Categories
Music

Every Current Country Music Feud, Beef and Vendetta [UPDATED]

Which country stars are still beefing? We got it figured out (for now). Continue reading…​The Boot – Country Music News, Music Videos and Songs

Categories
Music

Every Current Country Music Feud, Beef and Vendetta [UPDATED]

Which country stars are still beefing? We got it figured out (for now). Continue reading…​Country Music News – Taste of Country

Categories
Food

The Old-School Italian Deli That’s Been An LA Staple For Over 70 Years

Los Angeles is a foodie mecca, with restaurants, cafes, and delis from cultures across the globe, but this one old-school Italian deli is a true staple.

​Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips

Categories
Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Federal government may seek removal of individual Alaskans from state voter rolls

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Reject stickers await ballot envelopes Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at the Division 1 office of the Alaska Division of Elections in Juneau, Alaska during counting for Alaska’s special U.S. House primary election. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)


When the state of Alaska turned over a copy of the state’s voter rolls to the Department of Justice in December, it also signed an agreement that allows the DOJ to ask the state to put individual Alaskans on track for removal from the state’s voter list.

Officially labeled a “confidential memorandum of understanding,” the document was signed Dec. 19 by Carol Beecher, director of the Alaska Division of Elections, and U.S. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon.

Alaska is one of at least a dozen states that have signed similar documents, even as more states continue to fight the requests in court. 

In part, the document says “the Justice Department will securely notify you or your state of any voter list maintenance issues … i.e., that your state’s (list) only includes eligible voters.”

It goes on to state “that within forty-five (45) days of receiving that notice from the Justice Department of any issues … your state will clean its (list) by removing ineligible voters and resubmit the updated (list) to the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department” to confirm that the state is following federal law.

Alaska’s signed agreement was obtained by the Alaska Beacon on Tuesday via a public records request.

Beecher and Kelly Howell, chief of staff to Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom, said the agreement does not allow DOJ to purge voters — a term that means removing them from the voter roll altogether.

Instead, the DOJ’s picks, if any, would be placed on the state’s inactive voter list. Anyone on that list must provide ID and have their identity verified if they wish to vote.

People on the inactive list are also placed on the state’s path to removal, a process that takes four years according to a timeline set by federal and state law

The agreement says in part that it was “entered into at your state’s request,” but by email, Dahlstrom’s office said that isn’t correct and that the Department of Justice provided the agreement.

The lieutenant governor is in charge of Alaska’s elections, and in a cover letter dated Dec. 19, she said the memo was “entered at the request of the Department of Justice” and state law.

That law, Dahlstrom said, “allows the Division of Elections to share voters’ confidential information with a federal government agency, such as the Department of Justice, provided it uses ‘the information only for governmental purposes authorized under law.’”

If the Department of Justice were to seek faster removal of Alaskans from the voter rolls, it could violate that clause.

Responding to questions from the Beacon, the lieutenant governor’s chief of staff said the state has not received any notices from the Justice Department about problems with its voter list, that no “ineligible voters” have been removed and that the state isn’t aware of any times when Alaska’s rolls were used for “pre-litigation or litigation purposes,” as defined in the agreement.

Concerns about states’ rights being overridden

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the right of states to set the rules for local and state elections; changing voter rolls would represent a new expansion of powers by the Department of Justice.

Former Democratic state Sen. Tom Begich, posting about the issue on social media, said he is “outraged” by the agreement between the state and the federal government.

“That kind of federal interference threatens our constitutional right to run our own elections,” he said.

He later issued a statement calling on the Alaska Legislature to investigate the issue.

Dahlstrom, a Republican, is also a candidate for governor.

Writing in an opinion column published by the Juneau Independent on Friday, former Alaska Attorney General Bruce Botelho, a Democrat, said “it is alarming that the federal government has demanded” the copy of the voter roll with personally identifying information.

Nationally, at least 11 other states have signed agreements similar to the one signed by Alaska, according to federal court testimony in December over a lawsuit that challenged the state of California’s refusal to turn over its voter rolls to the federal government.

The text of Alaska’s agreement is almost identical to ones previously disclosed in court and by the American Civil Liberties Union in a lawsuit by the federal government against the state of Colorado.

“We will not comply with the Trump Department of Justice’s request for Coloradans’ sensitive voting information,” said Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, in December. “The DOJ can take a hike; it does not have a legal right to the information. Colorado will not help Donald Trump undermine our elections and hurt the American people.”

Nationally, the federal government has sued more than two dozen states, including Colorado, that refused to send voter rolls to the federal government.

Those states generally have provided copies of publicly available rolls, but the federal government is seeking more detailed information, including lists of personally identifying information that may include birth dates, driver’s license numbers and Social Security numbers in part or whole.

“The manner in which the Department of Justice has acted makes clear that what is at stake is not voter integrity, but voter privacy,” Botelho said.

The Justice Department has said that its requests are necessary to make sure that states are following federal laws that require them to regularly maintain their lists and keep noncitizens from voting.

The Department of Justice has been sharing the voter rolls with the Department of Homeland Security, searching for noncitizens.

As of this week, federal judges had ruled against the Department of Justice in lawsuits covering Oregon, California and Michigan. The department has not prevailed in any case so far.

In the Oregon ruling, published on Feb. 5, Judge Mustafa Kashubhai wrote that the federal government cannot be trusted about its true motives.

“When Plaintiff, in this case, conveys assurances that any private and sensitive data will remain private and used only for a declared and limited purpose, it must be thoroughly scrutinized and squared with its open and public statements to the contrary,” he wrote.

Alaska-specific implications may be broad

The national ACLU has opposed the federal government’s requests in general. When contacted Friday about the Alaska memo, the Alaska chapter of the organization said it did not have immediate comment and was still researching the issue.

The agreement between the state of Alaska and the Department of Justice could have broad consequences here. 

Days before signing the agreement, the Alaska Division of Elections disclosed that dozens of noncitizens had accidentally been registered to vote by the Alaska Department of Motor Vehicles.

Under guidelines imposed by the Trump administration, those noncitizens could be deported, because federal law strictly prohibits noncitizens from registering to vote, and appearing on a voter list prompts special review when someone is attempting to become a citizen.

The state has also criminally charged 11 American Samoa-born Alaska residents for voting in state elections. People born in American Samoa are American nationals, but not citizens, and thus are ineligible to vote.

When the Alaska Beacon reviewed Division of Elections files that were turned over to the Department of Justice last year, it found 70 people labeled as noncitizens who either voted or attempted to vote in the state between 2015 and 2025.

Those people were on the state’s inactive voter list, which was not provided to the Department of Justice.

In addition, the violent federal crackdown against noncitizens in Minnesota and other states has ensnared many American citizens, indicating that the federal action is resulting in many false positives or is targeting Americans regardless of citizenship. 

Correction: The initial version of this article incorrectly stated that the memo would allow the Department of Justice to direct the purge of individual voters. It only permits DOJ to identify Alaskans for eventual removal and does not immediately prevent them from voting.

Categories
Food

The Worst Fast Food Chocolate Milkshake Is Sold By A Struggling Chain

Many fast food restaurants offer milkshakes as a draw, but not all shakes are the same quality. This brand has the worst milkshake, and here’s why.

​Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips

Categories
Music

Jerry Kennedy, Legendary Guitarist + Producer, Dead at 85

The legendary guitarist and producer was responsible for some of country music’s all-time most iconic riffs. Continue reading…​The Boot – Country Music News, Music Videos and Songs

Categories
Music

Jerry Kennedy, Legendary Guitarist + Producer, Dead at 85

The legendary guitarist and producer was responsible for some of country music’s all-time most iconic riffs. Continue reading…​Country Music News – Taste of Country

Categories
Health

Prince Harry’s Go-To In-N-Out Meal Is A Calorie Explosion

Prince Harry revealed his favorite In-N-Out meal to an interviewer, and it’s full of calories. Here’s what the royal says he enjoys at the restaurant.

​Health Digest – Health News, Wellness, Expert Insights

Categories
Food

Dolly Parton’s Branded Store-Bought Pot Roast Is A Win, According To Customers

There are many reasons to be a Dolly Parton fan, but even if you don’t love the Queen of Country, shoppers say her store-bought pot roast shouldn’t be missed.

​Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips

Categories
Uncategorized

White men file workplace discrimination claims but are less likely to face inequity than other groups

In March 2025 the EEOC characterized DEI programs as potentially discriminatory against white men. Wong Yu Liang/Getty Images

In December 2025, Andrea Lucas, the chair of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, invited white men to file more sex- and race-based discrimination complaints against their employers.

“Are you a white male who has experienced discrimination at work based on your race or sex? You may have a claim to recover money under federal civil rights laws. Contact the @USEEOC as soon as possible,” she wrote in a post on X.

In February 2026, the EEOC began to investigate Nike on what the agency said was suspicion of discrimination against white workers.

Both initiatives followed the EEOC’s March 2025 characterization of diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, or DEI, as potentially discriminatory against white men. The EEOC characterization falls within the Trump administration’s larger pattern of calling DEI “illegal discrimination.”

At the Center for Employment Equity at the University of Massachusetts, we have done extensive research on who files discrimination charges with the EEOC.

Given the EEOC’s December 2025 solicitation for white men to file discrimination complaints, we revisited our prior research to see what is known about discrimination against white people and, in particular, what is known about white and white male discrimination charges registered with the EEOC.

As part of our research, the EEOC gave us access to discrimination charges submitted to the agency and state Fair Employment Practices Agencies from 2012 to 2016. By law, all U.S. employment discrimination claims must be submitted to the EEOC, or state agencies with equivalent roles, prior to any legal actions.

While the EEOC has a history of sharing its data with researchers stretching back to the 1970s, the EEOC stopped sharing current and historical data with researchers in 2016. As a result, we do not have any data on discrimination complaints after 2016. Judging by the EEOC’s yearly reports, the basic patterns have not changed much in the interim.

White men already file complaints

When we looked at all sex- and race-based discrimination charges received by the EEOC, unsurprisingly we found that men are much less likely than women to file sex-based discrimination charges. But white men do file about 10% of sex discrimination complaints. While Black, Hispanic and Asian male employees are more likely to file racial discrimination complaints, white men file about 9% of such complaints.

In the same study, when we compared legal charges filed with the EEOC to national survey data, we found that percentages submitting a legal complaint to the EEOC roughly correspond to the percentages of survey-reported experiences of discrimination at work. Together, these two findings suggest that white people generally, and white men in particular, were already filing employment discrimination charges.

A blonde-haired woman speaks in front of a microphone.
EEOC chair Andrea Lucas in December 2025 encouraged white men to file more discrimination complaints against their employers.
AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib, File

Second, we did a deeper dive on sexual harassment charges. We found that while white men were 46% of the labor force, they filed 11% of sexual harassment charges and 11% of all other charges, most commonly tied to disability and age.

The general pattern is that, while white men already file discrimination charges, they are less likely to experience employment discrimination than other groups.

The risk of filing complaints

Charges filed with the EEOC can result in two types of benefits to the charging party: monetary settlements and mandated changes in workplace practices.

White men who filed sexual harassment charges received some benefit 21% of the time, lower than white women, at 29%. That’s also lower than Black women, 23%, and higher than Black men, 19%. The EEOC already receives discrimination charges from white men and, at least for sexual harassment, treats them similarly to other groups.

Most people who submit a discrimination charge do so to improve their employment experience and those of their co-workers. But submitting these claims to the EEOC or a state Fair Employment Practices Agency is a high-risk, low-reward act.

We found that, at least for sexual harassment, employers responded to white men’s complaints in much the same way as to other groups. White men who filed sexual harassment discrimination charges lost their job 68% of the time and experienced employer retaliation at about the same rate. Retaliation can include firing but also other forms of harassment at work, such as abusive supervision and close monitoring by human resource departments.

A swoosh logo is seen on a building.
The Nike logo is shown on a store in Miami Beach, Fla., on Aug. 8, 2017.
AP Photo/Alan Diaz, File

We found this pattern of employer retaliation and worker firings for all demographic groups that file any type of discrimination complaint. White men who file discrimination charges receive the same harsh treatment from their employers as any other group.

Urging more white men to submit discrimination complaints based on the perceived unfairness of DEI practices, as the EEOC has done, is likely to lead to job loss and retaliation from employers.

What will happen?

It’s possible that EEOC chair Lucas’ call for more discrimination charges from white men will increase the number of filings.

This is exactly what happened after 2012 when the EEOC ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s prohibition of sex discrimination also protected LGBTQ workers from sexual-orientation and gender-identity discrimination.

More concerning is the EEOC defining employer efforts to prevent discrimination and create inclusive workplaces as discrimination against white men.

In the end, all workers want to be treated fairly and with respect. Employer efforts to create such workplaces should be supported. It would be a better use of EEOC resources to support companies’ efforts to create such workplaces.

The Conversation

When this research was completed the authors received funding from the W.K.Kellogg Foundation, the U.S. National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

When this research was completed the author received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

​Politics + Society – The Conversation