advance to the next round — in this case, her Sept. 10 debate with former President Donald J. Trump.

Here are seven takeaways from the interview:

She hugged Biden’s policy legacy …

The Biden administration’s economic record? Terrific. The president’s stance toward Israel and Gaza? Hers is the same. His position on the border? She shares it, and would sign the bill his team helped negotiate. Fracking in Pennsylvania? Mr. Biden is for it, and so is she.

As it turns out, Ms. Harris is a better salesperson for Mr. Biden’s accomplishments and defender of his record than he ever was. Perhaps that’s little surprise, given the president’s diminished political skills and trouble speaking coherently in recent years.

But if there were any question about whether Ms. Harris would put any daylight between herself and the Biden legacy, she provided a definitive answer on Thursday night.

She will not.

… but wants to turn the page on him as well as Trump.

What Ms. Harris did do was offer herself up as a continuation of Mr. Biden’s leadership even as she distanced herself from him.

Asked by Ms. Bash if she had any regrets about defending Mr. Biden’s fitness for office and ability to serve a second term, Ms. Harris said she did not and praised the president.

Then, in the next breath, she deftly put both him and Mr. Trump in the rearview mirror.

“I am so proud to have served as vice president to Joe Biden,” she said. “I’m so proud to be running with Tim Walz for president of the United States and to bring America what I believe the American people deserve, which is a new way forward, and turn the page on the last decade of what I believe has been contrary to where the spirit of our country really lies.”

Mr. Biden, of course, has been either president, vice president or a leading candidate for president for most of the last 15 years.

She’s hunting for Republican votes.

Since her rise, Ms. Harris has moved carefully toward the political center. She abandoned a host of left-wing positions from her 2020 presidential campaign and showcased never-Trump Republicans at the Democratic convention last week.

On Thursday, she suggested she would appoint a Republican to her cabinet, a symbolic move to show that she would govern in a bipartisan manner.

“It would be to the benefit of the American public to have a member of my cabinet who was a Republican,” she said.

It was once common for presidents to give the other party at least one cabinet post. President Barack Obama named Representative Ray LaHood of Illinois, a Republican, as his transportation secretary. President George W. Bush put Norman Y. Mineta, a Democrat, in the same role.

Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump did not appoint any members of the other party to their cabinets.

Harris would prefer not to discuss her race and gender.

Mr. Trump set off a blitz of negative headlines when he falsely suggested that Ms. Harris had identified as Black only later in life, and for political gain. It was an absurd assertion, and the vice president has sought to cut off oxygen to it.

“Same old, tired playbook,” she said when Ms. Bash asked her about the claim. “Next question, please.”

Asked if she had anything to add, Ms. Harris replied: “That’s it.”

Even after a softball question about a viral New York Times photo of her niece watching her speak at the Democratic convention, Ms. Harris refused to lean into the prospect of becoming the first Black woman elected as president.

“I am running because I believe that I am the best person to do this job at this moment for all Americans, regardless of race and gender,” she said, offering a clinical description of the photograph instead of revealing any emotions she felt viewing it.

“I did see that photograph,” she went on. “And I was deeply touched by it. And, you’re right, she’s — it’s the back of her head, and her two little braids, and — and then I’m in the front of the photograph, obviously speaking. It’s very humbling.”

She still struggles to be punchy off the cuff.

Ms. Harris’s speeches are filled with simple, declarative sentences.

But Thursday’s interview was a reminder that unscripted, she can sometimes deliver discursive answers that ramble and zigzag.

Discussing her feelings when Mr. Biden told her he was ending his campaign and endorsing her, Ms. Harris said she had not at first thought about how the momentous turn of events would affect her life and legacy.

“My first thought was about him, to be honest,” she said. “I think history is going to show a number of things about Joe Biden’s presidency. I think history is going to show that in so many ways it was transformative, be it on what we have accomplished around finally investing in America’s infrastructure, investing in new economies, in new industries, what we have done to bring our allies back together, and have confidence in who we are as America, and grow that alliance, what we have done to stand true to our principles, including the — one of the most important international rules and norms, which is the importance of sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

Simple and declarative it was not.

Dana Bash navigated a tough night adeptly.

In a setting arranged by the Harris campaign to appear friendly — just three people sitting together at a neighborhood coffee shop in Savannah — it was going to be difficult for Ms. Bash to extract much news out of the vice president.

Still, the veteran journalist had a good night. Conducting one of the most prominent interviews of her career, she ticked through the biggest questions looming over Ms. Harris’s young candidacy, including what specific plans, exactly, she would pursue and why she hadn’t carried out some of her proposals while serving as vice president.

When Ms. Harris dodged an opening question about what her “Day 1” plans were, Ms. Bash asked it again. When there still wasn’t a clear answer, she asked Mr. Walz. He did not really answer it, either. At some point, any inquisitor must move on, and Ms. Bash did.

Republican critics of Ms. Harris may have wished for a harsher grilling — or for more direct questions about how she felt about Mr. Biden’s aptitude and acuity — but Ms. Bash pressed the vice president when necessary.

She also forced Mr. Walz to concede he had misspoken about the extent of his military service: “My grammar’s not always correct,” he said.

Tim Walz is good at sitting and smiling.

At their joint rallies, Mr. Walz has played the role of excited cheerleader, offering a jubilant double-armed wave to crowds in support of Ms. Harris.

But in a joint interview setting, his role was more serene. He mostly sat there, silent, waiting for Ms. Bash to ask him to say something. At one point during the interview’s first segment, he went a full eight minutes without speaking.

Ms. Bash knew that the important person to hear from was Ms. Harris, and Mr. Walz probably did, too.

Legos in My Library (Click on to enlarge).

Dear Commons Community,

Toymaker Lego said yesterday it will replace the fossil fuels used in making its signature bricks with more expensive renewable and recycled plastic, as its sales and profits surged.

The Danish company reported that profit for the first half of the year jumped 26% to 8.1 billion Danish krone ($1.2 billion). Sales to consumers grew 14%, considerably outperforming the wider toy industry.  As reported by CNN and Reuters.

In an interview with CNN, CEO Neils Christiansen pointed to the brand’s strength “throughout the world with all consumers.”

“Our product portfolio resonates super well across ages and interests,” he added.

Lego’s blockbuster results come even though toy sales globally have suffered as consumers cut back on non-essential spending. Hasbro (HAS) announced plans to cut 20% of its workforce late last year due to the sales slump.

Lego, which sells billions of plastic bricks annually, has tested over 600 different materials to develop a new material that would completely replace its oil-based brick by 2030, but with limited success.

Now, Lego is aiming to gradually bring down the oil content in its bricks by paying up to 70% more for certified renewable resin, the raw plastic used to manufacture the bricks, in an attempt to encourage manufacturers to boost production.

“This means a significant increase in the cost of producing a Lego brick,” Christiansen told Reuters.

He said the company is on track to ensure that more than half of the resin it needs in 2026 is certified according to the mass balance method, an auditable way to trace sustainable materials through the supply chain, up from 30% in the first half of 2024.

Lego aims to make all of its products from renewable and recycled materials by 2032. The company will absorb the additional cost for now in the hope that its investment will spur the companies making these materials to increase volumes.

“With a family-owner committed to sustainability, it’s a privilege that we can pay extra for the raw materials without having to charge customers extra,” Christiansen said. “We don’t see consumers really ready to take on the cost,” he told CNN.

The move comes amid a surplus of cheap virgin plastic, driven by major oil companies’ investments in petrochemicals. Plastics are projected to drive new oil demand in the next few decades.

Lego’s suppliers are using bio-waste such as cooking oil or food industry waste fat as well as recycled materials to replace virgin fossil fuels in plastic production.

The market for recycled or renewable plastic is still in its infancy, partly because most available feedstock is used for subsidised biodiesel, which is mixed into transportation fuels.

According to Neste, the world’s largest producer of renewable feedstocks, fossil-based plastic is about half or a third of the price of sustainable options.

“We sense more activity and willingness to invest in this now than we did just a year ago,” said Christiansen. He declined to say which suppliers or give details about price or volumes.

Rival toymaker Hasbro has started including plant-based or recycled materials in some toys, but without setting firm targets on plastic use. Mattel (MAT) plans to use only recycled, recyclable or bio-based plastics in all products by 2030.

Around 90% of all plastic is made from virgin fossil fuels, according to lobby group PlasticsEurope.

When my grandchildren were younger, I would buy one or two Lego products for them to build.  It kept them occupied for hours. I still keep many of their finished projects in my office and library (see above).

Tony

Daniel Greenstein.  Credit – Bryan Thomas for The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Dear Commons Community,

The Chronicle of Higher Education interviewed Daniel Greenstein, the outgoing Chancellor of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. His major initiative during his tenure was to consolidate six colleges into two new merged institutions. Here is the introduction.

When Daniel Greenstein took over as chancellor of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education in 2018, it was bleeding students and money, and he was an unknown quantity as a system leader. Last month he announced he would step down in October, having led for six tumultuous years that included merging six of the system’s 14 four-year public universities in an attempt to save all of them from fiscal insolvency. Whether he ultimately “saved” the system still remains to be seen, but Greenstein has shown he can marshal the forces of a large public-university system for change.

Greenstein, the former director of postsecondary success for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation began his tenure at the system, known as PASSHE, with the usual listening tour of campuses and constituencies. But he also proved more forthcoming than many past chancellors, sources say. He shared data and other information more openly and cultivated less adversarial relationships with the system’s labor organizations. The good will he bought helped when he announced a controversial plan to combine six of the system’s most troubled campuses into two new institutions, Pennsylvania Western University and Commonwealth University of Pennsylvania. That initiative has consumed most of the rest of his stint in office.

First-time enrollment rose by 3.4 percent across the system in the fall of 2023, but overall enrollment fell by 2.2 percent and is still down 31 percent from its 2011 peak of 120,000 students. Commonwealth’s second fall class in 2023 saw a more than 10-percent increase in enrollment over its first, but Penn West’s fall-2023 enrollment was down nearly 12 percent from the previous year. Enrollment figures for the fall of 2024 are not yet available.

Greenstein is leaving PASSHE for a position he says he will announce next month. He’s interested to see if the work he’s done has taken root. Back in his Gates days, he says, the foundation often invested in people who had a particular idea or drive more than in the organizations they worked for. But “at the end of the day, you always want to know what happens after the leader leaves,” he says, “because that’s inevitable.”

The entire interview is worth reading if you have any interest in the state of higher education in an era of declining enrollment.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Vice President Kamala Harris will sit down with CNN this Thursday at 9:00 pm (EDT)  for her first interview since President Joe Biden dropped his reelection bid.

Harris will be joined by her running mate Minnesota Governor Tim Walz in an interview with CNN anchor Dana Bash in Savannah, Georgia.

Harris’ lack of access has become one of Republicans’ key lines of attacks against her as she ascended to the top of the Democratic ticket after Biden’s July 21 announcement. The CNN interview may be an opportunity for Harris to quell criticism that she is unprepared for uncontrolled environments, but it may also carry risks as her team tries to build on momentum from the ticket shakeup and Democratic National Convention.

During her three-plus years as vice president, she has done on-camera and print interviews with The Associated Press and many other outlets, often at a pace more frequent than Biden.

The Trump campaign has kept a tally of the days she has gone by as a candidate without giving an interview. On Tuesday, the campaign reacted to the news by noting the interview was joint, saying “she’s not competent enough to do it on her own.”

Earlier this month, Harris had told reporters that she wanted to do her first formal interview before the end of August.

Harris travels with members of the media on Air Force Two for all trips and nearly always comes to the back of the plane to speak to them for a few minutes before takeoff. Her office insists that those conversations are off the record, though, so what she says can’t be used publicly.

It should be an interesting interview!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Special counsel Jack Smith provided the latest development in the 2020 election subversion case against former President Donald Trump, filing a reworked indictment yesterday in Washington, D.C. that he hopes comports with the US Supreme Court’s immunity ruling and will let the case move forward.

The new indictment is 36 pages, down from the original 45 pages. The special counsel did not drop any of the four counts against Trump, but he was forced by the conservative Supreme Court justices to refashion the allegations underlying the charges.

Trump previously pleaded not guilty to the charges, which stem from his attempts to overturn the 2020 election after he lost to Joe Biden resulting in the January 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol. The new indictment was filed weeks before voters begin casting ballots in the 2024 presidential election, but a trial isn’t expected to happen anytime soon.

Below are takeaways courtesy of CNN.

Tony

———————————————————————–

What’s different and why?

The most glaring difference between the two indictments: prosecutors removed the entire section about Trump’s attempts to weaponize the Justice Department to help his reelection.

And the new indictment no longer mentions “co-conspirator 4,” who was referenced nearly 30 times in the original case and was previously identified by CNN as Jeffrey Clark, a Trump appointee at the Justice Department who embraced his false voter-fraud theories and supported his efforts to use federal law enforcement powers to try to overturn the election.

“Smith removed the allegations about Trump’s use of the Justice Department to perpetrate the scheme since the Supreme Court made clear that those acts were official acts and therefore immune from prosecution,” said Barbara McQuade, a former prosecutor and University of Michigan Law School professor.

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig called the superseding indictment “a strategic retreat by Jack Smith” in cutting the claims relating to the Justice Department.

“The indictment now rests primarily on Trump’s effort to pressure state and local officials and to submit false slates of electors,” Honig said.

Steve Vladeck, a CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, emphasized that the special counsel did not drop any of the charges themselves.

That, Vladeck said, suggests that prosecutors “are confident” that the law “still encompasses the conduct they allege former President Trump engaged in leading up to and on January 6.”

Trump’s role in election certification

Trump continues to be charged with illegally interfering with state election officials who certify their state’s presidential election results, and of obstructing Congress’ certification of the Electoral College results on January 6.

But the superseding indictment explicitly highlights the fact that the sitting president has no role whatsoever in this quadrennial exercise, neither on the state nor federal level.

The reworked indictment states, “The Defendant had no official responsibilities related to any state’s certification of the election results.” Regarding January 6, it states that “the Defendant had no official responsibilities related to the certification proceeding, but he did have a personal interest as a candidate in being named the winner of the election.”

Neither of those lines were in the original indictment that Smith filed last year.

Trump’s 2020 election rhetoric

Much of the case involves Trump’s words – specifically, his repeated false claims that the election had been “rigged” and “stolen” from him. (Democratic and Republican election officials, Trump’s handpicked attorney general, many of his own advisers, and the nation’s leading cybersecurity agency have all concluded the election was legitimate and secure.)

This adjustment by prosecutors was a reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling, which commentated on how presidents use social media and speeches to communicate with the public, but didn’t set out a hard-and-fast rule for when those communications are personal conduct.

“The Defendant continued to make false claims nonetheless, with deliberate disregard for the truth, including through his Twitter account,” prosecutors said in the new indictment. “Throughout the conspiracies, although the Defendant sometimes used his Twitter account to communicate with the public, as President, about official actions and policies, he also regularly used it for personal purposes.”

Like the original indictment, the new one quoted from Trump’s incendiary Ellipse speech on the morning of January 6, where he urged his supporters to march to the Capitol and “fight like hell.”

But in Tuesday’s document, prosecutors said that the event was a “campaign speech” and “a privately-funded, privately-organized political rally.”

Trump’s role in post-election lawsuits cited

Another example of how Smith retooled and reworded his indictment revolves around a lawsuit that Trump’s 2020 campaign filed regarding the results in Georgia, which he narrowly lost.

The original indictment said the lawsuit was “filed in his name.” But the new indictment says it was “filed in his capacity as a candidate for President,” explicitly arguing that this solely pertained to his campaign and was wholly removed from his presidential duties.

Trump personally signed a verification swearing that the information in the lawsuit was accurate, even though it contained “false election fraud allegations,” prosecutors wrote.

The right-wing lawyer who advised Trump on that lawsuit, alleged co-conspirator John Eastman, even told Trump’s team beforehand that the filing contained some “inaccurate” information, prosecutors claim.

Why is Mike Pence still in the indictment?

The reworked indictment is a response to the Supreme Court’s divisive ruling on July 1 granting sweeping immunity to Trump. The 6-3 conservative majority ruled that Trump’s interactions with Justice Department officials was entitled to absolute immunity from prosecution.

“The president cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority,” the Supreme Court wrote. “Trump is therefore absolutely immune from prosecution for the alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.”

Other actions, such as Trump’s interactions with Vice President Mike Pence, were entitled to “presumptive” immunity, but the majority said that lower courts would need to thrash out whether Smith could overcome that presumption and pursue his case. By keeping Trump’s contacts with Pence in the new indictment, Smith is plowing ahead with that part of the case in hopes it will be upheld.

The alleged conspiracy to pressure Pence into overturning the election is a core part of the indictment and a huge part of the 2020 election aftermath. Prosecutors retooled and reframed the section about Trump pressuring Pence to emphasize that, in their view, it was an abuse of power that had nothing to do with the constitutional role of the vice presidency and the normal lawful relationship between a president and vice president.

McQuade said she was “somewhat surprised” to see the allegations remain relating to Trump’s efforts to pressure Pence.

“The court said that this conversation was at least presumptively immune, but that the prosecutor could rebut the presumption,” she said. “It seems that Smith believes he can rebut the presumption, perhaps by framing Pence as acting in his legislative role as president of the Senate rather than in his executive branch role as vice president.”

The Supreme Court left open the possibility that other actions Trump took, such as his interactions with state election officials, might be open to prosecution. The high court didn’t resolve whether any of Trump’s conduct was, in fact, unofficial but rather left it to the trial court considering his case to decide.

“Unlike Trump’s alleged interactions with the Justice Department, this alleged conduct cannot be neatly categorized as falling within a particular presidential function,” the court wrote. “The necessary analysis is instead fact specific, requiring assessment of numerous alleged interactions with a wide variety of state officials and private persons.”

What happens next

Although the charges haven’t changed, Trump must enter a new plea to the superseding indictment. Prosecutors yesterday indicated they would waive a requirement for the former president appear in court.

Meanwhile, expect Trump to continue his strategy of challenging every aspect of the case, especially since the Supreme Court left aspects of the case unresolved.

“Trump still can litigate and then appeal the immunity issue before trial,” Honig said. “There’s no chance this trial happens before the election.”

Eamonn Fitzmaurice/The 74

Dear Commons Community,

Forbes published an article last Saturday entitled, “Will This Be The Year That Schools Shut Down Cellphones?”  It is a growing question among education policy makers that my colleague, David Bloomfield, is referenced as saying “it’s going to take time, it’s going to take expense, and it’s going to take enforcement.” 

The article also refers to the best-selling book, The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt as fanning the flames for restricting access to cellphones.

It is an important issue that will be reviewed carefully by state education departments and school boards in the months and maybe years ahead.

Below is an excerpt from the Forbes article.

Tony

Just a couple of decades ago, teachers at conferences heard that smartphones were the education tool of the future. Now it appears that the national mood is to take broad steps to keep those devices out of classrooms.

Since students could pass notes in class, student personal communication technology has been a classroom challenge. Teachers of a certain age can remember when digital pagers posed a problem. But smartphones represent a whole new problematic level; students could be distracted by everything from checking their socials to starting or continuing a fight to arranging a rendezvous in the hall, all while the teacher tries to explain quadratic equations.

Schools, trying to embrace current technology or just caught flatfooted, have for years left teachers to develop their own policies and procedures for dealing with the ubiquitous devices. Larger bans have fared poorly. In 2006, the Bloomberg administration banned cellphones in New York City schools, raising an uproar from parents and teachers, with outspoken opposition from everyone from Councilman Bill De Blasio to UFT President Randi Weingarten opposed the policy and parents threatened to sue.

While students often push back against phone bans, parents can be the real challenge for a school district. For helicopter parents, the power to stay in touch throughout the entire day can be irresistible. For families that are stretching resources (two jobs, three kids, one car), cellphones can be invaluable. And in an age with heightened fear of school shootings and other emergency situations, many parents to do not trust the schools to provide the kind of quick crisis communication that they need.

But in the last few years, schools have reached their breaking point. In 2015, Mayor Bill De Blasio lifted New York’s cellphone ban, but New York—both city and state—are now contemplating a new ban. And AFT President Randi Weingarten in a 2024 speech took credit for helping Cleveland craft a ban of their own.

And while pressure to ban the devices has been building in education circles for years, works like Jonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation have fed the idea that internet connection is at least partly responsible for a growing mental health problem among children.

Some parents still pose an obstacle. Philadelphia principal Jose Lebron told Education Week of parent pushback on his cellphone ban, “You would have thought the world was going to end.” One teacher told me that when their school imposed a new rule requiring students to keep phones all day in magnetic lock bags, parents showed up at school to protest, complete with protest signs.

There are also logistical challenges. How and when are phones collected? Where are they stored, and how are these very valuable pieces of personal property safeguarded?

With all that settled, classroom cellphone bans still come down to one moment. The teacher sees a student with a cellphone out. The teacher tells the student to hand it in. The student says no. What happens next? Does the teacher stop class in order to engage in a battle of wills? Does the teacher let it go as not worth the trouble? Does the teacher involve the office, and if so, does the office provide meaningful support?

It’s the irony of large sweeping policies like this. Education Week counts at least twelve states that have laws or policies containing student cellphone use, and innumerable districts have created policies as well. But the effectiveness of all those policies will boil down to how effectively building principals back up their teachers.

State policies make it easier for local district to pass the buck (”There’s no point in arguing with us; this came from the state”). But as David Bloomfield, an education leadership, law, and policy professor told NPR, implementation is “going to take time. It’s going to take expense, and it’s going to take enforcement.” While some teachers are already writing about “the joy of a cellphone free school day,” it will be up to local school leaders to provide the support for effective implementation of these policies. Where administrators find the strength to handle all the various obstacles, this may be the year that teachers finally have one less device competing for student attention.

Dear Commons Community,

More than 200 Republicans who previously worked for either former President George W. Bush, the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., or Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for president in an open letter Monday obtained exclusively by USA TODAY.

The letter above from alums of the three Republican presidential nominees prior to former President Donald Trump comes on the heels of a Democratic National Convention last week in Chicago that showcased Republican detractors of the GOP nominee. At least five former aides to former President George H.W. Bush also signed the letter, which has 238 signatures in all.

A similar group of about 150 anti-Trump former staffers of Bush, McCain and Romney pledged support for President Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

“We reunite today, joined by new George H.W. Bush alumni, to reinforce our 2020 statements and, for the first time, jointly declare that we’re voting for Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov. Tim Walz this November,” the letter reads. “Of course, we have plenty of honest, ideological disagreements with Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz. That’s to be expected. The alternative, however, is simply untenable.”

(See the letter with endorsements here.)

Among those who signed the letter in support of Harris and her running-mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, include: former McCain chiefs of staff Mark Salter and Chris Koch; Joe Donoghue, former legislative director for McCain; Jennifer Lux, press secretary for McCain’s 2008 campaign, and Jean Becker, longtime chief of staff for George H.W. Bush.

Also backing Harris are David Nierenberg, Romney’s 2012 campaign finance chair; David Garman, under secretary of Energy for George W. Bush; and Olivia Troye, a former advisor to both George W. Bush and Vice President Mike Pence. Troye spoke from the stage of the DNC convention last week.

Thank you to these Republicans for putting the country before party!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Western Governors University (WGU), one of the nation’s largest online universities, surprised many of its staff members recently by announcing they would need to work in the office if they wanted to keep their jobs. As reported by The Chronicle of Higher Education and Reddit.

In a series of meetings earlier this month, senior administrators at WGU told employees that beginning this fall, 19 of its 26 departments will be “co-located” at the university’s Salt Lake City headquarters, with staff members eventually required to be in the office four days a week. All vice presidents and directors on one team, for example, will need to move to Salt Lake City in the next one to two years, and all new hires will now be based there.The policy does not, however, apply to those with student-facing jobs, including course instructors, evaluators who grade students’ work, and enrollment and financial-aid professionals.

WGU employees who currently live within a 50-mile radius of Salt Lake City will need to work from the office three days per week beginning on October 1, and four days beginning January 1. According to a presentation leaked on Reddit, on the marketing and external communications team, vice presidents who live outside of Utah must decide by November 1 whether they will move; if they opt to do so, they must arrive in Utah by August 2025. Directors have until July 2025 to make their decisions and August 2026 to move. Those who opt not to relocate will be out of a job, though the presentation notes that “severance support will be available.

Tony