West Virginia jails are among the deadliest in the country. Though filed on behalf of everyone incarcerated in the state’s prisons and jails, at the center of the class-action lawsuit is Southern Regional Jail & Correctional Facility (SRJ). At least 17 people have died in SRJ custody since January 2022.

On October 17, an attorney for the governor as well as Chief of Staff Brian Abraham filed a motion to block the deposition, despite having received notice far earlier.

“The requests for depositions should be quashed in their entirety,” it states. “Absent truly extraordinary circumstances, the Governor and his Chief of Staff, as nonparties and high-ranking state government officials, should not be subject to a deposition seeking information that is—at best—tangential to the claims involved in this litigation.”

The governor’s investigation found that, in fact, all detainees had multiple sources of drinking water available to them 24/7.

In April 2022, media reports of the conditions inside SRJ prompted Justice to order an investigation. His resulting report was published later that same month and found that, in fact, all detainees had multiple sources of drinking water available to them 24/7. Everyone was additionally supplied with juice, milk, flavored water, flavored beverages and water bottles of various sizes.

The report interviewed 50 detainees, who provided quotes such as “I have never been denied water,” or “That story is from an inmate trying every angle to get out of jail.” No one had filed any grievances about being denied water. There were no medical records of dehydration.

The deposition would question Justice and Abramson about whether officials allegedly destroyed key emails and other electronic records, as well as appearing to bill the corrections system for $28 million in COVID-19 funds and then redirect that amount to funds controlled by the governor.

Two out of three people who die in WV county jails were being held pre-trial. Kenny Matthews, a criminal justice fellow at the American Friends Service Committee, spent 18 months in the state’s county jail system because he couldn’t afford bail.

“Barely anybody is being rehabilitated inside these systems,” Matthews told Filter. “There’s no mechanisms in place to help. When you’re in regional, a lot of times you’re just sitting there on the pod doing nothing.”

He emphasized the importance of social media in giving some incarcerated people a way to show the outside world the conditions they’re being held in. “People now have the ability … to follow the stories and connect the dots. [It’s] made it easier for stories to get out.”

Gov. Justice has repeatedly discredited media coverage of the state’s jails, claiming that any unflattering coverage is a scam by detainees trying to get out.

“The sad part of this investigation is that family members were repeatedly lied to by inmates about clothing, food, water, mattresses, medical attention, living conditions, even shoes,” his investigation report concluded. “Inmates yelled at family and friends for not telling the story the way the inmate wanted the media to hear it. One inmate said after hearing what a family member told the media, ‘Now I will never get out of here.'”

Top photograph via West Virginia Legislature. Inset photograph via West Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

The post WV Governor, Chief of Staff Fighting Subpoena for Jail Civil Rights Suit appeared first on Filter.

There were also significant cannabis decriminalization victories, with five cities in Ohio approving such measures.

Meanwhile, Colorado’s measure to allow possession of certain psychedelics and create regulated psilocybin “healing centers” has passed.

Missouri was the only red state out of the four to approve legalization.

All five of the statewide cannabis ballot measures have been called by major news networks. Notably, four of the five states concerned are red states. Still, more Republican voters nationally support legalization than oppose it. Advocates speaking to Filter had expressed confidence, stating that age might be a more telling factor than party affiliation in determining a person’s cannabis vote.

Yet Missouri was the only red state to approve legalization. At publication time, the state’s votes stood at 53 percent in favor versus 47 percent opposed. Polls had shown a slightly higher margin for the yes camp, but had been tightening.

Amendment 3 allows over-21s to purchase and possess up to 3 ounces of cannabis, and to grow their own if they obtain a registration card. It imposes a 6 percent tax on adult-use sales; revenues are slated to be used to facilitate automatic expungements of certain cannabis convictions, and to fund substance use treatment, veterans’ health care and the state’s public defender system. A microbusiness licensing system is meant to prioritize applicants with low incomes, or those in communities disproportionately impacted by criminalization.

However, concerns over barriers in the licensing system and the efficacy of the expungement provisions led some legalization supporters to oppose Amendment 3; for these reasons, the Missouri Democratic Party remained neutral on the question.

Maryland, the only blue state with cannabis legalization on the ballot, had widely been expected to pass its Question 4. At publication time, the race had been called with current approval of over 65 percent—somewhat heavier support than polls had suggested.

A bill previously passed by the state’s lawmakers will now be enacted. It sets basic regulations, including legalization of purchase and possession of up to 1.5 ounces and personal growing of up to two plants, though some other elements are yet to be determined. Advocate Kevin Ford Jr. of the Uplift Action Maryland PAC previously described to Filter his group’s efforts to reach Black voters and underline the social justice implications of legalization.

“The passage of Question 4 is a huge victory for criminal justice reform and racial justice in Maryland.”

“The passage of Question 4 is a huge victory for criminal justice reform and racial justice in Maryland,” said Olivia Naugle, senior policy analyst at the Marijuana Policy Project, in a press statement. “It will save thousands of Marylanders from arrests and further criminalization for cannabis possession, and it will begin to repair the decades of harm cannabis prohibition has caused, disproportionately in communities of color, by expunging records and reinvesting back into those communities. We look forward to working closely with Maryland lawmakers to ensure that the implementation of legalization is centered around equity.”

But there was disappointment elsewhere. In Arkansas, Issue 4 was defeated, with 56 percent opposed as of publication time. Past polling had shown a healthy majority in support, but the figures later tightened. Relentless attacks on legalization by the state’s Republican lawmakers may have taken their toll.

In North Dakota, where there was little available polling, Measure 2 was voted down, with 55 percent opposed at publication time. It may be limited consolation to advocates that support has risen since 2018, when almost 60 percent of voters in the state said no to a previous legalization measure.

In South Dakota, Measure 27 lost by a tighter margin; just under 53 percent of voters opposed it, with 99 percent of votes counted. It will be a heavy blow to advocates when the state already passed legalization in 2020, with 54 percent support—in 2021, the South Dakota Supreme Court invalidated that victory on procedural grounds.

Public polling had shown the 2022 South Dakota race to be on a knife-edge, although South Dakotans for Better Marijuana Laws, a group advocating for Measure 27, found more encouragement in its internal polling. “The biggest risk we face is complacency from pro-Measure 27 voters who do not always participate in midterm elections,” a representative told Filter in October.

Photograph by James St. John via Wikimedia Commons/Creative Commons 2.0

Update, November 10: This article was edited to reflect the outcome of Colorado’s psychedelics measure.

The post Maryland and Missouri Legalize Cannabis; Three States Say No appeared first on Filter.

“As I said when I ran for president, no one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana,” Biden began.

He and his administration have long been criticized for failing to carry out that election pledge, and Biden has been seen as holding up the momentum toward legalization, including after the Democratic-controlled House passed the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment and Expungement (MORE) Act in April. After a long silence on the subject, the president said in July that “we’re working on” freeing marijuana prisoners, without providing further details. He has finally followed through.

“Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana. It’s time that we right these wrongs.”

“It’s already legal in many states, and criminal records for marijuana possession have led to needless barriers to employment, to housing, and educational opportunities,” he continued in his October 6 address. “And that’s before you address the racial disparities around who suffers the consequences. While white and Black and Brown people use marijuana at similar rates, Black and Brown people are arrested, prosecuted and convicted at disproportionately higher rates.”

He then outlined the steps he would take. “First, I’m announcing a pardon for all prior federal offenses for the simple possession of marijuana. There are thousands of people who are convicted of marijuana possession who may be denied employment, housing or educational opportunities as a result of that conviction. My pardon will remove this burden on them.”

“Second, I’m calling on all governors to do the same for state marijuana possession offenses.”

“Third, the federal government currently classifies marijuana as a Schedule I substance the same as heroin and LSD and more serious than fentanyl. It makes no sense. So, I’m asking the secretary of health and human services and the attorney general to initiate a process to review how marijuana is scheduled under federal law. Even as federal and local regulations of marijuana change, important limitations on trafficking, marketing and underage sales should stay in place. Too many lives have been upended because of our failed approach to marijuana. It’s time that we right these wrongs.”

As I’ve said before, no one should be in jail just for using or possessing marijuana.

Today, I’m taking steps to end our failed approach. Allow me to lay them out.

— President Biden (@POTUS) October 6, 2022

Not long after Biden’s announcement, both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said that they would move to quickly follow the president’s order.

“The Justice Department will expeditiously administer the President’s proclamation, which pardons individuals who engaged in simple possession of marijuana, restoring political, civil, and other rights to those convicted of that offense,” the DOJ said in a statement. “In coming days, the Office of the Pardon Attorney will begin implementing a process to provide impacted individuals with certificates of pardon.”

“We are thrilled to see President Biden holding true to his commitment … This is incredibly long overdue.”

Drug policy reform advocates immediately celebrated the news.

“We are thrilled to see President Biden holding true to his commitment to pardon every person with simple marijuana charges at the federal level, including people in DC,” said Kassandra Frederique, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, in a press statement. “And we are further encouraged by his efforts to get Governors to take similar actions at the state level. This is incredibly long overdue. There is no reason that people should be saddled with a criminal record—preventing them from obtaining employment, housing, and countless other opportunities—for something that is already legal in 19 states and DC and decriminalized in 31 states.”

JUST OUT: President Biden plans to issue an executive order pardoning all people convicted of simple #marijuana possession under federal law. A shame it took him so long but still glad he did it. @lastprisonerprj @stevedeangelo @DrugPolicyOrg @NORML @JoeBiden

— Ethan Nadelmann (@ethannadelmann) October 6, 2022

According to the the US Bureau of Justice Statistics, “More than 99% of federal drug offenders are sentenced for trafficking.” However, officials said that over 6,500 people with federal cannabis possession convictions will immediately benefit.

In the political context, the news can be seen as an “October surprise,” as critical midterm elections loom—like the Senate race in Pennsylvania between the state’s lieutenant governor, John Fetterman (D), and celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz (R). According to Marijuana Moment, Fetterman, who has made marijuana legalization a primary issue in his campaign, talked with Biden about changing marijuana’s scheduling under the Controlled Substances Act. A recent poll showed that 69 percent of Americans support federal marijuana legalization, meaning Biden’s move is sure to be popular.

While unprecedented, the move fulls short of the full federal decriminalization that Biden pledged, let alone legalization. New FBI data showed more than 170,000 arrests for cannabis possession nationwide in 2021. Advocates recognize that there is much further to go.

“We … hope that the Biden Administration will go further and fully deschedule marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), rather than initiate a process that could lead to rescheduling,” Frederique said. “Keeping marijuana on the federal drug schedule will mean people will continue to face criminal charges for marijuana. It also means that research will continue to be inhibited and state-level markets will be at odds with federal law.”

The scheduling review process “will take some time because it must be based on a careful consideration of all of the available evidence, including scientific and medical information that’s available,” a senior official told CNN.

“We urge the President to support the Cannabis Administration and Opportunity Act, introduced in the Senate earlier this year,” Frederique continued, “which would fully remove marijuana from the CSA, provide expungement and resentencing for past marijuana convictions beyond simple possession, and comprehensively repair the harms of marijuana criminalization.”

Update, October 11: This article has been edited to more accurately reflect the status of the 6,500 people who will immediately benefit.

Photograph by United States Mission Geneva via Flickr/Creative Commons 2.0

The Influence Foundation, which operates Filter, previously received a restricted grant from the Drug Policy Alliance to support a Drug War Journalism Diversity Fellowship.

The post Biden Pardons All Federal Cannabis Possession Convictions appeared first on Filter.

A JAMA study published July 13, authored by researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute on Diseases of Addiction, found no risk associated with “permanently expanding take-home methadone.” Supposed dangers of “diversion” have routinely been cited by opponents of expanded acccess. The research strengthens the case for the Opioid Treatment Access Act of 2022, introduced in the House and Senate in February, which would lower methadone barriers—although the bill has been criticized for not going further, by eliminating the repressive clinic system altogether.

Early in the pandemic, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration expanded the eligibility requirements for unsupervised methadone dosing, allowing state-level exemptions for clinics to dispense 28-day supplies to patients deemed “stable” and 14-day supplies at clinics’ discretion.

Though the updated guidance was intended to slow the spread of COVID-19, its impact in increasing access or reducing transmission among patients at highest risk of either COVID-19 or overdose was severely limited. Cinics weren’t actually required to use it; many were not inclined to, especially in states where Medicaid covers methadone maintenance as fee-per-service. Methadone delivery vans vans rolled out in places, but to very few patients.

The Opioid Treatment Access Act would allow eligible providers to prescribe up to a one-month supply that patients could take home from a pharmacy. It would also remove a requirement that methadone clinics pursue a separate registration in order to operate delivery vans.

The Act is part of the Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-Being Act, a broader package of bills that also includes the Mainstreaming Addiction Treatment Act of 2021. The MAT Act passed the House on June 22. A companion bill in the Senate has yet to advance.

Eliminating the X-waiver

The legislation would also eliminate the X-waiver for DEA-licensed buprenorphine providers, and authorize other eligible providers to prescribe bupe for opioid use disorder (OUD) through telehealth appointments.

Since the Food and Drug Administration approved buprenorphine for OUD in 2002, outpatient providers have been required to obtain the waiver in order to prescribe it to such patients. No other medication has an X-waiver, and many providers have avoided prescribing bupe for OUD due to both the stigma associated with the waiver and the difficulty of getting it.

“The main issue is lack of provider availability,” Aaron Ferguson, of the Urban Survivors Union, told Filter. “That has less to do it seems with regulation than it does with doctors just not wanting to prescribe it. Not wanting to work with people who use drugs.”

Like integrating methadone into primary care, eliminating the X-waiver is a logical goal in increasing access.

Eliminating the X-waiver won’t erase the stigma on its own, but it would be a monumental step forward.

Prior to April 2021, DEA-licensed providers were required to take a minimum eight-hour online course and provide psychosocial services in order to be able to prescribe bupe to up to 30 OUD patients. There were additional requirements for later raising the patient cap to 100, and still more to reach the maximum of 275. Very few providers prescribe to their full capacity.

In April 2021, the Department of Health and Human Services released new clinical practice guidelines that allowed eligible practitioners to prescribe bupe to up to 30 OUD patients without the online training or provision of ancillary services.

Though the X-waiver still applies to providers who want higher patient caps, the update made it easier for DEA-licensed physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists and certified nurse midwives to prescribe it.

Like integrating methadone into primary care, eliminating bupe’s X-waiver is a logical goal in increasing access to medications that dramatically reduce mortality for people with OUD. No longer singling the medications out for restrictions will lift the aura of criminality around them—and thus, the people who take them.

Photograph via State of Connecticut

The post Momentum Builds to Broaden Access to Methadone and Buprenorphine appeared first on Filter.

Meth-involved deaths have continued to rise across the country, with Indigenous people most impacted. But meth users may be one step closer to a Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment—a common antidepressant taken alongside an addiction medication, which has been reported by clinical researchers to help reduce patients’ use.

Daily doses of oral antidepressant bupropion coupled with injections every three weeks of naltrexone, a medication usually used to treat opioid or alcohol use disorders, was shown to help patients with moderate to severe MUD mitigate cravings.

Although this is far from the first time these medications have been tested with the aim of treating MUD, the well-evidenced efficacy shown by a recent trial puts the scientific community that much closer to becoming the first treatment approved by the FDA for the purpose of treating MUD.

The buproprion/naltrexone combination reduced participants’ use of meth and resulted in overall life improvements, according to the study, which was published by The New England Journal of Medicine and funded by the federal National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). All 400-plus participants in the study wanted to reduce or stop their meth use.

Bupropion is suggested to reduce cravings, while naltrexone might reduce the euphoric effects of meth.

Participants were considered to have successfully responded to treatment if they returned three negative urine screens out of four total. A higher rate of participants on the medication responded to the treatment than those who were not taking it. For weeks five and six, 16.5 percent of those given the naltrexone/bupropion combination responded, compared to only 3.4 percent of those in the control group. In weeks 11 and 12 of the treatment course, 11.4 percent of the medicated group responded, compared to 1.8 percent of the control group.

Bupropion is suggested to reduce cravings, while naltrexone might reduce the euphoric effects of meth. In the study, researchers wrote that the combination’s “benefit as a treatment for methamphetamine use disorder is similar to most medical treatments for mental health disorders, including antidepressants prescribed for depression or naltrexone prescribed for alcohol use disorder.” No significant adverse effects were identified.

“The opioid crisis and resulting overdose deaths in the United States are now well known, but what is less recognized is that there is a growing crisis of overdose deaths involving methamphetamine and other stimulants. However, unlike for opioids, there are currently no approved medications for treating methamphetamine use disorder,” said NIDA director Dr. Nora Volkow in a statement. “This advance demonstrates that medical treatment for methamphetamine use disorder can help improve patient outcomes.”

Holistic Treatment

The bupropion/naltrexone combination seems to be a promising resource for people struggling to manage their meth use. But pharmacological treatment is only part of a comprehensive response to potential drug harms. To protect against meth-involved overdoses, known as overamps, harm reductionists recommend checking your bag for unexpected substances, like fentanyl, taking breaks and getting sleep, eating nourishing food and staying hydrated and staying on top of your heart and blood-pressure health.

Meth-involved overamp deaths “surged” between 2011 and 2018, according to NIDA. Overamps spiked most sharply among “non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Natives,” the agency wrote in a press release. For these populations, the rate rose from 4.5 to 20.9 per 100,000 people.

“While much attention is focused on the opioid crisis, a methamphetamine crisis has been quietly, but actively, gaining steam—particularly among American Indians and Alaska Natives, who are disproportionately affected by a number of health conditions,” Volkow, a senior author on NIDA’s mortality study, continued in the statement.

Just as MUD medication is only part of the solution to the overdose crisis, knowing who needs the most support is also crucial.

“Identifying populations that have a higher rate of methamphetamine overdose is a crucial step toward curbing the underlying methamphetamine crisis,” said Dr. Beth Han, a NIDA investigator, in the same statement. “By focusing on the unique needs of individuals and developing culturally tailored interventions, we can begin to move away from one-size-fits-all approaches and toward more effective, tailored interventions.”

Because the promising combo for MUD is not yet approved by the FDA, patients could try accessing treatment by speaking with their medical provider about the off-label prescription of bupropion and naltrexone. What remains to be seen is if or when this medication combo will become a viable low-threshold treatment for the majority of people who could benefit from it.

Photograph of crystal methamphetamine by Radspunk via Wikimedia Commons/Creative Commons 4.0

The post As Fatal Meth Overamps Surge, Promising Medication Combo on the Horizon appeared first on Filter.

Within the Department of Justice, the USMS is responsible for the custody of people awaiting trial or sentencing, while the BOP is responsible for people who are serving their sentences. The report reviewed national recommendations on 16 pregnancy-related care topics and their corresponding agency standards within BOP and USMS. BOP policies were found to fully align on eight of the 16 topics; USMS policies on just three.

Among much else, the report interviewed seven women detained by USMS while they were pregnant. Six out of the seven described being placed in restraints while pregnant.

The report made six recommendations, including that directors of both agencies more closely align their policies with the national guidelines. Neither agency, however, is actually required to abide by them.

Among the guidelines that the report cited were those of the American Correctional Association’s public policies, the American Medical Association’s “Health Care While Incarcerated” policy and the United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners (better known as the “Bangkok Rules”). The report authors also cited the 2018 First Step Act, which prohibits “the use of restraints on prisoners during pregnancy, labor and the postpartum recovery period—defined as 12 weeks following delivery—barring any exceptions.”

The care standards by which the BOP has abided, and which the USMS has not, include access to abortion, prenatal vitamins and HIV care. BOP policy recommends that HIV testing be offered for all pregnant people; the USMS policy on HIV testing for pregnant people is virtually non-existent.

The report also included interviews with 15 women who were incarcerated at BOP facilities while pregnant. Only nine reported receiving counseling from a psychologist or social worker during their incarceration.

One of the three care topics where USMS policies fully aligned with the national guidelines was the agency’s intake health screening procedures for pregnant people. The USMS Detention Standards require that all people in custody receive medical, mental health and substance use screening.

The report did not include any data on the perspectives of incarcerated pregnant people regarding substance use disorder treatment, withdrawal or access to medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) while in USMS or BOP custody.

USMS stated that its “policy or Detention Standards do not recommend or require that pregnant women be treated with medication-assisted treatment or counseled about withdrawal risks.” BOP’s stance on MOUD is only slightly more humane: The agency allows pregnant people to access methadone, but does not call for them to be counseled regarding withdrawal risks.

Photograph via StockSnap

The post Report Exposes Mistreatment of Pregnant People in Federal Custody appeared first on Filter.

On March 4, a database of city investigations into civilian-alleged NYPD officer misconduct, titled NYPD Members of Service Histories, was published online by the New York City Civilian and Complaint Review Board (CCRB).

The records’ release had already been authorized by the repeal of 50-A—a decades-old state law which largely prohibited the disclosure of police personnel records. Governor Andrew Cuomo approved that change, along with other so-called accountability measures, on June 12, amid the historic grassroots demonstrations against police violence in the wake of the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.

However, a legal challenge brought by a law enforcement union resulted in a stay being ordered in September 2020. On March 3, 2021, just a day prior to the publication of the database, the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeal finally lifted the stay and greenlit the records’ release.

“The repeal of New York State Civil Rights Law Section 50-a—one of the most restrictive police secrecy laws in the country—was a landmark moment for New Yorkers,” said CCRB Chair Fred Davie in a statement. “The court’s decision to affirm the repeal of 50-a and vacate the stay is the right one, and I am proud the CCRB has acted quickly to once again provide New Yorkers with greater transparency.”

The database contains records on more than 83,000 NYPD officers, active and inactive, for complaints received on or after January 1, 2000. It can be searched by officer command, rank, substantiated complaints, shield number and name. Incidents can be found found by locating the complaint ID, incident date, type of misconduct (Force, Abuse of Authority, Discourtesy or Offensive Language), allegation, Board disposition, NYPD disposition and NYPD penalty imposed.

Even more information, such as complaint narratives, can be obtained through a request under the Freedom of Information law.

Photograph of a New York Police Department Officer in June 2020, by Anthony Quintano via Flickr/Creative Commons

The post Long-Hidden NYPD Misconduct Records Now Available Online appeared first on Filter.

On February 2, State Representative John Fillmore alone introduced House Bill (HB) 2710, legislation that would instate a partial ban on HIV/AIDS education while imposing transphobic and heteronormative censorship of the instruction. This isn’t the first time he’s proposed such a policy: In May 2020, he introduced a bill with matching text, only for it to die after not being reviewed by the House Rules Committee.

Fillmore has a history of unabashedly transphobic and queerphobic statements. “I believe that if you were born with the equipment of a male … you are a male as long as you are with that equipment,” he stated on his personal website. In a February 10 hearing where lawmakers were considering another transphobic bill by Fillmore—this time to preemptively ban legal recognition of nonbinary people—he compared identifying outside the gender binary to “identify[ing] as a chicken.” Fillmore did not respond to Filter‘s request for comment.

More than 18,000 Arizonans were living with HIV/AIDS in 2019, and the state registered 776 new cases that year. Black Arizonans had the highest incidence HIV/AIDS, at 36.5 cases per 100,000.

The office of Superintendent Kathy Hoffman, Arizona’s top elected official overseeing education matters, responded to Filter‘s request for comment by voicing opposition to the ideas represented by the bill. “The Superintendent has not officially taken a position because it has not been put on a committee agenda for a hearing,” said Morgan Dick, Hoffman’s public information officer. “However, we have opposed similar legislation this session and would likely oppose this bill if it moves forward.”

That legislation also targeted HIV/AIDS education. Introduced by other Republican representatives in May 2020 and January 2021, HB 2658 and HB 2184, respectively, both aimed to eliminate HIV/AIDS instruction below the fifth grade and requiring parental permission for participation. While provisions related to gender identity and monogamous relationships were absent, the latest bill stated that sex education courses “may not violate” a law that prohibits providing “to minors any item that is harmful to minors.” A violation is a class four felony punishable by up to three-and-a-half years in prison.

Multiple aspects of Fillmore’s bill are problematic for Hoffman. “Requiring permission to receive HIV/AIDS education creates an extra barrier for students,” Dick said. Asked whether Fillmore’s bill was transphobic, she did not mince words: “Yes.”

Put together, she said, “Bills that promote transphobia or block students from receiving medically and scientifically accurate information do not advance safe learning environments.”

A national advocacy organization for youth sexual health denounced the legislation. “This bill can only do harm to Arizona’s young people by robbing them of information they need—and by needlessly attaching shame and stigma to HIV and to transgender individuals,” Emily Bridges, a spokesperson for Advocates for Youth, told Filter. “All people have the right to lead healthy lives, and that includes receiving non-judgmental, accurate, age-appropriate information about HIV.”

Both bills, HB 2710 and HB 2184, have yet to be scheduled for review by the Education Committee.

A Progressive Alternative

Democratic lawmakers have introduced their own bills on updating sex education policy. State House and Senate lawmakers introduced bills (HB2277/SB1120) during the 2020 session that would have mandated “medically accurate and age-appropriate” sex education programs, inclusive of HIV/AIDS prevention, for students from kindergarten through grade 12.

In stark contrast to Fillmore’s approach, the lawmakers required discussion about “populations that historically have been more vulnerable to sexual abuse and assault,” making specific reference to transgender people.

On January 13, a Democratic House bill was introduced that similarly amends the law such to require “medically accurate and age-appropriate” sex education. The sponsors did not respond to Filter‘s request for comment.

The Democrats’ bills seem more in line with Hoffman’s vision. “The Superintendent believes all students are entitled to age-appropriate, medically and scientifically accurate health education,” said Dick. “Research shows that when students have this information they are able to make healthy, informed choices about their health. HIV is a preventable disease; providing clear and factual information on how it is transmitted helps prevent infection.”

Dick also noted the benefits of the Democrats’ proposal to no longer require prior authorization from parents: “An opt-out system provides parents with a mechanism to direct their child’s education—while removing some of those barriers to participation.”

Screenshot of Representative John Fillmore on February 10 via Arizona Legislature

The post Arizona Lawmaker Moves to Censor HIV Education, Trans Identities appeared first on Filter.

As the fatal overdose toll reaches unprecedented heights during the COVID-19 pandemic, a research trio is developing the Opioid Rapid Response System (ORRS), a project that trains civilians in naloxone administration so they can respond to 911 emergencies reported to the app, PulsePoint.

Cris Henderson, Dr. Annie Pezalla and Dr. Michael Hecht hope to present a solution to the issues presented by under-resourced emergency medical services (EMS) and the time-sensitivity of overdose responses.

“Emergency responders have many responsibilities [and] there are just not enough to deal with the size of the overdose problem,” they wrote to Filter, adding that “EMS and fire departments are often geographically distanced especially in rural and exurban areas or inhibited by the density of inner-city or suburban environments.”

Equipping community members themselves with the know-how and medication to save the lives of people who use drugs can ameliorate these practical challenges. “Research demonstrates that
communities with more responders are more effective reversing overdoses and that this involves utilizing citizen responders,” the researchers continued. “Citizen responders, cross-trained to administer naloxone and rescue breathing responding to PulsePoint notifications, takes random luck and chance out of the equation—increasing the likelihood that lives will be saved.”

“The key will be informing communities about the availability of the Opioid Rapid Response System and how it fits into their overall emergency response preparedness.”

The ORRS has been undergoing a clinical trial since October 2020. In that trial, the researchers intend to establish its “usability and feasibility” by evaluating how 400 participants in two Indiana counties respond to either face-to-face or online naloxone training, and whether those methods are equally effective. The efficacy of the intervention—preparing participants to respond to overdoses—will be measured by the number of their responses and the number of lives saved.

The already-historic overdose crisis in Indiana has only worsened since the beginning of the pandemic. Between June 2019 and June 2020, the state saw a 26 percent increase in fatal overdoses—well above the nation’s average increase of 21.3 percent.

After the completion of the trial on March 31, 2021, statewide trials in Indiana and Washington will be conducted to determine the number of lives that can be saved and the program’s cost effectiveness. Scaling the intervention will then require getting the word out.

“Currently, the over 4,000 PulsePoint communities are not equipped to deal with opioid overdoses,” the team wrote. “The key will be informing the communities about the availability of the Opioid Rapid Response System and helping them understand how it fits into their overall emergency response preparedness, particularly the opioid overdose epidemic.”

A shift toward activating civilian responders represents a critical opportunity to remove police from responding to health emergencies.

The team believes the clinical trial findings will be make important contributions to the field of overdose response. “There do not appear to be any evidence-based naloxone training programs for any audience, citizen responders included. While programs exist, their efficacy has not been tested,” they wrote. “This training program will have scientific evidence of its ability to effectively train citizen responders and have a proven ability to save lives.”

They describe the naloxone trainings that do currently exist as “largely informational,” “didactic” and overall “not the most effective” in creating a sense of motivation and empowerment among trainees.

A shift toward activating civilian responders represents a critical opportunity to remove police from responding to health emergencies, as so many activists have called for—especially since the 2020 uprisings. But the researchers were clear that they have no intention of presenting an alternative to law enforcement. “[We] are grateful for the support we’ve received from law enforcement in Hancock.”

That includes the Hancock County prosecutor’s office, which established a policy last year of exploiting the successful administration of naloxone to pursue the criminalization of overdose survivors, according to public records obtained by Filter last year. Henderson noted that the prosecutor’s approach might not be the “most effective” for supporting people, and harm reduction advocates have denounced the policy in interviews for the article.

Despite that, the team says ORRS and the prosecutor “both have the same goal in mind: to save lives.”

The post How a Smartphone App Could Help Communities Respond to Overdoses appeared first on Filter.

The uprising began around 2:30 am with a fight between a detainee and a corrections officer, CJC Public Safety Director Jimmie Edwards said at a news conference later that morning. The incident escalated after some detainees “jimmied” the locks on their cells, gained access to the unit and released other people from their cells. Afterwards, the protesters set various objects on fire and threw them out of windows, according to local news station KSDK.

While Edwards said that the people involved in the uprising did not make any demands, photographic coverage of the event contradicts that claim. 

Included on the signs that the incarcerated participants displayed were messages such as “What about Anthony Smith” and “Free 57.” Smith, 24-year-old Black man, was fatally shot by then-St. Louis police officer Jason Stockley in 2011. Six years later, a judge found Stockley not guilty of first-degree murder.

“Free 57” is a reference to the 57 incarcerated people who took part in a December protest at the jail “and were punished and placed into different conditions,” Latrell Stanton, a leader with Ex-Incarcerated People Organizing St. Louis (EXPO-STL), a group that advocates to end mass incarceration, told Filter.

The uprising “was the natural evolution of the actions of living and feeling human beings” and took place “because of inhumane treatment by CJC Management concerning Covid-19 along with other issues,” EXPO-STL wrote in a Facebook post that morning. 

The protest was the third time in as many months that people incarcerated at CJC undertook some form of civil disobedience. On December 29, 2020, detainees protested conditions at the jail by refusing to return to their cells. On January 1, 2021, detainees “created a disruption because they refused to be housed with COVID-19 positive inmates,” Lewis Reed, the president of the city’s Board of Aldermen, told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.  

Demands

Cortez Easterwood-Bey, who is currently incarcerated at the city’s Medium Security Institution (known as the “Workhouse”), participated in the December 29 protest. Easterwood-Bey wrote that he and his fellow detainees staged that protest after the complaints and grievances that they submitted went ignored by the correctional officers (COs) at the facility, according to EXPO-STL. Easterwood-Bey also outlined the demands of those on the inside.

“We don’t want to DIE, we are hungry, we want proper ventilation, we are tired of being cold without being given winter clothing, we want proper PPE for COVID-19, we are tired of being price gouged in the commissary and vending machines, we want the mandated six [hours of recreational time] per day, and we want visits from family and friends since there is a glass barrier between them and the inmates,” Easterwood-Bey wrote, according to the EXPO-STL post.  

But the COs retaliated against the protesters, using tear gas and sending participants to the “Workhouse.”

Besides the demands mentioned in Easterwood-Bey’s letter, Expo St. Louis is currently calling for third parties—such as health and wellness organizations, elected officials and media members—to be granted transparent tours of CJC and the Workhouse, according to Stanton.

Addressing the conditions at those two facilities in conjunction with each other is crucial, Stanton told Filter, “because the Justice Center, as poor as the conditions are there, is considered to be much better than the Workhouse. The Workhouse is flooded, and has feces.”

Expo St. Louis is also demanding that COVID-19 vaccines be made available to detainees.

Next Steps

On February 7, Expo St. Louis co-sponsored a virtual rally in solidarity with those incarcerated with CJC. Other co-sponsors of the event included the legal advocacy group Arch City Defenders and the Close the Workhouse campaign.

Advocacy group For The People STL also held a demonstration outside of CJC on February 8. At the event, Christopher Winston, an organizer with the group, read an account from a detainee. 

“We’re out here today saying this is unacceptable. St. Louis taxpayers’ money should not be used to commit violations of the Geneva Convention and every other human rights law that has ever been passed, and we are not going to stand for it, and nobody else should,” Winston said, according to the St. Louis American. 

Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), whose congressional district includes St. Louis, tweeted a response to the protesters: “I want to talk to my constituents in the window. Their lives and their rights must be provided.”

St. Louis mayoral candidates have weighed in on the question of whether the Workhouse ought to be closed, after the city’s Board of Aldermen voted unanimously for closure last year. Three of them provided the St. Louis American with statements in support of closing the Workhouse; a fourth, Andrew Jones, said that “the proposed closure of The Workhouse would be costly.”

The city’s primary election will take place on March 2. 

Photograph via City of St. Louis

The post Detainees at St. Louis City Jail Rise Up to Protest Inhumane Treatment appeared first on Filter.