Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

North Carolina Moves to Repeal HB2…Sort of

A North Carolina Senate committee moved toward repealing the infamous bathroom bill, HB2, today. The controversial bill has led to a lot of negative publicity and backlash against the state. Now politicians say they’ve reached a compromise: they want to repeal the law, but also prohibit any local municipalities from passing anti-discrimination laws for three full years. LGBTQ groups are not happy with this development “The initiative is not a repeal. It’s doubling down on the discrimination that HB2 exacts–it’s HB2.0,” said Chris Sgro, executive director of Equality NC. “It doesn’t do anything to better the lives of LGBT North Carolinians.”

Don’t let political spin fool you. N.C. lawmakers are NOT voting to “repeal” HB2. They’re voting to make protecting LGBTQ people illegal.

— Raymond Braun (@raymondbraun) March 30, 2017

The bill is set for a vote this afternoon, and if it passes, North Carolina would still be one of a few states in the U.S. where it is actually “illegal for cities to protect the rights of their residents,” as Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, put it. The timing of this vote isn’t a coincidence–the NCAA said that the state had until today to address this issue, or else the organization would continue to avoid holding events in the state.

BOYCOTTS WORK.

North Carolina was poised to lose BILLIONS & BILLIONS of dollars over this. They buckled under that economic pressure. https://t.co/WvdNcyhUSk

— Shaun King (@ShaunKing) March 30, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: March 30, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

President-elect Donald Trump is taking shots at the intelligence community and the “mainstream media,” yet again, after BuzzFeed News published a 35-page report Tuesday, containing unverified and salacious allegations about Trump’s ties to the Russian government.

The dossier in question, which was said to have been compiled by a former British intelligence officer hired by Trump’s political opponents, has reportedly been circulating among some lawmakers, journalists, and intelligence officials for months.

CNN reported Tuesday that President Barack Obama and President-elect Trump received a two-page synopsis of the opposition research last week, warning of Russia’s efforts to compromise Trump.

Buzzfeed was unable to confirm the document’s contents, but decided to publish it in full anyways “so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government.”

The collection of memos allege that Russia has been “cultivating, supporting, and assisting” Trump for at least five years. It also claims that in 2013 Trump employed a number of prostitutes to perform a perverse “golden shower” display in front of him, on the same bed the Obamas slept in at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Moscow, and that the Russian intelligence agency FSB reportedly recorded the encounter.

Critics have debated the ethics of whether or not Buzzfeed was in the right to have published the secret dossier in full, without verifying its contents. Ben Smith, Buzzfeed’s Editor-in-Chief, defended the publication’s decision, offering this explanation:

Here’s the note I sent to @buzzfeednews staff this evening pic.twitter.com/OcAloWzVzb

— Ben Smith (@BuzzFeedBen) January 11, 2017

Trump responded to the article on Twitter, with his characteristic capitalized ferocity.

FAKE NEWS – A TOTAL POLITICAL WITCH HUNT!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2017

He later added:

Russia just said the unverified report paid for by political opponents is “A COMPLETE AND TOTAL FABRICATION, UTTER NONSENSE.” Very unfair!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2017

Russia has never tried to use leverage over me. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA – NO DEALS, NO LOANS, NO NOTHING!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2017

I win an election easily, a great “movement” is verified, and crooked opponents try to belittle our victory with FAKE NEWS. A sorry state!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2017

Intelligence agencies should never have allowed this fake news to “leak” into the public. One last shot at me.Are we living in Nazi Germany?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 11, 2017

During Trump’s first press conference as president-elect Wednesday morning, he categorically denied the document’s validity, calling it “fake news” and “phony stuff.” Trump also denied allegations that he watched a “golden shower” display at the Russian Ritz Carlton, claiming “I’m very much a germaphobe. Believe me.”

Trump did admit, however, for the first time, that Russia was behind the DNC hack. “I think it was Russia,” said Trump, before backpedaling a few minutes later to say that perhaps it was another country.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Donald Trump Rebukes Buzzfeed Report, Russian Ties appeared first on Law Street.

If you keep up with the latest exercise trends at all, you’ve certainly heard of SoulCycle. It’s a New York based fitness company that operates in many major cities and the classes are based on indoor cycling or “spinning.” The company promises “at SoulCycle we believe that fitness can be joyful. We climb, we jog, we sprint, we dance, we set our intention, and we break through boundaries. The best part? We do it together, as a community.” But one woman doesn’t appear to feel particularly welcomed by that community–a Los Angeles woman Carmen Farias is suing the exercise company after she dislocated her ankle during a 2014 class.

Farias claims that she went to the class in July of 2014, as part of a free promotion from her workplace. But she had never been to a spin class before, and alleges that she was not given proper training. She also claims that she didn’t sign the waiver that SoulCycle provides, which includes some basic bike riding instructions.

According to Farias, she had a hard time keeping up with the rather intense exercise class. She then claims that her instructor, Angela Davis, mocked her and told her that “we don’t take breaks.” Farias kept peddling, and eventually lost control and fell off the exercise bike. According to Buzzfeed News, the complaint reads:

Carmen was in serious peril. With the music blaring and in the shadowy darkness, Carmen was isolated on her spinning cycle. Her feet were locked to the pedals and the pedals just kept turning. Fatigue and disorientation overcame Carmen and she fell to her right and off of the saddle of the spinning cycle.

Her complaint alleges that she was “catastrophically injured” at the class. It also posits that her fall and subsequent injury were as a result of the negligence of both SoulCycle and her instructor. SoulCycle doesn’t appear to have returned requests for a comment to other news outlets, but it’s doubtful that this incident will slow the number of celebrities who frequent the exercise establishments.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Woman Sues After Falling off SoulCycle Bike appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to the RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through the top five controversial and crazy stories in the world of law and policy each day. So who is ranting and who is raving today? Check it out below:

Trump Pisses Off Buzzfeed, You’ll Never Guess What Happens Next

Online news, quiz, and listicle giant Buzzfeed is pulling out of a massive $1.3 million advertising deal with the Republican National Committee to protest Donald Trump’s rhetoric. Buzzfeed’s CEO, Jonah Peretti stated:

Earlier today, BuzzFeed informed the RNC that we would not accept Trump for President ads and that we would be terminating our agreement with them. The Trump campaign is directly opposed to the freedoms of our employees in the United States and around the world and in some cases, such as his proposed ban on international travel for Muslims, would make it impossible for our employees to do their jobs.

Peretti also said:

However, in some cases we must make business exceptions: we don’t run cigarette ads because they are hazardous to our health, and we won’t accept Trump ads for the exact same reason.

Good for you, Buzzfeed!

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: June 6, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Fashion is meant to be a form of self expression, but if you’re currently a teenage girl in high school that expression might be seriously limited due to strict dress code restrictions. Of course making sure there are no visible butt cracks, nipples, or genitals is a must for school administrators, but when bare shoulders, backs, and thighs are considered just as taboo there’s a serious problem. In the past week alone I’ve read two stories about obscene dress code restrictions and sexist double standards in both the New York Times and Buzzfeed that call for some rant worthy commentary.

Now about 100 years ago it was positively scandalous for a woman to show a bare ankle in public, but it’s not the Victorian era anymore. Unlike the oppressed women back then, we have the right to vote, serve in the military, obtain an education, and take birth control, just for starters. So you’d think that with all of these advancements in women’s rights, women would have the right to decide for themselves what to wear, right? Wrong.

The New York Times wrote a very interesting piece discussing the issue after speaking with high schools girls who were told by administrators that the expensive dresses they’d purchased for prom weren’t acceptable and either needed to be altered or they wouldn’t be permitted to attend. In their piece Kristin Hussey and Marc Santora write:

Girls have been told to cover up shoulders, knees and backs. They have been reprimanded for partially exposed stomachs and thighs and excessive cleavage. They have been ordered to wear jackets, ordered to go home and suspended.

For one girl in the article, that meant a dress and alterations that cost $400 on top of the $90 prom ticket. Some schools have even begun to require girls to take pictures of their gowns and submit them to administrators for approval before they’re even able to buy a ticket to the dance. When asked why the rules are so strict, one superintendent they spoke with said “We want our young ladies to be dressed beautifully; we want them to be dressed with class and dignity. But we are going to draw the line relative to attire that would be deemed overexposing oneself.”

This idea that schools need to protect girls from overexposing themselves isn’t restricted to just the U.S. Take 17-year-old Canadian teen Laura Wiggins, for example. Laura looked in her closet one morning and decided she wanted to wear a full-length halter dress to her high school in New Brunswick. Her legs weren’t showing. Her belly button wasn’t hanging out. Her breasts weren’t on display. The ensemble did, however, showcase her bare arms and a semi-bare back.

A Canadian Teen Wrote The Best Rebuttal After Getting Detention For Wearing A Halter Dress http://t.co/hS4WHTHsf0 pic.twitter.com/hfZSXjghbB

— BuzzFeed Canada (@BuzzFeedCanada) May 13, 2015

That was apparently enough for Laura to receive a detention for being a “sexual distraction” to her male classmates, because if there’s anything that gets a teenage boy all hot and bothered, it’s a back. Isn’t that what Justin Timberlake meant when he said he was “bringing sexy back?”

But it’s the way that Laura dealt with the situation that is truly amazing. Instead of taking the detention quietly, she chose to write a letter to her school’s vice principal and it was very eloquent, impressive, and inspiring. I won’t quote the whole badass letter, but here are two passages that particularly stood out to me:

In today’s society, a woman’s body is constantly discriminated against and hypersexualized to the point where we can no longer wear the clothing that we feel comfortable in without the accusation and/or assumption that we are being provocative.[…]

Then she continues with,

So no, Mr. Sturgeon, I will not search for something to cover up my back and shoulders because I am not showing them off with the intention to gain positive sexual feedback from the teenage boys in my school. I am especially not showing them to receive any comments, positive or negative, from anybody else besides myself because the only person who can make any sort of judgment on my body and the fabrics I place on it is me.

So instead of focusing on what causes boys to be “distracted” my advice to schools would be to try teaching them self control. These young men will need that in the real world, especially with all these empowered girls walking around in yoga pants everywhere.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Are Schools Going Too Far with These Dress Code Rules? appeared first on Law Street.

I’ve never been the biggest fan of hashtags. Cognitively, I guess I understand their use, but to be honest I’ve always thought of them as the annoying little sibling of captions; they give you some information about what you’re looking at but they’re too small to do much more. They help you find other similar posts or tweets, but I’m too lazy to really use that feature.

But this year, hashtags pleasantly surprised me. Maybe I’m just paying more attention, or maybe they’re getting more sophisticated, but over the course of 2013 hashtags were used to start some legitimately interesting sociopolitical discussions.

A few weeks ago, the GOP tweeted:

Today we remember Rosa Parks’ bold stand and her role in ending racism. pic.twitter.com/uxIj1QmtkU

— RNC (@GOP) December 1, 2013

The entire internet proceeded to make fun of this blithely ignorant tweet, myself included. But out of that internet backlash emerged something really interesting.

How I imagine people type when there’s new material to be mocked on the internet.

The hashtag #RacismEndedWhen was born. And everyone weighed in. Some responses were funny, some were angry, and some were just silly, but for the most part, they were thought-provoking.This wasn’t a hashtag dedicated to showing off a fun brunch entree, or explaining that the photo you just posted had #nofilter. It was genuine discourse, albeit through a relatively shallow medium.

#RacismEndedWhen doesn’t stand alone. In August of this year, #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen started trending after a user named Mikki Kendall used it to explain how she believes minority women have a history of exclusion in the feminist movement. Again, it sparked valuable debate and discussion.

Earlier this week, Suey Park launched the hashtag #NotYourAsianSidekick to discuss Asian-American stereotypes and feminism. And as with the other discussion-based hashtags, people chimed in. Park explained her motivation for starting the discussion to Buzzfeed, “My dear friends and I have had growing critiques of how patriarchy in Asian American spaces hurts, while white feminism leaves much to be desired, so we created this space instead. We talked about queerness, disability, immigration, multiracial/biracial issues, compulsory coalitions, challenging anti-blackness, mental health, body image, and all things feminism. It was all of the things we were told to never talk about.”

Complacency is easy. It’s easy not to have the difficult discussion. Social media has often been lauded as a lighter part of the internet — I don’t go on Facebook when I’m looking to expand my horizons or read a serious news article. I go on Facebook when I want to see funny pictures or observations about my friends’ lives.

That being said, I’m happy about this new use of hashtags. I’m happy that we’re having those difficult discussions. As a generation, we spend a lot of time online. It’s estimated that we each spend five hours a day looking at a laptop, TV, or smartphone.

The kinds of discussions that we’re now having within the confines of these hashtags are the kind of discussions that used to take place with a big group of friends at bar, or around a dinner table, or maybe in a classroom. But one of the benefits of our constant connectivity is that these conversations can happen a much larger level. We are no longer limited to our friends, families, and people who are like us, and I can’t help but think that’s a pretty great thing.

Moreover, as Park hoped, these hashtags and resulting discussions can help connect people. They can create safe spaces that allow people who thought they were alone in a problem, feeling, or grievance to connect with others who are experiencing something similar.

So, thought-provoking hashtags, I hope you continue into 2014. People who utilized those hashtags in 2013, keep going. Keep pushing the envelope. Keep using social media to engage in difficult conversations. Keep creating new forums to discuss the tough stuff. As technology changes the way politics, society, law, and people interact, this is a pretty cool new way to talk about it.

Here’s to you.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Michael Coghlan via Wikipedia]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post #Cheers to the Hashtag appeared first on Law Street.