TresSugar

Two Out of Three Americans Living in Constitution-Free Zone

CitizenSugar — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 10:00:50 -0700

Welcome to the border - where anyone can be stopped and searched. It used to be just the point of entry along Canada and Mexico, but Homeland Security has taken an increasingly loose - or wide - interpretation of it. Now? It's a 100-mile radius that wraps around the border of the United States.

Oh yes. It’s called the Constitution-Free Zone by the ACLU. The concern is that it erodes the rights of the Fourth Amendment - the one that protects against unreasonable searches and seizes - for two-thirds of Americans. That's 197.4 million people, and pretty much all of New England.

Authority that the Constitution would have prohibited can now be exercised by the US Customs and Border Protection. It’s been setting up inland checkpoints where it typically questions citizenship; however, people have reported extended questioning and increased pressure to permit searches.

Many are calling for congress to investigate and pass new laws to protect Americans before things go too far. Do you fear it will? Or are you glad to see a protective barrier ringing the country regardless?

Sex Offenders Get Scarlet Pumpkin for Halloween

LibertySugar — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 00:00:53 -0700

As part of their parole, Maryland sex offenders must display a pumpkin sign that states "No candy at this residence." Along with posting the warning sign, the violent and child-sex offenders must also stay in their homes on Halloween, keep the lights off, and not answer the door. The state has distributed warnings to families, telling them to stay away from homes with the pumpkins.

The ACLU is currently challenging an identical Missouri law, claiming the provisions are too vague to enforce and add punishment to sentences already served. While parents and the community must protect children, do you think rehabilitated sex-offenders have a right to some privacy? Does fear go too far in trampling the rights of these ex-cons, or did they give up those rights?

Clothes Call? Woman Kicked Out For Lesbian T-Shirt

CitizenSugar — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:00:10 -0700

Normally a woman entering a federal building to pick up a social security card for her son wouldn't end up in controversy. Unfortunately for Lapriss Gilbert, she was in the wrong place at the wrong time, wearing the wrong t-shirt. When she arrived at the government complex sporting a t-shirt with the words “lesbian.com” on the front, a private security officer hired by the Homeland Security Department stopped her and demanded she leave the premises.

The guard, an employee of Paragon Security, cited The Rules and Regulations Governing Conduct on Federal Property to support his claim that he is able to decide which articles of clothing are acceptable and which are not. Unfortunately, the document does not offer such guidance.

According to a witness, the hired guard’s “loud, unreasonable, aggressive and angry approach to the situation almost caused chaos.” Gilbert says of the incident, "As an African-American and a lesbian, I haven't been through one day without facing some sort of discrimination . . . but this is just shocking." The ACLU is looking into the case they call the most blatant discrimination they've seen in a federal office building.

Answer to Crime? Keep People Off the Streets With Curfews?

CitizenSugar — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:00:30 -0700

It's just like being a teenager, except your parents are the police! And instead of grounding, they can put you in jail! Curfews are popping up in tons of places, aimed at controlling crime. With goals similar to the police checkpoints in Washington DC, the newest towns getting an early bedtime: Helena, Arkansas and Hartford, Connecticut.

Sparked by violence, Helena, AR has implemented a 24-hour curfew in a troubled neighborhood, questioning all passers by. The city council voted unanimously to allow police to expand the program to any area of the city, despite ACLU claims that the police action is unconstitutional. The patrols have resulted in 32 arrests since they locked down the 10-block radius. The council acknowledges the hardship of the curfew but says those living in the city want the random and drug-fueled shootings to stop, regardless of what it takes.

To see what's happening in Hartford, and whether it actually works, read more.

Hartford, CT has a youth curfew scheduled to begin today, aimed at stopping gang violence. For one month, all juveniles have to be in by 9 p.m. After a parade Saturday left one dead, a 7-year-old shot in the head, and a 15-month-old shot in the leg, Hartford's mayor says, "we must do this because we cannot and will not tolerate innocent people, especially children, to be victims." The ACLU says the curfew blatantly violates the civil rights of minors.

With similar youth rules in Rochester, NY, and the rule's efficacy being questioned in Philadelphia, PA, (more crime happens right after school) is a curfew a good way to combat crime - or a crime against civil rights?

Source

Droopy Drawers: Is a Ban on Baggy Pants Racism in Disguise?

CitizenSugar — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:15:29 -0700

Like your pants with a little extra room? If you live in Flint, MI, you better hitch up your britches; the city's new police chief announced yesterday that he's going to start arresting people wearing baggy pants. Oh yeah, you heard correctly. No more low-hanging pantaloons - the chief says people are showing off altogether too much of their derrières and it's creating a problem. He says, "this immoral self-expression goes beyond free speech. It rises to the crime of indecent exposure/disorderly persons." The pants punishment? $500 and up to three months in jail.

While it's true that many don't understand the need to sag one's pants, and may rather not see someone's underduds, can a person's pants lead to arrest? It's a case the ACLU is quite interested in. Curious in not only how the law will be enforced, but also how it will disproportionately target young African-American men. A local ACLU attorney says, that a person's right to choose their clothing is an issue of freedom of expression, though he cautions that not all expression is protected by the Constitution. The local NAACP president expressed her concern that the new law has racial implications this way, "I'm not interested in looking at anyone's underwear. My concern is how (the policy) will be applied equitably."

At the moment, the police aren't entirely sure either. Is it possible that dealing with a small societal issue like indecent saggy pants, could have larger benefits over time? Is this a racially motivated move costumed by concern for decency?

Source

Teacher Throws Kid's Mexican Flag in the Trash - Kid To Sue

CitizenSugar — Thu, 08 May 2008 06:00:08 -0700

Cinco de Mayo may have left more than a tequila hangover and a fridge full of leftover nachos for one teacher in Idaho. A simple act of confiscating a flag from a student might put him on the receiving end of a lawsuit from the ACLU.

The student in question said he was changing into gym clothes at his high school on Cinco de Mayo and holding the Mexican flag when his teacher told him, "Give me the flag." The student claims he asked what the problem was, and his teacher said, "'The problem is that we are in the United States and not in Mexico.' He grabbed it from me. He threw the flag in the garbage can." The trouble worsened after school when the student went to retrieve his flag - he says the teacher taunted him and refused to give it back.

The teacher remembers the event differently, to see how, and how the ACLU is getting involved, read more.

The teacher says the student was waving the flag around and that he "had to confiscate it so it wouldn't escalate any problems in class. We're worried about that stuff all the time. We always have kids saying stuff to each other, and we have a lot of fights between kids." He says he stored it in the trashcan because there was no other place to keep it.

The ACLU has contacted the student who's now considering a lawsuit against the teacher. The school superintendent said this of the incident, "We believe in nondiscriminatory practices and cultural sensitivity. We train for that and talk about that. If there is a teacher making derogatory comments we don't approve of that. We also don't approve of a student disrupting the classroom." About a third of the student body is Hispanic.

Was the teacher right? Is it easy to judge decisions well after the fact? Should the ACLU get involved, or could this be a case of being too sue happy?

Source

High School Principal Outs Two Gay Students

LibertySugar — Thu, 01 May 2008 15:45:29 -0700

A Memphis high-school principal accused of outing two gay students, is now at the center of an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) lawsuit. The principal, Daphne Beasley, asked teachers to compile a list of student couples, in order to assist her in the fight against public displays of affection. Once armed with the romantic information, the principal posted the list in public, for teachers, students, and parents to see.

Two gay students, Nicholas and Andrew, were effectively outed. In an interview with local news, Nicholas explained: "I really feel that my personal privacy was invaded. I mean, Principal Beasley called my mother and outed me to my mother!" Nicholas also alleges that a teacher would not let him go on a school trip to build homes in New Orleans because he would embarrass the school with his gay affection. As a result of the list, Nicholas and Andrew say they are being harassed by fellow students as well.

The ACLU hopes the lawsuit will bring school-district policies that would stop such out-of-control behavior by administrators, policies they say violate students' constitutional rights. They also are asking that the principal apologize to the students, who should also be monetarily compensated for the horrible experience.

Are you outraged by the principal's action? Is PDA in high schools such a threat to the educational experience that it deserves such drastic action? Do these students deserve financial compensation? Is it the only way to get the school district's attention?

Source

American Violet Shows How War on Drugs Is the New Jim Crow

TresSugar — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 06:00:00 -0700

Imagine if someone with a grudge against you told the police you were a drug dealer. Officers would come to your work and arrest you. Then you'd be told that you could go home right away by taking a plea bargain. That, however, would come with probation, the loss of your right to vote and to accept federal benefits like food stamps and public housing. If you chose to fight the charges, you would have to come up with $70,000 for bail or stay in jail. And if you lost, you'd be facing 15 years.

That's the choice that character Dee Roberts has to make in the new film American Violet. The movie is based on the true story of Regina Kelly, an innocent woman who was urged to plead guilty to drug charges by her family, friends, and public defender so she could return to her children. She chose to fight the charges, and with the help of the ACLU, she took on the system.

I had a chance to see the film at a screening also attended by the filmmaker and Regina's ACLU lawyer. To find out what I learned, and to see the trailer read more.

American Violet depicts a terrifying picture of the American justice system. The district attorney wields totalitarian power over a hardworking single mother who faces shaming and unemployment after her wrongful incarceration. While she struggles with the decision to sue the blatantly racist attorney general and the police, she ultimately decides to do her part to stop those preying on her community.

Filmmaker Bill Haney was moved to make the movie after Regina's story brought him to tears. The reality that this was not an isolated incident encouraged Haney to share her story.

ACLU attorney Graham Boyd explained that drug law and enforcement practices target the black community. And when 95 percent of criminal convictions are a result of aggressively pushed plea bargain deals, millions of innocent African Americans lose their right to vote, especially in the South.

It's no coincidence the panel argued, that the so-called War on Drugs was soon declared after the Voting Rights Act was passed in the 1960s.

American Violet is now playing in select theaters. The story of a woman who took on the system - bolstered by her strong bond with her mother and four daughters - it will make you second guess the War on Drugs if you hadn't already.

Source

Airport Security: They Get to See You Naked!

TresSugar — Tue, 19 May 2009 08:30:00 -0700

Did you think taking off your belt, shoes, and sometimes dignity at airport security was the end of it? Think again. It turns out that due to a newish technology, airport security can basically see images of you naked.

Privacy advocates are attempting to stop the US Department of Homeland Security from using whole-body imaging, a technology that is being used now in 19 airports and which displays a blurry but distinctly naked image of a passenger's body with the face blurred out.

The machines "detect both metallic and nonmetallic threat items to keep passengers safe," according to a spokesperson for the Transportation Security Administration, and some say the machines speed up the otherwise annoying and time-consuming process of metal detectors or pat-downs. To find out what privacy advocates are up in arms about, and to watch a demo of whole body imaging in a video, read more

Privacy advocates, from the ACLU to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, say that although the person working the machine never sees the image, and the person looking at the image never sees the passenger (they're in a remote location), there are larger concerns.

Where are the legal disclosures? What if TSA changes their policies down the road? The computer doesn't store the images, but what if that changes later? The machines are being used now in some courthouses in the US, and opponents claim that it's only a matter of time they show up in mundane spaces like malls.

According to one ACLU lawyer, "A choice between being groped and being stripped, I don't think we should pretend those are the only choices. People shouldn't be humiliated by their government."

Has surveillance gotten out of hand? Do you feel safer, or think technologies like whole-body imaging are worth it?

Harvey Milk: OK For a Movie, but Not For the Classroom

TresSugar — Wed, 27 May 2009 08:30:00 -0700

When California sixth-grader Natalie Jones put together a research project about Harvey Milk, it received a near perfect grade. But, when it came time to share the Powerpoint presentation, Natalie's principal said parents would have to sign a permission slip before her classmates could see it during a special lunchtime period.

The principal explained that since Harvey Milk was gay, parents might object to their children learning about his life. But, Harvey's sexual orientation had nothing to do with Natalie's decision to research him. She said she chose Harvey as her subject not because of his gay activism, but because he stood up for all minorities. And while the school cited sex education policies for its decision, the ACLU says officials misapplied those guidelines and violated Natalie's freedom of speech.

Discussing the openly gay politician in California public schools might soon become less unusual (but probably equally controversial). State lawmakers are considering a bill that would declare May 22 "Harvey Milk Day." May 22 wouldn't be a holiday, but it would be an occasion for teachers to talk about Milk's fight for equal rights. Conservative groups are already mobilizing to urge Gov. Schwarzenegger to veto the bill that they say would teach students about "homosexual experimentation."

Do you think Natalie should have been able to present her project? Should public schools go even further and encourage teachers to introduce students to Harvey's life story?

To see video of Natalie discussing the controversy, read more.

Source