These Unprecedented Times Are Sorta Precedented; the Grocery-Store Merger Is on Hold–Coachella Valley Independent’s Indy Digest: July 25, 2024

Indy Digest: July 25, 2024

In recent weeks, watching or reading the news has felt like drinking out of a fire hose:

Philip Klinkner, a professor of government at Hamilton College in New York, assembled a list—in a story in The Conversation—of big news stories since April. Here it is, verbatim:

• April 15: Donald Trump’s New York hush money trial begins.
• April and May: Pro-Palestinian protests rock campuses around the country, and thousands are arrested.
• May 30: Trump is found guilty in New York of 34 felony counts related to hush money payments.
• June 27: Biden’s poor debate performance sets off intense speculation about his place on the Democratic ticket.
• July 1: A Supreme Court decision in Trump v. United States greatly expands presidential immunity from prosecution and raises serious questions about the status of various prosecutions of Trump.
• July 13: Trump is injured in an unsuccessful assassination attempt.
• July 15: A federal judge throws out the case against Trump for mishandling classified documents.
• July 15: Trump picks Ohio U.S. Sen. JD Vance as his running mate.
• July 15: The Republican Convention formally nominates Trump for president, capping a remarkable political comeback.
• July 21: Biden announces that he is withdrawing from the presidential race and endorses Vice President Kamala Harris for president.
• July 21-22: Harris is quickly endorsed by leading Democrats and seems almost certain to become the first Black woman of South Asian descent to head a major party ticket.

That’s a LOT. But is it truly unprecedented? Klinkner says it’s not.

“Many observers have already compared 2024 to 1968,” he writes. “Both years saw incumbent Democratic presidents bow out of the election, as well as tragic outbreaks of political violence. But 1968 also saw a rapid unfolding of other historic events.”

He then offers a list of 1968 events that’s certainly intense, between the Vietnam War, LBJ dropping out, the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, riots, the nomination of Richard Nixon, the Cold War, and a lot more. Klinkner then offers lists of events in 1940 and 1973 that are pretty intense as well.

So, yeah, there is a LOT going on—and who knows what the upcoming days and weeks will bring? But there have been “unprecedented” times before, and there most certainly will be again..

—Jimmy Boegle

More News

• The proposed merger between Kroger and Albertsons—which would result in the sale of two local Albertsons stores and two local Vons stores—is on hold until the fall, at least. The Denver Post reports: “The proposed merger between Kroger Co. and Albertsons Cos. is on hold until an antitrust lawsuit from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser to permanently block the deal is resolved. Denver District Judge Andrew J. Luxen issued a preliminary injunction Thursday morning—which all sides agreed to—that prevents the $24.6 billion merger from closing until five days after Weiser’s lawsuit is addressed. A two-week trial on the merits of Colorado’s case is set to start on Sept. 30. … In June, Luxen rejected a motion by Kroger and Albertsons Companies to dismiss Colorado’s lawsuit. Luxen wrote in his order issuing the preliminary junction that based on the evidence presented by the state, ‘the Court finds there is a reasonable probability that the State will prove its claims against Defendants at trial.’ The two grocers also face a challenge from other states in Oregon in a trial set for Aug. 26. In late February, the Federal Trade Commission sued to block the merger and an administrative review is set to start July 31.”

• Our partners at Calmatters report on the state’s big news story of the day with a fantastic headline that poses a question: “Gavin Newsom orders state agencies to move homeless people out of camps — but to where?” The lede: “Gov. Gavin Newsom today ordered state agencies to remove homeless camps throughout California, his first major show of force since the Supreme Court granted state and local authorities more power to clear encampments. Newsom’s executive order mandates that state agencies and departments adopt policies to clear camps on state property. It also encourages local governments to do the same. Reversing … precedent in Grants Pass v. Johnson, the justices last month found it is not unconstitutional for a city to ban homeless encampments, even if there is no shelter available. The ruling, which Newsom cheered, gives city leaders broad authority to crack down on camps. In Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass, who opposed the Grants Pass ruling last month, also was critical of Newsom’s new order. ‘Strategies that just move people along from one neighborhood to the next or give citations instead of housing do not work,’ she said in an emailed statement. ‘We thank the Governor for his partnership thus far and hope that he will continue collaboration on strategies that work.’”

• Also from Calmatters: Uber, Lyft and the delivery apps can continue to treat drivers like independent contractors, the state Supreme Court ruled today: “The decision on Proposition 22 was unanimous. Approved by 58% of California voters in 2020 and enacted the same year, Prop. 22 gave app-based gig workers some benefits but not full worker protections because the ballot initiative—which gig companies spent more than $200 million to pass—ensures they are not considered employees. … During oral arguments in May in San Francisco, justices zeroed in on whether Prop. 22 was incompatible with California law, which gives the Legislature responsibility over a complete workers’ compensation system. By declaring gig workers independent contractors, Prop 22 made them ineligible for workers’ comp benefits. SEIU California, the Service Employees International Union that had sought to overturn the law on behalf of four gig workers, argued that this made the law unconstitutional. The law about the Legislature and worker’s comp ‘does not preclude the electorate from exercising its initiative power to legislate on matters affecting workers’ compensation,’ Justice Goodwin Liu wrote in today’s ruling.”

• An essay in Time magazine by Fred C. Trump III, the nephew of Donald Trump, offers a disturbing look at the former president’s views on disabled people. Here’s a snippet discussing a meeting between Fred and his uncle at the White House: “(President Trump) sounded interested and even concerned. I thought he had been touched by what the doctor and advocates in the meeting had just shared about their journey with their patients and their own family members. But I was wrong. ‘Those people …” Donald said, trailing off. ‘The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.’ I truly did not know what to say. He was talking about expenses. We were talking about human lives. For Donald, I think it really was about the expenses, even though we were there to talk about efficiencies, smarter investments, and human dignity.“

• From the collection of headlines we’ve seen before, and will be seeing a LOT again, comes this one from The New York Times: “Planet Sets Record for Hottest Day Twice in a Row.” Some details: “Monday was most likely the hottest day ever recorded on Earth, with a global average of about 62.87 degrees Fahrenheit, or 17.15 degrees Celsius, preliminary data showed—beating a record that had been set just one day before. The data, released on Wednesday by the Copernicus Climate Change Service, a European Union institution that provides information about the past, present and future climate, caused alarm among some experts. Earlier this week, the service announced that Sunday had set a record, with a global average of about 62.76 degrees Fahrenheit, or 17.09 degrees Celsius. A day later it announced that Monday was the hottest day since at least 1940, when records began. Before this week’s back-to-back records, the previous record, 62.74 degrees Fahrenheit, or 17.08 degrees Celsius, was set last year, on July 6, besting a record that stood since 2016.”

• In other depressing news: It’s now been 15 years since the federal minimum wage has been increased. Yes, really. The Associated Press says: “The most recent hike to the federal minimum wage occurred on July 24, 2009, back when former President Barack Obama was still in his first year in office and the Black Eyed Peas topped the Billboard charts. At that time, it rose 70 cents from $6.55 per hour to $7.25 and it has stayed there for the last 15 years. That’s the longest stretch the national minimum wage has gone without an increase since the U.S. instituted the pay standard in 1938, according to a Department of Labor timeline. Meanwhile, the value of the dollar has diminished, and prices on everyday goods have taken off. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, around 869,000 workers in the U.S. earned the federal minimum wage or less in 2023, more than two-thirds of whom were women. … In 20 states, mostly in the South and Midwest, the federal minimum wage is in effect, according to the Economic Policy Institute. The other 30 states and Washington, D.C. have minimum wages higher than the federal standard, according to EPI data.”

• And finally … the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that in that state, chicken wings described as being “boneless” don’t actually have to be boneless. I just don’t understand judges sometimes. Anyway, The Associated Press reports on what happened after a man who ate “boneless” wings filed lawsuits after suffering from health issues because a bone got stuck in this throat: “In a 4-3 ruling, the Supreme Court said Thursday that ‘boneless wings’ refers to a cooking style, and that Berkheimer should’ve been on guard against bones since it’s common knowledge that chickens have bones. The high court sided with lower courts that had dismissed Berkheimer’s suit. ‘A diner reading “boneless wings” on a menu would no more believe that the restaurant was warranting the absence of bones in the items than believe that the items were made from chicken wings, just as a person eating “chicken fingers” would know that he had not been served fingers,” Justice Joseph T. Deters wrote for the majority. The dissenting justices called Deters’ reasoning ‘utter jabberwocky,’ and said a jury should’ve been allowed to decide whether the restaurant was negligent in serving Berkheimer a piece of chicken that was advertised as boneless.“

Support the Independent!

You will not find any utter jabberwocky in the Coachella Valley Independent. Instead, you will find quality, award-winning local journalism—made available for free to all. Please help us, if you’re able, keep doing what we do by clicking the button below and becoming a Supporter of the Independent. As always, thanks for reading!