August 2009 Archives

Missouri high school bans evolution-themed T-shirts worn by band members because they're "religious". Teacher complains she does not want her school "associated with evolution."

The Sedalia Democrat reports

T-shirts worn by the Smith-Cotton High School band have evolved into controversy among parents.

The shirts, which were designed to promote the band's fall program, are light gray and feature an image of a monkey progressing through stages and eventually emerging as a man. Each figure holds a brass instrument. Several instruments decorate the background and the words "Smith-Cotton High School Tiger Pride Marching Band" and "Brass Evolutions 2009" are emblazoned above and below the image.

Assistant Band Director Brian Kloppenburg said the shirts were designed by him, Band Director Jordan Summers and Main Street Logo. Kloppenburg said the shirts were intended to portray how brass instruments have evolved in music from the 1960s to modern day. Summers said they chose the evolution of man because it was "recognizable." The playlist of songs the band is slated to perform revolve around the theme "Brass Evolutions."

The band debuted the T-shirts when it marched in the Missouri State Fair parade. Summers said he was surprised when he received a direct complaint after the parade.

While the shirts don't directly violate the district's dress code, Assistant Superintendent Brad Pollitt said complaints by parents made him take action.

"I made the decision to have the band members turn the shirts in after several concerned parents brought the shirts to my attention," Pollitt said. 

Pollitt said the district is required by law to remain neutral where religion is concerned.

"If the shirts had said 'Brass Resurrections' and had a picture of Jesus on the cross, we would have done the same thing," he said.

Band parent Sherry Melby, who is a teacher in the district, stands behind Pollitt's decision. Melby said she associated the image on the T-shirt with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

"I was disappointed with the image on the shirt." Melby said. "I don't think evolution should be associated with our school." 

Thanks to Jonathan Turley

Seven years after being abducted by the CIA Haji Pacha Wazir, an Afghani national cleared by the Afghan government of wrongdoing, remains in US custody, uncharged.

The LATimes reports

Seven years after being abducted from Dubai, United Arab Emirates, by the CIA and shipped to the U.S. air base in Bagram, Afghanistan, Haji Pacha Wazir was hoping he would finally be free. 

The Afghan government had cleared him for release, and a recent court ruling allowed him to petition his case in a U.S. federal court.

But Wazir's petition was dismissed based on "lack of jurisdiction," despite the fact that Wazir, an Afghan national, has been in the sole custody of the U.S. government since his arrest, according to the nonprofit organization representing him.

Now, the International Justice Network, which also represents a number of other detainees, has announced that it will appeal Wazir's case.

"Unlike our Yemeni and Tunisian clients whose cases were not dismissed, Mr. Wazir is being denied fundamental legal and human rights based on his Afghan citizenship," the group's executive director, Tina Monshipour Foster, said in a statement released Thursday. "We will ask the Court of Appeals to remedy the obvious injustice of denying Afghan nationals the same rights afforded other foreign nationals at Bagram." 

This year, a judge ruled that Bagram detainees may appeal their detentions in U.S. courts. But according to the International Justice Network, Obama administration lawyers fought to have all its clients' petitions dismissed. In the end, the judge agreed to hear the petitions from the non-Afghan detainees but dismissed Wazir's, citing potential "friction" with the Afghan government.

Wazir is one of hundreds of Afghans and others who have been held as "enemy combatants" at Bagram, a former Soviet air base that has has been plagued by allegations of torture since the start of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. The same judge who ultimately dismissed Wazir's petition wrote in an earlier ruling that conditions at Bagram "fall well short of what the Supreme Court found inadequate at Guantanamo."

Thanks to the Bill of rights Defense committee

Indiana school system declares zero tolerance policy on the wearing of clothes with any distinguishing marks, including stripes, logos, plaid or floral prints, citing the connection between non-solids and being a loser or criminal.

Pal-Item.com (Richmond, Ind.) reports

Hundreds of irate parents challenged Richmond Community Schools' controversial dress code during Wednesday's school board meeting, asking what solid-colored clothes have to do with succeeding in school.
Their anger, which was in response to new rules prohibiting students from wearing clothes with any distinguishing marks, including stripes, logos, plaid or floral prints, delayed regular board business for more than three hours.

"Her plaids and her stripes, they don't affect her grades," parent Steven Morris said.

As he and others spoke, chants of "ridiculous" and "you're in the wrong, you know it" filled Richmond High School's cafeteria, which was used as a meeting place to accommodate the overflowing crowd.

"The ones I believe are hurt most by this are the elementary children," parent Gene Nolte said. "The kindergarteners and first graders just coming into the school system, they don't understand, I can't wear Winnie the Pooh.

"As they grow up, with all this strict, strict, strict (enforcement) they are going to rebel," he said.

The school board approved revisions to RCS' dress code by a 5-2 vote in May after school officials said they were unable to enforce a less restrictive code last school year. Why? To create a "culture of success" that focuses students on learning instead of fashion.

Thanks to Jonathan Turley

Have police officers roam the halls and inspect classrooms, ARRESTING students for text-messaging in class, being late to class, being messy or farting too often. 

Firedoglake, the Seminal reports

As a growing number of advocates and scholars have observed, K-12 public schools around the country have increasingly come to rely on law enforcement officers, frequently referred to as School Resource Officers (SROs), to patrol school hallways. Unfortunately, these officers are frequently deployed without sufficient consideration as to how their presence might impact the overall educational climate of schools, how overzealous policing tactics might compromise the educational achievement of at-risk children, or how to ensure that these programs are subject to transparency and accountability.

That's why, with the new school year getting underway, today the ACLU released a white paper outlining best practices for the administration of SRO programs. In setting the tone for a productive school year, school districts with SROs should adopt the policies recommended in this document to ensure that students learn in a safe and respectful environment.

When SRO programs do not adequately define the roles of the SROs or their purpose, students suffer. In New York City, public school students have been arrested for minor disciplinary infractions like being late to class or bringing cell phones to school. In Florida, a 13-year-old was arrested for repeatedly passing gas in class; a Los Angeles, 16-year-old was arrested after she dropped a piece of birthday cake and failed to clean the mess to the satisfaction of the school resource officer;and a Minnesota 14-year-old was arrested for text-messaging in class.Arrests of students for such minor incidents do not promote a safe learning environment.

The impact on students of improper school-based arrests can be devastating. Studies have shown that getting arrested dramatically increases the likelihood of students dropping out of school and reduces students' chances of succeeding academically. Students who are arrested and also have to appear in court are four times more likely to drop out of school, have lower standardized test scores, have reduced employment prospects and are far more likely to interact with the criminal justice system in the future. Additionally, children who witness fellow students being unnecessarily arrested tend to develop negative views or distrust of law enforcement, which may foster a confrontational relationship between police and the communities they serve.

Which unfortunately would be merely another "routine" tasering story, were it not for the fact that the 26 year old woman who was tasered happened to be the daughter of City Councilman Cecil Thomas, a former police officer who heads the council's law and safety committee.

UPI reports

A Cincinnati police officer is being investigated for using a Taser on the passenger in a car stopped after a collision, police said Monday.

Officer Anthony Plummer was charged with using the Taser on Celeste Thomas, 26, while she was on her knees with her hands in the air. Policy dictates a Taser should only be used if a suspect is resisting arrest or has assaulted the officer, The Cincinnati Enquirer reported Monday.

"A preliminary review shows he is not in compliance with our standards and he is being investigated for unnecessary and excessive use of force," Police Chief Thomas Streicher said.

Thanks to Eraser Girl

For "technical" reasons, of course.

The ACLU reports

Today, a federal court today dismissed our lawsuit challenging the unconstitutional government spying law known as the FISA Amendments Act (FAA). Congress passed the law last year, effectively legalizing the secret warrantless surveillance program approved by President Bush in late 2001. The FAA also gave the government new, sweeping spying powers, including the power to conduct dragnet surveillance of Americans' international emails and phone calls.

We filed our lawsuit last July -- less than an hour after it was signed into law by then-President Bush on behalf of a broad coalition of attorneys and human rights, labor, legal and media organizations whose ability to perform their work, which relies on confidential communications, is greatly compromised by the FAA.

Although the government does not generally have to reveal who it spies on under the highly secretive FAA, the district court judge dismissed the case because he ruled that plaintiffs could not prove with certainty that they had been spied on. The decision states, "[t]he plaintiffs' failure to show that they are subject to the FAA in any concrete way is sufficient to conclude that the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the FAA."

ACLU National Security Project Director and counsel in the case Jameel Jaffer stated in a press release:

We are disappointed by today's ruling, which will allow the mass acquisition of Americans' international e-mails and telephone calls to continue unchecked. To say, as the court says, that plaintiffs can't challenge this statute unless they can show that their own communications have been collected under it is to say that this statute may not be subject to judicial review at all. The vast majority of people whose communications are intercepted under this statute will never know about it -- in fact it's possible that no one will ever be able to make the showing that the court says is required.

The court's decision effectively means that Americans' privacy rights will be left to the mercy of the political branches. This is deeply troubling, because the courts have a crucial role to play in ensuring that individual rights are not needlessly infringed upon by statutes enacted in the name of national security.

Whether it's ordinances against criminal trespassing on public property (aka sleeping on the sidewalk), raids on homeless shelters to arrest the homeless for being homeless, or jail terms for the crime of being too poor to pay parking tickets, America is putting a new and macabre twist on the phrase "War on Poverty".

Barbara Ehrenreich reports in the NY Times

It's too bad so many people are falling into poverty at a time when it's almost illegal to be poor. You won't be arrested for shopping in a Dollar Store, but if you are truly, deeply, in-the-streets poor, you're well advised not to engage in any of the biological necessities of life -- like sitting, sleeping, lying down or loitering. City officials boast that there is nothing discriminatory about the ordinances that afflict the destitute, most of which go back to the dawn of gentrification in the '80s and '90s. "If you're lying on a sidewalk, whether you're homeless or a millionaire, you're in violation of the ordinance," a city attorney in St. Petersburg, Fla., said in June, echoing Anatole France's immortal observation that "the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges."

In defiance of all reason and compassion, the criminalization of poverty has actually been intensifying as the recession generates ever more poverty. So concludes a new study from the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, which found that the number of ordinances against the publicly poor has been rising since 2006, along with ticketing and arrests for more "neutral" infractions like jaywalking, littering or carrying an open container of alcohol.

The report lists America's 10 "meanest" cities -- the largest of which are Honolulu, Los Angeles and San Francisco -- but new contestants are springing up every day. The City Council in Grand Junction, Colo., has been considering a ban on begging, and at the end of June, Tempe, Ariz., carried out a four-day crackdown on the indigent. How do you know when someone is indigent? As a Las Vegas statute puts it, "An indigent person is a person whom a reasonable ordinary person would believe to be entitled to apply for or receive" public assistance.

That could be me before the blow-drying and eyeliner, and it's definitely Al Szekely at any time of day. A grizzled 62-year-old, he inhabits a wheelchair and is often found on G Street in Washington -- the city that is ultimately responsible for the bullet he took in the spine in Fu Bai, Vietnam, in 1972. He had been enjoying the luxury of an indoor bed until last December, when the police swept through the shelter in the middle of the night looking for men with outstanding warrants.

Thanks to Alternet

Kissimmee, Fla. cops claim mints were crack cocaine, then lock Donald May up for three months while mints are tested, negative for drugs. In the meantime, for good measure, they confiscate and auction off his car. 

WFTV-Orlando reports

A man is suing the Kissimmee Police Department for an arrest over mints. When officers pulled Donald May over for an expired tag, they thought the mints he was chewing were crack and arrested him.May told Eyewitness News they wouldn't let him out of jail for three months until tests proved the so-called drugs were candy.
May said he was just minding his business, driving home from work, when a Kissimmee police officer pulled him over near 192."I don't know how it occurred," he said.May was pulled over for an expired tag on his car. When the officer walked up to him, he noticed something white in May's mouth. May said it was breath mints, but the officer thought it was crack cocaine."He took them out of my mouth and put them in a baggy and locked me up [for] possession of cocaine and tampering with evidence," May explained.The officer claimed he field-tested the evidence and it tested positive for drugs. The officer said he saw May buying drugs while he was stopped at an intersection. He also stated in his report May waived his Miranda rights and voluntarily admitted to buying drugs.May said that never happened."My client never admitted he purchased crack cocaine. Why would he say that?" attorney Adam Sudbury said.May was thrown in jail and was unable to bond out for three months. He didn't get out until he received a letter from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the State Attorney's Office that test results showed no drugs were found."While I was sitting in jail I lost my apartment. I lost everything," he said.While May was behind bars, the Kissimmee Police Department towed his car and auctioned it off. He lost his job and was evicted. Now May is suing the city for false arrest and false imprisonment. He wants to be compensated for the loss of his car and job.

Thanks to Eraser Girl and Carlos Miller

For the prison-industrial complex.

The San Francisco Bay View reports

Prisoners at Nevada State Prison are pleading for help. We truly believe that the administration is intentionally inflaming conflict. Not only are tensions between inmates rising, but those between correctional officers and inmates are at an all-time high.

Most importantly, we are starting to become angry because of an ugly rumor that is circulating in this institution. Word is we are deliberately being used for political gain due to the budget cuts.

We are starting to believe that we are, against our own will, being pushed to the edge so that the administration can make their case for more funds.

I have no choice but to reach out with this letter because other attempts to find assistance have been spoiled by what we call abuse of authority. The prison administration is abusing the disciplinary system that is designed for the safety and security of inmates' rights.

The administration is trying to quiet our questions about their aggressive behavior. Not only the correctional officers but the administrators too are participants.

There is a grievance complaint system in place that we can no longer trust. This administration has given correctional officers the authority to either approve or deny inmate rights by doing away with the grievance procedure and to punish us for exercising our rights.

This is causing correctional officers to become very aggressive toward inmates. They refuse to obey their own rules and regulations without fear of consequences from any of the administrators.

We here at Nevada State Prison, like so many other prisoners around the globe, learn among ourselves that we are brothers in a never ending struggle. Seeking not to cause violence, we are trying hard to remain brothers because we recognize the administration's motives in pushing us to cause destruction.

So I ask - no, I beg - you to intervene. You are our only hope. Is there any help for a widow's son?

Ridiculing Presidents is a quintessentially all-American activity.  Yet  a Florida city,seeking to prosecute, is trying to determine what local crimes might be associated with the posting of the images on public property.

The Orlando Sentinel reports

Clermont police have interviewed one suspect who is admitting to putting up the dozens of posters pasted around the city depicting President Obama as the Joker character from the Batman film The Dark Knight, city officials confirmed.

Assistant City Manager Darren Gray said city officials have an individual "admitting to putting up 500" of the posters.

Clermont Police Capt. Eric Jensen said the male individual has admitted to putting up some signs, but investigators suspect others were involved and their investigation is continuing.

"We have talked to an individual," Jensen said. "He only admitted to some of it...We're still tracking down leads and talking to folks. We have not arrested anybody."

At this point officials are not sure how much damage was caused by the signs or the dollar amount associated with the clean-up.

Dozens of the posters were pasted around the city earlier this week. A pair of the posters were pasted to a Clermont Post Office collection box. They prompted the postmaster to contact the Postal Inspector's office, which is looking at potential federal crimes for defacing federal property.

City officials, meanwhile, are trying to determine what local crimes might be associated with the posting of the images on public and private properties. They've also been busy ripping down the sticky signs because they're a violation of city ordinance regarding illegal signs.

Thanks to Lew Rockwell

Government will neither confirm nor deny.

ACLU reports

The government cannot continue to fully withhold a list of names, citizenship, length of detention, capture location and other vital information about detainees at the Bagram detention facility in Afghanistan, according to a letter the American Civil Liberties Union sent to the Department of Defense (DOD) today. In response to an April Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request made by the ACLU to the Departments of Defense, Justice and State and the CIA for documents related to the detention and treatment of prisoners at Bagram, the DOD told the ACLU that it has a list containing basic information about the Bagram detainees but is withholding it in its entirety. The CIA has refused even to confirm the existence of records about Bagram.

"There are serious concerns that Bagram is another Guantánamo - except with many more prisoners, less due process, no access to lawyers or courts and reportedly worse conditions," said Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. "As long as the Bagram prison is shrouded in secrecy, there is no way to know the truth or begin to address the problems that exist there."

In a July 28 letter responding to the FOIA request, the DOD informed the ACLU that it had located a 12-page list compiled by the National Detainee Reporting Center of information about individuals held at Bagram as of June 22, 2009. However, it has refused to make public any portions of the list, claiming national security and privacy concerns. Today's letter to the DOD appeals the withholding of the list.

In May, the CIA stated in a letter that it could "neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records responsive" to the FOIA request. The ACLU sent a letter to the agency in June appealing their refusal to comply.

Recent reports suggest that the U.S. government is still detaining more than 600 individuals at Bagram, including not only Afghan citizens captured in Afghanistan but also an unknown number of foreign nationals captured thousands of miles from Afghanistan and brought to Bagram. Some of the detainees have been held there for more than six years without charge or access to counsel. Former Bagram detainees say they were beaten, deprived of sleep and threatened with dogs while at Bagram, according to a June BBC report based on interviews with detainees held there between 2002 and 2006.

Thanks to The Bill of Rights Defense Committee

After woman is arrested and taken away for disputing ticket children are left alone in mini-van at the side of the road by cop by 40 minutes.

Raw Story reports

police officer in the Syracuse, New York, area Tasered a 37-year-old mom repeatedly in front of her children during a routine traffic stop--and then arrested the mom, leaving the children alone in their family minivan for 40 minutes in freezing weather.

The incident took place in Onondaga County, New York, on January 31, but dashcam video of the incident only recently came to light.

According to a report at syracuse.com, what started out as a routine traffic stop "escalated quickly" when 37-year-old Audra Harmon challenged officer Sean Andrews' assertion that she had been talking on her cell phone when he pulled her over. Harmon disputed that fact, as well as the officer's claim that she had been speeding--doing 50 mph in a 45 zone.

An article at MSNBC.com describes the situation:

Harmon had been driving home with her 15-year-old son, whom she had just picked up from wrestling practice, and 5-year-old daughter. She said she was resting her right hand on her cheek as she pulled behind a sheriff's deputy to make a right turn onto the road where she lived. After she made the turn, the deputy pulled off the road to let her pass, then pulled out behind her with his lights flashing and siren blaring.

When Harmon got out of her minivan to show Officer Andrews that she wasn't in possession of a cell phone, and to ask to see video footage of her allegedly talking on the cell phone she didn't possess, the officer ordered her to get back in her car.

"And then he pulled out his taser and said I'm under arrest," Harmon said. "I got back in the car and he said he wanted me back out of the car now. And I said 'Why am I under arrest?' ... He then yanked me out of the car ... pulled his taser out and the first shot jolted me..."

A story of how academic politics spawns a mysterious FBI "investigation" which, though yielding nothing, destroys a career.

Counterpunch reports

Beginning in the early 1990s, I spent about a dozen years slowly collecting, analyzing and compiling tens of thousands of FBI files detailing how dozens of American anthropologists were investigated and harassed by the FBI and various loyalty boards during the late-1940s and 50s. In most of the cases I encountered, the scholars under investigation were targeted because they were involved in unpopular (legal) political causes--the most common of which involved activist campaigns fighting for racial equality, in others they challenged gender roles, economic stratification, the unbridled militarism or other conventions of their era. Many of those investigated already stood out amongst their colleagues as individuals unwilling to go along with the polite social conventions that supported the world they were challenging.

In most of these instances, non-relevant facets of individuals' lives were collected and analyzed by the FBI, employers or local law enforcement agents, and unsubstantiated accusations were collected and used to informally blackball and persecute individual anthropologists who were engaged in political activities. The range of these collected details was bizarre and often prurient (in one case, a well known anthropologist's reported, private, onanistic habits were collected and reported by the FBI). In the several dozens of cases I analyzed in my book Threatening Anthropology, none of the FBI's exhaustive inquiries into the private affairs of anthropologists provided any proof of illegal activity directly related to these investigations; but many of the anthropologists who were the subjects of these investigations wound up losing jobs, marginalized within their discipline, or leaving the field entirely, simply because they were investigated by the FBI. In the McCarthy years, the mere investigation by the FBI as a suspected communist was enough to ruin one's career, and the FBI's practice of keeping their files and findings private lent a twisted sense of legitimacy to shadowy accusations and rumors of wrong doing--yet, when I had over a dozen linear feet of these files released under the Freedom of Information Act, I found that the FBI actually had nothing of substance.

As it was in other academic fields, anthropology's weak disciplinary defensive response allowed the FBI and wider-facets of McCarthyism to flourish and wreck havoc on many of the field's best and brightest. There was an emerging silence that took over the American Anthropological Association's leadership and spread throughout the membership. Everyone got scared when the FBI investigated anthropologists in the late-1940s and 1950s, and, as the fear spread, everyone went silent. Sometimes the psychological anguish and reactions of those being persecuted made it easy for colleagues to rationalize abandoning friends. Just being investigated was enough to ruin careers and alienate individuals from other scholars--and, more generally, to teach the discipline not to study or engage in advocacy relating to controversial topics like racial inequality, poverty, segregation, and economic inequality. At a time when they were most needed, the professional associations went silent.

The relevance of this mid-century history takes on new meanings as Janice Harper, formerly of the University of Tennessee Knoxville's (UTK) Department of Anthropology has found herself subjected to a bizarre and Kafkaesque investigation of the sort which cannot hope to produce anything resembling a positive outcome for the subject, regardless of the findings of the investigation: indeed, this investigation's impact on Dr. Harper's reputation seems to be an outcome structurally connecting these events with investigations of the McCarthy period. As it was during the McCarthy period, just being investigated is enough to undermine one's career, and as reported by Robin Wilson in the Chronicle of Higher Education this past week, Dr. Harper has now been fired by the University of Tennessee.

Traditionally court records were "public". But, according to an appeals court ruling against the New York Times, which sought access to the wiretap records relating to FBI investigation of the "Emperor's club" prostitution ring sting that brought down Eliot Spitzer, there is no first amendment to wiretap application information.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rules

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY TO UNSEAL WIRETAP &
SEARCH WARRANT MATERIALS
Before: WINTER, CABRANES, and HALL Circuit Judges.
The United States appeals from a final order of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York (Jed S. Rakoff, Judge) granting an application by the New York Times
Company (the "Times") to access sealed wiretap applications relating to the investigation of the
"Emperor's Club," a prostitution ring once patronized by the former Governor of New York, Elliot
Spitzer. We hold that the Times has not shown "good cause" to unseal wiretap applications, orders,
and related documents pursuant to Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of
1968, 18 U.S.C. § 2518(8)(b). We also hold that the Times does not have a First Amendment right to
gain access to wiretap applications.
Reversed.

Thanks to Fourth Amendment blog

Neglecting to follow directions properly during annual Wyoming town tractor parade gets 76 year old 50 thousand volts.

The Casper Star-Tribune Online reports

State agents are investigating a Saturday incident in which a 76-year-old man driving a tractor in Glenrock was tasered by police after allegedly failing to obey their orders.

The Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation will look into whether anyone connected to the incident committed a crime, said Special Agent Tim Hill.

The incident happened at Glenrock's annual Deer Creek Days event. Glenrock police said the man, who was operating an antique tractor, failed to obey directions in a parade, Hill said.

At some point afterward, police subdued and tasered the man.

During the incident, the man's tractor apparently ran into a police car, Hill said.

After the investigation is completed, the findings will be turned over to Converse County Attorney Quentin Richardson and Glenrock Police Chief Tom Sweet.

The Converse County Sheriff's Office is investigating whether any traffic violations occurred during the incident, Hill said.

A press release issued by Glenrock police said Sweet requested the DCI investigation immediately following the incident. The release did not detail what took place, other than to say two officers were involved in an incident with a 76-year-old rural Glenrock resident.

No charges have been filed, and the department said it will offer no further comments pending the outcome of the DCI investigation.

In the meantime, the two officers have been put on paid administrative leave.

"At this time it does not appear ... any violation of Glenrock Police and Procedure was violated," the department said in the release. "However, a complete review of pertinent policies and a complete internal personnel investigation will be conducted after the DCI investigation is complete."

The man who was operating the tractor, Bud Grose, declined to comment when reached by phone Tuesday.

thanks to jgodsey

Elliot Grenade who's lived in the U.S. for nearly 28 years as a lawful permanent resident, has spent the past two years in immigration detention waiting to fight the government's efforts to deport him based on a drug sale offense that took place over 10 years ago. He's yet to have so much as a bond hearing. He's not alone. According to the ACLU it's not uncommon for immigrant detainees to spend years in prison awaiting a hearing.

The ACLU reports

The American Civil Liberties Union is arguing in a federal court in Pennsylvania today that the government is violating the law by detaining people for prolonged periods of time - sometimes for years -  while they fight their immigration cases, without ever giving them a hearing on whether their detention is justified.

"Locking people up for years without bond hearings flies in the face of the core American values of fairness and justice," said Judy Rabinovitz, Deputy Director of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, who is arguing before the court today. "We don't live in a country that has unfettered authority to imprison people without hearings for as long as it takes to decide their cases. Our Constitution guarantees every person a day in court, but many immigrants are denied this most basic due process protection."

In today's oral argument in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, the ACLU is representing two immigrants, Elliot Grenade and Alexander Alli, both lawful permanent U.S. residents, who have been held indefinitely without hearings in Pennsylvania prisons while they pursue legitimate legal challenges to deportation. Grenade and Alli are seeking to represent a class of other similarly detained immigrants in Pennsylvania. The ACLU charges that the prolonged detention of immigrants without bond hearings violates both the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and due process.

Grenade, who is from Trinidad and Tobago, has lived in the U.S. for nearly 28 years as a lawful permanent resident. His two children, domestic partner and his mother are all U.S. citizens. Grenade has spent nearly two years in immigration detention fighting the government's efforts to deport him based on a drug sale offense that took place over 10 years ago. During the entire length of Grenade's detention, he has never received a bond hearing to determine whether his detention is justified.

Alli, who came to the U.S. in 1990 from Ghana, is a lawful permanent resident married to a U.S. citizen with whom he has three children. He owns an established real estate company in the Bronx, New York. For the past 11 months, Alli has been held in detention while challenging the government's efforts to deport him because of convictions related to major credit card fraud. An immigration judge has found that Alli is eligible to apply for a waiver that would allow him to seek a new green card and remain in the country. However, Alli has never had a chance to present this information in a bond hearing so a judge can determine whether his detention is justified.

Over the last several years, the use of detention as an immigration enforcement strategy has increased exponentially. On an average day, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) detains roughly 33,400 non-citizens in federal detention facilities and local jails across the country, over a threefold increase in the detention population since just a decade ago.

"Many immigrants in detention have substantial challenges to deportation and pose no danger to society or flight risk, yet they are unable to endure the prospect of prolonged detention and end up abandoning their cases," said Vic Walczak, Legal Director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, which is co-counsel on the case. "It makes no sense to lock people up for years while their immigration cases wind their way through the courts. We are spending millions of tax dollars incarcerating people for no purpose."

The ACLU is launching a Web page today that features a video, profiles and podcasts of several immigrants the ACLU and other organizations have represented, including lawful permanent residents and asylum seekers, who have been subjected to prolonged detention without meaningful review.

Lawyers on the case include Rabinovitz, Michael Tan and Farrin Anello of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, Walczak and Valerie Burch of the ACLU of Pennsylvania, and Thomas Schmidt III, Kathleen Mullen and Frederick Alcaro of Pepper Hamilton LLP.

The new ACLU Web page on prolonged detention of immigrants, "No End in Sight: Immigrants Locked Up for Years Without Hearings," can be found online at: www.aclu.org/immigrants/review/39906res20090617.html

More information on the case Alli et al v. Decker et al is available online at: www.aclu.org/immigrants/detention/39687res20090527.html

See proposal here

AGENCY: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The proposed rule limits the use of film, photographic, and 
videotape equipment inside the National Archives Building in 
Washington, DC. Filming, photographing, and videotaping will be 
prohibited in exhibits of the National Archives Experience (NAE) in 
Washington, DC, including the Declaration of Independence, the 
Constitution, and the Bill of Rights (known as the Charters of Freedom) 
in the Rotunda of the National Archives Building. 

Alabama state liquor board bans sales of California wine because of brand's "nude" logo, the reproduction of an art nouveau illustration  of a nymph originally used in the 19th century to sell bicycles in Paris.

The Examiner reports

"Sweet home, Alabama," so the song goes. But not so sweet for Cycles Gladiator Wines produced by Hahn Family Wines of Soledad, Ca. The Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Board has banned Cycles Gladiator wines from being sold in Alabama, based on the nude nymph depicted on their labels.

The Alabama ABC code states that "No advertisement may include any illustration(s) of any person(s) consuming alcoholic beverages or any person(s) posed in an immodest or sensuous manner."  In a letter to Alabama restaurants and retailers, the ABC stated that the sale of Cycles Gladiator wines are prohibited. An attorney for the ABC was quoted as saying the label was submitted twice last year for approval and it was rejected both times. However, an Alabama citizen sent the ABC a bottle, indicating it was still being sold in stores. Consequently, the ABC issued a cease and desist order. The label had already been approved quite some time ago by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), the arm of the Federal government charged with approval of wine labels on a national level.

Antavio Johnson's angry lyrics, in which he fantasizes killing two cops he believes harassed him,get him two year jail sentence for "corruption by threat of public servant".

The Orlando Sentinel reports

Hardly anyone had heard Antavio Johnson's lyrics until they landed him in prison.

Now his words are getting the attention of free-speech advocates across the nation.

Johnson's friends and family say he was frustrated with the Lakeland police a few years ago when he recorded a violent rap song that called officers by name and threatened to shoot them.

Those words, they say, were meant only as a creative outlet and not intended to be made public or acted out.

"We don't punish for bad thoughts in America," said Howard Simon, executive director of the Florida chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. "Our Constitution forces us to make a distinction between ugly and hostile thoughts and words, and credible threats of violence."

The ACLU has not intervened in the case but is keeping a close eye on it until officials can speak to Johnson's lawyer, Simon said.

The song, "Kill Me A Cop," was posted on the Myspace.com page of an unofficial record label in February. It was online for about two weeks before a Polk County gang detective discovered it and began investigating, according to the Sheriff's Office.

Boise police decide (to their credit) that actions of an unnamed officer or officers who tasered a suspect who was handcuffed and on the floor in the ass and threatened to electrocute his dick, were perhaps a bit excessive.

The Idaho Statesman reports

A report issued Wednesday by Boise Community Ombudsman Pierce Murphy found that a Boise police officer who used a Taser on a suspect's buttocks violated the police department's use-of-force policy.

Boise Police Chief Michael Masterson, in a release, said he agreed with Murphy's conclusion that serious policy violations were made by that officer and another officer who erased a recording of an interview with the suspect at the jail. The two officers, whose names were not released, were among eight officers who responded to the incident in early 2009.

The Boise Police Department did an internal investigation, and both employees were disciplined; details on the discipline were not released. It is considered an internal personnel matter, said police spokeswoman Lynn Hightower.

The use-of-force violation occurred during an arrest at a Boise home; the address and the names of the occupants have not been released. Police were called to the house after a report of a fight. While on their way, they learned that a man inside the woman's residence had just been released from jail. They were also told a 3-year-old boy in the home, according to details provided in Murphy's report.

Upon arrival, the officers heard the sounds of a struggle and voices coming from inside. The officers yelled for someone to open the door, and were greeted with a profane comment by a man in the residence. The officers had to kick and push the door open; the man inside was pushing against the door for more than 80 seconds. Once they gained entry, the officers said the suspect did not comply with their demands to get on the ground and stop resisting.

The suspect said that he was hit three times with a Taser after he was already handcuffed and face-down on the floor. Murphy's investigation found evidence that the suspect was hit twice with the Taser -- once in the back before he was handcuffed and once in the buttocks after he was cuffed.

Murphy said the officer who used the Taser --- described as Officer #3 in the report -- also coarsely threatened to use the Taser in the man's anus and genitals. Murphy's report says that use of Taser on a man's buttock's does not violate policy in and of itself; the question is whether it was "reasonable and necessary."

Thanks to jgodsey