Category: Civil Rights

Fabulous!!!

No Comments

The French upper house has passed the same sex marriage law:

Following months of protests both for and against the measure, the French Senate on Tuesday night passed an important provision in a package of laws that would legalize same-sex marriage in the country. The vote is a political win for embattled President Hollande.

French President François Hollande has had precious little to celebrate since he was elected last May. His country’s economy has refused to ignite, unemployment is nearing record highs and his government has been rocked by recent corruption allegations.

But this week, Hollande was finally able to take a key step toward fulfilling a major campaign promise. After months of passionate debate both among lawmakers and on the streets of Paris, the French Senate late Tuesday passed a key provision of the package of laws that would ultimately place same-sex marriage on par with heterosexual marriage in the country.

Following a 10-hour debate, the Senate voted 179 to 157 in favor of an article allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The law will only go into effect once the Senate approves all of its component parts. A further article still pending approval would allow gay married couples in the country to adopt. The first article passed on Tuesday, however, was the most important and virtually assures the legalization of gay marriage in the country.

It could still take several weeks before all of the provisions of the law are passed in the Senate. France’s lower house, the National Assembly, passed the law in mid-February.

Good for them.

Finally!

No Comments

A judge has ruled that national security letters are unconstitutional:

Ultra-secret national security letters that come with a gag order on the recipient are an unconstitutional impingement on free speech, a federal judge in California ruled in a decision released Friday.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston ordered the government to stop issuing so-called NSLs across the board, in a stunning defeat for the Obama administration’s surveillance practices. She also ordered the government to cease enforcing the gag provision in any other cases. However, she stayed her order for 90 days to give the government a chance to appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“We are very pleased that the Court recognized the fatal constitutional shortcomings of the NSL statute,” said Matt Zimmerman, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed a challenge to NSLs on behalf of an unknown telecom that received an NSL in 2011. “The government’s gags have truncated the public debate on these controversial surveillance tools. Our client looks forward to the day when it can publicly discuss its experience.”

The telecommunications company received the ultra-secret demand letter in 2011 from the FBI seeking information about a customer or customers. The company took the extraordinary and rare step of challenging the underlying authority of the National Security Letter, as well as the legitimacy of the gag order that came with it.

I would expect the Obama administration to appeal this.

They have yet to seen an excess of the state security apparatus that they won’t fully support.

Solipsistic Narcissists

No Comments

Now that his son has come out, Senator Rob Portman becomes a supporter of gay marriage:

Republican U.S. Sen. Rob Portman on Thursday announced he has reversed his longtime opposition to same-sex marriage after reconsidering the issue because his 21-year-old son, Will, is gay.

 Portman said his son, a junior at Yale University, told him and his wife, Jane, that he’s gay and “it was not a choice, it was who he is and that he had been that way since he could remember.”

 “It allowed me to think of this issue from a new perspective, and that’s of a Dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities that his brother and sister would have — to have a relationship like Jane and I have had for over 26 years,” Portman told reporters in an interview at his office.

 The conversation the Portmans had with their son two years ago led to him to evolve on the issue after he consulted clergy members, friends — including former Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter is gay — and the Bible.

 “The overriding message of love and compassion that I take from the Bible, and certainly the Golden Rule, and the fact that I believe we are all created by our maker, that has all influenced me in terms of my change on this issue,” Portman said, adding that he feels that “in a way, this strengthens the institution of marriage.”

 Portman said his son didn’t push him to make his announcement, though he “encouraged me.”

 Portman, who backed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act now under review by the U.S. Supreme Court, said he now thinks parts of that bill should be repealed, though he hasn’t considered introducing such legislation himself because economic policy issues are his specialty.

So, how do we make legislators have children who grow up in poverty?

Seriously, if it doesn’t happen to them and theirs, it does not exist.

No Comments

The Obama administration is now claiming the right to assassinate citizens on US soil:

Yes, the president does have the authority to use military force against American citizens on US soil—but only in “an extraordinary circumstance,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a letter to Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Tuesday.

 “The US Attorney General’s refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening,” Paul said Tuesday. “It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans.”

 Last month, Paul threatened to filibuster the nomination of John Brennan, Obama’s pick to head the CIA, “until he answers the question of whether or not the president can kill American citizens through the drone strike program on US soil.” Tuesday, Brennan told Paul that “the agency I have been nominated to lead does not conduct lethal operations inside the United States—nor does it have any authority to do so.” Brennan said that the Justice Department would answer Paul’s question about whether Americans could be targeted for lethal strikes on US soil.

Worst ……… Constitutional ……… law ……… professor ……… ever.

You really should be horrified by this.

I am.

Scalia: Blacks Only Get to Vote When We Say So

No Comments

It appears that Antonin “Fat Tony” Scalia thinks that protecting people from having their right to vote stolen is “Racial Entitlement”:

Then, it is reenacted 5 years later, again for a 5-year term. Double-digits against it in the Senate. Then it was reenacted for 7 years. Single digits against it. Then enacted for 25 years, 8 Senate votes against it. And this last enactment, not a single vote in the Senate against it. And the House is pretty much the same. Now, I don’t think that’s attributable to the fact that it is so much clearer now that we need this. I think it is attributable, very likely attributable, to a phenomenon that is called perpetuation of racial entitlement. It’s been written about. Whenever a society adopts racial entitlements, it is very difficult to get out of them through the normal political processes.

Yes, preventing bad people from violating other people’s right to vote is “racial entitlement.”

What a repulsive bigoted excuse for a human being.

Surrender Your Privacy for the Good of the State Comrade

No Comments

The good folks at the Orwellian named Department of Homeland security has decided that they can seize and search your electronics without cause:

The Department of Homeland Security’s civil rights watchdog has concluded that travelers along the nation’s borders may have their electronics seized and the contents of those devices examined for any reason whatsoever — all in the name of national security.

The DHS, which secures the nation’s border, in 2009 announced that it would conduct a “Civil Liberties Impact Assessment” of its suspicionless search-and-seizure policy pertaining to electronic devices “within 120 days.” More than three years later, the DHS office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties published a two-page executive summary of its findings.

“We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits,” the executive summary said.

The memo highlights the friction between today’s reality that electronic devices have become virtual extensions of ourselves housing everything from e-mail to instant-message chats to photos and our papers and effects — juxtaposed against the government’s stated quest for national security.

Civil rights? How September 10th of you.

I do not like what our country is becoming.

Why Are We Supplying Arms to Bahrain?

No Comments

If anything, the crackdown on dissent in Bahrain is worse than in Syria, because of the overtones of ethnic cleansing against the Shia (At least the Syrians oppress everyone equally), and we are arming them:

Despite Bahrain’s bloody crackdown on pro-democracy protesters, the U.S. has continued to provide weapons and maintenance to the small Mideast nation.

Defense Department documents released to ProPublica give the fullest picture yet of the arms sales: The list includes ammunition, combat vehicle parts, communications equipment, Blackhawk helicopters, and an unidentified missile system. (Read the documents.)

The documents, which were provided in response to a Freedom of Information Act request and cover a yearlong period ending in February 2012, still leave many questions unanswered. It’s not clear whether in each case the arms listed have been delivered. And some entries that only cite the names of weapons may in fact refer to maintenance or spare parts.

For all the evil that the rulers in Syria have done, they have not arrested doctors for treating protestors that came into their emergency rooms, and they haven’t demolished mosques of other sects, as the the Al Khalifa monarchy has done in Bahrain.

Both regimes should be replaced by something that better serves the needs of their citizens, but we are letting the House of Saud dictate our priorities, and surprisingly, they oppose a secular regime run largely by non-Sunnis, and they support a Sunni monarchy like themselves.

The real problem here is that the Arab monarchies will eventually fall, either violently in the manner of the Romanoffs of Russia, or peacefully, in the manner of the House of Windsor in the UK, and the more that we prop them up, the bigger the backlash when they fall.

Iran’s transition from US ally to foe, which derived directly from our unqualified support of a despot, would not suit our interests, nor the interests of the people in that part of the world.

My rule of thumb here is that if the House of Saud is for it, I’m against it.

Murder by Prosecutor

No Comments

Aaron Swartz, age 26, suicide.

We cannot know all the reasons behind this, but his harassment by prosecutors was likely a contributing factor.

He was probably targeted because of his high profile opposition to SOPA (see vid). (To its shame, the New York Times does not mention this in the obit)

We have developed a regime where anyone can be harassed, and likely convicted, basically for being “troublesome.”

The term I used a while back, “Live in Obedient Fear, Citizen,” describes this phenomenon.

Live in Obedient Fear, Citizen

1 Comment

This is why privacy, and innocent until proved guilty are important.

If your entire life is available to the state security apparatus, they will find something, and so you had better not be inconvenient to said state security apparatus, because they already have the means to destroy you.

You do not want them to be inclined to actually do so.

It is depressing that the truth tellers in our society are cartoonists and comedians.


Link

I am adding cartoonist Zach Weiner to my list of, “People I Do Not Want to Piss Off.”

Creationism Lose

1 Comment

A federal judge has just ruled that public funding of private schools with creationist curriculums violates the 1st amendment:

A Louisiana District judge named Tim Kelley recently ruled that a Louisiana voucher program which used public money to pay for tuition for private religious schools has been deemed unconstitutional to the cheers of some, and sneers of others.

 In July Republican Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal, enacted legislation that allowed more than $11 million taxpayer dollars to be given to schools that teach Christian creationism. At the time this was a big win for Jindal, who is a self-professed Christian.

 According to Reuters.com the state argued public money was well within the rights of the state to grant to religious institutions, but Judge Kelley disagreed. He ruled that:

Louisiana’s annual education appropriation, calculated under a complex formula known as the Minimum Foundation Program, was intended exclusively for public schools. To divert it violated the state constitution.

It’s a loss for the people who are trying to divert public funds to private schools in order to fund religious education and desegregate the schools, which makes it a win for the good old US of A.

One interesting thing though, the article, from the Examiner uses a very interesting turn of phrase to describe Bobby Jindal.  They called him a, “Self-professed Christian.”

Why the hell do they call him that?

There are any number of reasons to dislike Jindal, he is, after all, a right wing Republican who spends much of his time pandering to the basest instincts of the right wing, but his record regarding his personal faith has been very consistent.

I note this, because the Examiner has a noted right-wing editorial bent, and Bobby Jindal has a surfeit of pigmentation, and I think that the two are linked.

They are doubting his religiosity because he is not white enough.

H/t DC at the Stellar Parthenon BBS.

No Justice No Peace — Know Justice Know Peace

No Comments

Seriously, when a cop is convicted of torture, a pardon is not a good way to resolve the issue:

More than 200 judges across Spain have come out publicly to manifest their anger with the Popular Party (PP) government over its decision to pardon four Catalan police officers who were found guilty of torturing a man who they mistakenly believed was an assailant.

 “The government’s decision is an improper one in a democracy; illegitimate and unethical. For that reason, we cannot just stand back and not raise our voices against the abuses committed in the right to pardon and warn of their effects, which are devastating,” reads a statement released by the judges.

 Among those who signed the document are Supreme Court Justices Perfecto Andrés and Joaquín Giménez, and a senior member of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), Margarita Robles.

 The four members of the Mossos d’Esquadra were convicted and sentenced in 2008 for torturing the suspect they had arrested. Their convictions had been upheld by the Supreme Court.

 ………

 In February, the Cabinet reduced their sentences to two years and gave them suspensions from the force rather than banning them for life as the court had ruled. It was a decision designed to prevent any of the four from serving time; in Spain jail terms of two years or less handed down to first-time offenders are habitually converted into suspended sentences.

A Barcelona provincial court, which advised the government that it was against the partial pardons, decided that the four officers must serve the remainder of their time in prison. In response the Cabinet last week decided on full pardons and agreed to give them fines.

So, these guys get to be cops again in 2 years.

You just know that they will have enthusiastic support of their fellow officers, so being back on the beat (pun not intended) is highly likely.

This sort of sh%$, abusive police officers and the craven politicians who support them in order to appear “tough on crime” is why you need a strong constitution and a strong judiciary.

You cannot ever trust the police to protect your rights as a citizen.

This Will Never Make it to Obama’s Desk

No Comments

While I am heartened that the senate has passed an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill to ban indefinite detention without trial of US citizens and green card holders:

The Senate voted late on Thursday to prohibit the government from imprisoning American citizens and green card holders apprehended in the United States in indefinite detention without trial.

While the move appeared to bolster protections for domestic civil liberties, it was opposed by an array of rights groups who claimed it implied that other types of people inside the United States could be placed in military detention, opening the door to using the military to perform police functions.

The measure was an amendment to this year’s National Defense Authorization Act, which is now pending on the Senate floor, and was sponsored by Senators Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, and Mike Lee, Republican of Utah. The Senate approved adding it to the bill by a vote of 67 to 29.

“What if something happens and you are of the wrong race in the wrong place at the wrong time and you are picked up and held without trial or charge in detention ad infinitum?” Ms. Feinstein said during the floor debate. “We want to clarify that that isn’t the case — that the law does not permit an American or a legal resident to be picked up and held without end, without charge or trial.”

The power of the government to imprison, without trial, Americans accused of ties to terrorism has been in dispute for a decade.

Even if Boehner were to support this, and my guess is that he won’t, I would expect the White House to fight this, on the theory that this is an executive branch prerogative.

It Appears that the Afghans Fault US On Our Commitment to Human Rights

No Comments

Because Afghan President Hamid Karzai has ordered a takeover of the prison at Bagram:

President Hamid Karzai ordered Afghan forces to take control of the American-built Bagram Prison and accused American officials of violating an agreement to fully transfer the facility to the Afghans, according to a statement from his office on Monday.

The move came after what Mr. Karzai said was the expiration of a two-month grace period, agreed to by President Obama, to complete the transfer of the prison at Bagram Air Base.

At issue in particular are 57 prisoners held there who had been acquitted by the Afghan courts but who have been held by American officials at the prison for more than a month in defiance of release orders, Aimal Faizi, the spokesman for President Karzai, said in an interview.

Afghan officials were also concerned about the status of new detainees being captured by American troops. The Afghans feel those detainees should be transferred to their control under the deal signed by the two countries this year.

Mr. Faizi said hundreds of new prisoners were being held by American authorities in a closed-off section of Bagram Prison, which the American military calls the Detention Facility in Parwan. American forces, mainly Special Operations troops carrying out night raids, have been arresting more than 100 suspected insurgents a month, Afghan officials said.

So we are being lectured with justification about our commitment to human rights by Hamid f%$#ing Karzai.

God Bless America

John Roberts Looks to Keep Pigment Rich Folks From Voting

1 Comment

It’s no surprise that mere days after non white voters gave Democrats their margin of victory in the Presidential and Senate elections, the Roberts court has decided to review the voting rights act:

The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to review a legal challenge to the Voting Rights Act, a landmark law adopted in 1965 to protect African-American voters who had faced decades of discrimination at the polls.

 The court’s decision comes just days after a presidential election in which Latino and African-American voters played a big role in re-electing Democratic President Barack Obama, reflecting a basic shift in national demographics.

 The high court accepted an appeal brought by Shelby County, Alabama, challenging a core provision of the act that requires nine states and several local governments with a history of bias to get federal permission to change their election procedures.

 Arguments in the case will likely be heard by the Supreme Court in early 2013, with a decision expected by the end of June.

 Some justices on the nine-member court, including Chief Justice John Roberts, have signaled in earlier cases discomfort with policies that draw distinctions based on race.

 In a 2009 Voting Rights Act case, the Supreme Court avoided ruling on the law’s constitutionality. The court suggested that the federal “preclearance” requirement may no longer be needed or constitutional. Roberts, dissenting from a 2006 voting-rights decision, criticized what he called “a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

 ………

Make no mistake here, this is the conservative wing of the supreme court looking to get Jim Crow voting regulations going again, because it favors conservatives in elections.


 “The America that elected and reelected Barack Obama as its first African-American president is far different than when the Voting Rights Act was first enacted in 1965. Congress unwisely reauthorized a bill that is stuck in a Jim Crow-era time warp,” he [Edward Blum, professional bigot and American Enterprise Institute Scholar*] said in a statement.

Yes, Mr. Blum, no racism in the good old USA. 

You might want to check out the Jezebel post, “Twitter Racists React to ‘That Nigger’ Getting Reelected.”

*But I am repeating myself.

More Election Updates

No Comments

Allen West, crazy man and war criminal (literally), gone.

Democrat Jon Tester, reelected from Montana, (!) in a victory for retro hair styles.

More interesting were the initiative elections.

Let’s start with Maryland, where gambling expansion and gay marriage passed.

On the gay marriage front, Maine and Washington also passed gay marriage, and in Minnesota, voters defeated an anti gay marriage constitutional amendment.

In California, things actually turned out better than I expected, with Democrats getting a super-majority in both houses of the legislature, meaning that they can raise taxes, and on initiatives, Jerry Brown’s tax increase passed, as did a moderation of their three strikes law, closing corporate tax loopholes, enhanced penalties for human trafficking, and non-partisan redistricting.

It’s kind of remarkable for California, nothing really stupid passed, though I am bumming a bit over the fact that death penalty repeal failed (by only 5%), and the ratf%$#s at Monsanto managed to kill the genetically modified foods labeling law.

Most importantly, California decisively defeated the labor union muzzling initiative(aka “paycheck prediction”).

Not a bad evening.