Sunday, July 27, 2025
Home Blog Page 321

Resegregation: University of Washington will have ‘affinity housing’ just for black students this fall

University of Washington in Seattle offers a special resident hall exclusively for black students starting this fall. The University insists that this is not segregation.

“Black Affinity Housing provides a unique living experience for students seeking connection through celebrating Black culture and scholarship,” the university says.

The segregated housing is in partnership with the publicly funded Office of Minority Affairs & DiversityBlack Student Union, and ASUW Black Student Commission. Washington and U.S. taxpayers underwrite this resegregation project.

The housing will provide space to “promote personal wellness, social connectedness, and academic success centering the Black student experience.”

The goals of the housing segregation experience, according to the university are also to:

  • Build a community to enhance the sense of belonging and affinity to UW
  • Champion respect for Black culture, identity, and history  
  • Cultivate open and honest conversations surrounding individual and shared experiences 
  • Celebrate the rich and vibrant Black culture worldwide 
  • Promote self-growth and potential through opportunities for academic achievement, civic engagement and career preparedness both in and outside the university community 
  • Create lifelong friendships and a meaningful network of likeminded individuals 

Black Affinity Housing will be located on the 8th floor of Lander Hall on West Campus. The floor accommodates 125 students through single, double, and triple rooms.

Alaska students attend medical school at UW through the WWAMI program, a multi-state medical education program for Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho. Some 20 Alaska students are accepted each year.

Sen. Sullivan bill would end U.S. cooperation with International Criminal Court, after I.C.C. moves to issue arrest warrant for Israel’s Netanyahu

On Monday, the International Criminal Court chief prosecutor announced he is seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders to charge them with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan has responded with a Senate resolution to remove the United States from the I.C.C., which is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal seated in The Hague, Netherlands.

His bill is titled, “Stop the ICC Act.” It calls for a prohibition against cooperating with the ICC and prohibits funding for the Palestinian Authority, a supporter of Hamas, as well as prohibits funding for the I.C.C.

I.C.C. Chief Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan announced that he was “filing applications for the warrants of arrests” for Netanyahu, and other senior Israeli and Hamas figures who have played key roles in the ongoing war in Gaza.

A panel of three judges will decide whether to issue the arrest warrants. The process could take several weeks. If the judges agree, then Benjamin Netanyahu, other Israeli leaders, and Hamas leaders could be arrested if they left their own borders.

Earlier this month, 12 Republican senators threatened the ICC with sanctions if it moves forward with an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, who has been drawn into a war to defend Israel from Hamas terrorists after an Oct. 7, 2023 raid conducted by the terrorist organization that killed several hundred Israeli citizens and kidnapped over 200. About 100 have been released. Israel says another 100 hostages are still being held captive in Gaza. There are another 39 bodies of hostages that were killed but not released by Hamas. Israel has only been able to recover 17 bodies of hostages.

“The ICC’s false moral equivalency between Israel and Hamas is reprehensible and dangerous,” said Sen. Sullivan. “Israel is facing a threat to its very existence from a barbaric enemy that actually uses civilians as human shields and welcomes civilian casualties as part of its strategy. Republicans and Democrats have rightly condemned the ICC’s outrageous arrest warrants for Israeli leaders, but now we need to back up those words with action. We must end American cooperation with this rogue organization and stand firmly with our strongest ally in the Middle East—the only democracy in the region.”

The legislation can be read at this link.

Sullivan has said multiple times that Israel has a right to defend itself.

“America stands with the people of @Israel, our greatest ally in the Middle East, as they repel a widespread assault launched by Hamas terrorists today at the conclusion of the Jewish holiday of Sukkot,” Sullivan noted on X/Twitter on Oct. 7.

“Israel has a right to defend itself and its existence against any terrorist group or its backers, including the largest state sponsor of terrorism—Iran. We must support this right of our close ally during this horrendous attack on innocent Israelis,” Sullivan said in October, a sentiment he has repeated. “The terrorist regime in Iran must know that the United States is watching its actions very closely.”

Tim Barto: Why the Alaska House vote to save girls’ sports matters

By TIM BARTO

At the very end of the 2024 Alaska legislative session, the House brought HB183 to a floor vote. This bill, introduced by Rep. Jamie Allard of Eagle River, is a piece of social legislation that provides protection for female athletes from intrusion by male athletes who identify as females.

Doubts existed that a majority of the House, Republican or not, was going to vote in favor of it. Concerns about it taking up time and energy from more pressing issues, such as energy and budgetary bills, frustrated lawmakers, especially conservatives who expected an onslaught of amendments by their leftist colleagues intended to drag out the process in the hopes of tiring the majority. 

Republican representatives from liberal and moderate districts worried that a vote in favor would cost them support, putting their November re-election runs in jeopardy. 

Besides, if the House mustered enough votes to pass the bill, it was a foregone conclusion that the liberal Senate majority would not pick up the bill, especially with only three days left in the session. 

The pragmatic solution, it seemed, was to not hear the bill on the floor. Deal with the simmering pots of boring yet important fiscal and energy matters, and play it safe on the controversial social stuff. But that is not what happened.

Allard, with encouragement from fellow staunch conservatives, pushed for the bill to be heard on the floor and for the representatives’ votes to be a matter of record. HB183 made it to the floor where it received that expected – and ridiculous – flurry of obfuscating amendments from the left side of the aisle. The Republicans suffered the long hours, stayed the course, and passed it by a vote of 22 to 18. The only Republican voting against keeping girls’ sports for girls was Kodiak Representative Louise Stute. No Democrats voted for it, but Independent Dan Ortiz of Ketchikan sided with the majority.

So,  was it worth it? Yes, absolutely yes, because truth, decency, and common sense are important; and so is fighting against the increasingly angry and absurd voices that continually introduce new categories of oppressed people.

It’s way past time to stand up to the unceasing attacks on traditional family values and the promotion of bizarre lifestyles, the latter of which are seemingly intended to drag the majority of human beings into a delusional world where biology is ignored and virtue lies in offending people . . . and, in turn, being offended because they were successful in their goal to offend.

Since the Senate did not hear the bill before the end of the 2024 session, it will be up to the 34th Alaska Legislature to introduce a new bill to save girls’ sports when they convene next January. Hopefully, the November elections will show that saving girls’ sports for girls is an idea supported by the majority of voters, and the matter will be taken up early in the new session.

For now, the Alaska House of Representatives scores a win for passing HB183.

Tim Barto is a regular contributor to Must Read Alaska and vice president at Alaska Family Council, which led the fight to keep girls’ sports for girls.

War between the states over climate change laws? 19 GOP attorneys general file complaint with Supreme Court against five anti-oil states

Nineteen Republican attorneys general, including Alaska’s Attorney General Treg Taylor, filed a complaint on Wednesday with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the high court to block five Democrat-led states from continuing to wage climate change-related litigation wars against major oil and gas companies in their state courts.

Plaintiffs include the states of Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

The states being sued are California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.

The complaint says, in part, that the five states “assert the power to dictate the future of the American energy industry. They hope to do so not by influencing federal legislation or by petitioning federal agencies, but by imposing ruinous liabilities and coercive remedies on energy companies though state tort actions governed by state law in state court.”

The five Democratic-led states have sued oil companies and demanded various payment for allegedly causing tides to rise and storms to intensify, and other disasters the Democrats say are caused by man-made climate change, and not simply because more people live in areas impacted by weather events.

“In essence, Defendant States Want a global carbon tax on the traditional energy industry. Citing fears of a climate catastrophe, they seek massive penalties, disgorgement, and injunctive relief against energy producers based on out-of-state conduct with out-of-state effects. On their view, a small gas station in rural Alabama could owe damages to the people of Minnesota simply for selling a gallon of gas. If Defendant States are right about the substance and reach of state law, their actions imperil access to affordable energy everywhere and inculpate every State and indeed every person on the planet. Consequently, Defendant States threaten not only our system of federalism and equal sovereignty among States, but our basic way of life,” the complaint reads.

This type of war between states can only be decided by the Supreme Court, because no other court in the land is equipped to handle state vs. state litigation. A similar complaint, filed by traditional energy companies themselves, was turned away by the Supreme Court in late April.

Exxon Mobil, Suncor Energy, Chevron and other companies sued the states of Rhode Island, California, Colorado, Hawaii, and Maryland, over their anti-oil policies. Those were heard in lower courts but the Supreme Court turned away those complaints, saying they should be heard in state courts. 

“In the past when States have used state law to dictate interstate energy policy, other States have sued and this Court has acted,” the 19 attorneys general argued. When West Virginia, then the leading producer of natural gas, required gas producers in the state to meet the needs of all local customers before shipping any gas interstate, the Supreme Court allowed the lawsuit brought by Ohio and Pennsylvania against West Virginia.

“And in 1981, this Court considered a ‘functionally indistinguishable’ challenge brought by Maryland and other States against Louisiana. Louisiana’s taxation scheme for natural gas threatened the ‘health, comfort and Welfare’ of ‘private consumers in each’ plaintiff State through ‘the threatened withdrawal of the gas from the interstate stream’ — ‘a matter of grave public concern,” the attorney wrote, quoting a case from four decades ago.

Those cases involved the same kinds of questions that the high court is intended to resolve, they argued, because “Defendant States are not independent nations with unrestrained sovereignty to do as they please. In our federal system, no state ‘can legislate for or impose its policy upon the other.'”

When controversies arise among sovereigns, the options are either “diplomacy or war,” the attorneys explained, citing supporting cases. “The Constitution changed that. When controversies arise among the States of our Union, their options are to seek a resolution from Congress or from this Court.”

Gabrielle Rubenstein’s Permanent Fund turf-war makes the news at Financial Times

The dust-up over perceived fiduciary improprieties by one of the members of the Alaska Permanent Fund’s Board of Trustees has made it to one of the most influential publications in the financial world: The Financial Times.

In a news article that appeared Friday, reporter Sun Yu used information provided in the initial story by the Alaska Landmine to analyze and expand on information about the troubles that Gabrielle “Ellie” Rubenstein has found herself in over the past few weeks, revealing staff perceptions that she used undue influence to steer the fund’s investment analysts toward her father’s private equity firm the Carlyle Group.

Yu’s story describes how the professional managers of the fund suspected Rubenstein of trying to steer state investments to friends and family members “while seeking the dismissal of a junior employee who left her father ‘unimpressed,’ according to leaked internal emails seen by the Financial Times and interviews with people with direct knowledge of the fund’s operations.”

Yu describes Ellie Rusenstein as “The daughter of one of the most powerful figures in US finance,” due to her relationship with her father, billionaire David Rubenstein.

Chris Ullman, a spokesman for Ellie Rubenstein, acknowledged to Yu that the trustee had made about 20 referrals of external asset managers to Alaska Permanent Fund staff, but he said she followed established protocols and had not exerted improper pressure. Through Ullman, she denied setting up a meeting between employees and her father, or seeking to have anyone fired.

“She played no role in investment decisions and no capital was deployed to those investment firms,” Ullman said to Financial Times.

That is not how the staff relayed the interactions, however, according to Yu’s reporting, which reinforces the initial documents divulged by the Alaska Landmine, although it appears true that the staff didn’t act on Rubenstein’s advice.

Yu reported that Rep. Cliff Groh, a Democrat from Anchorage, has called for a hearing into the “disturbing conflicts of interest” at the fund.

“The legislature must provide oversight to the Permanent Fund to protect it from the apparent threats it faces, including the risk that investments will be influenced by cronyism instead of what’s best for the fund,” Groh said in a letter to the Legislature.

Yu also reports that since the email messages were leaked to the Alaska Landmine, Rubenstein has sought to ban employees from forwarding internal emails.

The Governance Committee of the Board of Trustees did hold a hastily arranged meeting last week to discuss how to repair the damage done to the reputation of the board by the leaked emails.

After that meeting, the Permanent Fund issued a statement that said, in part, “The Governance Committee affirmed that APFC’s processes and systems are in place to ensure efficient internal operations that support our work on behalf of Alaskans. The Committee and Investment Advisory Group (IAG) members emphasized the importance of defined roles and responsibilities for Trustees and Staff in collaborative processes.” The complete statement is at this link.

“The leaked emails portray Rubenstein as eager to arrange meetings between staff and her business partners in private funds, though these rarely produced concrete results,” Yu reports.

“The unfolding drama at the US’s largest state sovereign wealth fund underscores the governance challenge facing a six-person board comprised mainly of financial laymen. As fortunes have cooled for Alaska’s oil industry, the fund has come under pressure to generate greater returns to meet its obligations,” Yu reports. That might lead to riskier plays.

Since taking a seat on the board, Rubenstein has been focused in increasing the Permanent Fund’s exposure to alternative investments.

Allen Waldrop, director of private equity investments at APFC, said in a February email to colleagues that Rubenstein had arranged a meeting last November in London between her father and a junior analyst, Yu reports.

“This was not something we discussed in advance nor did we plan when we arranged the trip,” wrote Waldrop in the email. After the meeting, Marcus Frampton, the chief investment officer for the Alaska Permanent Fund, said in a separate email that Ellie Rubenstin told him the analyst should be fired because David Rubenstein had been “unimpressed” with her.

This reported action is denied by Chris Ullman, who is Ellie Rubenstein’s personal spokesman and who worked for her father for many years.

Yu reports that the Carlyle Group told him that it had arranged the meeting, which contradicts the version of events demonstrated in the leaked emails.

“In another email in January, Frampton told colleagues that he considered Ellie Rubenstein’s efforts to make connections to private credit managers a ‘conflict of interest,’ deeming it a ‘more serious topic and perhaps more uncomfortable to address.'” According to that email, Ellie Rubenstein had made “dozens upon dozens” of investment managers recommendations. The investment team took a pass on all of them, but among those referrals was TCW, which is a Carlyle-backed asset manager whose principles had invested in Ellie Rubenstein’s equity fund, “Manna Tree,” which invests in food quality and security.

The next quarterly meeting of the Board of Trustees for the Alaska Permanent Fund is May 29 in Utqiagvik. Alaskans may observe the meeting via WebEx. Meeting information can be found here.

APFC was created by the Alaska State Legislature in 1980 as an independent state entity to manage the oil-royalty assets of the Alaska Permanent Fund on behalf of current and future generations of Alaskans and other funds designated by law.

The Alaska Permanent Fund itself is now an $80 billion sovereign wealth fund first established in 1976 by Alaska voters to preserve and convert the State’s non-renewable mineral and oil wealth into a renewable financial resource for generations of Alaskans. Alaskans receive a dividend from the fund annually, through an appropriation by the Alaska State Legislature, which determines the amount that lawmakers think they can give to “shareholders,” after skimming from the statutorily established dividend formula to pay for state government employees.

Other news stories about this developing issue are linked below.

 page5image8818336 page5image8818128

NOAA starts review process to list Alaska Chinooks as threatened or endangered

NOAA Fisheries on Thursday announced a 90-day finding on a petition to list Gulf of Alaska Chinook salmon “or any evolutionarily significant unit that may exist in the petitioned area, as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act and to designate critical habitat concurrent with the listing.”

The listing proposal comes after pressure from the Wild Fish Conservancy in Seattle, which filed a petition in January calling for federal protection of Alaska Chinook.

“For decades, scientists have been sounding the alarm that Alaska’s Chinook are in dire trouble,” said Emma Helverson, executive director of the Wild Fish Conservancy. “Despite existing management plans and years of efforts by the state of Alaska, Chinook salmon continue to decline in abundance, size, diversity, and spatial structure throughout the state. Through this action, we are asking the federal government to undertake a formal status review and implement protections warranted under the Endangered Species Act, including designating critical habitat protections, to ensure the survival of these iconic fish.”

The proposed safeguards would increase protection for imperiled Chinook populations from the Canadian border north to the Aleutian Islands, including watersheds of Southeast, Cook Inlet, and Southcentral Alaska. In other words, most of the Alaska Chinook salmon.

NOAA said, “We find that the petition, viewed in the context of information readily available in our files, presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, we are commencing a review of the status of Gulf of Alaska Chinook salmon to determine whether listing under the ESA is warranted. To ensure that the status review is comprehensive, we are soliciting scientific and commercial information regarding this species from any interested party.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski released a statement in response:

“Alaska’s king salmon need help, but an ESA listing based on a flawed petition from a Seattle-based environmental activist group is the wrong way to go. Should NMFS determine that Alaska’s Chinook be listed after conducting their 12-month review, it would be nearly impossible for king salmon from the Gulf of Alaska to be caught for commercial and recreational purposes, and perhaps even subsistence. Even this action on the 90-day finding will have a dangerous chilling effect on investment in our fishing industry at a time when they can least afford it.”

“Incredibly, NOAA is moving ahead even after finding that the Wild Fish Conservancy’s petition ‘contained numerous factual errors, omissions, incomplete references, and unsupported assertions and conclusions.’ As we fight to save our salmon and salmon fisheries alike, we need to rely on the best available science, instead of half-baked petitions intended to get conservation groups a foot in the door to attack our fisheries and resource development.”

In response to a petition to list Gulf of Alaska Chinook salmon as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, NOAA Fisheries has found that listing may be warranted. We filed a positive 90-day finding in the Federal Register, which is a threshold determination based mainly on the contents of the petition itself. It triggers a more in-depth review to determine whether listing is warranted.

The full statement from NOAA reads:

On January 11, 2024, we received a petition from the Wild Fish Conservancy to delineate and list one or more evolutionarily significant units of Chinook salmon in southern Alaska as threatened or endangered. It also requested that we designate critical habitat concurrently with the listing.

According to the Conservancy, the petition “encompasses all Chinook populations that enter the marine environment of the Gulf of Alaska.” It “includes all populations on the southern side of the Aleutian Peninsula, Cook Inlet, and the coast of Alaska south of Cook Inlet to the southern end of the Alaska/British Columbia border.”

We interpret the request as asking us to consider populations of Chinook salmon on:

  • Southern side of the Alaska Peninsula, including Kodiak Island, Cook Inlet, Prince William Sound
  • Gulf of Alaska coastline
  • Inside waters of Southeast Alaska to the United States/Canada border

The Endangered Species Act requires the Secretary of Commerce make a finding within 90 days on whether a petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating the petitioned action may be warranted.

The 90-Day Finding

To make a 90-day finding on a petition to list a species, we evaluate whether it presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating the species may be either threatened or endangered. At this stage, we do not conduct additional research, and we do not solicit information from outside parties to help us evaluate the petition.

We have reviewed the petition, the literature cited in the petition, and other literature and information available in our files prior to receipt of the petition. We found that the information present in the petition contained numerous factual errors, omissions, incomplete references, and unsupported assertions and conclusions. Still, we considered missed escapement goals in recent years for many stocks in the petitioned area, and evidence of decreasing size and age at maturity. We concluded that the petition contained enough information for a reasonable person to conclude that the petitioned action may be warranted.

With the positive 90-day finding, we are commencing a review of the status of Gulf of Alaska Chinook salmon to determine whether listing is warranted. We will convene a status review team of federal scientists to begin an in-depth review of the species’ current status and extinction risk. We will include input from non-federal experts by inviting them to participate as guest consultants to the team as part of a broad-based gathering of information.

“The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has tremendous expertise in salmon biology and management in Alaska,” said NOAA Fisheries Alaska Regional Administrator Jon Kurland. “In particular, we will seek technical assistance from our state partners on Chinook biology, genetics, and relevant risk factors.”

The status review team will collect and analyze the best available scientific and commercial information on the species to evaluate its current status and extinction risk, including:

  • Biology
  • Ecology
  • Abundance and population trends
  • Traditional Knowledge
  • Threats to the species 

The team will develop a status review report that will undergo peer review, and peer reviewer comments will be made publicly available.

Once the status review is complete, we must publish a finding as to whether the petitioned action is warranted within 12 months of receipt of the petition. The finding at the 12-month stage is based on a more thorough review of the available information; a positive 90-day finding does not prejudge the outcome of the status review.

We are dedicating personnel and resources towards a timely completion. We expect significant challenges given the vast geographical extent of the petitioned area. There is also potential for numerous distinct populations within that area that will each require a separate analysis of its status and trends. 

After completing the status review and considering ongoing conservation efforts, we will determine whether a listing is warranted and publish the finding in the Federal Register

If we determine that a listing of one or more evolutionarily significant units is warranted, we will seek public comments on the proposed listing. We will host public hearings and engage with Tribes to provide multiple opportunities for public engagement and input to inform our final listing decision.

How to Comment

To ensure that our status review is informed by the best available scientific and commercial data, we are opening a 60-day public comment period to solicit information on Gulf of Alaska Chinook salmon. Submit relevant data and information, identified by “Gulf of Alaska Chinook salmon petition” or by the docket number, NOAA-NMFS-2024-0042, by one of the following methods: 

  • Electronic submissions: via the Federal eRulemaking Portal
  • Mail to: Anne Marie Eich, Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Resources Division, Alaska Region NOAA Fisheries. Attn. Susan Meyer, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802

Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2024. 

NOAA Fisheries will post all information received on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information that is provided.

While Anchorage tilts left, Portland voters bounce the Rose City’s soft-on-crime district attorney

Anchorage voters have just elected a leftist for mayor, with the unofficial win of Suzanne LaFrance over Mayor Dave Bronson. LaFrance was the pick of the Alaska Democratic Party and labor unions; Bronson is a Republican.

But to the south of Alaska, in Multnomah County, Oregon, which has been ruled by Democrats for years, soft-on-crime District Attorney Mike Schmidt just lost his re-election bid this week against his own Deputy District Attorney Nathan Vasquez, who has worked in the office for more than 25 years and promised voters he would crack down on the county’s infamous mayhem.

With more than than 167,800 votes counted, Vasquez was ahead with 53.5% and Schmidt lagged at 46%. Schmidt conceded on Wednesday evening.

“While we do not always see eye to eye, I am committed to a smooth transition,” he said at a campaign thank-you event. “Thank you to this amazing community for the support they have shown for this campaign. And thank you for the opportunity to serve these past four years. It is an honor I will cherish for a lifetime.”

The defeat was heard around the country as a warning signal to Democrats that the far left wing of the party is the road to not only urban decay but political ruin. Schmidt was singled out by former President Donald Trump as a radical leftist during speeches in 2020, the year that Schmidt took office. Schmidt used that as a badge of honor in a campaign ad, which you can view here:

Not that Portland is going all-in for Donald Trump. Vasquez would still seem liberal to many Americans, but is a moderate in Portland.

Vasquez served as a prosecutor at the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office for nearly 25 years. Most of his career has been dedicated to ‘person crimes’, working directly with victims of violent crimes and their families, he said.

In 2018, Vasquez took over the “Neighborhood Unit,” which focused on community engagement, and pioneered district attorney’s Strategic Prosecution Unit – a model that uses objective data to inform the decisions and actions of prosecutors and law enforcement, focusing on root causes of criminal behavior and creative solutions to prevent recidivism.

His unit has led some of the most successful prison diversion programs and created the “High Volume System User” model to identify and interrupt some of the most prolific repeat offenders in Multnomah County, his campaign website says.

Vasquez received his undergraduate degree from UC Davis, and later went on to earn his Juris Doctorate at Lewis and Clark Northwestern School of Law, with a specialization in Environmental Law. 

He told Oregon Pubic Broadcasting that he’s going to work to make the streets of Portland safer, but that it will not happen overnight.

His task is Herculean: Portland shootings and homicides increased by 300% between 2019 and 2022; in 2022, there were 1,306 homicides, nearly twice as many as San Francisco, which has 25% more population than Portland. Robberies in Portland rose 50% in 2022.

“Multnomah County District Attorney Mike Schmidt’s tenure as Portland’s chief prosecutor has proved controversial since his term began in May 2020—coincidentally, the very month when the anarchist riots kicked off. Elected on a reformist platform, he declined to file charges against most of those arrested for rioting, even when their crimes included burglary and the unlawful use of a weapon. He routinely releases violent criminals within days of their arrest and declines to file charges against violent people if they’re mentally ill,” according to City Journal, in an analysis by Michael Totten titled, “Portland Sobers Up.”

Memorial Day ceremonies this weekend: Fort Richardson Cemetery, motorcycle ride to memorial

The Fort Richardson National Cemetery will hold a Memorial Day ceremony on May 27 at noon to honor our nation’s fallen heroes. The event, open to the public, will begin with ceremonial music starting at 11:30 a.m. and concluding at 1 p.m.

The keynote speaker for the ceremony will be Michelle Kwok, the executive director for the National Cemetery Administration’s Pacific District. Her speech is anticipated to be a highlight of the ceremony, offering reflections on the sacrifices made by service members and the significance of Memorial Day.

To ensure smooth access for attendees, the right-hand lane of the Fort Richardson Gate will be dedicated to controlled, direct access to and from the cemetery. Between 10 a.m. and 12:15 p.m., visitors can enter through this lane without stopping at the Richardson Visitor Control Center to obtain a JBER visitor pass. Attendees will be directed along a specified route to the cemetery parking areas.

Those arriving before 10 a.m. or after 12:15 p.m. will need to follow the usual procedure of obtaining a visitor pass at the Richardson Visitor Control Center.

After the ceremony, guests will exit the installation via the same route they entered.

For those seeking access to the cemetery outside the designated hours on May 27, U.S. citizens aged 16 or older should be prepared for criminal background checks as part of the visitor pass process. Non-U.S. citizens must have a Department of Defense-affiliated sponsor and must request access to JBER four weeks in advance to complete additional screening.

It is important to note that the special direct-access process on May 27 is strictly for attending the Memorial Day ceremony at the Fort Richardson National Cemetery. Attendees are reminded to stay within the designated areas.

Alaska Veterans Memorial, Mile 147.1 Parks Highway

Join motorcyclists as they pay tribute to fallen comrades in arms with a ceremony at the Alaska Veterans Memorial on Sunday, May 26.

Motorcycles will gather at Mary’s McKinley View Lodge, mile 132.5. They will depart in formation at 12:30 p.m. and ride to the Alaska Veteran’s Memorial (147.1, Parks Highway). At 1 p.m. there will be a ceremony honoring the men and women that have paid the ultimate price in service to our country and to each other. Please meet at the memorial if you are not riding in the formation.

Anchorage

Barbecue at American Legion in Anchorage: Veterans and active-duty military members plus a guest are invited to attend a free appreciation barbecue at American Legion Jack Henry Post 1, 840 W Fireweed Lane on May 27, 12:30 – 3 p.m. This event is open to any veteran, you do not need to be a member of the American Legion or Nuvision Alaska, the sponsor, to attend but registration is required. Website here.

  • Free BBQ lunch catered by Peppercini’s
  • Live Music from Nothin’ but Trouble
  • Spending time with fellow veterans
  • A special Memorial Day Ceremony presented by the American Legion and Nuvision

Matanuska-Susitna Borough

Homer-Ninilchik

On Memorial Day, the  Virl “Pa” Haga VFW Post 10221 VFW will hold services at three local cemeteries for fallen service members. The day starts at the Homer Cemetery at 10 a.m., moves to the Anchor Point Cemetery at noon, and then the and at the Ninilchik Cemetery at 2 p.m.

Kenai

City of Kenai and American Legion Post 20 honor our fallen service members on Monday. Activities begin at 11 a.m. at the Kenai City Cemetery, 840 First Avenue in Kenai and continue at 1 p.m. at the Leif Hanson Memorial Park, 10959 Kenai Spur Highway in Kenai.

Fairbanks

There are two significant Memorial Day events in the Fairbanks community on Monday, according to Fort Wainwright. The first is a series of ceremonies hosted by the VFW at local memorial sites and cemetaries, with the first of five starting at 10 a.m. at Veterans Memorial Park. The other event is a ceremony at Pioneer Park at noon that will honor Fort Wainwright soldiers SPC Jeremy Evans and SPC Joshua Snowden. All events are free and open to the public.

Delta Junction – Fort Greely

The Delta Junction Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 10450 and American Legion Post 22 are hosting the annual Memorial Day Ceremony Monday at Rest Haven Cemetery, beginning at Noon.

Speakers include U.S. Army Garrison Fort Greely Commander Lt. Col. Keith Marshall, 49th Missile Defense Battalion Commander Lt. Col. Jorge Lorenzana, and Grand Master of Prince Hall Masons, Abdullah Mustapha-Thomas.

Help complete this listing

Some communities have not publicized their ceremonies widely; if you know of one, please put the information in the comment section below. Thanks.

Attorney General Treg Taylor joins multi-state lawsuit against Biden’s new regs on heavy-duty trucks

Electric trucks on Alaska’s Haul Road? They’d be as useful as an ejection seat on a helicopter.

Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor has joined a coalition of states in filing yet another lawsuit against the Biden Administration for imposing unreasonable regulations on heavy-duty vehicles. The lawsuit, led by Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers, was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The states charge that the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule imposing stringent tailpipe emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles effectively forces manufacturers to produce more electric trucks and fewer internal-combustion trucks.

Right now, electric trucks—and the infrastructure needed to support them—are virtually nonexistent. They also have shorter ranges and require longer stops.

In Alaska’s long-haul uses, including the remote Dalton Highway to Deadhorse, an electric truck would add an increased element of danger to the driver.

The Biden rule would require manufacturers to produce fewer vehicles that utilize reliable internal-combustion technology. 

A separate coalition of 17 states and the Nebraska Trucking Association filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California that seeks to block a package of regulations targeting trucking fleet owners and operators.

The lawsuit against California challenges a suite of California regulations called Advanced Clean Fleets that require certain trucking fleet owners and operators to retire internal-combustion trucks and transition to more expensive and less efficient electric trucks. The rule applies to fleets that are headquartered outside of California if they operate within California. Given California’s large population and access to ports for international trade, this regulation will have significant nationwide effects on the supply chain. 

The lawsuits argue the Biden Administration and California regulators exceeded their constitutional and statutory authority in forcing the entire country to transition to electric trucks.

In addition to their legal flaws, both regulations defy the reality that electric trucks are inefficient and costly and will harm citizens by increasing the costs of interstate transportation, raising prices for goods, and burdening the electric power grid, Hilgers said.

Hilgers recently won a lawsuit that stopped the Biden Administration from forcing States to reduce on-road C02 emissions, and he won an early victory in a lawsuit challenging the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rule requiring businesses to make climate change disclosures.

Alaska’s AG Taylor and the following states joined the lawsuit against the Biden Administration: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.