As both a meme and an embodiment of real life racism, “Karen” is a symbol of White supremacy, privilege, and weaponizing racial hierarchy against those who are not “supposed” to be in certain places. Karens are regularly captured on video questioning the rights of minorities to exist in public parks, private gyms, or in their own homes.

In contrast, Kamala represents the aspiration of so many women, children of immigrants, and people of color to break through boundaries and surpass what is expected of them.

In Karen’s world, Kamala Harris is a Black woman in the “wrong” place.

Racist birther arguments concerning the California-born Harris are the latest example of certain Americans using their authority to ensure that people of color remain second class citizens. From lynching and brutalizing newly freed Black citizens, restricting Asians from immigrating to the United States and prohibiting them from naturalizing as citizens, interning innocent Japanese families, to violently upholding segregation laws, those in power have consistently deployed a shameful arsenal of racist policies and practices under the guise of upholding morality, the rule of law, and public safety.

In reality, Harris threatens only the status quo. On the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Harris’ cold pursuit of the truth contrasted with Judge Kavanaugh’s angry outbursts and tears. She campaigns relentlessly, and does not shy away from her ambition.  She prioritized police accountability and implicit bias training in California, sponsored a bill in Congress to criminalize lynching, and makes notable and powerful career racists like former Attorney General Jeff Sessions nervous.

Racism is not a bug of the current administration; it is a feature of the modern GOP at every level. In 2016, conservatives embraced a presidential candidate focused on two issues: building a wall to keep “criminal” and “rapist” Mexicans out and banning Muslims from entering the country. The Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to denaturalize foreign-born citizens reinforces a presumption that White Americans are the “real” citizens. In anticipation of major losses in the 2020 elections, Republican officials continue to devise new methods of voter suppression targeting communities of color.

Republicans do not object to Trump’s bombastic rhetoric and do not oppose his discriminatory policies.

Racism has infected the party at the local level, as well. In 2014, Collin County Commissioner Mark Reid warned that an “illegal immigrant tsunami” was headed for the state of Texas. Five years later, a young man from Collin County drove to El Paso to murder 23 people, declaring online, “This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas.” Police in Ohio pulled over and harassed congressional candidate Desiree Tims immediately after a political debate last fall. A Muslim candidate in Virginia, Qasim Rashid, responded to racist tweets by fundraising to pay off his harasser’s medical debt. In 2017, a group of Karens in New Jersey published racist fliers that accused Ravi Bhalla, the turbaned Sikh Mayor of Hoboken of supporting terrorism and advocated for the deportation of an Indian American candidate and Chinese American candidate for school board.

In my unsuccessful run for a State House seat in Texas, conservatives accused me of being part of a secret Muslim takeover of local government. Never mind that I am an attorney sworn to uphold the laws of Texas and the Constitution of the United States.  Their evidence? My name–I must have anglicized it to hide my ‘foreign” roots.

Across the country, candidates of color face attacks on their personal safety for daring to pursue political power on behalf of underrepresented minorities. They are harassed, online and off. Their professional and personal accomplishments are called into question at every turn. 

In contrast to how conservatives are interrogating Harris’ eligibility, Republicans quickly resolved any constitutional concerns when George Romney—born in Mexico—ran for president in 1968. In 2008, they embraced their presidential nominee John McCain, who was born on a military base in Panama. Birtherism began with President Obama—born in America to an American mother, but born black.

 The striking figure of a Black and Asian woman ascending in power does not comport with the images of helpless brown women and children in cages that dominated the news cycle in 2018.  For Americans invested in politics based on White identity, Kamala Harris upsets the social order.

For the rest of us, candidates of color represent an inclusive and equitable sharing of political power that holds the key to our children and grandchildren’s future in this country.

While some users decried the invasion of politics into previously cozy and “neutral” spaces, these spaces were never truly neutral. Members are rejecting online communities whose comfort depends on allowing macroaggressions to continue unchecked all the while claiming that they refuse to take sides on controversial issues.

The end of a false neutrality online is a positive development for diversity and inclusion.

Psychologists identify “belonging” in a social group as a primal human need. Belonging is why we engage in social media. But online communities that claim neutrality towards racism or tolerate racist and bigoted posts in the name of free speech reinforce the feeling that people of color don’t really belong in these spaces.

Generally, admins are quick to delete posts concerning racism as “off-topic.” However, when one filters through, the responses are illuminating: Racism isn’t real. Racism is in people’s hearts, but it’s not a systemic problem. Why do people of color insist on seeing differences when we’re all the same? Forget all this divisiveness: here’s a puppy wearing a vest!

Such responses reflect privileged notions of what is positive. For many people of color, the recognition that Black lives matter across social media channels is a positive and uplifting development.

Online communities of all kinds must, at this moment, acknowledge the reality of racism and affirmatively object to it. This will be outside the comfort zone of many of their community members. When so-called moderates remain neutral, white supremacy prevails.

Each week showcases a new video of a person of color accosted as they live their lives, shouted at for taking up space, or having a gun pointed at them by law enforcement of a fellow citizen. This behavior is not new, but it is news to some.  To those comfortable in their bubble of privilege, these videos unveil a different reality than the one they know. They are a shock. They are not comfortable, but the revolution will not be comfortable. It will be the truth.

Making people uncomfortable in their own private spaces is necessary to sustain the momentum of last month’s anti-racism mass protests. In the 1960s, civil rights organizers used television to bring the marches, speeches, fire hoses, and police dogs, directly into white living rooms. Now, social media is bringing the continual individual harassment of minorities in videos, memes, and words directly to computer screens in diverse households across the country.

Don’t look away.

Even the social media platforms themselves have recognized inaction is a false form of neutrality. Facebook removed Trump ads that promote hate. Twitter flagged several Trump tweets for being misleading and one tweet that glorified violence. Youtube updated its hate-speech policy in June to ban videos that glorify Nazi ideology or deny the existence of well-documented events such as the Holocaust or the Sandy Hook school shooting.

Perhaps they too have realized the wisdom of Desmond Tutu: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

Unlike a home, a real jail has restrictions on access to soap and bathrooms, a ban on hand sanitizer, and a constant flow of staff and detainees entering and exiting the facility.

In a jail, you would be unable to maintain social distancing and would not be permitted adequate masks, gloves, or cleaning supplies to keep yourself safe from COVID-19. And you would be subject to these unsafe conditions even though you had not been convicted of a crime.

Nationally, two thirds of people in jail are simply being held as they await trial, most because they lack funds to post bail. Many states and counties have addressed this inequity head on.

California state jails expedited the release of over 3,500 inmates from state jail. Los Angeles County jails released an additional 1,700 inmates, ensuring that those released were not registered sex offenders, or serving time for a violent crime or domestic violence. California released inmates with fewer than two months left in their sentences and is working closely with parole officers and community partners to provide social services upon release.

Court orders in New Orleans called for the immediate release of all people held pretrial for misdemeanor offenses. A Massachusetts state court ruled that those held on bail have a “rebuttable presumption of release.”

District Attorneys in San Francisco and Boulder are taking steps to release people held pretrial, or who have nearly completed their sentences, and are charged with nonviolent offenses. Orange County in Florida released 300 people held pretrial.

This piecemeal approach is commendable, but releases remain at a much slower pace than the virus is spreading.  Releasing all people being held pretrial would be a relatively quick, easy, and low-risk way to reduce the public health crisis and restore some justice to a broken money bail system.

Allowing the virus to spread behind bars will result in more sick people in the general public – thousands more, according to one recent epidemiological model.

The magnitude of the crisis grows daily. In New York, the state Department of Corrections and Community Supervision recently reported a total of 783 cases among staff and 210 among prisoners, with a statewide population of 43,000 prisoners. Reports show 70% of prisoners test positive, higher than the 50 percent rate of positive results in New York City.

At the end of April, Cook County Jail in Illinois had nearly 1,000 confirmed cases. Harris County Jail in Texas had over 500. Nearly all of the biggest clusters of cases in the United States are in jails or prisons.

At the end of April, 626 inmates in Dallas had tested positive for COVID-19, only two weeks earlier, the number of positive cases was 31. That’s a five-fold increase in two weeks. Dallas County released 1,000 inmates in April to slow the spread of the virus.

Prisoners around the world are protesting, going on hunger strikes, and rioting.

In Washington state, more than 100 inmates took part in a demonstration earlier this month after several prisoners tested positive for the virus.  The men refused to comply with orders, set off fire extinguishers, and were eventually subdued with pepper spray and sting balls.

The potential for contagion is nightmarish. Eighty percent of inmates and nearly half the staff at the Marion Correction Institution in Ohio had tested positive for COVID-19 as of last week.

New York earlier this month announced plans to release elderly prisoners across the state. At the time of the announcement, New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision reported 793 staff and 190 inmates with confirmed cases of COVID-19.

Later the same department reported 894 staff members and 263 inmates have confirmed cases as of April 23. This is 70 new cases in inmates and 101 new cases in staff members in just one week.

In March, several federal prisons experienced an outbreak of COVID-19. Wardens suspended attorney visits and regular visitation. In late March, Attorney General William Barr instructed the Bureau of Prisons to prioritize the transfer of inmates to home confinement based on factors such as their risk for contracting the virus, their age, security level, and danger posed to the community. The agency also updated its isolation and quarantine procedures.

But precaution and planning did not slow the spread of the virus in federal prisons.

Just one week from the earlier memo, Barr sent an additional memo expanding the inmates eligible for release and putting instructions in bold and caps lock. He directed federal wardens to immediately maximize appropriate transfers to home confinement of all appropriate inmates, where COVID-19 is materially affecting operations.

In early April, 138 federal inmates and 59 Bureau of Prisons staff tested positive for COVID-19. At the end of last month, 1,500 inmates and 357 staff tested positive.  Nearly 70% of tests given to federal prisoners result in positive diagnosis.

These official counts of confirmed positive tests are likely severely underestimating the actual cases – even so, they show that confirmed cases are more than doubling each week.

Montgomery County in Southern Pennsylvania administered testing to every single inmate. Nearly 20% of the county jail population tested positive, although prior to testing officials suspected only 6cases. Of the 177 positive test results, 171 people showed no symptoms at the time the test was given.  These results are similar to the mass testing that the US Navy conducted on the USS Theodore Roosevelt.

Mass testing across found state jails in Arkansas, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia showed similar results: 96 percent of the inmates who tested positive were asymptomatic.

Due a test shortages, many jails have tested only those who show symptoms. Prison systems, already in crisis, are vastly underestimating the crisis to come.

While the Bureau of Prisons has released to home confinement over 1,800 inmates convicted of a federal crime since the Attorney General’s first memo, we have a much simpler ask: release those convicted of no crime.

Inside jails, COVID-19 spreads swiftly. Inmates are particularly vulnerable because of close crowding and unsanitary conditions. Outbreaks in jails result in a flood of inmates at local hospitals and tax first responders already under strain.

By quarantining themselves at home, innocent people awaiting trial can protect the health and safety of themselves and their families, correctional staff, courtroom personnel, and their communities.

Contracting COVID-19 is a risk that no person should have to bear merely because they are behind bars or working in a jail. Threat of a deadly virus further incentivizes people to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit in exchange for time served, one of many unjust results of the current bail system.

With jury trials suspended and courtrooms slowed, the right to due process, equal protection, and a speedy trial are in jeopardy. The great majority of defendants released from jail return for their trial date. The quicker a person is released pending trial, the greater the likelihood that they will return for their court appearances.

If released on their own recognizance, they are able to report to their jobs, care for their families, and avoid spending unnecessary days and nights in jail at the taxpayer’s expense.

Supervised release is far less costly than incarceration. In a pandemic, the cost is measured not just in taxpayer dollars saved per day, but in the lives saved by flattening the curve.

Being released on personal recognizance doesn’t equal being released from accountability; people released on their own recognizance are subject to restrictive conditions. They are often required to check in with correctional officers, maintain employment, and wear electronic monitors. They are given strict travel restrictions and home arrest orders. Judges can conduct individualized risk assessments.

Public safety remains paramount. In response to a pandemic explosion across jails and prisons in Texas, officials are using every tool in the toolbox to keep from introducing new individuals into jails.

Officers are avoiding arrests of individuals who commit low level offenses such as graffiti or marijuana possession. Sheriffs are implementing “cite and release,” treating minor offenses like a traffic ticket, leaving the offender to return home with a court date.

Some officials are encouraging compassionate release and suspending warrants to allow low risk defendants to stay out of unsafe jails.  These measures are a step in the right direction, but curbing this pandemic calls for bold strokes. Inmates awaiting trial should be released.

The only purpose of bail is to ensure that defendants return to court, not to punish them. In recent years, the debate over bail reform has taken on a fever pitch even as the population of inmates awaiting trial has doubled and tripled.

In light of recent outbreaks in correctional facilities, counties can implement long awaited reform immediately to empty the jails and save lives.

COVID-19 has put a heavy thumb on the scales of justice.

After Governor Greg Abbott’s recent executive order failed to clearly instruct Texans to stay home, Dallas, Tarrant, and Denton counties responded by issuing and amending countywide shelter-in-place orders.

In contrast, Collin County Judge Chris Hill first delayed taking any action, and eventually declared a week later, “All persons in Collin County are hereby ordered to stay home, except for travel related to essential activities.”

Hill did not provide a definition of ‘essential activity.” He further equivocated:  “All businesses, jobs, and workers are essential to the financial health and well-being of our local economy and therefore are essential… Businesses that are able to remain open need to remain open.”

Collin County Commissioner Darrel Hale explained, “We’re giving freedom to allow people to decide for themselves what is most essential to them versus having the government tell them this is the things we deem essential for you.”

Lives hang in the balance. Texas recently reported 6,812 cases of COVID-19 with 127 deaths. Across the United States, there are 338,000 cases with nearly 10,000 deaths.

Families across Texas need leaders who put people over profits.

For my family, having an immunocompromised child, we decided to stay home when the first case was reported in Frisco. But around us, the thrum of business as usual continued. Home improvement stores were crowded, employees were called into work at retail shops, and organized teams are still practicing on “closed” fields.

A majority of states have stay-at-home or shelter-in-place orders in effect, covering 75% of the population of the United States. With Florida, Nevada, and Arizona going under statewide orders this week, Texas remains the prominent holdout.

The Governor recently amended his statewide order to clarify essential activities and businesses, but devotion to the abstract ideals of limited government and personal freedom has resulted in a patchwork of conflicting and confusing public safety messaging that will cost lives.

This crisis demands action, not an abdication of the responsibility to lead. Stopping the spread of this disease is a collective action problem.

Hospitals and ICU beds fill quickly to capacity. Unwillingly, healthcare providers may not have the resources to care for all who need it.

Government exists to step in when selfish behavior endangers others. The Centers for Disease Control’s advice is clear: stay home.

Rather than follow the advice of every public health expert to isolate community members and shut down all but the most essential services as the pandemic explodes, Collin County Commissioners want to remain open for business.

This will be deadly for some.

Following the failure of the Governor and the County Commissioners to protect the public, cities within Collin County scrambled to issue stricter orders.

One day after Collin County’s official “Stay home, work safe” instruction, McKinney’s Mayor George Fuller signed an executive order requiring city residents to shelter in place. Other cities followed his lead.

Not only did the Governor and Collin County Commissioners delay publishing necessary restrictions to stop the spread of a pandemic, they also burdened city leaders seeking to enforce any meaningful restrictions to protect North Texans.

The State of Texas has been touting local control and local solutions, but state government will gladly override a local government’s ability to address fracking, taxation, and education.

Meanwhile, Collin County is a case study in the dangers of local control in emergency management. A laissez faire approach to public health endangers everyone.

Public safety demands leadership, and leaders must follow the facts and the science, not partisan beliefs. Those facts and that science is clear–the actions and pronouncements of the Governor and Collin County Commissioners are not, and that has endangered our North Texas community. The State and County governments must act in concert with Texas cities to preserve physical health over financial health.

It is a matter of life and death.