National Roundup

North Carolina
Report: Raleigh police used expired tear gas on protesters
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — Raleigh police used expired tear gas on demonstrators during protests over the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, according to a report released Tuesday.

The News & Observer reports that the review of the Police Department’s response and use of force during the protests also found that police used tear gas unnecessarily in one instance.

Fourteen officers were injured, and 17 police vehicles were damaged during the protests, according to the report.

Raleigh Police Chief Cassandra Deck-Brown told the City Council there have been 106 arrests stemming from the protests.

After an initially peaceful demonstration May 30, law enforcement officers repeatedly launched tear gas and foam batons — also known as rubber bullets — at protesters. Some demonstrators threw water bottles, rocks and fireworks at police. Downtown windows were smashed and some stores were robbed.

At least one of the department’s uses of tear gas was a mistake, according to the report.

“This should not have happened,” Deck-Brown said.

The report said officers used tear gas to clear a street for an ambulance needed on a nearby medical call. The ambulance call was canceled, but word did not get to officers on the scene.

The report also confirms that some of the tear gas canisters used were expired.

“While the RPD did deploy some expired gas canisters, there is no scientific evidence to support claims that expired CS (tear) gas contains harmful levels of cyanide,” according to the report.

Wisconsin
Woman sues Univ. of Wisconsin over Cephus’ reinstatement
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A woman who accused former Badgers football player Quintez Cephus of sexual assault in 2018 is suing the University of Wisconsin-Madison over its decision to reverse Cephus’ expulsion and allow him back on the football team.

While a university investigation concluded Cephus “more likely than not” sexually assaulted the woman, he was acquitted of criminal sexual assault charges following a jury trial last year. He was soon readmitted to the university.

The lawsuit filed in federal court in Madison this week by “Jane Doe” accused the university and its chancellor of ignoring state and federal law by shutting her out of the process that allowed Cephus to be readmitted and return to the team. That violated the federal gender equity law known as Title IX, the plaintiff said.

“Such gender bias and deliberately subjecting a female student to a known hostile educational environment in the interest of football is exactly the types of discrimination that Title IX was designed to prevent,” the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit doesn’t mention Cephus by name, calling him Player 1, but the facts of the case in the lawsuit are identical to those involving Cephus and his roommate, Danny Davis, the State Journal reported.

University spokeswoman Meredith McGlone said the university is aware of the lawsuit but doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

The Detroit Lions selected Cephus in the fifth round of the NFL draft earlier this year and signed him to a four-year contract.


Tennessee
State defends abortion reversal law in legal challenge
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — A Tennessee law requiring doctors to inform women that drug-induced abortions may be reversed is critical for women who may change their minds halfway through the procedure, the state’s top legal chief said.

Last month, abortion rights groups filed a lawsuit arguing the newly approved statute violated several constitutional rights because it not only illegally singled out abortion patients and physicians who provide the procedure, but also forced doctors to relay a “controversial government-mandated message.”

The complaint specifically seeks to block the law before it goes into effect on Oct. 1 as the groups pursue their legal battle.

However, Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery’s office has since responded by citing several women who say they wanted more information about their options when they underwent the procedure.

“Here, the challenged law does not hinder patients from obtaining an abortion. Instead, it merely provides patients with additional information about the abortion procedure itself and advises them about the availability of potential remedies should they change their mind between taking the first and second abortion pill,” Slatery wrote this week in court documents.

A drug-induced abortion, also called a medical abortion, involves taking two drugs. The first — mifepristone — thins the lining of the uterus and loosens the connection between the embryo and the uterine lining. The second — misoprostol — softens and opens the cervix and causes contractions to push out the pregnancy.

A medical abortion reversal involves giving a woman progesterone after the first step of a medical abortion. Progesterone is a hormone that thickens the uterine lining and inhibits contractions.

Multiple medical groups across the country have cited potentially flawed science and ethical concerns surrounding the reversal procedure. The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said there is no medically accepted evidence that a drug-induced abortion can be interrupted.

According to the state, doctors are not required to promise women that their medical abortions can be reversed, only that it “may be possible” that the “intended effect” could be reversed.

The state included testimony from Carrie Beth Dunavant, who says she changed her mind after pursuing a medical abortion and taking the first pill, mifepristone, in 2016. Court documents show that Dunavant, from Erin, Tennessee, began searching online for options and ran across the “Abortion Pill Rescue hotline” — which eventually instructed her to connect with a doctor and get a prescription for progesterone.

“I am actually pro-choice, and I think the requirement that abortion providers tell mothers that they may be able to reverse the abortion procedure if they don’t take the second pill gives women more options,” Dunavant wrote. “To be truly pro-choice, you have to allow women to know their options so they can make an informed choice.”

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights and the American Civil Liberties Union. These same groups are also involved in the initial lawsuit challenging a separate statute that bans abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected — about six weeks into pregnancy, before many women know they’re pregnant.