EJS Supports Effort to Protect Communities from Transit Discrimination
The Equal Justice Society is supporting efforts by Transit Riders for Public Transportation (transitriders.net) to have Congress expressly establish a private right of action in the Federal Surface Transportation Authorization Act (FSTAA) that enforces the disparate impact regulations adopted by the Department of Transportation (DOT). By restoring private enforcement of DOT’s antidiscrimination regulations, the FSTAA will give local communities a well-proven tool to redress existing transportation disparities while ensuring inclusive treatment and equitable outcomes in future transportation investments.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits racial discrimination by recipients of federal funds. To ensure compliance, all federal agencies have adopted regulations that prohibit two types of racial discrimination: activities that discriminate purposefully on the basis of race, color or national origin (intentional discrimination), and activities that have a discriminatory effect on the basis of race, color, or national origin (disparate impact discrimination).
For over 35 years, civil rights advocates effectively used Title VI regulations to dismantle segregation and uproot discriminatory practices. However, in Alexander v. Sandoval (2001), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that individuals could no longer bring private lawsuits to enforce disparate impact regulations, reasoning that Congress had never expressly created such a “private right of action.” As a result, federally-funded activities that have harmful and disproportionate effect on people of color can only be challenged in court if one can demonstrate intentional discrimination, which is rarely possible.
The Sandoval decision has had a chilling effect on civil rights enforcement, leaving communities of color with limited recourses to challenge decisions that have racially inequitable outcomes. This is particularly true in the area of transportation, where billions of dollars in investments are stake, and where communities of color already suffer from a disproportionate share of transportation-related burdens while lacking access to safe, affordable and reliable transit.
Coalition Urges Congress Not to Confirm Sharon Browne to Legal Services Corporation Board
UPDATE2: New posts on Huffington Post and Think Progress.
UPDATE: Bob Egelko of the San Francisco Chronicle covers the opposition to Browne in a Feb. 3, 2010, article and join us for a Feb. 11 briefing by Alliance for Justice on the Browne nomination.
A coalition of more than seventy civil rights, women’s rights, consumer, fair housing and legal organizations – including the Equal Justice Society – this week sent a letter to Congress urging the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (“HELP”) Committee to reject the nomination of Sharon Browne to the Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation (“LSC”).
“Sharon Browne’s nomination is highly troubling because she has spent her entire career advocating against the very constituencies the Legal Services Corporation serves, said Nan Aron, Alliance for Justice. “After extensively reviewing her record, I have seen nothing to indicate that she is committed to supporting women, people of color, or the poor – the very people LSC was created to support.”
When creating the LSC, Congress established that members of the legal services board should be committed to the development of legal assistance for the poor and supportive of the principal that this population have access to adequate and effective legal services.
Eva Paterson of the Equal Justice Society indicated, “At a time when inadequate funding means that legal services turns away nearly half of those who seek its help, LSC needs leadership from those dedicated to its core mission: serving society’s neediest.”
“Sharon Browne’s nomination defies the basic criteria that Congress established in identifying LSC board members,” continued Paterson. “She would not contribute to making the LSC board representative of those who provide, use, and support legal services. She is not committed to keeping politics out of the LSC’s work. And, her track record reveals a long history of political efforts against the LSC’s basic mission of providing equal justice for the poor.”
“AFJ and the more than 70 organizations who have signed onto this letter urge Congress and the HELP committee to reject Browne’s nomination and ask that another nominee – with a personal and professional commitment to providing equal justice for the poor – be identified,” concluded Nan Aron.
NCLR Expresses Profound Disappointment with Saenz Decision
Janet Murguía, President and CEO of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States, today expressed profound disappointment today that distinguished civil rights attorney Thomas Saenz is no longer a candidate to head the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.
(Also see EJS’s statement here.)
“Thomas Saenz was a great choice to oversee a department tasked with enforcing federal statutes to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, sex, disability, religion, and national origin. He follows the law meticulously and is one of the best litigators our country has. He has dedicated his entire career to the fight for justice, equal opportunity, and dignity for those who have no voice,” said Murguía.
Calif. Transportation Dept. to Reinstate Race-Conscious Contract Goals
The Coalition for Economic Equity (CEE) on Friday announced that after a nearly three-year hiatus, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is poised to reinstate race-conscious goals for federally funded transportation contracts in California.
CEE is an umbrella coalition of associations serving diverse minority- and women-owned businesses that was first formed in 1982 in response to an almost total exclusion of MBEs and WBEs from San Francisco’s public contracting system. In 1984, the Coalition succeeded in securing enactment of San Francisco’s first contracting equity ordinance introduced by Supervisors Doris M. Ward and Willie B. Kennedy. Since that time, the Coalition has worked to strengthen and defend contracting equity programs throughout the Bay Area, as well as at the state and federal levels.
CEE has confirmed with the Federal Highway Administration that the Caltrans’ Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program needs no further approvals to set goals for improving the awarding of these contracts.
Kate Kendell, Eva Paterson: ‘Standing Together and Continuing the Conversation’
Next Thursday, the California Supreme Court will hear arguments in our legal challenge to Proposition 8. As we seek to overturn Prop 8, we have the broadest array of support ever seen on an LGBT issue before any California Court. This support speaks directly to the relationships and coalition work that many in the LGBT, religious, business, and civil rights communities have been doing for years. However, there is another truth motivating the breadth of voices calling on the court to invalidate Prop 8. Prop 8 is an assault on the California Constitution and the most fundamental principal of any functioning democracy: all people will be treated equally under the law.
Day Without A Gay: Protesting Prop. 8 by Donating to Causes
Conceived by Sean Hetherington of West Hollywood, the day of protest is modeled after A Day Without Immigrants, which took place on May 1, 2006.
Individuals participating can call in sick and donate their time to a cause and buy nothing that day to show again how important the LGBT community is to this country. The organizers have FAQs here. And their Facebook event listing is here.
Read more about how EJS has been involved in the ongoing fight for equality.
Feedback on Immigration and the Black Community
I wanted to say thank you to our audience, panelists, and cosponsors for coming out last night. In the next days and weeks we are hoping to continue the discussion on these important topics, and will be providing additional information, resources and commentary. We really hope that as many people and as many different viewpoints participate in the debate and we encourage your participation. Please, let me know what you thought of the event, what was useful, what could have been done better, and what still needs to be talked about. Also, please stay tuned as in the next few days we will continuing with blog entries based on some of the discussions from the event, providing related materials, speaker’s bios, the audio recording, and much more.
Nico
Update I
We have been getting commentary that, while the event was an important first step, more needs to be done. On that note, we would really appreciate it if you could help us understand what the next steps should be. What format should they take? Who needs to be at the table?