EJS, Others File Brief on Prelim. Injunction Against Ariz. Anti-Immigrant Statute
The Equal Justice Society, the Asian American Institute and thirty-six other public interest organizations, represented pro bono by the law firm Covington & Burling LLP, have filed an amicus brief in Friendly House v. Whiting, supporting the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction against SB 1070, Arizona’s disturbing new immigration statute.
The lawsuit, a class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, challenges the constitutionality of this recently passed law on the grounds that it invites the racial profiling of people of color, violates the First Amendment and interferes with federal law.
The amicus brief argues that an injunction is justified on three principal grounds.
First, SB 1070 will result in discrimination against communities of color. Although the statute was written seemingly to exclude the possibility of racial profiling, in practice, there is no question but that this law will lead to heightened and disproportionate police scrutiny of minorities. Because Mexico is the nearest border, Latinos especially will be targeted under SB 1070.
Second, this bill threatens public safety in Arizona. If enforced, it will breed resentment and distrust of the police in communities of color. Fearing immigration inquiries, communities of color are very likely to report crime less, making their neighborhoods increasingly unsafe. Moreover, the under-reporting of crime in minority communities will render them even more vulnerable to hate crimes.
Finally, the bill, ostensibly designed to reduce crime, simply does not justify the means. American history is sadly littered with numerous statutes aimed at excluding certain minority groups from the benefits, rights, and liberties granted to the majority. The courts have struck down those laws for over 150 years. SB 1070 is in keeping with this sordid past and must also be struck down.
EJS and Other Organizations File Amicus Brief Supporting Application of Voting Rights Act and Protection of Minority Voting Rights
The Equal Justice Society (EJS), the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, and American Parole and Probation Association submitted an Amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit case Farrakhan v. Gregoire, which will determine whether Washington State’s felon disenfranchisement law violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA). (Download a PDF of the brief here.)
Earlier this year, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit held that Washington State’s law denying the vote to people with felony convictions is racially discriminatory and violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The case is now scheduled for rehearing en banc by an eleven-judge panel in September.
EJS agrees with the three-judge panel’s conclusion that Washington’s law is racially discriminatory and violates the VRA by disproportionately disenfranchising both individuals and communities of color. As a result of Washington’s law, 24 percent of Black men and 15 percent of Washington’s Black population have lost their voting rights because of felony convictions.
Our brief, in particular, focuses on the importance of voting rights to successful reintegration and rehabilitation for formerly incarcerated persons. Not only do felon disenfranchisement policies impede political participation and successful re-entry of formerly incarcerated individuals, they also impact entire communities by diluting their collective voting strength.
Section 2 of the VRA was enacted to protect against racial discrimination in voting, and prohibits states from using any voter qualification system that results in a denial of the right to vote on account of race or color. EJS encourages the en banc panel to uphold the panel’s decision and strike down Washington’s racially discriminatory law.
The law firm Cooley LLP provided assistance on the brief.
Honolulu Advertiser: ‘More join ceded lands fight’
Honolulu Advertiser reporter Gordon Pang mentions EJS and JACL in his roundup of amicus briefs filed with the Supreme Court in the case involving lands held in trust for Native Hawaiians.
Because the U.S. has admitted that the 1893 overthrow was illegal, “the ceded lands hold unique cultural, spiritual and political significance for the Native Hawaiian people — they are not fungible or replaceable,” said the brief filed on behalf of the Equal Justice Society and Japanese American Citizens League.
Read the announcement of our brief here.
EJS, Civil Rights Groups File Brief Asking Calif. Supreme Court to Invalidate Prop. 8
The Equal Justice Society joined other civil rights groups today in filing an amicus brief (PDF) with the California Supreme Court to invalidate Proposition 8 because it would mandate discrimination against a minority group and did not follow the process required for fundamental revisions to the California Constitution.
In the amicus brief, the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Equal Justice Society, California NAACP and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. argue that minority communities cannot be stripped of their fundamental rights by a simple majority vote.
“We would be making a grave mistake to view Proposition 8 as just affecting the LGBT community,” said Eva Paterson, president of the Equal Justice Society. “If the Supreme Court allows Proposition 8 to take effect, it would represent a threat to the rights of people of color and all minorities.”
On Nov. 14, the same groups filed a writ petition with the California Supreme Court to stop the enactment of Proposition 8, but the California Supreme Court on Nov. 20 deferred action on that petition, and invited the petitioners to file an amicus curiae brief.