OurTupelo

GULFPORT – The state’s largest tourism bureau is once again caught in the crosshairs of infighting by members of the Harrison County Board of Supervisors. 

Coastal Mississippi, a taxpayer-funded tourism bureau, is tasked with marketing the entire Gulf Coast as a destination for Jackson, Hancock and Harrison Counties. But for the second time since September, Harrison County supervisors are at the center of strife that could affect the tourism agency’s ability to do business.

The tourism commission – which oversees the bureau’s spending – is without a clear president as Harrison County leadership spars publicly over the position’s appointment. The disagreement has brought forth allegations of vote-stacking and doing favors for friends from one side and claims of ignoring the letter of legislation from the other. 

The latest wave of drama comes as Coastal Mississippi is preparing to receive more than $6 million in American Rescue Plan Act funds allocated by the state. 

“Coastal Mississippi is vital to tourism marketing and not just for the three coastal counties,” said Sen. Scott DeLano, R-Biloxi, who has long supported the three coastal counties working together.

“It’s extremely important for the entire state of Mississippi to understand that Coastal Mississippi represents a large amount of tourism spending in our state and the importance of having stability on that board and for it to work together in a collaborative manner.” 

But stability hasn’t lasted more than a few months at a time. 

Within recent weeks, four staffers at Coastal Mississippi’s office resigned. In September, Coastal Mississippi’s director of over three years abruptly left. In October, Mississippi Today reported Coastal Mississippi could cease to exist, as local business and casino leaders shared concerns Harrison County might pull out of the three-county agreement that allows the counties to pool resources to market the region. 

Those same leaders credit then-president of the tourism commission, Brooke Shoultz, for seeing county leaders through the turmoil that took place last fall and welcoming new Coastal Mississippi executive director Judy Young. 

“We unanimously support the work that Brooke has done to really frankly bring us from the brink of collapse to a much more stable place,” Jonathan Jones, the general manager of Harrah’s Gulf Coast, said during a Harrison County Supervisor meeting in Gulfport on Tuesday. 

Shoultz’s term ended July 1. She said she intended to continue with her role. The tourism commissioners endorsed her reappointment unanimously – with two absentees – during a Coastal Mississippi meeting on May 26. But Harrison County’s board has the ultimate authority of who gets appointed.

Last month, Harrison County Supervisor Connie Rockco came to the board saying Shoultz didn’t want to be reappointed. Rockco motioned to appoint a new president with her pick: Thomas Sherman, a Biloxi-based alcohol distributor. The board voted 3-2 to approve Sherman . 

At Tuesday’s meeting in Gulfport, Shoultz came before the supervisors asking to be reappointed. She had the public backing of seven Gulf Coast casino operators and the Gulf Coast Business Council’s executive committee – all of whom signed letters in support of her leadership.

Shoultz said past comments about not wanting to do another term as president were months old and from a time when turmoil was high and she was traveling to care for her ailing mother.

“And then we hired Judy Young, who has been an exceptional executive director and professional,” Shoultz said at the supervisor meeting held in Gulfport. “Things changed. And it became a nice place to be. We were making some true reforms and really going in the right direction, getting the board to be more of an oversight board instead of day-to-day management.” 

Rockco contended that despite the tourism commission vote, Shoultz didn’t properly inform supervisors she wished to be reinstated and that the new appointment should stand. 

Harrison County Supervisor Rebecca Powers said she was blindsided by Rockco’s call to appoint Sherman. She questioned the choice and said he was close friends with another tourism commission member, Kim Fritz, and her husband. 

Fritz audibly gasped from her seat in the audience. 

“This is about stacking the vote and that’s all it is,” Powers said during the meeting. “I’m sorry I have to speak the truth. You deserve to know the truth,” she told the crowd. “This is ludicrous.” 

Rockco stood by her choice, calling Sherman a hospitality veteran who is excited and prepared to take over the role and was approved fairly. 

“You can throw out the rule book if you wish,” Rocko said. “But that is the rules and regulations and it seems to not matter if someone doesn’t get their way.” 

No action was taken at the board meeting this week — supervisors are awaiting clarity on their bylaw’s wording from the state’s attorney general before making any more appointment decisions. That puts both Shoultz and Sherman in limbo. 

“Tourism was sort of the shining example of the way the region can come together to market itself,” said Ashley Edwards, the president and CEO of the Gulf Coast Business Council. “The difficulties that that structure continues to run into all seem to surround sort of internal politics on county boards.” 

Coastal Mississippi is funded by a 2-3% tax on hotel stays across Harrison, Jackson and Hancock counties. In a budget report to Harrison County made late last year, Coastal Mississippi reported about $5.2 million in its budget from the taxes. 

The bulk of that tax revenue — about 80% of Coastal Mississippi’s funding — comes from Harrison County’s casino resorts and hotels. As a result, Harrison County has the largest voting bloc within the board of commissioners that approves Coastal Mississippi’s spending. 

Rich Westfall, a former casino operator, finished his eight-year term on the tourism commission last year. Toward the latter years of his tenure, he said noticed more struggles for power. 

“We shouldn’t be worrying about who votes for what and who’s leading and who’s not leading and where the power is,” Westfall said. “We need to worry about how many people are in hotel rooms and how many people are visiting Mississippi. If tourism goes on the coast, so does tourism in Mississippi.” 

Harrison County has a regularly scheduled supervisors meeting in Biloxi Monday. Coastal Mississippi will have its regularly scheduled meeting with the tourism commissioners at the end of the month. 

The post Infighting, allegations of vote stacking clouds Mississippi’s largest tourism bureau appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Chancery Judge Debbra Halford refused to block Mississippi’s abortion ban from going into effect on Thursday despite a 1998 ruling from the Supreme Court saying the state Constitution grants abortion rights.

Just hours after a 45-minute Tuesday morning hearing, Halford issued the eight-page decision ruling on Tuesday afternoon refusing to side with the state’s only abortion provider, Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which had requested a temporary restraining order to prevent laws from going into effect banning most abortions in Mississippi.

Abortion rights groups had argued that laws banning abortions in the state could not go into effect until a 1998 state Supreme Court decision, Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Kirk Fordice, was overturned. The 1998 decision, the abortion rights supporters argued, could only be overturned by the Mississippi Supreme Court.

But in ruling against the abortion rights groups, Halford said that it is likely that the current state Supreme Court will uphold the Mississippi laws banning most abortions now that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that abortion is not a protected right under the federal Constitution.

Halford wrote that since a right to an abortion as granted by the U.S. Constitution “is no longer the law of the land, reliance upon Fordice almost certainly will not be well-founded when pursuing this case in the (state) Supreme Court.”

“We are going to review the decision and consider our options,” said Jackson attorney Rob McDuff of the Mississippi Center for Justice. McDuff and Hillary Schneller, senior staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, represented Jackson Women’s Health Organization in Tuesday’s hearing in the Hinds County Chancery Court building.

They argued that Halford should halt the abortions ban from taking effect because the 1998 ruling by the state Supreme Court was the law of the land in Mississippi. It would take a new ruling from the state Supreme to reverse the 1998 ruling.

“The primary issue before you is whether the decision of the Mississippi Supreme Court is binding and we clearly believe it is,” McDuff said during the hearing.

Halford ultimately agreed with the arguments of Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart, who argued on behalf of Attorney General Lynn Fitch. He told Halford that the 1998 state Supreme Court ruling was no longer binding law because of the recent landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the Roe v. Wade decision and the Casey v. Planned Parenthood decision that enshrined in the U.S. Constitution the right to an abortion.

“They depend on Roe and Casey. There is no Roe and Casey anymore. And there is no Fordice,” Stewart said, referring to the 1998 state Supreme Court ruling titled Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Kirk Fordice.

READ MORE: Supreme Court could assure abortion ban in Mississippi, or people could vote

Stewart had also argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court, Dobbs vs Jackson Women’s Health Organization, that resulted in the reversal of Roe and Casey.

What happens next depends on whether Halford’s ruling is appealed to the state Supreme Court.

As the issue is litigated, though, the clock is ticking on abortion rights in Mississippi. A trigger law is slated to take effect on Thursday banning all abortions in the state except in cases where it is determined the life of the mother is at risk or in cases where there is rape reported to law enforcement.

Another Mississippi law that would take effect based on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling would ban all abortion after six weeks except in cases of medical emergencies.

About 50 spectators heard the Tuesday morning arguments, and a small group protected outside of the Hinds County Chancery Court building.

Stewart did not try to argue that the 1998 ruling did not say abortion was a right under the state Constitution. Instead, he argued that the majority in 1998 ruled that abortion was a right under the state Constitution to be in alignment with the federal Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade decision.

But McDuff said nowhere in the ruling was any reference made to the state Supreme Court decision being contingent on the Roe v. Wade decision. He said in other rulings, the state Supreme Court had ruled that the rights granted in the Mississippi Constitution did not “inflate or deflate like a balloon” based on the rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court. But on Tuesday, Halford disagreed with McDuff.

McDuff pointed out to the court that abortion had been legal for a vast majority of Mississippi’s statehood and that the judge should block the enactment of the laws banning abortion to give the Mississippi Supreme Court time to rule on the issue.

Stewart argued that it would not be a hardship to allow the laws to go into effect. He said programs had been put in place, such as pregnancy counseling programs, to help mothers who might otherwise had wanted to have an abortion.

Halford heard the case because all four Hinds County chancery judges recused themselves.

The post Judge refuses to stop abortion ban from going into effect Thursday appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Gazing across a subway car full of enticing, strange faces, young Milo thrusts his imagination into action. 

The wondrous train ride is the setting of “Milo Imagines the World,” a children’s picture book written by Matt de la Peña and illustrated by Christian Robinson. 

The story follows Milo, who wields his sketchpad to explore the mysterious lives of his fellow passengers. But while diving deep into his make-believe backstories, the boy pauses to reflect, and begins to see the boundaries of first impressions.

“Milo Imagines the World,” published last summer, is the duo’s second picture book exploring the world of public transportation through the lens of working class communities. The two also partnered on the New York Times bestseller “Last Stop on Market Street,” which won the 2016 Newbery Medal. 

De la Peña, set to appear at the Mississippi Book Festival in Jackson on Aug. 20, spoke with Mississippi Today about his latest work. 

Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Mississippi Today: You mentioned having a focus on writing for working class folks and exploring public transportation, with this book and your last one, “Last Stop on Market Street.” Can you talk a little bit about that intersection in your work?

Matt de la Peña: I’m always drawn to working class communities, just because I grew up in one. I grew up near the border of San Diego and Mexico, and I have grandparents from Mexico, and my dad was first gen. So that’s something I always want to feature in anything I write, people who are working hard and trying to make a life in America.  

The way I describe it is, my goal is to be as honest as possible, but in the back of my head I want to show moments of grace and dignity in these communities.

It’s funny because when I first started out writing, my stories would always be pushed toward kids who were living in those communities or who were diverse racially. That was annoying to me because these stories are for everyone. I think we’re seeing a push now, where a story that focuses on a kid like Milo, now will be celebrated in a private school with predominantly white kids, well-to-do kids. That’s a nice thing to see.

Early in my career, I remember a teacher at a conference finding me and saying, ‘Hey Matt, I really like your books. But I’ll be honest, we don’t really have those kids at our schools, so we don’t have that many copies.’

I remember saying to her, ‘How many wizards do you have at your school?’ Because of this idea of, we can read books about wizards but not kids from different backgrounds.

What’s interesting is public transportation, it really depends on where you are, who’s on it. So in “Last Stop on Market Street” and where I grew up in San Diego, if you’re on the bus, you are there –  pretty much 99% chance – because you don’t have a car, you can’t afford a car. It’s usually all working class people on the bus. If you go to New York City, you could be on the subway next to a CEO, and on the other side of you is someone who cleans that building. So I find those stories change dramatically if you’re going to explore public transportation depending on what city it is. 

That also factors into Milo’s journey. He’s looking around at these people and sees the kid with the perfect part (in his hair) and thinks, ‘This kid’s rich.’ He sees the guy with the scruffy face and thinks, ‘This guy’s poor and lonely.’ So part of his journey is to kind of challenge that idea.

MT: On the subway, you’re exposed to so much from so many different people at once. How do you capture that from a young child’s perspective?

MD: You know what’s amazing about public transportation is, you learn the truth, which I think kids growing up in car culture don’t quite grasp. The truth is, we kind of think our story is the most important. And if you’re in a car, you think that even more. It’s almost like everyone’s in the movie starring you. 

But if you grow up taking public transportation and you just look around and watch people and listen to conversations, it’s so much easier to grasp that you are just one of millions of stories. 

So I actually think that’s one of the healthiest parts about growing up taking public transportation, is you sort of position your story alongside other stories. And when you’re in a car culture, you don’t have as many opportunities to see that. 

MT: I wanted to ask you about, you kind of summarized it nicely in the dedication page – the message: “For those who dare to imagine beyond the first impression.” It got me thinking about the fact you’re writing through a child’s perspective, and how we typically think of kids being more imaginative. I was wondering if you thought writing from Milo’s perspective made it easier to give him a broader imagination of what people might be like because he’s a kid and he’s got this creative mind. Is that fair to say?

MD:  I actually think I would approach it almost the same way from an adult’s perspective. I just think the big difference would be the arc of an adult’s story. If it was the same storyline, I would approach the arc of it, the movement at the end where Milo’s re-thinking the pictures, I think with an adult it would be louder, and it would be more direct. 

One of my favorite things about writing a picture book and thinking about the character’s arc is that, really, I don’t think it’s truthful if you get to the end of a picture book and the character has arced dramatically. I think it’s much more honest to show a character who is just beginning that arc. Things like Milo’s experience, it has to happen dozens of times for it to sink in and for you to move as a person. 

As an adult, I think a lot of people are just as imaginative, maybe not quite as imaginative as a kid, but you still tell yourself the story of the people around you. But I think the ending of a picture book shouldn’t be as dramatic.         

MT: (Spoiler alert) The end of the book (where the reader learns Milo is going to visit his mother in prison) caught me off guard. Was it important for you to make that a surprise, and if so what do you think was the effect of that?

MD: It is kind of a surprise, but my hope is that if you read it again, everything is leading that direction. He’s a shook-up soda, because he’s excited to see his mom but he’s also anxious. He doesn’t know how to feel about it. The whole story is about where he’s going, but it’s quiet. And then at the end it’s a revelation about where he’s going, but it’s not that I wanted it to be a big surprise. 

It fits with the story, if that makes sense. He’s looking out so that he doesn’t have to directly look in, although like we talked about that’s what he’s kind of processing. 

And at the very end he’s showing his mom this picture he worked very hard on the night before. He of course shows her a picture of them, sitting on the stoop, and she’s not in prison. 

So he’s doing something that I have taped on my wall, above my computer, as a writer, I live by this motto: do not write what you see, write what will be seen. Because one of the things you can do writing a kid’s book is help sort of reveal the world of tomorrow. And I think what he’s doing when he’s showing them the picture is he’s also drawing not what he sees today but he hopes will be seen tomorrow.  

Really, the surprise ending for me as the writer is not that his mom is in prison, but it’s the piece of art that he shows his mom. 

MT: There was a part in the book, it might feel like a small detail, but it told me, okay, you’ve clearly spent some time thinking through the mind of a kid: Milo is looking at his reflection and thinking about his own life and his aunt’s apartment, and the fact he calls it his “aunt’s apartment near the cemetery” really stood out to me because that’s something I remember doing as a kid, associating these two things that aren’t related but are just next to each other. 

How do you generally get in the process of getting into a kid’s mind and transport yourself there?

MD: Forgive me if I’m going a little too deep on this, but you identified what this book is really about. There is so much going on in Milo’s unconscious through the book. Because if you look at each vignette he comes up with for the people he’s looking at, he’s sketching out who he thinks they are, where they’re going, but he’s also sort of exorcising his own situation, because every vignette has some form of, either emancipation or building up a wall. He’s really thinking about his mother being in a place where he can’t access her all the time. 

If you look at the first vignette, he’s looking at a bird in a cage, but in his vignette the birds get to go free. And the married couple, they rise above the walls of the city and they’re free. And then the boy who’s wealthy, he’s got this castle, and after he goes through, the drawbridge is going to close again so he can protect all his stuff. Every vignette is about other people, but he’s using it as a way to explore his current situation.  

Now, does any kid get that? Probably not. But I have this theory, especially for writing about young people: we often say it’s more valid to get something consciously than it is to get it viscerally. 

And what I love about kids books is, kids are mostly operating on that visceral feeling. Even if a kid can’t say, ‘Oh I see there’s a form of emancipation in each vignette,’ a kid might feel it. And that to me is just as valid as, you’re in a college course and pulling out every symbol and every detail.    

MT: What do you think Milo learns on this journey? Like you said, it takes a while and it’s not a complete learning experience by the end, but how do you think this learning experience is helping Milo grow?

MD: I think what Milo is doing at the end of the book is he’s starting to question the way he sees other people, and whether or not his first impression is the right impression. And he’s starting to think that way because he’s also along the way starting to understand how others might see him.   

So when he looks at his reflection, he’s starting to think, what do people think of my face? And then he lists a few things that are real, this is who he is to himself, but maybe others can’t access that. Through that, and misjudging this boy with the part, I think he’s beginning to question this idea of first impressions. 

As kids, we learn how to access those stereotypes, but to be an intelligent person, you have to then almost dismantle those stereotypes. So he’s learning through early life how to acquire those stereotypes. Maybe he’s just beginning to question them, which may ultimately lead to him dismantling them.

The post Beginning to question first impressions: Q&A with author Matt de la Peña appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Houston, we have a huge problem.

The post Marshall Ramsey: Safe Place appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Mississippi is just hours from banning abortion in most instances, but an eleventh-hour lawsuit before a special state judge could at least temporarily delay the “trigger law” from going into effect.

The Mississippi Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that abortion is a protected right under the state Constitution and that right cannot be taken away unless the state’s high court reverses itself, attorneys representing the state’s only abortion clinic told a chancery judge on Tuesday.

Based on that 1998 ruling, Jackson attorney Rob McDuff asked Chancery Judge Debbra Halford of Franklin County to issue an injunction preventing laws that would ban most abortions in Mississippi from taking effect. McDuff and Hillary Schneller, senior staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, represented Jackson Women’s Health Organization in the lawsuit.

“The primary issue before you is whether the decision of the Mississippi Supreme Court is binding and we clearly believe it is,” McDuff said Tuesday morning during a hearing in the Hinds County Chancery Court Building that lasted about 45 minutes.

READ MORE: Hearing set in Mississippi lawsuit trying to prevent abortion ban

Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart, arguing on behalf of Attorney General Lynn Fitch, told Halford that the 1998 state Supreme Court ruling was no longer binding law because of the recent landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the Roe v. Wade decision and the Casey v. Planned Parenthood decision that enshrined in the U.S. Constitution the right to an abortion.

“They depend on Roe and Casey. There is no Roe and Casey anymore. And there is no Fordice,” Stewart said referring to the 1998 state Supreme Court ruling titled Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Kirk Fordice.

After the hearing, Halford said she would soon issue a decision regarding whether to grant the temporary restraining order allowing abortions to continue to be performed in Mississippi. But at this time, she will not rule on the actual merits of the case.

It is likely her decision will be appealed by the losing side to the state Supreme Court.

As the issue is litigated, though, the clock is ticking on abortion rights in Mississippi. A trigger law would take effect on Thursday banning all abortions in the state except in cases where it is determined the life of the mother is at risk or in cases where there is rape reported to law enforcement. Another Mississippi law that would take effect based on the U.S. Supreme Court ruling would ban all abortion after six weeks except in cases of medical emergencies.

But on Tuesday in the hearing attended by about 50 spectators with a handful of protesters outside the courthouse, McDuff told the chancery judge that the state Supreme Court ruling would supersede the laws and she did not have the authority to ignore Mississippi’s highest court.

He conceded the current Supreme Court could reverse its 1998 ruling.

Stewart did not try to argue that the 1998 ruling did not say abortion was a right under the state Constitution. Instead, he argued that the majority in 1998 ruled that abortion was a right under the state Constitution to be in alignment with the federal Supreme Court in the Roe v. Wade decision.

But McDuff said nowhere in the ruling was any reference made to the state Supreme Court decision being contingent on the Roe v. Wade decision. He said in other rulings, the state Supreme Court had ruled that the rights granted in the Mississippi Constitution did not “inflate or deflate like a balloon” based on the rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court.

McDuff pointed out to the court that abortion had been legal for a vast majority of Mississippi’s statehood and that the judge should block the enactment of the laws banning abortion to give the Mississippi Supreme Court time to rule on the issue.

Stewart argued that it would not be a hardship to allow the laws to go into effect. He said programs had been put in place, such as pregnancy counseling programs, to help mothers who might otherwise had wanted to have an abortion.

Halford is hearing the case because all four Hinds County chancery judges recused themselves.

READ MORE: Supreme Court could assure abortion ban in Mississippi, or people could vote

The post Judge ponders blocking law that bans abortions in Mississippi appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Mississippi Today political reporters Geoff Pender and Bobby Harrison discuss the results of the U.S. House party primary runoff elections where an unusual event occurred and also discuss some surprising twists in the aftermath of the landmark reversal of Roe. v. Wade.

The post Podcast: A wild week of historic election outcomes and court rulings appeared first on Mississippi Today.

In this episode of Mississippi Stories, Mississippi Today Editor-at-Large Marshall Ramsey sits down with award-winning author W. Ralph Eubanks to talk about his book, A Place Like Mississippi. A Place Like Mississippi takes readers on a complete tour of the real and imagined landscapes that have inspired generations of authors.

Eubanks is also the author of two other books: Ever Is a Long Time: A Journey Into Mississippi’s Dark Past (Basic Books) and The House at the End of the Road: The Story of Three Generations of an Interracial Family in the American South (HarperCollins) and recently received the Nonfiction award for A Place Like Mississippi: A Journey Through a Real and Imagined Literary Landscape by the The Mississippi Institute of Arts and Letters.

Eubanks talks about teaching other writers to learn their voice and how those voices have helped lift Mississippi’s literary tradition.

The post Mississippi Stories: W. Ralph Eubanks appeared first on Mississippi Today.

For abortion to be banned in Mississippi, a 1998 Supreme Court ruling — that “abortion is protected” under the state Constitution — must be reversed.

The most obvious way for that reversal to occur is for the same Mississippi Supreme Court, but with different judges than in 1998, to write a new decision saying abortion is not a protected right under the state Constitution.

The state Supreme Court most likely will have a chance to make that reversal thanks to a lawsuit filed claiming a Mississippi trigger law banning most abortions upon the repeal of Roe v. Wade cannot go into effect because of the 1998 state Supreme Court ruling. A very conservative Supreme Court can simply reverse that 1998 decision and the trigger law can go into effect banning most abortions in the state.

But another way to reverse that 1998 decision is to let the people vote.

Gov. Tate Reeves could call a special session of the Mississippi Legislature for the purpose of passing a constitutional resolution. That resolution — presumably to ban abortion or most abortions in Mississippi — would then go before the voters. If the voters approved it, presto — abortion would be banned.

The election could take place on Nov. 8 — the date of the already scheduled general election. But if legislators wanted, they could schedule a special election earlier to vote on the constitutional amendment to ban abortions. In the past, legislators have scheduled votes on constitutional amendments for dates other than the date of the regularly scheduled general election.

Until the 1998 Pro-Choice Mississippi v. Fordice is overturned either by a new Supreme Court ruling or by the vote of the people, it is difficult to see a path for the trigger law to take effect in the state. It is the same principle that applied nationally in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision — abortion could not be banned until the U.S. Supreme Court wrote a new decision reversing the Roe decision that said abortion rights were protected by the federal Constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court, of course, reversed Roe in late June in a Mississippi case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. But the U.S. Supreme Court in the Dobbs ruling did not and could not reverse what the state Supreme Court said in 1998 about the right to an abortion being found in the Mississippi Constitution.

“We find that the state constitutional right to privacy includes an implied right to choose whether or not to have an abortion,” the late Mississippi Supreme Court Justice Michael Sullivan wrote for the majority in 1998.

Sullivan further wrote that when the Mississippi Constitution was written in 1890, “abortion was legal until quickening (until fetus movement) some four to five months into pregnancy.”

There has been only one statewide vote involving abortion, which occurred in 2011 on what was known as the “personhood amendment.” The proposal would have defined as a person “every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the equivalent thereof.”

The ballot initiative process, where sponsors gather signatures to place issues before voters, was used for the personhood amendment. It was soundly defeated 58% to 42% by voters even though most of the state’s politicians, including Phil Bryant who was elected governor that year, supported it. Had it passed, the proposal would have been placed in the state Constitution.

The personhood proposal might have gone steps further on banning abortions than most Mississippi voters wanted to go. Based on the personhood vote, even many conservative Mississippians favor exemptions from abortion bans for the life of the mother, for rape and for other reasons. But on the other hand, House Speaker Philip Gunn said recently he believes life begins at conception and did not appear to favor any exemptions.

Legislators could craft the constitutional ban as strict or with as many exceptions as they want and then let the people vote.

One of the primary arguments used for overturning Roe v. Wade was that courts should not decide the controversial issue.

Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart, arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court for Attorney General Lynn Fitch’s office in the landmark Dobbs case, said, “The Constitution places its trust in the people. On hard issue after hard issue, the people make this country work. Abortion is a hard issue. It demands the best from all of us, not a judgment by just a few of us. When an issue affects everyone — and when the Constitution does not take sides on it — it belongs to the people.”

The post Supreme Court could assure abortion ban in Mississippi, or people could vote appeared first on Mississippi Today.

It’s been nearly 70 years since Emmett Till was lynched in the Mississippi Delta, but his family has not given up on justice. 

Last week, a search team that includes Till family members Deborah and Teri Watts discovered the original, unserved arrest warrant for the only living accomplice to Till’s death in the basement of the Leflore County courthouse in Greenwood. 

Deborah Watts, Till’s cousin and founder of the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation, said uncovering the document is the result of the family’s perseverance and determination. 

“We never accepted (the) closing of this case by the authorities or gave up hope,” she said in a Thursday statement. “We have always pushed for full accountability of all those involved in Emmett’s murder who may still be alive.”

The uncovered warrant is for Carolyn Bryant Donham, listed as “Mrs. Roy Bryant,” and is dated Aug. 29, 1955, days after Till’s death. The document had been in the courthouse for 67 years.

She was formerly married to Roy Bryant, who with his half-brother, J.W. Milam, killed 14-year-old Till who was visiting family from Chicago. They kidnapped him after Donham wrongfully accused Till of grabbing her and making unwanted advances. 

Donham is now in her 80s and most recently lived in North Carolina. 

The Department of Justice reopened Till’s case several times in the past two decades, but no new charges were made. The two men tried for his murder in 1955 were acquitted by an all-white jury. 

For several years, family members, supporters and the foundation have called for justice for Till and for Donham to be held accountable. Finding the original warrant could make that happen, they say. 

The Till family sent certified copies of the warrant to local and federal law enforcement, according to the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation. They are asking the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division and the Mississippi Fourth District Attorney’s Office to consider the warrant new evidence, investigate and charge Donham as an accessory in Till’s death. 

The search team, which also includes foundation ambassador Melissa Earnest, family ambassador Khali Rasheed and filmmaker and justice advocate Keith Beauchamp, received access to the courthouse on June 21, according to the foundation.

The team went through boxes organized by decade, and Rasheed found a file folder containing the warrant, according to the foundation.The original warrant and file and a certified copy can be found at the Leflore County courthouse. 

Beauchamp was granted access in March for an initial search for the warrant, according to the foundation. A few months earlier, Earnest told Watts that the warrant may possibly be in Leflore County. 

Watts said the pursuit of justice is dedicated to and honors Till and other late family members: his mother, Mamie Till Mobley; cousin Simeon Wright, who was the last to see him alive; and great uncle Mose Wright, whose home Till stayed at before his death. 

Family members have been seeking justice since Till’s death, according to the foundation. His mother chose to have an open casket at his funeral to show the world what happened to Till, and she continued to fight for justice until her death in 2003. 

In March, Till’s family and supporters visited the Mississippi State Capitol and delivered a petition with over 300,000 signatures to the attorney general’s office calling for Donham to be charged. 

Family members founded the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation, whose goal is to preserve the memory and legacy of Till and his mother’s hope for justice. The group hopes to create a legacy of hope by bridging the past, present and future through programs, according to the foundation’s website. 

In the petition, the foundation links Till’s death to modern killings of Black people, such as George Floyd in Minnesota, Ahmaud Arbery in Georgia, Breonna Taylor in Kentucky, and Eric Garner in New York.

The post Arrest warrant discovery is latest step in Emmett Till family’s decades-long quest for justice appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Facing the specter of most abortions being prohibited in Mississippi on July 7, a special judge has scheduled a hearing for 10 a.m. Tuesday to hear arguments in a lawsuit attempting to prevent the ban from taking effect.

Chancellor Debbra Halford of Franklin County in the 4^th District in southwest Mississippi was appointed late Thursday by Mississippi Supreme Court Chief Justice Michael Randolph to preside over the case after all four Hinds County chancery judges recused themselves.

Halford will hear arguments in a lawsuit filed by Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the state’s only remaining abortion clinic, claiming a trigger law cannot go into effect banning abortions in the state because of a 1998 ruling by the Mississippi Supreme Court. That ruling stated that the Mississippi Constitution provides the right to an abortion. The Supreme Court ruling would be a precedent that would supersede state law banning abortions, the lawsuit argues.

Two laws are at issue in the lawsuit. They are:

• A trigger law that states abortions except in the case of the life of the mother being at risk or in the case of a law enforcement-reported rape would be banned when the national constitutional right to an abortion (Roe v. Wade) is overturned. Roe v. Wade was overturned late last month.
• A ban on abortions after six weeks that provides no exemptions except in the case of medical emergencies.

The lawsuit maintains allowing the laws to take effect “will infringe on the constitutionally protected right of Mississippians to abortion under the Mississippi Constitution” as recognized by the state Supreme Court in 1998.

The trigger law states that most abortions would be illegal in the state 10 days after the attorney general certified that Roe v. Wade had been overturned. Attorney General Lynn Fitch made that certification June 27, meaning, according to the Secretary of State’s office, that the ban would go into effect on July 7.

The Mississippi abortion fight is of particular note nationwide since it was Fitch’s office that argued successfully before the U.S. Supreme Court that Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

The post Hearing set in Mississippi lawsuit trying to prevent abortion ban appeared first on Mississippi Today.