Commentary roundup: What newspapers around the state are saying
Houston Chronicle
Jan. 30 editorial, "Is bill banning Asian landownership about hate — or national security?"
“There is no discernment about what type of land is being purchased or who is doing the purchasing,” [Rep. Gene] Wu said earlier this month. “It targets individuals indiscriminately.”
Besides fanning anti-Asian sentiment, the bill also raises constitutional and economic concerns.
By barring individuals, particularly those from specific national backgrounds, the bill suggests that those communities in general are not to be trusted, a common refrain in a long history of exclusion and discrimination, including the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882.
These sorts of claims, linking national origin to American loyalty and belonging, are old fodder, used again and again in efforts to restrict or ban Asian immigration and land ownership. Amid a global pandemic that has seen a surge of anti-Chinese and anti-Asian sentiment, the flame needs no further kindling.
In response to protests in Houston and Austin, Kolkhorst emphasized that the bill will not restrict citizens nor legal permanent residents from purchasing land. She also said she would consider including people “in the pipeline to become citizens,” according to Chronicle reporting.
— Houston Chronicle Editorial Board
San Antonio Express-News
Jan. 30 editorial, "A glaring lack of transparency in Supreme Court leak investigation."
The investigation comprised 126 interviews with 97 court employees, determining 82 of them — not including the nine justices — had access to the draft. Their printer logs, search histories, court-issued laptops and cellphones were searched.
The court concluded none of these employees was responsible for the leak.
The initial report didn’t mention if justices or their spouses had been interviewed.
A day later, after criticism from the left and the right over this omission, Marshal Gail A. Curley said the justices and their spouses were interviewed but unlike their 87 subordinates, they didn’t have to sign sworn affidavits.
“During the course of the investigation, I spoke with each of the Justices, several on multiple occasions,” Curley said in a statement. “The Justices actively cooperated in this iterative process, asking questions, and answering mine. I followed up on all credible leads, none of which implicated the Justices or their spouses.”
In other words, 82 employees who could have lost their jobs for leaking the draft opinion have been exonerated. Who else is left to consider than the justices, who serve with the benefit of lifetime appointments, and their spouses? Why are they not put under oath?
— San Antonio Express-News Editorial Board
Dallas Morning News
Jan. 31 editorial, "Frisco ISD teacher’s online harassment shows why social media laws must change."
State. Rep. Jared Patterson, who represents Frisco, has floated a bill to ban minors from social media. We understand his motivation. There is increasing concern about the effect social media has on the mental health of young people.
But parents, not the state, are better arbiters of what their children view.
We instead urge Patterson and other lawmakers to look at ways to make it easier to hold social media companies responsible in civil court for the material they disseminate. Why should Meta, Instagram’s parent company, profit from Kacie Smith’s harassment and fear? The answer is that she should have some recourse against the company that gave her harasser a platform.
Screenshot of a now-deleted Instagram account that expressed hatred toward a Frisco ISD…Screenshot of a now-deleted Instagram account that expressed hatred toward a Frisco ISD teacher, with references to violence.(Instagram)She doesn’t because federal law gives social media companies broad immunity from civil liability for what is posted on websites. And there is no serious impediment to the creation of an anonymous account that can be used to spew abuse and threats.
“That’s just the world we live in” has become a strange defense to this new reality. It wasn’t always the world we lived in. In fact, it’s a pretty new and frightening world.
— Dallas Morning News Editorial Board
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Feb. 1 editorial, "Fort Worth understands Memphis' pain. But we also proved cops can be brought to justice."
Where do such horrors, such disregard for life, come from?
We know the shock of such a crime. [Former officer Aaron] Dean's body cam showed him outside scouring [Atatiana] Jefferson's home just moments before he sees a shadowy figure inside, with a gun, and shoots, point blank at the same time he uttered his warning for her to put her hands up. Dean admitted in his trial that he never tried to resuscitate his victim.
Jefferson's death was quick but nonsensical. [Tyre] Nichols' murder is heinous in its length and just as baffling.
We know little about the members of law enforcement who repeatedly beat Nichols but we don't need to know much to see, based on the body camera footage alone, that they and Dean share a nasty sadistic side, a bloodlust, and a need to wield the power that the police badge and firearm gave them, without restraint and without remorse. These are not the men we need protecting Memphis or Fort Worth.
We all deserve better. The thousands of members of law enforcement who put their lives on the line and act with honor do, too.
— Fort Worth Star-Telegram Editorial Board
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Austin American-Statesman Commentary Roundup: Feb. 5, 2023
