This Day in Legal History: Wyoming Territory Suffrage

On December 10, 1869, the Wyoming Territory made history by enacting the first law in the United States to grant women the right to vote. Signed into law by Governor John A. Campbell, the legislation represented a bold step toward gender equality in a country where voting rights for women were otherwise non-existent. This groundbreaking decision was influenced by a mix of progressive ideals and pragmatic concerns. Some lawmakers supported the measure as a genuine effort to recognize women's rights, while others believed it might attract settlers to the sparsely populated territory.

The law not only granted women the right to vote but also allowed them to hold public office, a rarity even in international contexts at the time. The first woman to serve on a jury in the U.S. would soon do so in Wyoming, and Esther Hobart Morris became the first female justice of the peace in 1870, further cementing Wyoming's legacy as a leader in women's rights.

Although Wyoming’s population was small and its territorial status meant it didn’t have full representation in Congress, the move set a precedent that fueled the broader suffrage movement. When Wyoming sought statehood in 1890, it faced pressure to revoke women’s voting rights, but the state stood firm, famously declaring it would remain out of the Union rather than sacrifice women's suffrage. This early commitment earned Wyoming its nickname, the "Equality State."

By taking this step in 1869, Wyoming paved the way for the eventual passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920, which extended voting rights to women across the United States. Wyoming's decision remains a landmark moment in the history of democracy and gender equality in America.

President-elect Donald Trump’s administration is expected to target diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs in businesses and universities, arguing that such policies violate anti-discrimination laws. The Justice Department under Trump plans to investigate and potentially litigate against these practices, framing them as unlawful discrimination. Trump's nominee to lead the Civil Rights Division, Harmeet Dhillon, has a record of opposing "woke" corporate policies. The administration may leverage Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act to challenge federally funded programs that consider race in decision-making, including university admissions and healthcare equity initiatives.

Legal challenges to DEI efforts could also arise from private lawsuits, some of which have already been dismissed due to lack of standing. Conservative groups, such as America First Legal, have intensified pressure on corporations to dismantle diversity initiatives, often citing laws historically intended to protect marginalized communities. Critics argue this approach undermines the mission of civil rights laws, which were designed to address systemic inequities affecting underrepresented groups.

Proponents of DEI programs contend they are crucial for addressing structural racism and promoting equitable opportunities. However, the threat of government scrutiny may prompt some companies to scale back their diversity commitments, as seen recently with Walmart and JPMorgan Chase. Legal experts note that while many DEI policies may withstand legal challenges, the broader campaign against them reflects a contentious debate over equity, merit, and the role of government in addressing societal disparities.

DOJ v. DEI: Trump's Justice Department likely to target diversity programs | Reuters

The bankruptcy court hearing over Alex Jones’ Infowars platform began with heated accusations, including claims of "voodoo economics" from Jones' attorney. The trustee overseeing the bankruptcy has chosen The Onion’s corporate parent, Global Tetrahedron LLC, as the preferred bidder with a $7 million offer, which includes waived claims by Sandy Hook families against sale proceeds. Competing bidder First United American Cos., offering $3.5 million in cash and plans to keep Infowars operational, argues its bid is more substantial, calling The Onion's bid inflated and misleading.

The sale aims to liquidate Jones’ assets to address $1.3 billion in judgments related to his false claims about the Sandy Hook shooting. The Onion plans to replace Infowars with a new platform by January 2025, in collaboration with Everytown for Gun Safety. The Sandy Hook families’ participation in boosting The Onion’s bid has been criticized by Jones’ team as manipulative.

Meanwhile, social media accounts associated with Infowars on X (formerly Twitter) were excluded from the sale after X Corp. asserted ownership of the handles. The court has yet to decide who will take control of Infowars, with testimony expected to continue.

Alex Jones Lawyer Accuses Onion of ‘Voodoo Economics’ in Court

New York prosecutors have charged Luigi Mangione, 26, with murder in the shooting of UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson, concluding a five-day manhunt. Mangione was arrested in Altoona, Pennsylvania, after being spotted at a McDonald's. Upon his capture, police found a "ghost gun" matching the weapon used in the crime, along with masks, cash, false IDs, and a handwritten manifesto expressing hostility toward corporate America. Mangione is also facing forgery and gun charges in Pennsylvania, where prosecutors successfully argued to deny him bail.

Thompson, 50, was killed outside a Manhattan hotel, in what authorities believe was a targeted attack. Surveillance footage showed the suspect fleeing on a bike, later boarding a bus out of the city. Investigators are probing whether others were also targeted. Shell casings at the scene were inscribed with the words "deny," "defend," and "depose," referencing a book critical of the insurance industry.

Mangione, a Maryland native and Ivy League graduate, had a documented history of academic excellence but harbored grievances against corporate entities. Thompson's murder has fueled public frustration over the insurance industry, though officials, including Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, have condemned any glorification of the act. Thompson, a longtime UnitedHealth executive and father of two, was in New York for an investor conference at the time of his death.

Suspect in killing of UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson charged with murder | Reuters

Texas exemplifies the need to condition federal aid on state tax reform, especially as federal debt grows and economic inequities deepen. While Texas touts its business-friendly, low-tax environment, this model relies heavily on regressive taxes that disproportionately burden lower- and middle-income residents. The state’s avoidance of personal and corporate income taxes forces reliance on property taxes—among the nation’s highest—and sales taxes, both of which hit poorer Texans hardest. Compounding the inequity, Texas receives significant federal funding, partly financed by taxpayers in higher-tax states like California. This dynamic effectively subsidizes Texas’ low-tax model at a national cost.

The state’s tax policies create a paradox: wealthy individuals and corporations enjoy the benefits of Texas’ infrastructure and services while avoiding proportional contributions, with federal taxpayers covering the shortfall. This system also distorts interstate competition, incentivizing migrations to low-tax states and exacerbating national fiscal inequities. As population growth and climate challenges strain Texas’ regressive tax system, federal policymakers may need to condition aid—such as disaster relief or infrastructure grants—on reforms that promote equity and fiscal sustainability.

Texas Shows Why Federal Aid Should Be Tied to State Tax Reform

This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe