Migration Category: Feminist Newswire

Stories from the Feminist News Wire.

New York Passes Child Victims Act, Extending Time Child Sexual Abuse Victims Can Sue

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The New York State Legislature passed the Child Victims Act, which greatly extends the statute of limitations for victims of child sexual abuse to sue both criminally and civilly, ending one of the most restrictive time limits in the nation.

The new law allows victims of childhood sexual abuse to take action against their abusers until the age of 55 for civil cases and 28 for criminal cases. The Child Victim Act significantly increases the former limit which required both criminal and civil charges to be brought by the age of 23. The bill also created a one-year window where any case of child sexual abuse that was beyond the previous statute of limitations can be prosecuted.

The legislation previously received opposition from Republican legislators who blocked the bill in past years from the Senate floor. However, in November, Democrats won control of the Senate and the bill received overwhelming support, from both Democrats and Republicans.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Roman Catholic, said, “I believe it was the conservatives in the Senate who were threatened by the Catholic Church,” resulting in more than a decade of dispute over the bill. New York’s Catholic Conference had opposed the bill but later supported it once the bill was amended that both private and public institutions could be prosecuted.

Several other states in the nation allow child sexual abuse victims to prosecute their cases decades after their abuse. Studies show that 1 in 3 victims never disclose their childhood sexual abuse with the average age to disclose being 52 years old.

 

Media Resources: Child USA; CNN 1/28/19; New York Times 1/28/19

New Jersey Providing Gender Neutral Option on Birth Certificates

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

Starting tomorrow, a New Jersey law, named after New Jersey resident Babs Siperstein who was the first transgender woman to join the Democratic National Committee, goes into effect, providing a gender neutral option on birth certificates.

Previously, New Jersey law only allowed a person to change the gender on their birth certificate if they had already received gender reassignment surgery. This law will allow people to change the gender on their birth certificate without having to receive the expensive and often inaccessible reassignment surgery. Governor Phil Murphy stated that this bill will allow “transgender individuals to control the disclosure of their transgender status.”

New Jersey is the fourth state to allow a gender neutral option on birth certificates, following Oregon, California, and Washington. Three more states allow for gender neutral options on drivers licenses.

This comes after a wave of attacks on transgender individuals from the Trump administration, including the Supreme Court decision to allow President Trump’s ban on transgender individuals in the military and Trump’s attempts to undercut Title IX protections for transgender students.

 

Media Resources: NBC News 1/30/19; U.S. News 1/30/19; Feminist Newswire 1/28/19; Feminist Newswire 1/22/19

Fifth Circuit Upheld an Anti-Abortion Louisiana Law, Despite SCOTUS Precedent

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The Center for Reproductive Rights has filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, after the Fifth Circuit upheld the law despite Supreme Court precedent, to prevent an extremely restrictive anti-abortion Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges from going into effect on Feb. 4th; the law would leave only one abortion doctor in the entire state, drastically decreasing access to abortion and reproductive healthcare in Louisiana. The Fifth Circuit denied requests from the Center for Reproductive Rights for a rehearing and requests to stay the law while the case is appealed to the Supreme Court; however, this case gives an opportunity for the conservative-majority Supreme Court to re-shape abortion rights after Justice Kennedy’s retirement.

The Fifth Circuit has chosen to uphold Louisiana’s law, ignoring Supreme Court precedent that admitting privileges are unconstitutional obstacles to prevent abortion care as ruled in Whole Women’s Health v Hellerstedt. A Mississippi law, similar to the Louisiana law in question was struck down by the Fifth Circuit. However, this ruling on the Louisiana law effectively disregards past Supreme Court precedent and past Fifth Circuit precedent.

Reproductive rights organizations and advocates fear that the Supreme Court, especially without Justice Kennedy that provided the crucial fifth vote in the Whole Women’s Health v Hellerstedt ruling, will use this case as an opportunity to seriously limit abortion access or the right to abortion by disregarding precedent that expanded reproductive rights.

The Whole Women’s Health v Hellerstedt ruling struck down a similar Texas law at the Supreme Court in a 5-3 vote. This law required doctors to have admitting privileges for patients seeking an abortion, leading to the closure of over half of abortion clinics in Texas. The Supreme Court found this law unconstitutional because the Texas government was unable to provide proof of the medical benefits the law would provide.

 

Media Resources: Pacific Standard 1/25/19; Washington Examiner 1/29/19; Feminist Newswire 6/29/17

Congress Introduces Paycheck Fairness Act to Prevent Pay Discrimination

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The Paycheck Fairness Act of 2019 was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate on Wednesday, giving women stronger protections against sex-based pay discrimination and helping ensure pay equity for all women.

On the 10 year anniversary of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, Sen. Patty Muarray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) introduced the Paycheck Fairness Act to provide women with legal tools to challenge pay discrimination and incentives for employers to comply with the law. The proposed bill both closes loopholes in the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and complements the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which ensured that workers can challenge pay discrimination.

The act would protect employees from retaliation for sharing salaries with colleagues as well as prohibit employers from demanding salary history during the hiring process. In addition, the act would require the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to collect data from employers on compensation and require employers to prove discrepancies in pay are for legitimate reasons.

On the federal level, the battle for gender pay equity has been waged for over 60 years now. The first Equal Pay Law was signed by President Kennedy in 1963, making it illegal to pay women less money for doing the same job as men. However, a Supreme Court ruling later limited the amount of time that a woman could file a wage discrimination suit against her employer to within 180 days of the first discriminatory pay check. In 2009, President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, allowing women to file suit for wage discrimination no matter how much time had passed since the discrimination first began.

The Paycheck Fairness Act has been introduced in Congress several times since 1997, with Republicans filibustering and blocking the bill each time.

According to the Association of American University Women, women currently make an average of 80 cents to a man’s dollar, but the racial disparity in the gender wage gap is vast. Compared to white men, Asian women earned 90 percent, white (non-Hispanic) women earned 76 percent, black women earned 63 percent, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander women earned 60 percent, American Indian women earned 58 percent and Hispanic/Latina women earned 53 percent.

“It’s time we strengthen our equal pay laws,” said Lilly Ledbetter, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court discrimination case that led to the Fair Pay Act of 2009. “Women and their families literally can’t afford to wait any longer.”

Media Resources: ACLU 1/30/19; Globe Newswire 1/20/19; CBS News 1/30/19; Feminist Newswire 8/7/18; Feminist Newswire 4/4/17; CNN 1/30/19

New Brazilian Gun Laws May Pose Risk to Domestic Violence Victims

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

New Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has signed a decree to loosen gun laws throughout the country, despite public safety experts concern, a decree that makes it easier for Brazilians to have guns in their homes, as well as waives old standing safety checks such as federal police approval. In addition, Bolsonaro increased the validity period of gun licenses from five to ten years.

These changes come with significant backlash from the Brazilian Public Service Reform, which conducts annual violence statistics for Brazil along with other civil society groups. Their research has found that Brazil has one of the highest murder rates in the world. Many experts warn that this new decree will only lead to more deaths and violence within the country. Despite this concern, Bolsonaro has gained popularity among the people through this campaign, as more Brazilian than ever are seeking gun access. In fact, 33,000 new gun owners have been registered since 2007.

This rise in gun owners and access is particularly concerning for women. In the last year, Brazil has seen a 6.1% rise in female murders. Campaigners against the decree point out that over half of those women were killed by a firearm. Because of this, non-governmental groups warn that domestic violence could see a rise with the instatement of this decree. In Brazil, women are disproportionately affected by gun violence in communities where violence is already common.

Although stricter punishment has been in effect for men who commit femicide in Brazil, an estimated one third of girls and women still report acts of violence. Furthermore, Brazilian women are less likely than other cultures to report incidents to the police. This stems from the historic mistreatment of domestic violence cases as well as lack of support for victims by the police and government systems. Activist groups argue that machismo culture has contributed to creating an environment that aggravates and encourages actions of domestic violence and sexual assault.

 

Media Resources: Guardian 2019; Human Rights Watch 2018; Brazilian Public Service Reform 2017; Feminist Newswire 2015

Congress Leads Renewed Fight For the ERA

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

On Tuesday, Congresswomen Jackie Speier (D-Ca.) and Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) hosted a press conference at the U.S. Capitol to announce the introduction of legislation in support of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). They were joined by activists and organizations spearheading the movement such as the Feminist Majority, the National Organization for Women, the National Women’s Law Center, the ERA Coalition, Virginia General Assembly Delegate Jennifer Carroll Foy (D-Price William), actors and activists Alyssa Milano and Patricia Arquette, and other members of Congress.

Because the 1982 deadline has been one of the biggest obstacles to the ERA, Rep. Speier plans to introduce a bill to Congress that will remove the 1982 deadline from the ERA bill. Speier mentions the statue of a woman called “Contemplation of Justice” which resides on the steps of the Supreme Court, and states women are tired of contemplating justice; “we want justice now.” Rep. Maloney introduced a separate bill to kick-start the ratification process again. Supporters of the ERA have waited long enough and continue to push forth effort in ratifying the ERA.

As Alyssa Milano stated, “it is time for the Constitution to reflect the principles of three words- ‘We the People[…];’” she continues, “equality is not an issue of party. It is not as issue of politics. It’s an issue of basic human dignity. The Equal Rights Amendment is a powerful simple statement. We are all equal. It’s a basic American ideal… 94% of Americans believe that gender equality belongs in the Constitution… this is not just political, this is personal. Ratifying the ERA will be a statement of principle, it will send a message to our daughters and our sons, to those who govern our states and make our laws, to our country, and to the world. These rights are our birthright, but enshrining them in the Constitution, is our responsibility. My name is Alyssa Milano, and I belong in the Constitution.”

Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority stated at the press conference that, “Generations of women have fought to achieve constitutional equality through an Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The movement to ratify the ERA has maintained increasing momentum because women continue to be fed up with the discrimination faced in schools, in the workplace, in our homes, and on the streets. Congress has a duty to correct a historic mistake and remove the arbitrary deadline in the preamble of the ERA. The states never voted on the deadline, and there can be no time limit on the pursuit of equality and justice.”

On January 15th, the Republican majority Senate of the state of Virginia passed a resolution to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment. The resolution is now the responsibility of the House. The Senate has passed the resolution multiple times in the past, but the Virginia House’s Privileges and Elections Committee has blocked the resolution from coming to the floor for a vote.

 

Media Resources: Washington Post 1/29/19; The Hill 1/29/19; Politico Twitter 1/29/19; House of Congress Rep. Carolyn Maloney 1/29/19; Feminist News 1/17/19

Afghan Women Concerned Over Possible Agreement With Taliban

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

Afghan government officials have reportedly negotiated a draft peace framework with the Taliban, raising concerns among women’s rights activists in Afghanistan and around the world that any reemergence of the Taliban on the political scene could mean a rollback of women’s advancements in the country, as it did under the Taliban’s previous reign. Peace talks with the Taliban have been led by Zalmay Khalilzad, the former US ambassador to Iraq and Afghanistan (appointed by President Bush), and current envoy assigned to bring negotiators to the table.

Arezo Shinwari is one of the many Afghan women who are concerned that they might not be able to continue their public life if the Taliban returns and continues their suppression of Afghan women. Speaking in a group meeting in Kabul, she said, “All our demands should be considered in the peace process. This is what all Afghan women want.”

Hashima Sharif is another woman from the eastern province of Afghanistan, Nangarhar, where the Taliban continues to rule in rural parts of the province and suppress girls’ access to education. Like many Afghan women, she also demands that the government must take the peace process seriously and guarantee their rights.

In an interview with TOLO TV, Dr. Sima Samar, Chairwoman of the Afghanistan Independent Human Right Commission (AIHRC) and recent appointee to the United Nations High Level Advisory Board on Mediation, said that “human rights, especially those of women, should not be stepped on in talks with Taliban, otherwise people will stand up against the Taliban.” She added that “talks with the Taliban is a transient political deal and rights should not be sacrificed for it… peace talks should be transparent and the process should not be rushed.”

According to Samar, “If the Taliban wants peace, then they should not resist against human rights and the rights of women. Because, this demand (resistance against these rights) will not lead to peace, this demand will deadlock the issues.”

After questions raised by human rights organizations, and to reassure the Afghan public, President Ghani of Afghanistan gave a televised address to the nation, stating that “People’s rights will not be compromised,” although the President did not specifically mention women’s rights.

The leaders of the Taliban view the Afghan government as illegitimate and foreign-imposed. They have continuously insisted on first brokering a deal with the United States, who toppled their regime in 2001. On the other hand, the government of Afghanistan has made it clear that no other country or government speaks for them.

During the ongoing peace talks led by Khalilzad, the Taliban has not stopped their militant activities, executing suicide attacks on civilians and Afghan security forces. Just this month, the Taliban took responsibility for an attack in Kabul, killing and wounding more than 115 civilians. Although the target was an expatriate’s compound, the Taliban fighters blew up a car-bomb in a densely populated civilian neighborhood. Similarly, the militant group attacked a security forces base near Kabul, killing and wounding many of the intelligence personnel of the Afghan government. This is not unusual. The Taliban militants have a history of carrying attacks in heavily civilian-populated areas even when engaged in negotiations.

 

Media Resources: Tolo News 1/29/19, 1/28/19, 1/28/19; BBC 1/28/19; Feminist Newswire 1/22/19, 1/18/19, 12/21/18

Trump Defies Science to Attack Transgender Americans

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The Center for Disease Control’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report found that nearly 2% of all high schoolers identify as transgender; this report also confirms that transgender students need to be protected in and out of school.

In school, transgender students are more likely to be victims of bullying, whether in person or online. They are also four times more likely to feel unsafe at school compared to their cisgender peers. Trans students are often misgendered, unable to access the bathroom that matches their gender identity, and subject to rude comments and stares. Outside of school, transgender students disproportionately experience sexual violence and drug addiction. For these reasons and more, transgender students are three times more likely to attempt suicide.

This past October, the Trump administration announced a plan to rigidly redefine gender based on genitalia at the time of birth. Not only is the Trump administration actively hurting transgender Americans by legitimizing erasure, but they are furthering a scientifically incorrect perception of gender. Approximately one in 100 Americans has some sort of sexual development condition, meaning they are not explicitly male or female.

The medical community acknowledges that gender is not binary. They see gender as a spectrum with room for those who identify as something other than what’s on their birth certificate or as nothing at all.

“The idea that a person’s sex is determined by their anatomy at birth is not true, and we’ve known that it’s not true for decades,” says Dr. Joshua Safer, an endocrinologist at the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery at Mount Sinai Health System in New York.

Trump’s attempt to redefine gender out of existence goes against science and legal precedent, all so they can undercut Title IX protections.

 

Media Resources: Advocates for Youth 1/28/19; The New York Times 10/21/18; Human Rights Watch 7/25/17; Feminist Newswire 10/22/18; Nature.com 10/30/18; Transequality.org

Japan’s Supreme Court Upholds Law Requiring Sterilization to Legally Change Gender

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The Japanese Supreme Court unanimously upheld Law 111, which requires transgender people looking to officially change their gender to undergo sterilization by removing their original reproductive organs, causing human rights and LGBT activists to immediately denounce the ruling.

The Supreme Court denied Takakito Usui, a transgender man, an appeal against the 2004 law, citing that the law was made to prevent “problems in parent-child relations” and “societal confusion.” However, despite upholding the law, the judges also claimed the law was invasive and proposed regular reviews of it.

Usui appealed to the Supreme Court after the lower courts failed to grant him legal recognition as a male while still having his female reproductive glands. Usui said that forced sterilization violated his right to self-determination and is unconstitutional.

Japan’s ruling party, the Liberal Democratic Party, has a history of making discriminatory statements against LGBT people. Katsuei Hirasawa, a lower house legislator, said that “a nation would collapse if everyone became LGBT.” In addition, another legislator, Mio Sugita, has criticized using taxpayer dollars to back same-sex marriage, describing LGBT people as “unproductive.”

Japan’s government is also facing multiple lawsuits from people with disabilities who were forced to be sterilized under a 1948 Eugenics Protection Law that was designed to “prevent the birth of poor-quality descendants.”

Japan is not the only country with sterilization laws. Twenty-two of the countries under the European Court of Human Rights jurisdiction still require sterilization for a legal gender change, and it has since ordered an end to the requirement in 2017. Human Rights Watch believes Japan’s ruling on sterilization is “incompatible with international human rights standards, goes against the times, and deviates far from best global practices.”

 

Media Resources: Associated Press 1/25/19; CNN 1/25/19; The Japan Times 1/5/19; The Guardian 9/26/18

4 Young Girls Subjected to Strip Search in Binghamton, NY

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

Last Thursday, a school district in Binghamton, New York was accused of subjecting four 12-year old girls to strip searches; the allegations have united community members to call for the resignation of school employees involved in the strip search.

The rallied community members called for the resignation of the school nurse and assistant principal at a school board meeting. The group stated that the girls, who are African-American, were interrogated and “strip-searched” by faculty at Binghamton’s East Middle School on January 15. The faculty suspected drug use and drug possession because the students seemed hyper and giddy during their lunch. The community members and parents of the students stressed that the group of girls no longer feel safe at school and are traumatized by their experience. The group also issued demands for the school district, including to stop strip searches and to issue public apology to the students and community.

Binghamton County School District’s apologized for the “impact” the incident had on students, but defended their actions in a statement claiming, “A student may, under current law and policy, be searched in a school building by an administrator […]. These searches involve an administrator requesting a student to empty their pockets, remove their shoes and/or remove their jackets.” However, The Progressive Leaders of Tomorrow, a group representing the student’s parents refute the district’s claims by stating that student A was searched in their bra and underwear, student B was searched in their leggings and bra, student C was searched in their bra and underwear, and student D received an in-school suspension for refusing to remove their shirt and pants. The students consented to sobriety tests and observations; however the parents did not consent to these searches, nor were they informed.

Media Resources: Washington Post 1/24/19; Huffington Post 1/26/19

State ERA Introduced in Maine Legislature

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

Yesterday, lead sponsor Representative Lois Reckitt and lead co-sponsor Senator Rebecca Millett introduced a state Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in the Maine state legislature. The State ERA already has 116 co-sponsors. The lead sponsors believe the measure will pass with at least the two-thirds majority needed. If the State ERA passes with a two-thirds vote, then the constitutional amendment will go on a statewide ballot for passage. A simple majority of state voters is necessary for final approval.

Maine recently elected its first female governor, Democrat Janet Mills, in the 2018 midterms. Governor Mills is pro-ERA and ran on a platform promoting equal rights, anti-discrimination, and accessible healthcare. With Governor Mills support and a solid two/thirds majority of the state legislation, advocates are hopeful that Maine voters will vote overwhelmingly for the state ERA.

A state ERA is also being introduced in the New York General Assembly. Governor Andrew Cuomo has said he wants the General Assembly to approve the NY State ERA within the first 100 days of the 2019 session.

 

Media Resources: Bangor Daily News 5/16/17

Bills to Re-Open Government Fail in the Senate

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

Today, furloughed workers received their second consecutive $0.00 paycheck because yesterday, a plan made by the Democrats, that they hoped would have bipartisan support to end the shutdown, failed to pass, forcing the government shutdown to continue in its 35th day. House Democrats are in the process of composing a border security proposal of $5.2 billion, on a “smart wall” that will include drones, sensors, and additional fencing. Their proposal does not include a wall from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico.

Democrats hope to reopen the government without funding President Trump’s border wall but lawmakers are now forced to shape a new agreement to end the government shutdown. The plan needed 60 votes to advance, but received 52-44. Trump’s own proposal, which still included his unwavering desire for $5.7 billion for his border wall, met a similar fate.

The failed bills emphasize the immense divide in Washington, D.C., that has put the country and over 800,000 federal workers at risk. Today is the second consecutive paycheck of $0.00 that federal workers will receive.

House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, remains hopeful and stated, “I’m still optimistic in the goodness of the Republicans in the Senate, that they will care enough about these people that they will say, ‘Ok, we’ll give two weeks so that we can negotiate an evidence-based, cost-effective, value-respecting way to protect the American people with border security.’”

 

Media Resources: New York Times 1/24/19; Feminist News 1/22/19

Nissin Removes Naomi Osaka ad After Receiving Backlash for Whitewashing

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

Nissin Food Holdings took down a controversial advertisement on Thursday that included a whitewashed version of tennis star and 2018 US Open winner, Naomi Osaka who is half Japanese and half Haitian. The anime style ad drawn by Takeshi Konomi, a notable manga artist, depicted Osaka with light skin, changed hair style, and Caucasian features while alongside Kei Nishikori, a Japanese male tennis player.

“There is no intention of whitewashing,” said Nissin spokesman Daisuke Okabayashi. “We accept that we are not sensitive enough and will pay more attention to diversity issues in the future.”

Osaka has stated that she has talked with Nissin and would like her input to be included in the any future portrayals. The tennis star is facing off with Petra Kvitova in the Australian Open Final for the top spot in the women’s world rankings on Jan. 26. Osaka will become the first No. 1 ranked Japanese singles player if she wins against Kvitova.

Osaka became the first Japanese-born Grand Slam singles champion after a controversial win against Serena Williams in the U.S. Open. Williams was issued three penalties after being accused of cheating by the match’s chair umpire.

The match between Williams and Osaka prompted not only conversations of sexism within sports, but also a racist cartoon in an Australian newspaper. The cartoon portrayed Williams in a Jim Crow era caricature style and Osaka as a pale-skinned blonde.

“Making her look white just tells these people that what they are isn’t good enough,” said Baye McNeil, an author who has lived in Japan for 15 years. He adds that representation of diverse races and inclusivity is important, especially in a global market.

 

Media Resources: New York Times 1/22/19; New Yok Times 9/9/18; New York Times 1/24/19; Associated Press 1/14/19

New York Passes Reproductive Health Act, protecting Abortion Rights

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

On Thursday, Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York signed the Reproductive Health Act into law, providing protection against prosecution if an individual receives abortion care as well as expanding the availability of abortions. The law expands the criteria for receiving an abortion as well: the fetus is not viable; endangers the life of the mother; and allows for abortions past 23 weeks. The bill was introduced in 2006 but the legislation stalled until finally being passed this week.

This law codified the right to an abortion in New York, securing reproductive rights if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. There is a lack of abortion protection at the state level, leaving reproductive rights at risk in many states without a constitutional right to an abortion. New York now has one of the most progressive laws pertaining to reproductive healthcare in the nation.

The passage of the Reproductive Health Act in New York reflects a larger national conversation about abortion care without Roe v. Wade and how states can protect reproductive healthcare and autonomy. The 2018 midterm election also displayed a national majority that supports and elects pro-choice candidates. In the new 116th Congress, the majority of the House of Representatives support abortion rights, the first time since abortion was legalized in the 1970s.

Governor Cuomo signing the Reproductive Health Act into law was a victory for abortion advocates, especially since there is a possibility Roe v. Wade may be overturned or seriously weakened. New York previously passed laws that provide free menstrual products to homeless shelter and enhance the availability of contraception.

 

News Sources: Huffington Post, 1/23/2019; NPR, 1/22/2019; Feminist Newswire, 5/20/2015; Feminist Newswire, 6/23/2016

California Bans Gender-Based Rating for Car Insurance Premiums

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

California has joined multiple states in banning discriminatory gender-based criteria in determining car insurance premiums, practices that charge higher premiums for women based solely on their gender. The Gender Non-Discrimination in Automobile Insurance Rating Regulation was put into effect this month by the California Commissioner’s Office.

Doug Jones, the California Commissioner, approved this regulation as one of his final acts before leaving office, as he believed that the industry has been inconsistent as well as discriminatory to women. Removing gender as criteria for determining prices was done in an effort to promote the use of alternative factors that are within the driver’s control, such as driving history or years of experience. Generally, predetermined or personal factors, such as race, have been banned from being used to determine insurance rates, but gender is not a banned factor nationally. The Commissioner’s Office made this change in an effort to protect all consumers from discrimination, but especially women who have experienced higher premiums than their male counterparts due solely to gender.

Other states, such Hawaii, Massachusetts, Montana, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, have instituted similar bans. Research has found little evidence to show that gender based rating is effective or accurate. In addition, the Consumer Federation of America has showcased findings which suggest that some women pay up to $100 more per year than men for car insurance due solely to their gender and discriminatory practices.

 

Media Resources: New York Times 2019; Consumer Federation 2019; CBS News 2019; Insurance California 2019

Federal Trial Reviews Trump Administration’s Citizenship Question on 2020 Census

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

A new federal trial began Tuesday in Maryland reviewing concerns that the inclusion of a citizenship question to the 2020 census will depress participation of households with noncitizens just a week after a federal judge in New York barred the Trump administration from adding the question to the survey. The same issue is also being tried in California where closing arguments are scheduled for Feb. 15.

The court had consolidated the claims of residents in Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Florida, as well as more than two dozen organizations and individuals in December for the upcoming trial in Maryland. Their attorneys state that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the Census Bureau, is using the addition of a citizenship question “to further the unconstitutional goal of diluting the political power of non-white immigrant communities.”

While different lawsuits challenging the question are underway, the Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to intervene and bypass the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit due to a pressing deadline. The Census Bureau needs to finalize questions for the 2020 census by June 30 in order to print paper forms on time.

Last week, Judge Jesse M. Furman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ordered the administration to end its plans to include a citizenship question on the 2020 census. The judge stated that Ross’s addition of the question was “arbitrary and capricious” as well as an “egregious” violation of the Administrative Procedure Act after Ross ignored the advice of officials who said the question could lead to an inaccurate census. However, following the decision, the Justice Department filed a notice that it is appealing the ruling. Ross is set to testify on Mar. 14 to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform about the citizenship question.

Children, minorities, and people in poverty are at the highest disadvantage if a citizenship question is included. Over 13 million children under the age of 18 lived with at least one noncitizen in 2016. In addition, one in five people in poverty live with at least one noncitizen. Furthermore, Asians and Hispanics/Latinos were the most likely to live with a noncitizen.

The inclusion of a citizenship question could result in a suppression of the count, risking the accuracy of information that is used for the allocation of federal funding, determination of the number of representatives from each state, and identification for first responders and disaster recovery personnel during emergencies.

 

Media Resources: Population Reference Bureau 10/5/18; The Washington Post 1/22/19; The Washington Post 1/15/19; National Public Radio 1/22/19

Michigan State University Interim President John Engler Resigns

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

John Engler, the interim president at Michigan State University, resigned Wednesday after receiving backlash against his comments on the survivors of the former physician for two women’s varsity teams at Michigan State University and previous doctor for the American gymnastics team, Larry Nassar, stating the survivors were “enjoying the spotlight.” In an 11-page letter to the board of trustees, Engler stated his plans to officially resign on Jan. 23.

Engler became interim president early last year after Lou Anna K. Simon resigned amid Nassar’s sentencing for sexual abuse and is now currently facing four charges for lying to police about her knowledge of Nassar’s abuse. Nassar is currently serving several prison sentences which ultimately amount to 235 years.

At Nassar’s sentencing hearing last year, 156 survivors made statements about their experiences and exposed Michigan State University and USA Gymnastics’ corruption and disregard for female athletes. Nassar is accused of sexually assaulting over 200 women and girls.

For two decades before Nassar’s arrest, at least 14 Michigan State University representatives were aware of the sexual abuse allegations. Even after police began a criminal investigation in 2014, Nassar continued to see patients at the university for 16 months. Nassar was not fired until new reports of sexual assault were filed to police in 2016.

Michigan State’s Title IX coordinator also dismissed reports from students alleging Nassar had sexually assaulted them. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has proposed harmful new regulations to Title IX that would make it easier for schools to ignore student survivors of sexual violence and sweep allegations of sexual harassment and assault under the rug by getting rid of reporting requirements. DeVos’s setbacks to Title IX will majorly impact the rights of survivors and how schools will handle sexual violence.

 

Media Resources: Detroit Free Press 1/16/19; New York Times 1/24/18; Lansing State Journal 12/18/18; Feminist Newswire 1/22/17; Feminist Newswire 7/5/18; Feminist Newswire 11/16/18; Feminist Newswire 10/6/17

Senate to Vote on Short-Term Spending Bill

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The Senate has scheduled a vote for Thursday on Trump’s proposal to reopen the government, after the 33 day government shutdown. If the proposal fails to receive the 60 votes needed to prevent filibuster, the Senate will then vote on a different short-term spending bill that will reopen the government until February 8th—the House has already passed this bill.

The short-term spending bill requires 60 votes—however Trump has said he would veto it as it does not include funding for a wall. The bill also includes relief for those recovering from natural disasters. Receiving 60 votes would require Senators to cross party lines, however Speaker Nancy Pelosi sees no issue with the spending bill the House has passed, and thus no reason why any Senator would vote on Trump’s proposal. However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has made it clear he will not bring any bill to the Senate that Trump would not sign.

As a result of Senator McConnell’s opposition to every bill House Democrats offer the Senate, House Democratic leaders have begun drafting a letter to President Trump that would propose $5 billion to border security so long as he reopens the government. However, Democrats are making it clear in the letter that the money cannot be spent on a wall. Thus, Trump is expected to reject this letter.

Trump’s proposal contains the $5.7 billion dollars he would like for the wall and temporary protections for undocumented immigrants. However, these protections do not provide a permanent solution or a path to citizenship. Trump also included an offer that would allow Central American minors to apply for asylum through their home countries rather than at the border. However, Trump’s proposal also eliminates automatic court hearings for these minors which would make deporting them easier.

Senate Republicans will need at least seven Democrats to support Trump’s proposal, however Democratic leaders have made it clear that they will never fund a border wall and do not trust Trump to permanently provide protections for undocumented immigrants. Polls show that a majority of Americans also oppose funding a border wall or increased border security—even if it means the government will reopen.

In what has been the longest government shutdown in history, IRS employees have now been given permission to skip work—which will impact tax refunds, the FDA has stopped inspecting food, major airports have had to close terminals, and national parks have been open without staff which has resulted in trash pile up, trees being cut down, injuries, and even several deaths.

 

Media Resources: USA Today 1/22/19; NBC News 1/22/19; USA Today 1/23/19; Vox 1/19/19; Politico 1/23/19; Washington Post 1/22/19; USA Today 1/14/19; Washington Post 1/5/19

Supreme Court Announces Trump Transgender Military Ban can Immediately take effect

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

The Supreme Court announced this morning that the Trump administrations’ ban on transgender military service can immediately take effect, impacting over 9,000 Service members, but the Supreme Court declined hear arguments regarding the ban’s constitutionality. Appeals to lower courts will continue but the Supreme Court issued a stay of lower courts’ injunctions which prevented the policy from being implemented when it was tweeted in 2017.

In a 5-4 vote, the more liberal Supreme Court Justices all voted against granting the stay, while Chief Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh voted to immediately implement the ban. The Supreme Court decided against hearing arguments as to whether the ban was constitutional but multiple lower courts have ruled that the policy is most likely unconstitutional.

On January 3rd, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit reversed an injunction against the implementation of the policy. This ruling did not immediately go into effect because there were multiple district court injunctions. However, the Supreme Court ruling halts the enforcement of all injunctions. This is the first time Trump’s transgender ban will be allowed to go into full effect.

In July 2017, Trump tweeted, “After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept nor allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military;” this tweet surprised the Pentagon and was later officially released by former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis. While Trump’s initially tweet alludes to an outright ban of Transgender individuals from military service, the official policy from Mattis bans individuals from military service if they have transitioned and if they have a condition known as gender dysphoria.

A 2016 Obama administration policy first allowed transgender individuals to serve and transgender individuals have been able to join the military since 2018. Trump administration officials have repeatedly emphasized their concern over the effects transgender troops serving openly might have on health care costs within and the “readiness and lethality” of the military. A 2016 RAND Corporation study commissioned by the Defense Department concluded that letting these troops serve openly would have a “minimal impact” on readiness and health care costs, largely because there are so few in the military’s 1.3 million-member force.

Specifically, the study estimates that total costs for hormone treatment and gender transition surgery could range from $2.4 to $8.4 million, an amount which would also represent “an exceedingly small proportion” of total military health care expenditures, which amount to more than $50 billion dollars per year, including $84 million a year on erectile dysfunction medications.

Media Resources: Buzzfeed News 1/22/19; CNN 1/22/19; Feminist Newswire 7/26/17; Forbes 3/12/12; The RAND Corporation 2016

Government Shutdown Now at 32nd Day, Impacting Federal Workers

Posted on by Feminist Newswire

On Saturday, during a White House address, President Trump stated he would grant a temporary three-year protection for Deferred Action For Child Arrivals (DACA) immigrants from deportation, without a pathway to citizenship, in exchange for $5.7 billion to fund a permanent wall on the U.S. – Mexico border. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced he would put Trump’s proposition into a bill and present it to the floor by the end of the week, despite refusing to allow any funding bills from the House onto the Senate floor. Democratic leaders consider the plan “dead on arrival” because of the temporary and limited protections for DACA recipients. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated that “the [Trump’s] proposal does not include the permanent solution for the Dreamers and TPS recipients that our country needs and supports.”

Last Thursday, the State Department called for employees to report back during the government shutdown and proclaimed they will be paid for a minimum of one pay period. However, the employees will not be paid for work done so far, until appropriations bills are passed. The deputy undersecretary of management, Bill Todd, declared that the department is attempting to make funds available to pay employee salaries.

As the government shutdown continues into its 32nd day, 800,000 federal workers are still without pay ad last week received $0.00 paychecks. The House Democratic leadership has put forth and voted on bills to cease the partial government shut down that Mitch McConnell refuses to bring to a vote in the Senate. Despite the Democrats proposal of granting $1.3 billion towards stricter border security, President Trump refuses to accept anything other than his desired $5.7 billion Democrats are eager to end the shutdown, but are firm in their refusal to sacrifice billions of dollars for Trump’s wall. There seems to be no end in sight for the government shutdown.

Federal workers are now motivated to look for new, or second jobs. However, not all federal workers are able to leave their current positions despite the government shutdown. Employees deemed indispensable are obligated to continue working without pay or risk losing their jobs. However, unlike civilian federal employees, Coast Guard members may face criminal charges for being absent without approved leave. In the early stages of the shut down late last year, the White House gathered money together to payroll federal workers, including Coast Guard members, but no funds remain to do so this year. If funding is not sorted by February, over 50,000 Coast Guard retirees could see their pensions held up. Working without being paid puts the livelihoods of federal employees at stake, whether financial or otherwise, as many federal workers may no longer be able to afford their daily expenses.

Media Resources: NBC News 1/19/19; Politico 1/17/19; The Wall Street Journal 1/16/19; New
York Times 1/14/19; Feminist News 1/9/19

>