How El Niño will change the world’s weather (and more) in 2014

(Link) The global El Niño weather phenomenon, whose impacts cause global famines, floods – and even wars – now has a 90% chance of striking this year, according to the latest forecast released to the Guardian. El Niño begins as a giant pool of warm water swelling in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, that sets off a chain reaction of weather events around the world – some devastating and some beneficial.

El Nino Sea surface temperature in May 2013 and May 2014

The latest El Niño prediction comes from the European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), which is considered one the most reliable of the 15 or so prediction centres around the world. Tim Stockdale, principal scientist at ECMWF, said “The amount of warm water in the Pacific is now significant, perhaps the biggest since the 1997-98 event.” That El Niño was the biggest in a century, producing the hottest year on record at the time and major global impacts, including a mass die-off of corals. “But what is very much unknowable at this stage is whether this year’s El Niño will be a small event, a moderate event – that’s most likely – or a really major event,” said Stockdale, adding the picture will become clearer in the next month or two. “It is which way the winds blow that determines what happens next and there is always a random element to the winds.”

The movement of hot, rain-bringing water to the eastern Pacific ramps up the risk of downpours in the nations flanking that side of the great ocean, while the normally damp western flank dries out. Governments, commodity traders, insurers and aid groups like the Red Cross and World Food Programme all monitor developments closely and water conservation and food stockpiling is already underway in some countries.

El Niño events occur every five years or so and peak in December, but the first, and potentially greatest, human impacts are felt in India. The reliance of its 1 billion-strong population on the monsoon, which usually sweeps up over the southern tip of the sub-continent around 1 June, has led its monitoring to be dubbed “the most important weather forecast in the world”. This year, it is has already got off to a delayed start, with the first week’s rains 40% below average.

Read More

Incredibly, laws against interracial couples stayed on the books for decades after the Loving decision. In 1998, a clause that prohibited “marriage of a white person with a Negro or mulatto or a person who shall have one-eighth or more Negro blood” was removed South Carolina’s state constitution. According to a Mason-Dixon poll four months before the vote, 22% of South Carolina voters were opposed to the removal of this clause. It had been introduced in 1895.

In Alabama, it took until 2000 to remove these laws. A referendum was passed that removed this article from the Alabama State Constitution:

"The Legislature shall never pass any law to authorize or legalize any marriage between any white person and a Negro, or a descendant of a Negro."
Alabama State Constitution, Article IV, Section 102

This section was introduced in 1901. According to a poll conducted by the Mobile Register in September of 2000, 19% of voters said that they would not remove section 102. This is comparable to the 22% in South Carolina. However, 64% said that they would vote to remove it. While this is a majority, it is still far from a unanimous vote.

Because of the Loving decision, these laws were not legally enforceable after June 12th, 1967 - even though they were on the books.

sustainableprosperity
todaysdocument:

Overturning the Racial Integrity Act


Decision, Loving v. Virginia, 06/12/1967
From the Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1772 - 2007

In June 1958, Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a black woman, quietly married in Washington, DC. They returned home to Virginia and woke up one morning with policemen in their bedroom. The Lovings were arrested for violating the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. 
Richard and Mildred were found guilty and sentenced to one year in jail, or they could accept a plea bargain and leave Virginia. So they left. But by 1963, they sought legal help and the case was eventually sent to the United States Supreme Court. 
Dated June 12, 1967, and initialed by Chief Justice of the United States Earl Warren, this page confirms the decision the justices reached—they voted unanimously in favor of the Lovings. The Supreme Court justices ruled Virginia’s law violated the equal protection clause in the 14th amendment. 

(via the “Making Their Mark: Stories Through Signatures” eGuide)
The Supreme Court’s Decision is among the featured items at the “Making Their Mark: Stories Through Signatures" exhibit now on display at the National Archives Museum.

todaysdocument:

Overturning the Racial Integrity Act

Decision, Loving v. Virginia, 06/12/1967

From the Records of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1772 - 2007

In June 1958, Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a black woman, quietly married in Washington, DC. They returned home to Virginia and woke up one morning with policemen in their bedroom. The Lovings were arrested for violating the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. 

Richard and Mildred were found guilty and sentenced to one year in jail, or they could accept a plea bargain and leave Virginia. So they left. But by 1963, they sought legal help and the case was eventually sent to the United States Supreme Court. 

Dated June 12, 1967, and initialed by Chief Justice of the United States Earl Warren, this page confirms the decision the justices reached—they voted unanimously in favor of the Lovings. The Supreme Court justices ruled Virginia’s law violated the equal protection clause in the 14th amendment

(via the “Making Their Mark: Stories Through Signatures” eGuide)

The Supreme Court’s Decision is among the featured items at the “Making Their Mark: Stories Through Signatures" exhibit now on display at the National Archives Museum.