Opponents of CA's newly implemented childhood vax law are suing in federal court - we hear from both sides; the state senate is considering a bill aimed at companies boycotting Israel over its policies related to Palestinians - does it infringe on freedom of speech? Automakers worry a fatal Tesla autopilot crash could have a chilling effect on the driverless car industry; Plus, how classic summer BBQ is evolving for vegetarians, the gluten-free, and others on restricted diets.
California makes vaccines mandatory for schoolchildren — which side are you on?
As California’s new law requiring almost all children entering day care, kindergarten or 7th grade to be vaccinated against various diseases took effect Friday, opponents filed a federal lawsuit seeking to have the law overturned.
The suit, filed by six parents and four advocacy groups in U.S. District Court in San Diego, argues that the law violates the California Constitution’s guarantee of a public education for all children. It also claims the law violates the rights to, among other things, equal protection and due process guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
The law "has made second-class citizens out of children who for very compelling reasons are not vaccinated according to the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] schedule," said plaintiffs’ attorney Robert Moxley.
Interview highlights
Interview highlights with AirTalk callers and guests Robert Moxley, a Wyoming-based attorney representing plaintiffs in a lawsuit against California over SB 277, and Michelle Mello, professor of law at Stanford Law School.
What are the prospects of this lawsuit?
Michelle Mello: Legally, the footing is very fragile. The complaint has a long laundry list of claims. ... Unfortunately, there’s very little precedential reason to think that any of these will find footing in the court.
Do you think the U.S. Constitution has bearing here?
Mello: There is, in a sense. The due process clause of the 5th and 14th amendments, which is one of the bases on which this lawsuit is being brought, asks courts to balance interests whenever somebody’s liberty is being limited. So the state’s interest is being balanced against the interest of the burdened individuals. Here the state’s interest is in public health generally. ... And when the courts have done that in the case of vaccination mandates, the decision has routinely been in favor of the schools.
How are children who are not vaccinated not a risk to other kids? If an unvaccinated child gets measles, doesn’t that increase the likelihood of the disease spreading in a school?
Robert Moxley: The whole idea of having 97 percent vaccination, which is what California already has, is that so-called “herd immunity” will prevent the spread [of disease]. It’s hypothetical and it’s fear-mongering [to require vaccinations]. The chance of anything like that actually happening with the rates of vaccination that California has already achieved are infinitesimally small.
Quiana in the West Adams district has two sons under the age of 6 and said she won’t vaccinate her children, even if it means she has to move to another state.
Quiana: Home schooling is an option. It’s not something I really want to do. I’ve been at home with my sons since my first son was born, and I’m looking to get back into the workforce. But if I have to, I will stay home. Vaccination is not an option for me, and if I don’t want to do the homeschooling thing, my husband and I are completely willing to move.
Stephanie in Manhattan Beach said she hasn’t decided whether she will vaccinate her son.
Stephanie: The frustrating thing is not vaccinating him for something like chicken pox, which I don’t see as a public health risk, and then having to keep him home from school. So far, we’ve kept him out of preschool.
Guests:
Robert Moxley, Wyoming-based attorney representing plaintiffs in lawsuit against CA over SB 277
Michelle Mello, Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and Professor of Health Research and Policy at Stanford University School of Medicine
Are boycotts against Israel anti-Semitism or free speech?
A California state bill that would punish companies participating in the boycott, divestment, and sanction (BDS) movement against Israel recently passed the California state Senate Judiciary Committee.
The controversial movement calls on individuals and companies to boycott Israel until it ends occupying “all Arab lands.” Rather than punish boycotts directly, AB 2844 targets “violations of existing anti-discrimination laws that take place under the pretext of a boycott or other ‘policy’ aimed at ‘any sovereign nation or people recognized by the government of the United States, including, but not limited to, the nation and people of Israel,’" according to a Los Angeles Times editorial. It also requires those seeking state government contracts to certify that they haven't engaged in discrimination through such a policy.
There is disagreement about the the strength of the current bill, as language directly referencing BDS has been removed in favor of more general assertions that reference the existing Unruh Civil Rights Act and California Fair Employment and Housing Act.
This has not mitigated the controversy surrounding the legislation.
Proponents of the bill seek to portray the BDS movement as anti-Semitic. Dillon Hosier, senior political adviser for the nonprofit advocacy organization Israeli-American Nexus, said that it has created an insidious anti-Jewish environment across California.
“Californians are being targeted who have zero connection to the government of Israel,” Hosier said. “What BDS has become is not ‘boycott, divestment and sanctions,’ [but rather] ‘bigotry, discrimination and anti-Semitism.’”
Opponents of the legislation argue the bill violates the First Amendment.
Estee Chandler is a founding member of the Los Angeles Chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace, an organization that seeks to end Israel’s presence in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. She finds the California legislature’s actions against BDS “deeply troubling," saying she sees what the Legislature is doing as punishing political speech.
“From the start, AB 2844 was introduced to single out, stigmatize and suppress the political speech of Californians who criticized ... Israeli and U.S. policies,” Chandler said. “Denying state business to an otherwise qualified contractor based solely on their views about Israel and their participation in a legal boycott … goes beyond government exercising its speech, and it impedes on our constitutional rights.”
AB 2844 passed an initial vote in the Assembly, and last week it passed through the Senate Judiciary Committee. Next, it heads to a vote in the Appropriations Committee in early August.
Guests:
Dillon Hosier, national director of state governmental affairs for the Israeli-American Council, that advocates on behalf of the pro-Israel and Israeli-American communities
Estee Chandler, founding member of the Los Angeles Chapter for Jewish Voice for Peace, a national organization that seeks an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem
Congressional leaders promise new vote on Zika funding deadlock
An emergency funding bill dedicated to combating the Zika virus is expected to come up for another contentious vote in Congress this week.
Republicans and Democrats are quarreling with amendments to the bill, including a Republican amendment that would exclude Planned Parenthood from receiving any allocations. Democrats argue that Planned Parenthood's contraceptive services are critical in preventing the spread of the virus through sex and with helping women avoid pregnancy as is advised on an ad hoc basis as mosquito vectors spread.
As reported by "The Hill," Republicans argue Planned Parenthood can still be reimbursed through Medicaid, and that the Zika bill provides funding for alternatives like community health centers. AirTalk will discuss and debate the politics of this funding bill.
Guests:
Jamila Taylor, Senior Fellow specializing in women’s health policy at the Center for American Progress - a left-leaning think tank
Paris Dennard, Republican political analyst and former staffer for President George W. Bush and the Republican National Committee
Automakers worry Tesla autopilot crash could have chilling effect on driverless car industry
Joshua Brown was killed when his Tesla Model S electric sedan crashed into a tractor-trailer.
It’s posited that the self-driving feature of Brown’s Tesla didn’t detect the white side of the tractor-trailer and therefore did not apply brakes, but many questions remain about what went wrong.
Tesla released the “Autopilot” software update last year for a “public beta phase” to help improve the technology.
Without more evidence about what happened, there is concern that the incident could have a chilling effect on development within the autonomous driving industry. And the story has reignited a discussion in auto circles about what the best way is to proceed forward.
Guests:
Susan Carpenter, Co-host for KPCC’s The Ride, and the former car critic for the Los Angeles Times and Orange County Register; she tweets from
Mary Cummings, director of Duke University’s Humans and Autonomy Lab. She testified in front of the Senate Commerce Committee in March about the state of self-driving cars.
When dietary downers ruin perfectly good summer cookouts
Vegan. Gluten-free. Cleanse. Hosts dread these words.
Ever-changing dietary trends can make it nearly impossible to please everyone when throwing a get-together. And with summer in full swing, a simple barbecue can turn into a nightmare between sending out a group text and receiving a slew of replies with sentences that harbor the word “vegetarian” or “allergic.”
But have food restrictions escalated over the years? With the low-carb, no meat, kale-obsessed Los Angeles culture, food trends can be hard to keep up with, especially if you’re an omnivore. And let’s be real, what’s the fun of a wine and cheese party (the simplest of all gatherings) when neither will work for your finicky work buddy?
Do dietary restrictions put a damper on your get-togethers? How do you host with so many changing guest food guidelines? When attending a gathering, how do you approach eating within your own dietary restrictions?
This segment was inspired by Robin Rauzi's Op-Ed piece in the Los Angeles Times. Read the full story here: "How vegetarians, gluten-frees, grain-frees and other L.A. food tribes ruined my BBQ tradition."