TIME Supreme Court

Supreme Court Keeps Texas Abortion Clinics Open for Now

Blocks restrictions from going into effect until the court decides whether to hear appeal

The Supreme Court voted Monday to temporarily block several abortion restrictions in Texas until the court decides whether to take the case on appeal.

The Court voted 5-4 to grant an emergency reprieve from the restrictions, which would have forced many Texas abortion clinics to close. Earlier this month, a lower court upheld the two restrictions, which would have required abortion clinics to meet the same building, equipment and staffing standards that surgery hospitals must meet, and required physicians who administer abortions to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. If upheld, the restrictions would force half the abortion clinics in Texas to close, leaving the state with fewer than a dozen clinics. Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Anthony M. Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were the five majority votes, according to SCOTUSblog.

The Fifth Circuit Court previously sided with the Texas legislature, writing that the restrictions “protect the health and welfare of women seeking abortions,” and adding that “there is no question that this is a legitimate purpose that supports regulating physicians and the facilities in which they perform abortions.” Major medical groups like the American Medical Association say that the restrictions “impede, rather than serve, public health objectives,” and reproductive rights advocates say they’re expressly designed to restrict access to abortion.

“We are grateful the Supreme Court has stepped in to protect women’s access to safe, legal abortion, for now. Restricting or banning abortion blocks women from getting safe medical care,” Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards said in a statement. “This dangerous law never should have passed in the first place — which is why we need to elect leaders who will champion women’s health and rights.”

The Supreme Court decision does not strike down the restrictions—it merely prevents them from going into effect until the Court decides whether or not to hear an appeal from the clinics. If the law stays as it is, the abortion regulations in Texas will be among the most restrictive in the country.

The Court is also hearing a similar case from Mississippi, involving the requirement that doctors get admitting privileges at a local hospital. If the Court upholds that restriction, the last remaining abortion clinic in Mississippi may be forced to close. The Court may issue a decision on that case as early as Tuesday.

TIME celebrity

Age Gap is the New Wage Gap: Just Ask Top-Paid Female Celebrities

Celebrity Sightings In New York City - June 24, 2015
Raymond Hall—GC Images Actress Jennifer Lawrence is seen walking iSoho on June 24, 2015 in New York City. (Raymond Hall--GC Images)

On average, the women on the Forbes List of 100 Top-Paid Celebrities are almost 10 years younger than the men

Aging rockers, has-been radio personalities, and ex-action stars get paid more than A-list actresses. That’s one major takeaway from Forbes’ annual list of the 100 top-paid celebrities this year.

Two things were apparent from this year’s list: women make up only 16% of the top-paid celebrities in the world, and the ones who do make the list are significantly younger than the men. The average age for men on the list was 42– for women, it was 36. If you take out Judge Judy, who at 72 is an outlier by about 15 years, that average drops to just over 33.

In other words: the pay gap is alive and well, even among the richest celebrities, and while male stars are adept at turning youthful success into a lifetime of fame, female celebrity is far more delicate. The average age for men on the 2015 Forbes list does not include the collected ages of The Rolling Stones, the Eagles, and Fleetwood Mac, all ’70s era bands who made the list (Fleetwood Mac includes two women)– if the ages of these men had been included, the average age for men on the list would have been significantly higher. Older guys like Jimmy Buffett (68) Jackie Chan (61) and Howard Stern (61) make the list, but Meryl Streep (66) and Madonna (56) don’t.

The 16 women on the list earned a combined $409 million, while the combined male earnings topped $4.3 billion. More importantly, many of the women on the list tend to be young and beautiful, while older stars are simply not making the cut. Of the 16 women on the list, only a quarter are over the age of 35 (Sofia Vergara, Jennifer Lopez, Ellen Degeneres and Judge Judy.) The other twelve are much younger, including Jennifer Lawrence (24), Taylor Swift (25) and Lady Gaga (29). Almost half of the 16 women on the list are under 30.

To be clear–it’s not Forbes’s fault there are so few women on their list, they’re just the messenger here. This year they expanded their annual list of top-paid celebrities to include international icons, and restricted it to on-camera talent (which might be why Shonda Rhimes and Oprah aren’t on it). They assembled the list by measuring earnings from June 1, 2014 to June 1, 2015, then subtracted management fees and taxes. That sounds like a fair methodology for determining which celebrities are making the most money.

And yet, women are notably absent. Lots of women who would ordinarily be on the list seem to be taking a little break this year. As Forbes’s Natalie Robehmed explains, in her post about why there are so few women on the list:

Sandra Bullock clocked an impressive $51 million in 2014′s ranking thanks to her solo payday in Gravity, but a quiet 12 months took her out of the running this year. Other seemingly big stars, such as Emma Stone, have yet to see their earnings catch up with their status. Even Melissa McCarthy, who has proven her ability to carry an action/comedy movie solo with Spy, St. Vincent and Tammy failed to break the Celebrity 100′s $29 million barrier to entry.

Of course, there’s also the fact that there’s a pay gap between men and women in most professions, and Hollywood isn’t immune. As Robehmed points out, it’s no coincidence that Jennifer Lawrence and Amy Adams only saw 7% of the profits for American Hustle, while the male actors got 9%. Women are also less likely to be the main character, which means smaller paychecks, and in other countries the gap is even worse– in Bollywood, actresses make about a sixth of what their male co-stars make.

And yet it’s impossible to ignore the age trend at work here. Among the richest celebrities, all the women young, beautiful, and at the top of their game right now– Beyonce, Katy Perry, and Sofia Vergara are all in the prime of their careers. Not so with the richest male celebrities– Jerry Seinfeld hasn’t been on primetime TV in years, and Adam Sandler hit his stride in the early 2000s.

 

In other words: when it comes to top-paid celebrities, the age gap might be just as important as the wage gap.

 

 

 

TIME motherhood

Millennials More Supportive of Working Moms than Previous Generations

482147905
Jasper Cole—Getty Images/Blend Images RM Mother and daughter walking on city street

Much more likely to say that moms who work have just as good relationships with their kids

Working moms are getting more love than ever. Millennials are much more supportive of working mothers than young people in the 1970s and 1990s, and there’s a broader consensus that working moms can have a great relationship with their kids, according to a new study shared exclusively with TIME.

Sign up here for TIME’s weekly roundup of the best parenting stories from anywhere.

Researchers at University of California, San Diego and San Diego State University attribute the increased acceptance to a shifting social and economic realities over the last 30 years, in which there are more single moms and few can afford not to work. The study, published Monday in the Psychology of Women Quarterly, analyzed the results of two national representative studies of nearly 600,000 respondents. They found that in 2010, only 22% of 12th-graders thought young children suffered if their mother worked, down from 34% in the 1990s and 59% in the 1970s. Adults also showed an increased tolerance for working mothers, with 35% believing that a child was worse off if his or her mother went to work in 2012, compared with 68% in the 1970s.

The researchers also found that more people believe working moms can have just as good relationships with their kids as moms who stay at home. In 1977, less than half of adults agreed that “a working mother can establish just as warm and secure a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work.” In 2012, 72% agreed with that statement.

“When you have more working mothers, you have to have more acceptance of them,” says Jean Twenge, author of Generation Me and a main researcher on the study. “When people look around and see ‘this is what people do now,’ you have to have more acceptance.”

But in some areas, there appeared to be a bit of a backtracking. In the 1990s, 27% agreed that it was best for the man to work and the woman to stay home, while 32% agreed with that idea in 2010-2013. In the 1990s, 14% thought the husband should make important decisions in the family, but 17% thought so in 2010. Twenge says that probably doesn’t indicate a spike in sexism, but instead might signify an increased perception that marriage is only for a certain kind of person. “It’s possible that this generation sees marriage as something that people with traditional gender roles do,” she says. “They think it’s for more traditional people.”

Twenge says the increased acceptance of working moms isn’t just because millennials have been around more women who work– it’s also part of the millennial tendency towards individualism. “One aspect of individualism is to treat people equally,” she says. “When you treat people as individuals, you’re not going to distinguish between a working mother and a working father.”

 

TIME LGBT

Why June 26 Should Be a National Holiday to Honor Progress

Carlos McKnight, from Washington, D.C., waves a rainbow colored flag outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Friday, June 26, 2015. The high court will decide by the end of the month whether the Constitution gives gays the right to marry. The court's actions until now have suggested that a majority of the nine justices will vote to legalize same-sex weddings nationwide. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg *** Local Caption *** Carlos McKnight
Andrew Harrer—© 2015 Bloomberg Finance LP Carlos McKnight, from Washington, D.C., waves a rainbow colored flag outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., U.S., on Friday, June 26, 2015. (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)

Charlotte Alter covers women, culture, politics and breaking news for TIME in New York City.

It's an important date not just for gay Americans, but for us all

When several historic events happen on the exact same day, it’s a sign: June 26 should be a national holiday.

On Friday the Supreme Court ruled that gay Americans had the right to marry in every state in the country. On the exact same date two years ago, the same court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, allowing same-sex couples to access federal benefits. And when the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex sexual activity should be legal in every state in the Lawrence vs Texas ruling in 2003, it did so on … June 26. It’s a coincidence, but also much more than that.

Because June 26 isn’t just an important date for gay Americans– it’s a date that symbolizes how rapidly change can happen in America, how quickly our attitudes can evolve, and how, when used correctly, our system is one that propels us all towards a more equal state.

In other words, June 26 is a date that represents what happens when America works the way it’s supposed to work. Only 11 years ago, in 2004, Massachusetts became the first state to allow gay couples to marry. In a little over a decade, gay marriage has gone from a provocative pipe dream to a legal and constitutional right. In that time, the battle has been fought in the legislatures, in the courts, and in the American national conscience.

In 2004, then-Senate candidate Barack Obama said he believed marriage was “between a man and a woman.” In 2010, he said his views on same-sex marriage were “evolving.” This morning in 2015, the White House Twitter avatar turned rainbow-colored, in celebration of the Supreme Court’s decision.

June 26 isn’t just a symbol of marriage equality or gay rights– it’s a day that commemorates a collective change of mind, the American ability to choose freedom and equality.

But wait! Isn’t June 26 a little too close to July 4? If we had two national holidays within the course of a week, wouldn’t the U.S. economy come grinding to a halt and the world implode?

Not necessarily. Just think about how glorious it would be to have two national holidays just over a week apart. It would be the perfect timing for a summer vacation, one that all Americans could enjoy with their families. Maybe they’d celebrate by taking trip to an American beach town, staying in an American hotel, eating at American restaurants. Maybe they’d fly somewhere on an American airline or grill some American burgers. Studies have shown that vacations are good for the economy, and that if everyone took their allotted vacation time, it would support 1.2 million jobs and create $21 billion in tax revenue.

June 26 and July 4 could be sister holidays– both celebrations of freedom, equality, and the promise of America.

TIME Ideas hosts the world's leading voices, providing commentary and expertise on the most compelling events in news, society, and culture. We welcome outside contributions. To submit a piece, email ideas@time.com.

TIME Race

Rev. Clementa Pinckney to Be Laid to Rest in Charleston

President Obama Funeral Clementa Pinckney
Win McNamee—Getty Images Members of the clergy wait to enter the funeral service where U.S. President Barack Obama will deliver the eulogy for South Carolina State senator and Rev. Clementa Pinckney who was killed along with eight others in a mass shooting June 26, 2015 in Charleston, S.C.

Thousands line up to pay their respects

Thousands gathered in Charleston, South Carolina on Friday for the funeral of Rev. Clementa Pinckney, the state senator who was shot dead with eight other worshippers in the Emanuel A.M.E. Church last week.

So many people lined up outside the TD Arena at the College of Charleston to pay their respects to Rev. Pinckney that the Red Cross is handing out bottles of water to attendees who might be at risk for heat exhaustion. Mourners started lining up at 4 a.m., the Charleston Post-Courier reports. President Obama gave an emotional address, in which he sang a passionate rendition of ‘Amazing Grace.’

Pinckney, who was both a prolific minister and a state senator, was considered one of the most respected figures in South Carolina before his death just weeks before his 42nd birthday. Called to the pulpit at 13, he became an ordained minister at 18.

He believed that political action goes hand-in-hand with worship, so at 23 he became the youngest elected black member of the South Carolina House of legislature, where he championed legislation for police body cameras, background checks for buyers of assault weapons, and insurance coverage for smoking cessation programs. He even considered supporting a casino in his district, because even though as a pastor he disapproved of gambling, he knew his constituents needed jobs.

“I always told him, ‘You’re going to be a national political figure,’” legislative aide Helen Pittman told the New York Times. “I’d like to scrub those words out of my mouth, because now he is.”

Many of Pinckney’s friends and family members spoke at the funeral. U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) also spoke, encouraging mourners not to let the tragedy of Pinckney’s death cast a shadow across all he worked to achieve. “We’ve seen too many victories to let defeat have the last word,” he said.

Pinckney is survived by his wife and two young daughters, Eliana and Malana. Both girls wrote notes to their late father which were included in the funeral program. “Although he may be gone, he’s here with me all day and night long,” wrote Eliana. “I know you were shot at the Church and you went to Heaven. I love you so much!” wrote Malana, who signed her note, “your baby girl and grasshopper.”

TIME Internet

Read Monica Lewinsky’s Moving Speech on Online Shaming

Cannes Lions : Day Five
Marc Piasecki—Getty Images Monica Lewinsky attends the 'Cannes Lions Festival' on June 25, 2015 in Cannes, France.

Read excerpts of her speech provided exclusively to TIME

Monica Lewinsky is back in the spotlight, this time as an activist working to end cyberbullying and online shaming.

Almost two decades after she was thrust into international infamy for her affair with then President Bill Clinton, Lewinsky has emerged as a fierce advocate for victims of online shaming, arguing that her experience as a 22-year-old intern made her “patient zero” of online internet shaming, perhaps the earliest example of what internet shame can do to someone’s life.

In a series of articles and speeches, including a TED Talk earlier this year, Lewinsky says that we all need to work together to create what she calls a “compassionate society.” On Thursday, Lewinsky delivered the Ogilvy + Inspire speech at the Cannes Lions advertising festival on the relationship between the media and public shaming, and what advertising can do about it.

Here are extensive excerpts from her remarks, provided exclusively to TIME:

If you were a brand, what brand would you be?

That’s a question I was asked in an interview. A job interview, just a few years ago. Let me tell you, when you’re Monica Lewinsky, that’s a loaded f*cking question.

All of you here today touch marketing and advertising … with successful, established and respected companies. You are familiar with what it means to shepherd, nurture, shape and grow your brand … and, while unfortunate, it is likely that at one point or another you have been at the center of a “brand crisis” — when your brand’s narrative ran away from you.

But, can you imagine what that is like when the brand, is you? You. Personally. Your likeness. Your name. Your values. Your history. Your soul.

That’s what happened to me in 1998.

Gossip websites, paparazzi, reality programming, politics, news outlets and sometimes hackers all traffic in shame. It’s led to desensitization and a permissive environment online to troll, harass, invade privacy and cyber bully.

This shift, has created what Professor Nicolaus Mills calls … a Culture of Humiliation. And in this Culture of Humiliation, there is another kind of price tag attached to public shaming. The price does not measure the cost to the victim – which Tyler [Clementi] and too many others have paid,but rather, the price measures the profit of those who prey on them.

This violation of others is raw material efficiently and ruthlessly mined, packaged, and… sold at a profit. Whether tallied in dollars, clicks, likes or just the perverse thrill of exposure…A marketplace has emerged … where shame is a commodity. Public humiliation an industry. How is the money made? Clicks.

The more shame, the more clicks; the more clicks, the more advertising dollars. The more advertising dollars — you can see where this is going — the more of what sells … shame.

Of course, this is not an indictment of advertising dollars. Nothing wrong with advertising dollars … and everyone in the room can agree on that!

But I believe we can also agree that there are boundaries where profit halts and social responsibility steps in.

Now, we’re in a dangerous cycle: the more we click on this kind of gossip, the more numb we get to the human lives behind it … and the more numb we get, the more we click.

All the while, someone is making money off the back of another’s suffering.

Political commentator Sally Kohn pointed out in a Ted talk on clickbait, that because of online algorithms, we … are now co-creating our content by clicking behavior. As she said, “we are the editors of the new media. Clicking is a public act. “

I would argue, a moral act, too. We don’t stop to think that with a click on clickbait, we are entering the online Coliseum.

Building a more compassionate society is going to be a bilateral exercise between individuals and the brands that represent their aspirations, their values and their truths. People make brands. If people are compassionate, brands will be compassionate in return.

We can lead one another to a more compassionate, more empathic place. We can help change behavior. We can all learn from our mistakes and be more resilient. And we can together make a society where the sometimes distancing effect of technology doesn’t remove our fundamental humanity.

All of the most vibrant creative minds in the world are here — and here this week. You are the creative engines that will drive our culture moving forward.

Will you help me?

And so I end, where I began: if you were a brand, what brand would you be?

 

TIME Culture

Monica Lewinsky Slams a Society Where ‘Shame Is a Commodity’

Cannes Lions : Day Five
Marc Piasecki—Getty Images Monica Lewinsky attends the 'Cannes Lions Festival' on June 25, 2015 in Cannes, France.

Urges brands to help build a more "compassionate society"

Monica Lewinsky made a powerful speech at Cannes Lions festival conference Thursday about how public shaming, media and advertising are connected.

“The more we click on this kind of gossip, the more numb we get to the human life behind it,” she said, according to AdAge. “And the more numb we get, the more we click. All the while, someone is making money off of the back of another suffering.”

Lewinsky has re-emerged as a public figure two decades after she was thrust into the center of a media maelstrom over her affair with then-President Bill Clinton. In the last year, she’s come out as a vocal advocate of online compassion—she even gave a speech at TED2015 where she called herself “patient zero”of internet shaming.

“Violation of others is raw material, efficiently and ruthlessly mined, packaged and sold at a profit,” she said Thursday at Cannes. “Whether tallied in dollars, clicks, likes, or just the perverse thrill of exposure, a marketplace has emerged where shame is a commodity, and public humiliation an industry.”

But Lewinsky was quick to add that her focus on shaming wasn’t an indictment of advertising—it was a call to action.

“Building a more compassionate society is going to be a bilateral exercise between individuals and the brands that represent their aspirations, their values and their truths. People make brands. If people are compassionate, brands will be compassionate in return.”

[AdAge]

TIME Crime

Freddie Gray Autopsy Shows He Suffered a ‘High-Energy Injury’

Baltimore seeks answers in Freddie Gray's death in police custody
Family of Freddie Gray

Report compares his injury to the kind sustained in a shallow-water diving incident

An autopsy report on Freddie Gray, the unarmed Baltimore man whose death in April reignited the national conversation on race and police brutality, reveals he sustained a “high-energy injury” in police custody that under different circumstances might have been ruled an accident.

The report, a copy of which was obtained by the Baltimore Sun, details how Gray, who was arrested on April 12 and put into a van on his stomach, might have been tossed around after the van changed its direction. The 25-year-old died a week later. Six police officers were later indicted in the case; all have pleaded not guilty, and a trial is set for later this year.

The state’s medical examiner’s office ruled Gray’s death a homicide due to the officers’ apparent failure to abide by safety protocols “through acts of omission,” the report states. It describes an injury similar to the kind one would endure from a shallow-water diving incident, and notes that Gray would likely have been unable to break his own fall because his ankles and wrists were tied. The injury to his spinal cord, the report finds, also would have inhibited his abilities to breathe or move his limbs.

The autopsy was finished on April 30, but has not yet been released publicly. The medical examiner’s office did not comment on the report.

Read more at the Baltimore Sun

TIME South Carolina

South Carolina Legislature Agrees to Debate Confederate Flag

They need a two-thirds majority in both houses to remove the flag

The South Carolina legislature decided Tuesday to schedule a debate on whether to remove the Confederate flag from the statehouse grounds.

The measure comes after Governor Nikki Haley suggested Monday that the Confederate flag be removed from the capitol grounds in Columbia following the murder of nine black worshipers, including state senator Rev. Clementa Pinckney, in the historically black Emanuel A.M.E. church in Charleston, S.C. last week. Calls for the flag’s removal intensified after photos surfaced the accused shooter, 21-year old Dylann Roof, posing next to the Confederate flag.

“For many people in our state, the flag stands for traditions that are noble,” Haley said Monday in a news conference at the state capitol, flanked by American and South Carolina state flags. “For many others in South Carolina, the flag is a deeply offensive symbol.”

State Representative Leon Howard, a Democrat, told TIME last week that voting for removing the flag could be politically dangerous for many Republicans. But now that Haley, a Republican, has called for the flag’s removal, some are hoping her colleagues in the legislature may follow her lead. Protesters gathered in front of the state capitol and chanted “take it down” as lawmakers entered the building.

On Tuesday lawmakers didn’t vote on whether to lower the flag—they just decided to formally consider on it. Removing the Confederate flag would require a two-thirds majority from each chamber of the legislature, since the flag’s presence is guaranteed by the South Carolina Heritage Act of 2000. According to a poll of lawmakers conducted Tuesday by the Charleston Post-Courier, about 40% of surveyed state lawmakers said they supported removing the flag, but the majority dodged the question or wouldn’t state an opinion.

Since Haley’s announcement Monday, Walmart has said it will stop selling merchandise that displays the Confederate flag. Sears, K-Mart, and eBay quickly followed suit.

TIME Sports

Utah Baseball Team Cancels ‘Caucasian Heritage Night’

Was to have included "wonder bread on burgers with mayonnaise"

A minor league Utah baseball team cancelled a ‘caucasian heritage night’ planned for August after social media backlash in the wake of the racially-motivated shootings in Charleston.

The Orem Owlz were planning on hosting a “Caucasian Heritage Night” on Aug 10, inviting fans who are “Irish, Italian, Scandinavian, German…. or even Utahn! Whatever your background, celebrate it at the Home of the Owlz!” The Owlz are a minor league farm team for the Los Angeles Angels.

Screen Shot 2015-06-19 at 5.01.30 PM

But the backlash on social media has been swift, especially in the wake of the racial tensions surrounding the killings in a Charleston church this week.

In a statement canceling the event, an Owlz spokesperson said that the event was intended to “have fun and make fun of everyday normalcies.”

“Our night was to include wonder bread on burgers with mayonnaise, clips from shows like Friends and Seinfeld and trying to solve the vertical leaping challenge,” the team said in a statement. “We understand, in light of recent tragic events, that our intentions have been misconstrued. For that, we sincerely apologize.”

 

 

Your browser is out of date. Please update your browser at http://update.microsoft.com