Eva authored this guest post on Jan. 11 for the SAFE California Campaign site.

My fiancé, Steve Henry, was murdered in Kingston, Jamaica, on November 25, 1997. As bizarre as this may sound, one of the thoughts I had as the initial shock wore off, was “Well, am I still against the death penalty?” My answer then and now is a resounding “YES”. The death penalty is wrong.

I will be thinking of Steve this weekend as Rev. Jesse Jackson, the California NAACP, and civil rights leaders throughout the state come together to honor Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. We are all supporting the SAFE California campaign to end death sentences. Dr. King once said, “Life’s most persistent and urgent question is: ‘What are you doing for others?’” I plan to honor Steve’s memory and Dr. King’s passionate commitment to justice.

Will you join us to honor justice and Dr. King?

The SAFE California campaign is sponsored by a broad coalition of justice organizations who are all joined in the commitment to replace the death penalty to protect the innocent, save our very limited state resources, and improve safety in our communities. SAFE is working hard to get the hundreds of thousands of signatures needed to qualify the “Savings, Accountability, and Full Enforcement for California Act” ballot initiative in time for the November 2012 election.

I am proud to say that my organization, Equal Justice Society, sits on the SAFE California Campaign Steering Committee. We at Equal Justice Society, like Dr. King and his wife Coretta Scott King, have always been opposed to the death penalty and advocated for an end to this risky and costly punishment. I am also proud to say that many of the dedicated members of Equal Justice Society will be joining the thousands of volunteers statewide who are ready to commemorate Dr. King’s leadership by joining this historic movement over MLK weekend.

Coretta Scott King declared, “As one whose husband and mother-in-law have died the victims of murder assassination, I stand firmly and unequivocally opposed to the death penalty for those convicted of capital offenses.” I know how difficult that statement is to make and I agree wholeheartedly.

Please join me to honor the King family and all victims of senseless violence by making a commitment to justice this coming weekend.

In peace,
Eva Paterson

- Written by Eva Paterson, President and Co-Founder of the Equal Justice Society and guest blogger for the SAFE California Campaign

In its brief, EJS argues that Proposal 2 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution by creating procedural barriers for people of color.

“Since its founding, certain interests in America have tried to restrict access to the political process,” said Eva Paterson, President of the Equal Justice Society. “First only white male landowners could vote. The franchise was expanded after the Civil War but women could not participate. Now we see many states erecting barriers to voting that may appear harmless, but are designed to keep voters of color from helping shape their political destinies. The national civil rights community speaks in one strong voice in opposing these measures, including Michigan’s Proposal 2.”

Several organizations joined EJS in signing the brief: the California Voting Rights Institute, Public Advocates, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, the National Women’s Law Center, Chinese for Affirmative Action, Worksafe, South Asian Network, the Association of Asian American Attorney and CPA Firms, the Council of Asian American Business Associations, Equal Rights Advocates, and the Asian American Justice Center and the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the latter two both members of the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice.

Michigan voters passed Proposal 2 in 2006, amending the state’s constitution to prevent the state government from advancing equal opportunity by considering race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin. In March 2008, a federal district court judge upheld the law, but the decision was reversed this July by an appeals court panel. The case is now under consideration by the full Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“We stand with our civil rights allies in opposing Proposal 2 and other similar laws that exclude racial minorities and women from the political process,” said Allison Elgart, Supervising Attorney at the Equal Justice Society. “When people of color have to amend the state constitution just to have their interests represented, the law is not protecting their right to equal protection under the law, and the court should step in.”

“Proposal 2 is the most recent example of a voter initiative that restructures the political process in a non-neutral way and places special burdens on racial minorities who want to lobby for race-conscious admissions processes,” reads the brief. “Voting changes and requirements that disproportionately impact racial minorities and provide them less opportunity than others to participate in the political process and effectuate their choices are violations of the Equal Protection Clause.”

The brief cites several reasons why Proposal 2 violates the Constitution:

The law impedes participation in the political process by people of color. After Proposal 2 passed, advocates of race-conscious admissions policies can no longer lobby admissions committees or university administrators. Their only recourse is to launch another statewide initiative, a costly process that could take years to see through to its conclusion. Advocates for other considerations in the admissions process do not face the same burden and are free to continue lobbying admissions committees without structural limitations.

People of color have historically faced hurdles that hinder participation in the political process. Participation in the political process by people of color in the past has been thwarted by literacy tests applied differently to distinct racial groups, electoral redistricting that disfavored racial minorities, and more recently by states that have established seemingly innocuous voter requirement laws that often result in racial exclusion and vote suppression. Courts have found these seemingly “neutral” laws unconstitutional if their purpose is to impede participation by people of color in the political process. Proposal 2 falls into this category.

Proposal 2 is a modern reincarnation of white primaries, literacy tests, and redistricting. Like voting, lobbying to change the admissions processes in Michigan is a way for people of color to participate in governance. The Equal Protection Clause “guarantees racial minorities the right to full participation in the political life of the community,” and therefore requires that every group has equal opportunities to participate in the decision-making process, particularly in the context of public education. Proposal 2 prevents the full participation by people of color in the decision-making process regarding admissions.

The case should be fully briefed before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals by the end of the year and the Sixth Circuit will then set a hearing date.

SB 490 would abolish the death penalty and instead make the maximum punishment life without the possibility of parole. In June, before this bill went to the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, Equal Justice Society (EJS) wrote a policy letter in support of this bill’s overarching goal of ending the death penalty because of its fiscal importance and impact on racial justice.  While we have problems with the notion of permanent imprisonment, this bill is a step in the right direction.

The bill was approved by the Assembly Committee on Public Safety earlier this month and it is now moving to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations and, hopefully, to the floor before the end of the legislative term. Several polls show that there is support for ending the death penalty.

EJS knows this bill is necessary because it will save taxpayer dollars and prioritize funding where it is most vital. SB 490 will save taxpayer dollars by eliminating the cost of the death penalty system. A recent study by Ninth Circuit Judge Arthur Alarcon and Paula Mitchell found that it costs California an estimated $184 million per year to keep more than 700 people on death row pointing out that only 13 criminals had been executed in the last 33 years.

California cannot continue to fund a lengthy and expensive process in these dire financial times. SB 490 will allow California to save $1 billion in five years. This savings will allow California to spend money in areas where it is most vital. The County of Los Angeles has denied overtime compensation to homicide investigators and last year over $50 million was cut from the Victims Compensation Fund. The City of Oakland laid off police officers while 45 percent of homicides statewide continue to be unsolved. Spending money on the death penalty instead of investing in police officers, investigators, and courts, is a bad use of our limited funds.

Furthermore, this bill furthers a vision of ensuring fair and consistent application of the law without racial bias. Defendants are three to four more times likely to be sentenced to die in cases where the victim is White than in cases where the victim is African American or Latino. Also, African Americans and Latinos are over-represented on death row. Spending money on a system that perpetuates racial discrimination denies Californians the right to a fair and consistent application of our laws and criminal sentences. Eliminating the death penalty is a necessary step towards ensuring that Californians are not executed based on racial biases and inconsistent decision making.

SB 490 will save money, prioritize community safety, and improve our criminal justice system. SB 490 is necessary and will make California a stronger state.  We encourage you to voice your support and urge legislators to pass SB 490.

In August, Judge Vaughn Walker, of the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, ruled that Proposition 8 ‘s ban on same-sex marriage violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause as not rationally related to any legitimate governmental interest.

Supporters of Proposition 8 appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit, which is set to hear arguments regarding the measure’s constitutionality on December 6. The State of California decided against appealing.

The amicus brief argues that Proposition 8 excludes an entire class of people – gay men and lesbians – from the long-standing institution of marriage, pushing them instead to the inherently unequal category of domestic partnership.

As the Supreme Court announced in Brown v. Board of Education, “separate but equal is inherently unequal.” Because gay men and lesbians are denied the opportunity to marry, they suffer extreme societal harm. Indeed, their families are stigmatized, deprived of benefits married couples enjoy and are vulnerable to increased discrimination.

“The Equal Justice Society lauds Judge Vaughn’s thoughtful and carefully reasoned opinion,” said Reggie Shuford, EJS’s Director of Law and Policy. “We sincerely hope that the Ninth Circuit will follow suit.”

Download the brief (PDF)

On Tuesday, May 26, President Barack Obama announced his historic nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. On the same morning, the California Supreme Court ruled against marriage equality by upholding Prop. 8. The following day brought news that a preeminent scholar on our nation’s diversity, UC Berkeley professor Ronald Takaki, passed away.

SUPREME COURT NOMINEE JUDGE SONIA SOTOMAYOR

In nominating Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, President Obama fulfilled a promise to the American people to appoint judges who are well-qualified, grounded in the rule of law and the Constitution, fair-minded and committed to equal justice for all. Judge Sotomayor embodies all these traits.

In the course of a life that began in a housing project in the South Bronx and brought her to the pinnacle of her profession, Judge Sotomayor accumulated more experience on the federal bench than any incoming Supreme Court Justice in the past 100 years, touching nearly every aspect of our legal system.

But Judge Sotomayor’s ethnicity has proven too much of a temptation for the voices of hate and extremism, who instead of looking at her judicial record have launched a vocal rampage that has reached new heights of absurdity, including calling her a “reverse racist” and calling the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) “the Latino KKK without the hoods and nooses.”

Condemn these unacceptable attacks on Latinos and Judge Sotomayor now. Join NLCR and send a message to Chairman Michael Steele of the RNC, House Minority Leader John Boehner, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell asking them to denounce these statements and restore the nomination process for Judge Sotomayor to a more appropriate and civil discourse.

EJS has also launched a blog and Facebook page in support for Judge Sotomayor. Visit http://ConfirmSotomayor.org and join the Facebook page as a fan. The blog includes a page with information on how you can support Judge Sotomayor.

And if you’re in California, please support our Californians for Fair and Independent Judges coalition so that organizations and individuals here can work together to support Judge Sotomayor’s confirmation. Email Keith Kamisugi at kkamisugi@equaljusticesociety.org for information about joining the coalition.

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT RULING ON PROP. 8

The California Supreme Court last Tuesday in a 6-1 vote upheld Prop. 8, the ballot measure discriminating against marriage by same-sex couples.

EJS is relieved the Court protected couples who married before November 5. The presence of thousands of married same-sex couples across California will show that marriage strengthens families and communities and threatens no one.

But by upholding Prop 8, the Court has diminished its legacy as a champion of equality. No minority group should have to defend its right to equality at the ballot. The Court’s decision jeopardizes every minority group in California.

As a racial justice organization, the Equal Justice Society opposes Prop. 8 – not only because it’s the right thing to do, but also because EJS strongly believes in working with others to ensure that the rights of all are expanded, rather than diminished, in our society.

We cannot just pigeonhole Prop. 8 as a ‘gay’ issue. By rolling back the fundamental rights of one group, the Supreme Court’s decision on Prop. 8 casts a threat that now looms over the civil rights of all.

Since the vote on Prop 8, there has been a tidal wave of momentum in favor of full equality. Five states now embrace marriage equality for same-sex couples, and several more are on the brink. We believe that California voters will reverse this injustice at the ballot. California has been a leader in standing up for equality, and it will be again.

Banning same-sex couples from marriage is unfair. Same-sex couples have the same hopes, dreams and concerns for their families as everyone else. They should be allowed the dignity, recognition, and responsibility that come with marriage, just like everyone else.

The fight is not over. Join our friends at the National Center for Lesbian Rights (led by EJS board member Kate Kendall) to receive updates on next steps in this battle for justice.

PROF. RON TAKAKI PASSES AWAY

Ronald Takaki, professor emeritus of ethnic studies at the University of California, Berkeley, and a preeminent scholar of U.S. race relations who taught the University of California’s first black history course, died at his home in Berkeley on Tuesday, May 26, at age 70. He had struggled for years with multiple sclerosis, an autoimmune condition that attacks the central nervous system.

During his more than 40 years at UC Berkeley, Takaki established the nation’s first ethnic studies Ph.D. program as well as UC Berkeley’s American Cultures requirement for graduation, and advised President Clinton in 1997 on his major speech on race.

“Ron Takaki elevated and popularized the study of America’s multiracial past and present like no other scholar, and in doing so had an indelible impact on a generation of students and researchers across the nation and world,” said Don Nakanishi, director of and professor at UCLA’s Asian American Studies Center and a longtime friend of Takaki’s.

Takaki’s 1989 book, “Strangers from a Different Shore: A History of Asian Americans,” was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize.

A descendent of Japanese field workers in Hawai’i, Takaki was acutely attuned to the inequities in Hawai’i's tough and ethnically divided plantation system.

In 1966, he was hired to teach UCLA’s first black history course in the wake of the explosive Watts riots. “I can still remember the smoke rising from Los Angeles and the sound of gunfire – it was a war zone,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle in that same interview.

When a student in the black history class asked him which revolutionary tools he could teach them, Takaki replied: “We’re going to study the history of the U.S. as it relates to African Americans. We’re going to strengthen our critical thinking skills and our writing skills. These can be revolutionary tools if we make them so.”

After five years at UCLA, Takaki returned in 1971 to UC Berkeley as the Department of Ethnic Studies’ first full-time teacher. He became wildly popular, filling auditoriums with hundreds of students hungry for perspectives on the struggles of America’s minority groups, and went on to win the campus’s Distinguished Teaching Award in 1981.

Takaki is survived by his wife, Carol; his three children, Todd of El Cerrito, Calif., Troy of Los Angeles and Dana of Chester, Conn.; and several grandchildren.

Takaki has donated his research and published papers to the Ethnic Studies Library at UC Berkeley. His family asks that, in lieu of flowers, donations be made in Takaki’s name to the Asian Law Caucus in San Francisco. Plans for a campus memorial service are pending.

All of us at the Equal Justice Society mourn Prof. Takaki’s passing and we express our deepest condolences to Ron’s family and friends.

Join a Facebook page launched in tribute to Prof. Takaki.

]]> http://www.equaljusticesociety.org/2009/06/bittersweet-week-judge-sotomayor-prop-8-upheld-ron-takaki-passes-launching-confirmsotomayororg/feed/ 0