Thursday, December 2, 2021

Opinion Today: Police handcuffed her, naked, in her home

Will she ever see justice?
Author Headshot

By Eleanor Barkhorn

Editor at Large, Opinion

In the past decade, a powerful tool has emerged as a way to help people seeking justice for wrongdoing by the police: video footage. Viral videos of police officers abusing their power have spurred protests and efforts at legal reform.

But what are the costs of relying so heavily on video documentations of trauma?

Esau McCaulley addresses this question in a new essay today. He tells the story of Anjanette Young, a woman who was handcuffed, naked, in her Chicago apartment in February 2019 by police officers with a warrant based on faulty information.

The experience changed her life. She moved because she no longer felt safe in her home. She was diagnosed with PTSD and depression.

"My life before was just a quiet life," Young told McCaulley. "I lived a very quiet and simple life and now my life has been completely turned upside down. I can't sleep at night."

As McCaulley writes, Young tried to pursue justice with the city of Chicago quietly, and made very little progress.

So she and her lawyers made the decision to release the body camera footage of the raid to a local television station. The video went viral in December 2020, inspiring tweets of outrage and support.

And it had the desired effect: The city finally apologized to Young and began negotiations on a settlement. The officers involved in the raid were placed on desk duty.

All of this encouraged Young. But it also resurfaced the trauma she experienced on the night of the raid, and she had to take medical leave from her job at a hospital. As important as releasing the video was for her effort at obtaining justice from the city, it exposed her to a new round of pain. McCaulley's essay argues that it shouldn't be this way.

"I do wonder if it is right for us as a society to expect that level of sacrifice and vulnerability for already traumatized people to receive justice," McCaulley writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here's what we're focusing on today:

ADVERTISEMENT

Subscribe Today

New York Times Opinion curates a wide range of views, inviting rich discussion and debate that helps readers analyze the world. This work is made possible with the support of subscribers. Please consider subscribing to The Times with this special offer.

ADVERTISEMENT

Games Here is today's Mini Crossword and Spelling Bee. If you're in the mood to play more, find all our games here.

Forward this newsletter to friends to share ideas and perspectives that will help inform their lives. They can sign up here. Do you have feedback? Email us at opiniontoday@nytimes.com.

Contact us If you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other issues, visit our Help Page or contact The Times.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for the Opinion Today newsletter from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

Wednesday, December 1, 2021

Opinion Today: Where the pro-choice movement went wrong

It's time to get out of the defensive crouch.
Author Headshot

By Lauren Kelley

Ms. Kelley is a member of the editorial board.

The pro-choice movement has lost.

For many supporters of reproductive rights, of which I am one, it might feel taboo or defeatist to say that out loud (or to commit it to writing, in this case). But I've come to believe that it is essential to confront this truth, and to analyze the role "our side" played in allowing us to get to this point. This point being: Roe v. Wade, which ostensibly protects abortion access up to the point of fetal viability, is a dead letter in large swaths of the country, and a conservative supermajority in the Supreme Court is considering overturning it altogether, in oral arguments this morning.

That's not to say that the justices will overturn Roe in this case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, when that decision comes down next year. But if Roe survives this term, it is almost sure to emerge further hobbled, setting the stage for yet more challenges to Roe. Big picture, the trajectory for American abortion rights is clear: They are on the wane, especially for the most vulnerable among us.

It's also true that there have been some reproductive rights victories in recent years — like blue states expanding access to abortion — and there is much to learn from those efforts as well. But if the leaders of the pro-choice movement can't take a cleareyed look at their mistakes, how will they ever be able to stage a robust response if and when Roe falls for good?

ADVERTISEMENT

That's why I was excited to work with Amy Littlefield, a well-sourced reporter who focuses on reproductive rights, on her cover story for this weekend's Sunday Review, which explores where the pro-choice movement went wrong.

The point of her essay isn't to kick a movement when it's down — it's to take an honest look at how American reproductive rights ended up in this grim place. Yes, the pro-choice movement has had to contend with plenty of bad luck and bad actors. But in interviews with more than 50 advocates, analysts, abortion providers and legal experts, Littlefield identified several ways the big players in the movement could have proceeded differently, like focusing more on state efforts to erode abortion access and being more proactive overall.

"I think that when you're in a defensive position it's hard to not be last-minute, you're having to play catch-up all the time," Monica Simpson, executive director of the reproductive justice group SisterSong, told Littlefield. "I wouldn't say that we're behind the mark or that we're not paying attention," Simpson said of the broader movement, "it's just when you're constantly fighting it's hard to be proactive and to think long term."

As America enters this next phase of the fight over abortion rights, it's worth considering how the pro-choice movement's strategy ought to shift. Too many lives and livelihoods are at stake to not have that conversation.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here's what we're focusing on today:

ADVERTISEMENT

Subscribe Today

New York Times Opinion curates a wide range of views, inviting rich discussion and debate that helps readers analyze the world. This work is made possible with the support of subscribers. Please consider subscribing to The Times with this special offer.

Games Here is today's Mini Crossword and Spelling Bee. If you're in the mood to play more, find all our games here.

Forward this newsletter to friends to share ideas and perspectives that will help inform their lives. They can sign up here. Do you have feedback? Email us at opiniontoday@nytimes.com.

Contact us If you have questions about your Times account, delivery problems or other issues, visit our Help Page or contact The Times.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for the Opinion Today newsletter from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018