Keith Kamisugi

Jim Brosnahan: A Debate With Myself on Proposition 8

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 00:26:00 +0000

Jim Brosnahan's commentary was published today on Law.com. Mr. Brosnahan is a member of the Equal Justice Society board of directors.

This is a one-sided debate that is addressed to you, Richard Peterson. You have listed yourself as a faculty member of Pepperdine University School of Law and you have, as is your right under the First Amendment, broadcast your views throughout the state in a pro-Proposition 8 advertisement.

I wrote you a polite letter and I asked you to debate the measure but I have heard nothing and I take it you're not going to respond. Therefore, if you don't mind, I would like to express to you and anybody who reads this my thoughts on the points that you make and what's wrong with them. In my view, your points are deeply flawed, misleading and, at times, an attempt to play on the fear of the viewer unfairly.

Here goes:

First, in California, when there are two people who are in love and who are committed to each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, they should have, as declared under the law, every right to be married like anybody else.

In support of Prop 8, you have falsely suggested that churches would have a tax problem if the initiative were not passed. Prop 8 should be defeated and its defeat will not cause any problem to churches. Churches have the protection of the First Amendment. They are free to marry or not marry anyone they wish and they would not lose their tax-exempt status as you suggest. Your point is unworthy of a law professor.

In a similar vein of attempting to frighten people, you have suggested that somehow, if Prop 8 does not pass, little children will be taught about same-sex marriage in school, and that this will be bad for them. As others have pointed out, there is no requirement that schools have to teach anything about marriage, and furthermore, whatever is taught will be determined by the local school boards.

I would have thought, sir, as I assume you are a religious person, that you understand and have indeed taught that God has made all of us, not just some of us. If we are in God's image, then we must accept all of God's children. This is fundamental and you should accept it.

With regard to your religion, it has no place in the California Constitution, just as I am sure that you would not want me to enshrine my religion in our state's laws. I not only respect your religion, but have, in court, defended people's right to practice their religion. But it still should not be put into the Constitution.

You have presented yourself as a law professor and indeed you are, but the courses you've taught seem to have nothing to do with the Constitution. You are not, as far as I can determine, a person who has studied the constitutional law of this country, taught it, or litigated it in cases involving it. Perhaps I am wrong, but your school Web site's biography does not show it. Therefore, as you present yourself as an expert in the California Constitution, I would seriously question your credentials to do that.

Your commercials attack the judges of California. This is despicable for a number of reasons. One, you are a law professor and you know better. Two, they cannot answer you, they cannot fight back because it's against the rules that govern judges and you know that. More important is the fact that those judges did what they thought was right under the law and they deserve your respect and the respect of the people of California. They are learned, they are studious and they believe that people in California under the Constitution are entitled to equality and equal rights. It is one of the most fundamental constitutional principles that govern and indeed protects all of us.

Equality itself involves the rights of citizens and the rights of minorities. As many Californians are minorities, this is fundamental to any understanding of our Constitution. As a lawyer, I am sure you have been told this many times. So the suggestion that the majority should be allowed to oppress a minority or to deny a minority equal protection is one that you ought to know is not governed by the California Constitution and should not be.

Further, you should know that U.S. Supreme Court authority says that you can not write discrimination into a state constitution. There are cases that have held exactly that, which would mean that Prop 8 would be a dead letter.

The history of marriage includes the history of using it as a weapon against unpopular or despised groups. I could give you many precedents and if we ever do debate, sir, I would be happy to suggest a few to you where certain groups were not allowed to marry as a manifestation of social opprobrium. This history has, for example, included race until it was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court and the California Supreme Court. Before it was struck down, a white person could not marry a black person. That sad history should not be resurrected in Prop 8 and that is one of the reasons this initiative should be defeated.

The people that you attempt to discriminate against are our friends, our neighbors, our colleagues. They are people who pay taxes, they are people who fight and die in our military, they serve in our police forces and our fire departments. In every way possible they participate in our society and our culture. They do everything that they can as citizens of California, and yet you want to put it in the Constitution that they be denied a fundamental right, the important right of marriage which is so central to one's life.

Sir, there is not enough love in this world and what love there is should be nurtured and not opposed by a state government and certainly by a state constitution.

There are a lot more arguments but these will have to suffice. I am voting no on Prop 8 and I am asking anybody I can find to do the same.

If you ever want to debate this issue before Nov. 4, please let me know.

Very truly yours,

Jim Brosnahan

Jim Brosnahan is a senior partner at Morrison & Foerster in San Francisco. The views expressed are solely those of the author. As a matter of policy, Morrison & Foerster does not endorse political candidates or initiatives.

New TV Ad Exposes Ward Connerly as Affirmative Action Profiteer

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 04:08:00 +0000

The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center today launched a new TV ad in Colorado and Nebraska highlighting how Ward Connerly has personally profited off his efforts to re-write state constitutions with his misleadingly named "civil rights" ballot initiatives.

BISC also launched a new website on Wednesday, BigMoneyConnerly.com, which is the most comprehensive one-stop shop for research and information on Connerly and his campaign. The new ad can also be seen on the website.

�??Ward Connerly has used voter fraud and deception to place his initiatives on the ballot and profited off a campaign to outlaw equal opportunity,�?? said Kristina Wilfore, Executive Director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center, �??Today we are revealing the truth and exposing Connerly and his campaign as a fraud.�??

Based on available information from the 990 forms filed by Connerly with the IRS, between 1997 and 2006, Connerly has lined his own pockets with over $7.6 million from his two tax exempt, non-profit organizations; American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), 501(c)3, and American Civil Rights Coalition (ACRC), 501(c)4.

This includes over $500,000 in salary from 2004 to mid-2006 and $2.2 million in payments that Connerly paid himself for �??speaking fees and interviews.�??

Connerly�??s excessive compensation levels from his tax-exempt, non-profit organizations have raised questions in Congress about their propriety and in 2006 the IRS was asked to investigate.

The most recent issue of The American Conservative recently revealed that, �??In 1998, 22 percent of his nonprofits�?? revenue was paid to Connerly in salary or to his firm. By 2001, Connerly�??s salary and the fees charged by Connerly and Associates ate up 49 percent of the nonprofits�?? combined revenue. Most of the money paid to the firm was listed on tax forms as �??speaking fees.�?? In 2006, when Connerly took up a concrete goal in political activism�??ending Michigan�??s affirmative-action policies�??the cut of nonprofit revenue paid to him and his firm rose to 66 percent of total receipts, nearly $1.6 million.�??

The American Conservative also reported, �??An IRS spokesman said that he could not comment on a case under investigation.�??

The TV ad also exposes the hypocrisy of Connerly�??s campaign to outlaw equal opportunity programs. From 1989 to 1994 Connerly used his own race to land no bid contracts worth over a million dollars. Connerly repeatedly enlisted as a minority contractor with the California Energy Commission -- securing contracts for his Sacramento lobbying firm without having competitive bidding. By certifying with the commission's special race-based program, Connerly helped guarantee his firm three separate contracts -- one for $1.1 million in 1989, a second for $105,227 in 1992, and another for $35,000 in 1994, according to the records. The contracts were filed under the name of California Building Officials, an association that lists Connerly as its sole agent.

Connerly, a long time California lobbyist, targeted five states this year with his misleadingly named �??civil rights�?? ballot initiative - Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma. His campaign has faced charges of fraud and deception in every state and as a result he failed to qualify for the ballot in Arizona, Missouri, and Oklahoma. Connerly has spent over $2.8 in out-of-state funding to re-write state constitutions with his ballot initiative.

Calif. Supreme Court Rejects Richard Sander Request for Confidential Bar Exam Data

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:51:00 +0000

UPDATE (SEPT. 19): There was an error in the commentary we included in our Sept. 18 email about the California Supreme Court's denial of the lawsuit against the State Bar of California brought by UCLA Law professor Richard Sander and the California First Amendment Coalition. (The commentary was published today on the Los Angeles Times website.)
The commentary inadvertently cited the Scaife Foundation as supporting Sander's research. Sander is conducting his research through a consortium called Project SEAPHE, which received funding from the Searle Freedom Trust, a foundation that also funds Right-wing groups such as the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Federalist Society and the Pacific Legal Foundation.
The relationship between Sander's research and the Searle Freedom Trust was reported by The Chornicle of Higher Education in a Jan. 18, 2008, article, "Scholars Mount Sweeping Effort to Measure Effects of Affirmative Action in Higher Education."
We also mentioned the grant was for $1 million. That was also incorrect. The amount is actually $1.2 million. Indiana University School of Law professor William D. Henderson lists on his CV his role as the study's co-principal investigator and a $1.2 million grant from the Searle Freedom Trust.

The California Supreme Court yesterday denied the request by UCLA Law professor Richard Sander and the California First Amendment Coalition. The petition for writ of review was denied without prejudice to re-file in an appropriate court.

EJS also yesterday submitted the following op-ed to the Los Angeles Times in response to its editorial published the same day.

Bar Exam Data Debate About Privacy, Not Affirmative Action
By Anthony Solana, Jr. and Sara Jackson

A Sept. 17 Times editorial characterizes a UCLA law professor�??s request for the confidential data of state bar exam takers as a debate over affirmative action.

Proponents of equal opportunity do not fear Prof. Richard Sander�??s hypothesis that affirmative action puts Black law students in institutions where they are doomed to fail. Our opposition to his specific request for bar exam data is rooted in the protection of exam takers�?? privacy and compliance with the law.

The Times editorial dismisses these concerns as �??spurious�?? and then provides no explanation to support that view. Instead the Times advances Sander�??s and the California First Amendment Coalition�??s attempts to convert this into a controversy over affirmative action because their anti-privacy arguments have no merit.

For example, Sander wants exam takers�?? undergraduate and law school GPA, LSAT as well as bar scores �?? even though individuals who take the bar cannot access these scores themselves.

The State Bar cannot disclose information provided by exam applicants, irrespective of its relevance in a public policy debate, because state and federal law precludes its disclosure absent consent. One�??s private records do not become public records, accessible to anyone, simply because a person applies to take a state exam and becomes part of a database.

It is on these legal grounds that the State Bar Board of Governors voted unanimously to deny Sander�??s request and why many prominent lawyers support the Bar�??s protection of bar exam takers data. In a Nov. 7, 2007, letter to the State Bar president and chair of the Bar�??s Regulations, Admissions & Discipline Committee, 28 lawyers and leaders of bar organizations, both local and statewide, wrote:

�??The State Bar holds the confidential information of Bar applicants in trust. It is not at liberty to divulge these applicants�?? confidential information because they have a right to privacy in this information and a right to due process with respect to its disclosure.�??

Sander's research design solves neither the problem of consent nor the problem of privacy. Given the current demographic makeup of many of California�??s top law schools, simply removing names and other identifying characteristics does not ensure the confidentiality of all applicants.

At UC Berkeley and UCLA Law Schools, several classes have had 10 or fewer Black students since the adoption of Proposition 209. Small numbers of Black students in a class are typical of some private law schools as well. Under such circumstances, even �??anonymized�?? data can still render persons easily traceable, and in such cases the law prohibits disclosure of academic records without consent.

As Dean Larry Kramer of Stanford Law School stated in a letter to the State Bar on this issue last year: �??[t]he use of these records envisioned by the Sander team would violate FERPA [the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974].�??

The disclosure of such educational records presents a serious legal question, not fairly characterized as �??spurious.�??

And to the extent that the issue of political motivation or orthodoxy is invoked, it surely should be considered with respect to all sides. After all, Sander�??s research is funded by a $1 $1.2 million grant from the conservative ~~Scaife Foundation~~ Searle Freedom Trust and enjoys the full support of all of the conservatives now in control of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, including Gail Heriot�??one of the authors of Proposition 209.

That Sander has a right to advocate his position is undeniable. He doesn�??t have the right to acquire personal and confidential information of bar exam takers when the law mandates otherwise.

Anthony Solana, Jr., is president and chairperson of For People of Color, Inc. Sara Jackson is the Equal Justice Society Judge Constance Baker Motley Civil Rights Fellow. For more information on this issue, visit www.equaljusticesociety.org.

National Council of La Raza's New WeCanStopTheHate.org

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:02:00 +0000

A revamped website launched today by the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) documents how hate groups in the U.S. have been reenergized by the immigration debate and how the growing intolerance fanned by these groups is leading to a record increase in hate crimes against Latinos.

The website, WeCanStopTheHate.org, spotlights hate in the immigration debate with analyses of the leading groups, spokespeople, and media allies of the anti-immigrant movement.

�??Given that dozens of anti-immigrant talk show hosts and organizations have descended on Capitol Hill this week, it is especially important that information on what these entities are really all about is readily available to those interested in combating intolerance,�?? said Janet Murguía, NCLR President and CEO. �??Regardless of how one feels about immigration policy, we can all agree that a hate-filled debate is not acceptable.�??

The website, originally launched in January of this year, has been redesigned to make it easier for visitors and users to find information, obtain the latest updates, and learn how to get involved. Its features include an extensive library of videos on the links between anti-immigrant and extremist organizations throughout the country; fact sheets on, among other topics, the code words of hate used in the debate and the most prominent media spokespeople from these anti-immigrant and extremist groups; and frequently updated posts, called �??The Latest,�?? on incidents of hate in the media, from policymakers and others.

Privacy, Not Political Correctness: Ideology, Not Science, Behind Richard Sander Request for Confidential Bar Exam Data

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:59:00 +0000

EJS submitted the following commentary by Anthony Solana, Jr. and Sara Jackson in response to an opinion piece written by Peter Scheer of the California First Amendment Coalition. CFAC has joined UCLA Law professor Richard Sander in a lawsuit demanding that the State Bar of California turn over confidential data on state bar exam takers for research by Sander that has been roundly criticized. CFAC published this piece on their site.

Peter Scheer's Aug. 20 commentary defended a suit by Sander and CFAC against the State Bar to obtain the academic records and exam scores of applicants to the Bar. Sander wants exam takers' undergraduate and law school GPA, LSAT as well as bar scores - even though individuals who take the bar cannot access these scores themselves.

Scheer claims that the decision of the State Bar to deny access to these records was motivated by "political correctness." Since the initial request from Sander was tied to his controversial research asserting that affirmative action puts Black law students in institutions where they are doomed to fail, objections to the release of the data are summarily dismissed as reflecting a benighted adherence to liberal orthodoxy.

Obscured by the charges of "political correctness" is the paramount legal issue Sander's request presents: privacy. The information provided to the Bar by exam applicants cannot be disclosed by the Bar, irrespective of its relevance in a public policy debate, because state and federal law precludes its disclosure absent consent.

When applicants to the bar applied to take the exam, they were asked to provide personal information on the Bar's promise that it would be used only for specific and limited purposes: to determine whether an applicant met the requirements to sit for the Bar and for the Bar's own internal studies.

This express limited written consent does not authorize the Bar to give this highly confidential information to anyone without permission. Because the Bar made this promise it is legally and morally bound to keep it.

Federal law protects the privacy of these educational records as well. One's private records do not become public records, accessible to anyone, simply because a person applies to take a state exam and becomes part of a database.

It is on these legal grounds that many prominent lawyers support the Bar's protection of bar exam takers data. In a Nov. 7, 2007, letter to the State Bar president and chair of the Bar's Regulations, Admissions & Discipline Committee, 28 lawyers and leaders of bar organizations, both local and statewide, wrote:

"The State Bar holds the confidential information of Bar applicants in trust. It is not at liberty to divulge these applicants' confidential information because they have a right to privacy in this information and a right to due process with respect to its disclosure."

Sander's research design solves neither the problem of consent nor the problem of privacy. Given the current demographic makeup of many of California's top law schools, simply removing names and other identifying characteristics does not ensure the confidentiality of all applicants. For example, at UC Berkeley and UCLA Law Schools several classes have had 10 or fewer Black students since the adoption of Proposition 209. Small numbers of Black students in a class are typical of some private law schools as well. Under such circumstances, even "anonymized" data can still render persons easily traceable, and in such cases the law prohibits disclosure of academic records without consent.

As Dean Larry Kramer of Stanford Law School stated in a letter to the State Bar on this issue last year: "[t]he use of these records envisioned by the Sander team would violate FERPA [the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act of 1974]."

At the very least, the foregoing indicates that the disclosure of these educational records presents a serious legal question, not fairly characterized as a matter of "political correctness."

And to the extent that the issue of political motivation or orthodoxy is invoked, it surely should be considered with respect to all sides. After all, Sander's research is funded by a $1 $1.2 million grant from the conservative ~~Scaife Foundation~~ Searle Freedom Trust (update: read correction here) and enjoys the full support of all of the conservatives now in control of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, including Gail Heriot-one of the authors of Proposition 209. At no point in Scheer's commentary are these facts mentioned.

Nor does Scheer mention the fact that there have been numerous scholarly criticisms by leading social scientists and legal scholars challenging the methodological integrity of Sander's work, and raising the question of whether he has proven his claims. The questions raised are particularly important since it is unclear the extent to which any of Sander's articles on this topic were peer-reviewed and none of them is published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Sander's unsuccessful effort to obtain National Science Foundation funding for this project also raises questions about its methodological soundness. According to some reviewers (whose evaluations were published on Sander's website), Sander's mismatch hypothesis cannot reasonably be tested by analyzing the bar scores of Black and Latino test takers.

Sander's research conclusions largely remain uncorroborated. According to one researcher, since Sander's article on the mismatch theory was published almost four years ago, "I have been unable to find a published article or working paper in an academic venue that defends Sander's work, other than his own." Sander might well contend that the absence of concurring work is due to the fear of staking out a controversial position. But an equally plausible hypothesis - and one well supported by critiques - is that significant questions exist as to whether he has proven what he claims. Under the guise of being balanced, Scheer's commentary considers none of this.

That Sander has a right to advocate his position is undeniable. What he does not have is a right to acquire personal and confidential information of bar exam takers when the law mandates otherwise.

Anthony Solana, Jr., is president and chairperson of For People of Color, Inc. Sara Jackson is the Equal Justice Society Judge Constance Baker Motley Civil Rights Fellow. More information on this issue, visit www.equaljusticesociety.org.

Julian Bond Introduces Ben Jealous, New President of the NAACP

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:57:00 +0000

Next week a new chapter will begin at the NAACP when Benjamin Todd Jealous, 35, becomes only the 17th President of the NAACP in its 99-year history, wrote NAACP chairman Julian Bond in an email today.

Ben has been an ally of the Equal Justice Society since our founding and all of us here are proud that he will lead the NAACP.

Mr. Jealous has spent his professional life working for the very social justice concerns for which the NAACP advocates. We believe that he is a perfect match, and I think you will agree.

A life-long community activist, Mr. Jealous organized his first voter registration drive at age 14, with a determination that stemmed from being raised in a family that has actively supported the NAACP for five generations.

He began his career as a community organizer with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund working on issues of healthcare access in Harlem. At age 21, Jealous moved to Mississippi to work as a field organizer as part of a successful campaign to stop the state's plan to close two of its three public historically black universities, and convert one of them into a prison.

During that time, he took a job at Mississippi's Jackson Advocate newspaper investigating human rights abuses. His reporting for the frequently firebombed weekly paper was credited with exposing corruption amongst high-ranking officials at notorious Parchman State Prison. His investigations also helped to acquit a black small farmer who had been wrongfully and maliciously accused of arson.

He soon became Managing Editor at the Advocate, and eventually went on to serve as Executive Director of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA), a federation of more than 200 black community newspapers. While at the NNPA, he rebuilt its 90-year old national news service and launched a web-based initiative that more than doubled the number of black newspapers publishing online.

His career path has also included leadership positions at Amnesty International, where he directed the U.S. Domestic Human Rights Program and published their widely acclaimed 2004 report, Threat and Humiliation: Racial Profiling, Domestic Security, and Human Rights in the United States, leading efforts to rebuild public support against racial profiling post 9/11.

Most recently, Mr. Jealous served as President of the Rosenberg Foundation, an independent institution that supports civil and human rights advocacy related to the economic interests of working people.

A Rhodes Scholar as well as an accomplished activist, Mr. Jealous is one of the best and brightest of his generation; and he represents a new generation for the NAACP. To learn more about him, visit the NAACP website.

I hope you will join me in welcoming Benjamin Todd Jealous to our organization. I know we can expect great things from his leadership.

James Rucker: Are we finally ready to help rebuild the Gulf Coast?

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:35:00 +0000

James Rucker of ColorOfChange.org today sent out an email promoting a bill in Congress that will give Katrina survivors a fair chance to rebuild their lives. But it won't become law if enough representatives don't stand up to support it.

Three years after Hurricane Katrina, there's finally legislation.

The Gulf Coast Civic Works Act would hire 100,000 Gulf Coast residents and evacuees, providing them with training and jobs to rebuild their homes and communities. It started as nothing more than a good idea, but after thousands of ColorOfChange.org members called on Congress to support the plan, and after years of persistent activism from students and Gulf Coast organizations, it now has a real chance of bringing some justice to the Gulf.

Even though it's come this far, it will take massive public pressure on each member of Congress to get the bill passed. If we want justice for Katrina survivors, we need to make our voices heard now as the media focuses its attention on the third anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.

I've signed on with ColorOfChange.org to tell my member of Congress to co-sponsor the Gulf Coast Civic Works Act, will you join us?

http://www.colorofchange.org/gulfcoast/?id=2188-126103

The Gulf Coast Civic Works Act represents a powerful shift from what's currently happening in the Gulf. It calls for hiring 100,000 Gulf Coast residents to rebuild New Orleans and the surrounding region. They'll be provided with temporary housing and job-training and will build and repair houses, schools, parks, and other civic buildings.

The idea behind the Gulf Coast Civic Works Project is not new. During the Great Depression, the federal government believed it had a responsibility to ensure that those hit hardest did not fall through the cracks. It also knew that those Americans wanted a hand up, not a handout. So, in 1935, Congress created a program to hire out-of-work Americans to get things done to benefit their communities.

It's a plan that makes sense--for displaced survivors, for the communities of the Gulf Coast, for the nation as a whole. It provides an opportunity to invest in Americans while reversing the most glaring problems that plague current rebuilding plans: gentrification, government waste, and massive corporate profiteering. It would revitalize the Gulf Coast's economy while rebuilding its infrastructure, and it's a model that could be applied to solve similar problems across the country.

Learn more and please join us by calling on your representative to co-sponsor the Gulf Coast Civic Works Act. It only takes a minute:

http://www.colorofchange.org/gulfcoast/?id=2188-126103

Thanks.

ACS Criticizes Attorney General's Inaction On Justice Department Hiring Scandal

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:28:00 +0000

Our friends at the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy today criticized Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey's lack of response to the actions of several former top Justice Department officials who improperly used political criteria to fill career positions at the Department.

"Attorney General Mukasey has abdicated his responsibility to ensure that the Department of Justice is dedicated to the impartial administration of Justice," said ACS executive director Lisa Brown. "Rather than addressing the corruption of the hiring process and the harm that has been done to the Department, the Attorney General offers no substantive response."

Since June, the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility have released two comprehensive reports chronicling the use of political hiring for nonpolitical positions in violation of both civil service law and Department of Justice policy. The first report examined the Department's honors and summer intern programs, detailing bias against candidates affiliated with "liberal" groups, including ACS. The second report, released in late July, identified the improper actions of top aides to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales concerning the screening of potential U.S. prosecutors and immigration judges.

Speaking to the American Bar Association yesterday, the Attorney General acknowledged the serious problems at the Justice Department, noting that "the system failed," but at the same time he made clear that he would not take action against the wrongdoers, saying that they have been sufficiently punished by "substantial negative publicity."

"It may be, as Attorney General Mukasey says, that 'not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime,'" said Brown. "But it does not follow that every violation of the law is to be met with blank indifference. What the Attorney General apparently does not grasp is that failing to address widespread and systemic wrongs at the nation's highest institute of justice undermines the very mission of the Department and the confidence that Americans have in their government and its ability to pursue justice.

"The U.S. Department of Justice has been seriously undermined by improper partisan activities and policies over the past eight years," Brown added. "Unfortunately, Attorney General Mukasey's disheartening remarks yesterday offer nothing to a nation looking for a return to leadership on principles of justice and fair and equal treatment for all.

"When the Attorney General was chosen to be the nation's top law enforcement officer, he pledged to restore integrity to the Department of Justice," Brown stated. "His comments yesterday reveal, through both his tone and the lack of understanding of the need for a serious response, that his promise was an empty one."

Christopher Punongbayan Appointed Deputy Director at Asian Law Caucus

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:53:00 +0000

The Asian Law Caucus today announced that Christopher Punongbayan will be joining the Asian Law Caucus as Deputy Director in September. Chris is currently Staff Attorney at Positive Resource Center and was previously a 2004 recipient of the Ford Foundation New Voices Fellowship, serving as Advocacy Director for Filipinos for Affirmative Action.

He is Vice-Chair of the San Francisco Immigrant Rights Commission and the Chair of South of Market Community Action Network. He has served on the boards of a number of other youth and API advocacy organizations in New York and San Francisco and also has community experience from LA, where he went to law school. He brings to the Caucus a number of different perspectives, an incredible amount of energy, and a strong commitment to our mission.

The Caucus also has two new staff attorneys for the Housing Program joining us this fall. Eva Auyeung was previously Staff Attorney at Eviction Defense Collaborative, is a fluent Cantonese and Mandarin speaker and has significant experience working with Chinese-speaking tenants. Deborah Sheen is a recent graduate of University of San Francisco Law School and fluent Korean speaker. Previous to law school, she worked as Program Coordinator at the Korean American Coalition. She has also worked with communities on participatory planning and community benefits agreements projects in the past.

Enter the Civil Rights 2.0 Video Contest

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:33:00 +0000

What are you and your generation doing for civil rights? The National Campaign To Restore Civil Rights wants to hear from people ages 16 to 25. To enter our video contest, upload a video up to 2-minutes in length, tag it civilrights2.0, and register at http://www.rollbackcampaign.org/video-contest.

Dennis Kucinich Introduces Articles of Impeachment

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 02:51:00 +0000

Congressman Dennis Kucinich is right now on the floor of the House of Representatives introducing 35 articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush.

The Equal Justice Society (EJS) supports impeachment proceedings. In a Dec. 19, 2007, letter to Speaker Pelosi, EJS president Eva Paterson wrote that "impeachment should be put back on the table. We know that this administration has but one more year to govern but we know that it is critical that lawyers stand up and speak the truth. Dangerous precedents are being set. Future presidents and vice presidents will take from our silence our acquiescence to lawless acts. This compels us to act."

"We've waited seven years to find one Member of Congress brave enough to stand up for our Constitution, for which generations of Americans have fought and died," said Bob Fertik, President of Democrats.com. "We are thrilled and honored that Dennis Kucinich has chosen to be that one genuine patriot. We congratulate him on his historic leadership, and pledge to do everything in our power to persuade Congress to adopt all 35 Articles and put George W. Bush on trial before the Senate of the United States, exactly as the Founding Fathers wanted."

"Some might question why Congressman Kucinich has done this now," continued Fertik. "My question is why 434 other Congress Members have not done it before. Despite the uncountable and unspeakable crimes this administration has committed, George Bush and Dick Cheney remain in power and immune from prosecution. Congress must impeach Bush and Cheney now - before they further abuse their power by pardoning for all of their crimes."

"Our Founders created a single executive precisely so that we could hold that one person accountable for the actions of the Executive Branch. It is high time we did so, and millions of Americans will be urging their representatives to support the effort being led by Congressman Kucinich," said David Swanson, creator of ImpeachCheney.org, Washington Director of Democrats.com and co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition.

Email or call (202-224-3121) your Member of Congress to support Rep. Kucinich's Articles of Impeachment. And sign the petition at Democrats.com http://www.democrats.com/35-articles-of-impeachment. (At the time I posted this, the link didn't work, likely due to traffic.)

Encouraging people of color to apply for Netroots Nation scholarship

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 29 May 2008 00:12:00 +0000

The third annual gathering of the Netroots (formerly known as the YearlyKos Convention) will be held July 17�??20 at the Austin Convention Center in Austin, Texas.

Netroots Nation 2008 will include panels led by national and international experts; identity, issue and regional caucuses; prominent political, issue and policy-oriented speakers; a progressive film screening series; and the most concentrated gathering of progressive bloggers to date.

To help everyone get there, Netroots Nation is partnering with Democracy for America to offer scholarships to bring some of those activists to Austin to network with fellow progressives just like them.

The scholarship program will cover the cost of registration and lodging for at least nine activists.

Click here to apply for your scholarship now.

The scholarship program is a way to ensure that activists of every age, background, and economic bracket, representing numerous points of view and all 50 states, are able to attend Netroots Nation. Because the more diverse the audience, the richer our experience in Austin will be.

Whether you're an activist organizing locally to support a campaign or a blogger mobilizing communities for a common cause, this is your chance to show off what you've done to move the progressive agenda forward.

Barbara Rodgers to Leave CBS 5

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Wed, 28 May 2008 19:10:00 +0000

Barbara Rodgers estimates that she's done at least 8,000 interviews during her 36 years in broadcasting. Most of those for CBS 5 (KPIX-TV), the station that has been her home away from home since 1979. Now Rodgers has decided to take a break.

"After almost 29 years at CBS 5, I had been thinking about when I might hang up my reporter's notebook and microphone. So I decided that the right time is now, while I still have the enthusiasm to pursue some of my other interests," said Rodgers.

Rodgers' last day on the air will be Friday, May 30. She will still be seen after that in a few Jefferson Award stories and �??Bay Sunday�?? shows that she taped earlier.

(Turns out that EJS president Eva Paterson and film director Eric Fournier, both spearheading the documentary Presidential Race, will be among the last of Barbara's guests on her Bay Sunday show. See the show segment here.)

�??Barbara has been a dedicated professional and pioneer at CBS 5. During her 29 years at KPIX, she has inspired and mentored countless scores of young journalists. Her energy and enthusiasm for the job are without peer. Just a few weeks ago, her anchoring three hours of uninterrupted Olympic Torch coverage was a text book example of her formidable skills and a reminder of how she made the most difficult tasks seem easy. She leaves us at the top of her game,�?? said Ron Longinotti, President and General Manager, CBS 5/The CW 44 Cable 12.

"It has been my great privilege to work with Barbara for the past eight years. She is an exceptional broadcast journalist -- a terrific reporter and a wonderful news anchor who remains clear and cool even under pressure of major breaking news. We will miss her skills, her insight, her empathy and her wonderful laugh in our newsroom," said Dan Rosenheim, Vice President and News Director of CBS 5

�??Besides being a cherished friend, Barbara's unstoppable curiosity, deep empathy, sharp writing, and good cheer make her the kind of reporter you love to work with. Somehow the world seems a little less confusing when Barbara is covering the news,�?? said Craig Franklin Senior Producer, News Special Projects.

�??As an accomplished journalist, Barbara Rodgers brings unbridled passion and professionalism to her job. The numerous awards she�??s received over the years speak volumes about the high quality of her work. As my friend, Barbara is priceless�?? said �??Bay Sunday�?? producer and Executive Producer of �??Eye on the Bay�?? Lena Sullivan.

Barbara Rodgers has been with CBS 5 Eyewitness News since 1979. She co-anchors CBS 5 Eyewitness News at Noon with Juliette Goodrich--her second time around on the Noon News. Prior to this, Rodgers anchored the weekend newscasts from 1987 to 2000.

In 2001, Rodgers returned as the host of �??Bay Sunday,�?? CBS 5's weekly public affairs program. She helped create the show in 1989 and was its host for seven years before taking a hiatus. �??Bay Sunday�?? is an eclectic mix of news, arts and community information all tossed up in lively conversation. Prior to this, she anchored CBS 5 Eyewitness News at Noon from 1984 to 1987.

In 1985, Rodgers was awarded the prestigious William Benton Fellowship in Broadcast Journalism at the University of Chicago. During her six-month leave of absence to participate in the fellowship program, she took courses in such diverse subjects as international relations, poetry writing and Meso-American pre-history. "It was," says Rodgers, "one of the most exciting and intellectually stimulating experiences of my life."

Rodgers has received numerous honors for her work and community service, including the Frederick D. Patterson Outstanding Individual Award from the United Negro College Fund, seven Emmy Awards from the Northern California Chapter of the National Association of Television Arts and Sciences (NATAS), five Excellence in Journalism Awards from the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) and awards for reporting from the Associated Press, United Press International and the (San Francisco) Peninsula Press Club.

In 2004, she received the "Pioneer Award" from the National Coalition of 100 Black Women and the Governor's Award from NATAS, the highest local award a journalist can receive. That year, she was also inducted into the Golden Key International Honor Society. In 1992, the San Francisco Chapter of the League of Women Voters chose her as one of its "Women Who Could Be President." She has also been honored by the California Legislature, the National Council of Negro Women, CityFlight Magazine and the Golden Gate Chapter of American Women in Radio and Television, receiving AWRT's Kudo Award for Best On-Air Anchor in 2003.

Also in 2003, she was given the national Unity Award from the Radio and Television News Directors Association for reporting in the series "Muslims in America," which examined cultural, civil rights and religious issues involving American Muslims in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In 1993, she was chosen by the Freedom Forum and the National Association of Black Journalists as one of five journalists to participate in the South Africa Journalists Exchange Program. She spent a month in that country reporting on the changes taking place since the end of Apartheid.

Rodgers joined CBS 5 after seven years at WOKR-TV in Rochester, New York. Prior to entering a career in broadcasting, Rodgers headed the Business Skills Department and was an instructor of English and communications at theEducational Opportunity Center in Rochester. She also worked as an urban affairs researcher and a computer programmer for the Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester.

Rodgers holds a bachelor's degree in business from Knoxville College in Knoxville, Tennessee. She did additional studies at the State University of New York at Buffalo and the University of Chicago. She is a member and co-founder of the Bay Area Black Journalists Association and has served on the boards of various organizations, including the World Affairs Council of Northern California, the Society of Professional Journalists, Walden House, a non-profit health and human services program specializing in substance abuse treatment for people of all ages and Friends of Faith, which raises funds to help low income women diagnosed with breast cancer. She has volunteered her time to scores of other community groups.

Rodgers loves traveling and is off to somewhere every chance she gets. She has been to countries on five different continents.

When asked what she'll be doing now, Rodgers said she wasn't sure about the long term, but she has a definite short term goal. "I want to clear out all the clutter in my garage and spare room at home--stuff that has been piling up for all these years when I've spent more time at the office than I did at home. That could take six months or more! After that, I'll start to explore some of my other loves like travel, food and my new computer; and I'm excited about finally getting to spend more time visiting with family and friends both in and outside the Bay Area."

And what will she miss most about this job that has been a part of her life for so long? "Meeting a multitude of new and fascinating people. I am a person who still has so much curiosity about everything and this job let me indulge that and be as nosey as I wanted to be. I'll also miss being in the middle of the action when there's a big story and I'll especially miss getting to be a part of this year's Presidential election night when history might be made. But I'll be watching from home and doing a critique."

SOURCE: CBS5 Press Release

UN Expert on Racism Begins Fact-Finding Mission in US

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 19 May 2008 20:44:00 +0000

Several national civil liberties and human rights groups today welcomed a fact-finding mission to the U.S. by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance. The American Civil Liberties Union, Global Rights, the Lawyers�?? Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law, the U.S. Human Rights Network, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Rights Working Group and the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty call on the U.S., both state and local governments, to fully cooperate with the Special Rapporteur.

�??The visit of the Special Rapporteur is a critical opportunity to shed light on the pervasive and systemic problem of racism and discrimination in the United States,�?? said Jamil Dakwar, Director of the ACLU Human Rights Program. �??In this election year, the eyes of the world will be turned toward America and its longstanding promise to end racial and ethnic inequalities.�??

At the invitation of the U.S. government, Special Rapporteur Doudou Diène is visiting the U.S. from May 18 to June 6 to examine issues of racism and racial discrimination in this country. Diène will visit Washington, New York, Chicago, Omaha, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Miami and San Juan, Puerto Rico over the next three weeks where he will study incidents of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the governmental measures in place to address them.

Diène is scheduled to meet with federal and local government officials as well as members of diverse communities across the United States and representatives of several non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

�??The Special Rapporteur�??s visit presents a unique opportunity to give voice to those combating racism in the U.S. and will bring our concerns to the U.N. and its enforcement mechanisms,�?? said Aubrey McCutcheon, Director of Programs at Global Rights. �??I am confident Mr. Diène�??s visit will heighten our efforts towards eliminating racism and its vestiges.�??

In March 2008, the separate U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) issued a strongly worded critique of the United States' record on racial discrimination and urged the government to make sweeping reforms to policies affecting racial and ethnic minorities, women, immigrants and indigenous populations in the U.S. Several civil liberties and human rights organizations have urged the Special Rapporteur to critically examine the continuation of racism and racial discrimination in various areas identified by CERD and well documented in extensive NGO reports, including criminal justice, education, housing, juvenile justice, immigration policy, police brutality, hate crimes and racial profiling.

The mandate of the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance was established in 1993 by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights and further extended by the U.N. Human Rights Council. The Special Rapporteur will submit a final report on the visit to the Human Rights Council in the spring of 2009.

More information about the Special Rapporteur�??s visit is available online at: www.aclu.org/intlhumanrights/racialjustice/sronracism.html and www.ushrnetwork.org/special_rep

More information about the CERD recommendations to the U.S. is available at: www.aclu.org/intlhumanrights/racialjustice/cerd.htmland and www.ushrnetwork.org/projects/cerd

Barb Shelly: 'Good riddance to the anti-affirmative action drive in Missouri'

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 05 May 2008 18:14:00 +0000

Kansas City Star editorial board member Barb Shelly posted this earlier today in response to the failed attempt by the Missouri campaign to erode equal opportunity in that state:

Nice to see the cynically named "Civil Rights Initiative" fall short of the petition signature requirements in Missouri.

This was, in my mind, the most offensive of several constitutional amendments being pushed by out-of-state groups. It would have barred schools and employers from giving preference to applicants based on race.

Schools and employers should have the right to determine whether it's in their interests to boost minority representation. If Missourians thought affirmative action was a problem here, proposals to curb it would have bubbled up from the General Assembly or from a grass-roots initiative.

But the petition drive that's been taking place was spearheaded and largely financed by California businessman Ward Connerly. And many of the signature-gatherers are not Missourians upset by affirmative action. They're employees of another creatively named company, National Ballot Access of Georgia.

Another petition drive, to recall the $500 loss limit for gamblers at Missouri casinos, is being coordinated by National Petition Management Inc., a Michigan firm.

A good story in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch has more details about the business of signature gathering.

Some states have passed laws banning gatherers from being paid by the signature, on the theory that it promotes deceit about the petitions. Rep. Rachel Storch, a St. Louis Democrat, has proposed such a measure for Missouri.

I'm for it. It's good for a state to have a vigorous citizen initiative petition process. But the process is being manipulated in an unhealthy way by monied out-of-state groups and individuals. Some correction wouldn't be a bad thing.

Panel on 'Unconscious Bias Theory and Its Impact on Race Coverage' at UNITY Convention in Chicago

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 01 May 2008 03:44:00 +0000

You're invited to attend our panel on "Unconscious Bias Theory and Its Impact on Race Coverage," taking place on Saturday, July 26, from 1:15 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. at the UNITY '08 Convention in Chicago.

UNITY is the largest gathering of journalists of color with nearly 10,000 journalists and media executives meeting to discuss timely issues affecting journalism and the media industry.

UNITY: Journalists of Color, Inc. is a coalition of the four alliances, the Asian American Journalists Association, the National Association of Black Journalists, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists and the Native American Journalists Association. Our mission is to advocate fair and accurate news coverage about people of color, and aggressively challenge the industry to staff its organizations at all levels to reflect the nation's diversity.

About our "Unconscious Bias Theory and Its Impact on Race Coverage" panel: Much of racism today is created by a historically influenced, institutionalized, and often subconscious, process. This session provides a background on the social science theory of unconscious bias, explores how this theory applies to journalism and the media industry, and how newsrooms can improve their coverage with this understanding.

Our panelists include:
- John Dovidio, Professor of Psychology, Panelist, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
- Carole Simpson, Anchor, World News Tonight Sunday, Panelist, ABC News, New York, NY
- Roosevelt Thomas, President, Panelist, The American Institute for Managing Diversity, Atlanta, Ga.
- Eva Paterson, President, Panelist, Equal Justice Society, San Francisco, Calif.

The panel is coordinated by Keith Kamisugi, Director of Communications at the Equal Justice Society and independent investigative producer Melissa Cornick.

The panel is schedule to take place at McCormick Place West W176 in the convention main venue.

This event is listed on Facebook. For more information on UNITY and to register: http://www.2008unity.org/registration.cfm.

Or contact Keith Kamisugi at 415-288-8710 or kkamisugi@equaljusticesociety.org.

MALDEF: Celebrate César Chávez Day with Action

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 18:34:00 +0000

MALDEF today marked the 81st anniversary of the birth of César Chávez with a call to action.

�??Cesar Chavez was not just a Latino leader, a labor leader or a civil rights leader. He was an American leader reaching the conscience of the times and toiling for those whose daily struggles providing the fruits and vegetables for tables across the nation and the world had otherwise been ignored. An official state holiday in California, this day is celebrated by many communities across our nation as a day to honor the legacy of this historic leader and recognize the value of America�??s immigrant workforce. It must be a day of renewal and action,�?? stated MALDEF President & General Counsel John Trasviña.

Chávez�??s works and passion were instrumental in achieving historic social change through non-violent means. His boycotts, pickets, strikes, and fasts demonstrate the sacrifices Chávez made in achieving positive social change for underserved communities.

Today, one of the most important issues facing America is the protection of worker and immigrant rights. MALDEF follows in the footsteps of Chávez in many ways, including through our commitment to protect the First Amendment rights for workers, day laborers, and those that are most vulnerable in our country.

Last week, MALDEF, with the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit in federal court in Phoenix, Arizona challenging an unconstitutional anti-solicitation ordinance. The lawsuit challenges a law passed by the town of Cave Creek in October that targets day laborers who are seeking employment.

"The Cave Creek anti-solicitation ordinance is a clear violation of the First Amendment right to engage in free speech. Day laborers are the most visible and vulnerable segment of the immigrant population, and they and others who wish to exercise their First Amendment right to solicit employment in public places have the right to do so without fear that they will be targeted in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner and suffer fines and arrest as a result,�?? said Kristina Campbell, lead MALDEF staff attorney on the case.

MALDEF's work will not be done until these and other workers can work legally, with rights, dignity and legal protections.

Assemblyman Wants Prisons to Verify Immigration Status

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:09:00 +0000

Republican Assembymember Van Tran (Costa Mesa) wants to help the state's budget crisis by having Califorinia prisons verify the immigration status of new prisoners.

Caroline B. Sanders of the California Immigrant Policy Center has written a letter to Assemblymember Jose Solorio, who chairs the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, in opposition to Tran's bill, AB 2141. The Equal Justice Society opposes the measure and is signing on to the letter. What follows below is an edited version of Caroline's letter.

AB 2141 would require the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to verify the immigration status of any new prisoner under the custody of the department, cooperate with Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and on ICE laws and regulations. This bill effectively requires the Department to take on federal responsibilities for the enforcement of immigration laws and diverts limited state resources away from pressing problems within the state correctional system.

Immigration laws are extremely complex, even more complicated than the tax code, and state and local officials can hardly be expected to enforce them appropriately. Compounding the inevitable lack of resources for sufficient training of state personnel, this bill invites heightened scrutiny and racial profiling of selected ethnic minorities in the state prison system. The unavoidable mistakes made by ill-prepared state and local officials in determining an individual's immigration status can be costly, resulting in lawsuits and protracted litigation.

Additionally, the bill offers little clarity or guidance as to how state officials would identify the immigration status of California's inmates. Only federal immigration courts are competent to determine the immigration status of individuals, and these determinations are generally not made by courts until deportation or "removal proceedings" are initiated, usually after an inmate has completed his or her sentence in state prison.

California can ill afford to divert limited resources away from pressing problems with the state correctional system, including overcrowding, a complete breakdown in medical treatment of inmates and huge parole hearing backlogs, to embroil state officials in a time-consuming venture that remains the legal responsibility of the federal government, not California.

State correctional officials need to stick to their essential job of promoting the public safety of Californians - overseeing the incarceration, parole, and rehabilitation of the state's prisoners - not taking on the responsibilities of federal authorities.

Bush Nominee for District Court an Anti-Choice Zealot

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:34:00 +0000

President Bush has nominated Richard Honaker for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge to the District Court in Wyoming. Richard Honaker has worked tirelessly to ban abortion and has publically stated that abortion is �??wrong, and no one should have the right to do what is wrong.�?? Richard Honaker is one of Bush�??s most anti-choice nominees to date and shouldn�??t receive Senate confirmation.

As a representative in the Wyoming State Legislature, Honaker introduced the �??Human Life Protection Act�?? in 1991. The act would have criminalized abortion from the moment of conception except in the cases of rape, incest, or to protect the woman�??s life. Even women who were the victims of rape or incest would have been denied abortions unless they reported the incidents to the authorities within five days. When the act failed to pass, Honaker reintroduced it in 1992 and it was again defeated. In 1994, Honaker served as counsel to the Unseen Hands Prayer Circle, which formed to place the �??Human Life Protection Act�?? on the statewide ballot.

In one year President Bush will be out of the White House. We must ensure that President Bush doesn�??t get anymore of his anti-choice zealots on the federal bench. Tell your Senators to reject the nomination of Richard Honaker.

Visit the Californians for Fair and Independent Judges website to learn more and for links to sites with online tools to write your Senator opposing this nomination.

EJS in Community Spotlight on Monique Morris' Blog

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:34:00 +0000

Monique Morris, the Senior Research Fellow at the Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall), mentioned EJS on her blog at moniquewmorris.net/blog. Thank you, Monique!

Monique is an accomplished scholar and advocate (and author!) and an incredible ally.

She featured EJS in her Community Spotlight:

In just seven years, EJS has accomplished a lot to support an infrastructure to sustain a progressive legal and political agenda. A few of EJS�?? accomplishments include: partnering with the California Teachers Association and Kaiser Permanente to address unconscious bias, building effective progressive alliances; creating discourse on government as a source for good ; and commissioning a jazz orchestra to chronicle and interpret many of the significant events and people in civil rights history. As a truly creative force in the legal advocacy community, the Equal Justice Society stands out as an organization and Movement worthy of praise.

Please visit Monique's blog and say hello.

EJS Board of Directors Selects Anthony Solana, Jr. as New Chairperson

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:38:00 +0000

The Equal Justice Society today announced that its board has selected Anthony Solana, Jr. as its new chairperson, effective immediately.

Solana, an attorney with the Los Angeles office of Winston & Strawn LLP, and an EJS board member since 2003, succeeds Harvard Law School Jesse Climenko Professor of Law Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. as chair.

"I'm delighted that Anthony will assume the role as Chair of EJS. He has a remarkable ability to build a strong consensus among people fighting for more equality and fairness," said Professor Ogletree, EJS's inaugural chair. "He is the right person to lead EJS at this critical time in our journey."

"Anthony has been with us from the inception of EJS and brought to the board a tenacity for justice, strong leadership and the belief that the law can be used to ensure opportunities for the disenfranchised and oppressed," said Eva Paterson, co-founder and president of EJS. "We're enormously proud to have him as our board chair."

Solana is also president and chair of For People of Color, Inc., an organization he founded to empower people of color wanting to enter the legal profession.

He is the author of "A Guide to the Law School Application Process For People of Color" and "A Guide to the Bar Examination For People of Color" and a motivational speaker, frequently enlisted to be the keynote at numerous events, including law school admissions workshops, bar examination workshops, academic support programs and commencement ceremonies.

In the Los Angeles office of Winston & Strawn LLP, Solana practices in the areas of complex commercial litigation, internal investigations and general business disputes. He was formerly an attorney with Morrison & Foerster LLP. He focuses his pro bono practice to immigration and international human rights matters. The Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights recently awarded Solana the Father Cuchulain Moriarity Award, which recognizes an attorney who has made an extraordinary contribution to the organization's asylum program.

Solana also serves as a board member of the Greenlining Academy Alumni Association, which recently recognized him as its "Alumnus of the Year."

Solana received his Juris Doctor from the University of California Los Angeles School of Law where he served as the co-chair of the Seventh Annual National Latina/o Law Student Conference and was a founding member of the National Latina/o Law Student Association. He received numerous accolades, including the University of California Regents' Scholarship, American Bar Association Legal Opportunity Scholarship, Los Angeles County Bar Association Diversity Scholarship and Mexican American Bar Foundation Scholarship.

In 2003, Solana and a team of UCLA School of Law students submitted an amicus curiae brief supporting the University of Michigan's affirmative action program to the Supreme Court of the United States in Grutter v. Bollinger. He was also involved in creating the "Preserving Diversity in Higher Education" manual on admissions policies and procedures after the University of Michigan decisions. His progressive views on equal educational opportunities have been chronicled in the Wall Street Journal, California Law Review, and L.A. Weekly.

Solana received his B.A. in Political Science and History, with honors, from the University of California, Berkeley. He was the first person in his family to attain a college degree and Juris Doctor. Anthony, however, is proudest of the fact that he was born and raised in East Los Angeles, California.

Heartland Presidential Forum on Dec. 1 in Des Moines, Iowa

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 27 Nov 2007 17:30:00 +0000

From an email I received today from Alan Jenkins:

As we head into the 2008 presidential election cycle, it's time to consider how we center the values that are important to us in the midst of the political rhetoric and debate. We want to share with you one such opportunity. Held in Des Moines, Iowa on December 1, The Heartland Presidential Forum will kick off the Campaign for Community Values. This campaign emphasizes through community values the idea that we're all in it together, and that we must address challenges collectively to move forward.

The Heartland Presidential Forum, sponsored by the Center for Community Change, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement and dozens of grassroots organizing groups, will bring together Iowans, Midwesterners and others who want to address issues important to them through this lens of community. With special emphasis on health care, clean elections, workers' rights, and immigration, the Forum will challenge candidates to outline how their vision for the country will bring us together and strengthen our national community. Participants will include Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, and Barack Obama.

If you are in the area, please consider joining us for this remarkable event.

Sincerely,

Alan Jenkins

The Heartland Presidential Forum
Saturday, December 1, 2007
1:30 p.m.
HyVee Hall
730 3rd Street
Des Moines, Iowa

For more information about the forum, and for tickets:
http://www.communitychange.org/iowa-heartland-forum/

To learn more about the Campaign for Community Values:
http://www.communitychange.org/community_values/

MALDEF: FBI Report Documents Hate Crimes Against Latinos at Record Level

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 19:39:00 +0000

MALDEF today issued a press release saying that a FBI Hate Crimes Statistics Report issued today shows a sharp increase in the number of hate crimes reported against Hispanics based on their ethnicity or national origin to the highest levels since the reports were first mandated by the Hate Crimes Statistics Act.

According to the report, in 2006, Hispanics comprised 62.8% of victims of crimes motivated by a bias toward the victims�?? ethnicity or national origin. In 2004, the comparable figure was 51.5%. Since 2004, the number of victims of anti-Hispanic crimes increased by 25%.

�??Anti-immigrant hatred heard on the radio and cable shows reaches America�??s neighborhoods with real consequences,�?? stated MALDEF President and General Counsel John Trasviña. �??Heightened anti-immigrant sentiment has blocked immigration reform and seeks to turn local police into immigration law enforcers thus making it more difficult for victims to report crimes. The FBI report should serve as a wake up call to our nation�??s leaders to take action on comprehensive immigration reform, reduce tensions and safeguard the basic civil rights and liberties of all Americans.�??

The report goes on to demonstrate the steady growth of anti-Hispanic hate crimes after 2004.

2006: 576 anti-Hispanic crimes against 819 victims
2005: 522 anti-Hispanic crimes against 722 victims
2004: 475 anti-Hispanic crimes against 646 victims
2003: 426 anti-Hispanic crimes against 595 victims
2002: 480 anti-Hispanic crimes against 639 victims

Founded in 1968, MALDEF, the nation�??s leading Latino legal organization, promotes and protects the rights of Latinos through litigation, advocacy, community education and outreach, leadership development, and higher education scholarships. For more information on MALDEF, please visit: www.maldef.org

New York Times Editorial Board Blog Kicks Off With Feinstein-Southwick Post

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:41:00 +0000

I posted this on the fairandindependentjudges.org blog:

The editorial board of The New York Times launched a new blog yesterday with a post questioning Senator Dianne Feinstein�??s support for Leslie Southwick, Bush�??s nominee for New Orleans-based United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Judge Southwick �??has the sort of record that should have made his nomination dead on arrival,�?? wrote the author. �??Mississippi Judge Leslie Southwick, whose record includes decisions that have been labeled anti-black and anti-gay, is just the sort of Bush judicial nominee everyone thought would be blocked when Democrats retook the Senate. But Judge Southwick may be headed for confirmation thanks to Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat.�??

The New Employment Non-Discrimination Act Hurts Us All

noreply@blogger.com (admin) — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 23:12:00 +0000

The recent revisions to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) have left us with a bill that no competent attorney representing the LGBT community would ever support.

More than 150 LGBT and other civil rights and community organizations are on record as opposing the new version of ENDA for a number of very compelling reasons as a legal organization our opposition is grounded in the reality of the cases we have seen and stories of clients we have heard over the years.

NCLR (home of EJS board member Kate Kendall), Lambda Legal, the ALCU Lesbian and Gay Rights Project, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders and the Transgender Law Project are all unified in our opposition to a bill that will leave many lesbian, gay and bisexual, as well as transgender employees with no redress if fired from their jobs. The revised ENDA marks a major step backwards in the development of laws that protect LGBT employees from discrimination.

By dropping "gender identity" from the bill, this enormously important law, completely betrays the transgender community. Our transgender brothers and sisters have stood with this movement from our earliest beginnings. Transgender individuals loose jobs, are rejected from consideration for employment and are passed over for promotion at greater rates than lesbian, gay or bisexual employees.

Moreover, under the revised ENDA employers can claim-and we know they will-that a firing was not based on sexual orientation, but rather on the employees failure to act feminine or masculine enough. This kind of sex stereotyping is at the root of much of the discrimination against lesbians and gay men. Yet, this kind of discrimination will be perfectly legal under ENDA.

We have been working with our colleague organizations for years to pass an Employment Non-Discrimination Act that will protect the victims of discrimination we see every day. For years we have also made clear to key leaders in Congress that including gender identity in ENDA is the only way to protect all of us.

The loopholes in the new bill are not only based on the removal of gender identity, the section of ENDA which provided a religious exemption to some employers has been broadened to encompass hospitals and universities run by "faith-based" groups. Under the new version employers can refuse to extend health insurance benefits to couples in domestic partnerships, even if they provide such benefits to married couples.

There is no good reason to support this inferior, flawed and unacceptable version of ENDA. Over a dozen states have passed laws that include gender identity. We cannot and should not accept a federal law which is riddled with loopholes when we can and have been successful in passing laws that truly do protect us all from discrimination on the job. NCLR and our colleagues are committed to fighting for everyone in our community. We are committed to fighting not only the best ENDA we can get, but the ENDA we all deserve.