Migration Category: news-10001-15000-national

I will never forget the day in 1981 that I asked Betty Ford to be an honorary co-chair with Alan Alda of the Equal Rights Amendment Countdown Campaign. I thought it would be a long, involved process. But she said almost immediately that she would be honored to do so.

At the time Betty Ford, the wife of former President Gerald Ford, was one of the most admired women in the United States. She also was completely unpretentious. If she could help women win full equal rights with men under the U.S. Constitution, Betty Ford wanted to give it her all. Read the rest of “Betty Ford, Champion of Women’s Rights” by Eleanor Smeal at CNN.com.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), and The Southern Poverty Law Center, joined by a coalition of other civil and human rights groups, recently filed a lawsuit against an Alabama anti-immigration law, scheduled to take effect in September. The law requires that state law enforcement officials “stop, question, and detain” any person who they have a “reasonable suspicion” is undocumented.

The law also requires parents and students in primary and secondary schools prove their immigration status to the schools with affidavits. Public schools in Alabama must then publish figures on the numbers of immigrants who are enrolled in schools, as well as any additional costs to the school due to the education of undocumented immigrant children. Moreover, the law bars undocumented immigrants from enrolling in any public college after high school and makes it a crime to rent housing to undocumented immigrants.

Cecilia Wang, the director of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, stated, “Alabama has brazenly enacted this law despite the fact that federal courts have stopped each and every one of these discriminatory laws from going into effect. Local Alabama communities and people across the country are shocked and dismayed by the state’s effort to erode our civil rights and fundamental American values. Just as we’ve stopped similar draconian laws in Arizona, Utah, Indiana, and Georgia from going into effect, we will do so here in Alabama as well.”

A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit voted 2-1 to strike down the anti-affirmative action provision of the Michigan Constitution. That provision, which was passed in a 2006 referendum, banned any preferences on the basis of ethnicity, sex, or race, particularly affecting admissions policies at state universities. This decision overturned Article I, Section 26 of the Michigan Constitution. Other states, including Arizona, California, Nebraska and Washington, have similar bans.

The 2006 referendum, also known as the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI), was designed to “sound as if it advocated equal opportunity for minorities and women seeking public employment, public contracts or admission to public universities. In fact, it did away with programs created to support equal opportunity,” as the Lansing State Journal described the initiative. Many reports on this ruling, and on the MCRI itself, fail to note that it also prohibits sex-based affirmative action, such as public school efforts to engage more girls in science and mathematics.

The passage of that referendum with 58 percent of the vote was an enormous loss for defenders of affirmative action, as well as for universities that are deeply impacted by the ban, like the University of Michigan. Following the referendum, the percentage of underrepresented minority students admitted to Michigan’s freshman class dropped from 12.6 percent in the 2005 to 9.1 percent in 2008. In 2010, a class action lawsuit was filed against a similar California anti-affirmative action measure, Proposition 209, by the same Michigan-based group that brought the successful Michigan suit, arguing that the measure negatively affected the numbers of minority students, particularly at UCLA and Berkeley.

The dissenting judge and lone Republican appointee on the Sixth Circuit panel, Judge Julia Smith Gibbons, noted that the referendum actually overturned a decision that had been made by academics (i.e. admissions policies), not a political decision. She stated “Michigan has chosen to structure its university system such that politics plays no part in university admissions at all levels within its constitutionally created universities. The Michigan voters have therefore not restructured the political process in their state by amending their state constitution; they have merely employed it.”

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette announced that he will appeal the ruling because “MCRI embodies the fundamental premise of what America is all about: equal opportunity under the law. Entrance to our great universities must be based upon merit, and I will continue the fight for equality, fairness and rule of law.” Critics of affirmative action expect the decision to be overturned by the full Sixth Circuit, which contains a substantial majority of conservative judges.

Planned Parenthood of Arizona has won a temporary victory over new state laws restricting access to mifepristone, also known as RU-486 or the “abortion pill.” The two statutes would have taken effect on July 20, requiring the pill to be administered by a doctor rather than a nurse practitioner.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Richard Gama put enforcement of the laws on hold pending an August 22 hearing on a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood, which argues that the laws deny mifepristone users equal protection and violate privacy rights explicitly granted by the Arizona constitution.

“This is about women accessing basic health care that has been provided safely for over a decade by nurse practitioners and physicians assistants with no evidence, no medical evidence, that that situation needs to change,” said Bryan Howard, president of Planned Parenthood of Arizona. He added that the restrictions would make it impossible for Planned Parenthood to provide mifepristone in Flagstaff, Prescott and Yuma, where its offices are staffed only by nurse practitioners.

An activist group says it has collected 10,000 signatures demanding that state Supreme Court Justice David Prosser resign after fellow Justice Ann Walsh Bradley accused him of grabbing her neck in a chokehold. “Prosser took his bullying to a new level of unacceptable conduct and now he must go,” said One Wisconsin Now Executive Director Scot Ross in a statement. “There is no excuse for David Prosser’s conduct and the people of Wisconsin are demanding he resign.”

Meanwhile, women’s groups and some female elected officials are calling on the judge to at least go on leave while he is under investigation. “Somebody who has been potentially victimized in the workplace certainly deserves to be safe and not in the same workplace working alongside the person accused of assaulting them,” said Lisa Subeck, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Wisconsin and a member of the Madison City Council, in a press release Tuesday.

Justice Bradley alleged Prosser “put his hands around my neck in anger in a chokehold” last month while she was “demanding that he get out of my office following a disagreement about labor issues.” Two investigations of the incident are ongoing, one by the Dane County sheriff’s office and another by the Wisconsin Judicial Commission.

This is not the first time Prosser’s behavior toward the women he works with been called into question. In April, Prosser issued a public apology after e-mails released to the Journal Sentinel revealed that he had called Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson a “bitch” and threatened “to destroy her.”

Yesterday Governor Bobby Jindal (R) signed a law requiring that clinics providing abortion services post signs indicating that a woman cannot be forced to obtain an abortion and that her partner is legally obligated to pay child support. The signs must also state that services are available to help women during and following their pregnancies and that adoptive parents may be able to offer financial assistance with the pregnancy, regardless of whether or not that statement is true.

Planned Parenthood indicated that it opposes language that “urges (a woman) to consult an independent physician about the risks of abortion to [her] physical and psychological well-being.” Planned Parenthood, which does not operate in Louisiana, vocally opposed the law stating that it patronizes women and compromises the doctor-patient relationship.

The law also requires that abortion providers notify women about a biased state Department of Health and Hospitals “abortion alternatives” website that includes information about adoption services, so-called crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs), which do not offer women neutral or comprehensive medical advice. The website also includes statements about so-called fetal pain, which has been discredited by medical experts

According the Guttmacher Spring 2011 Policy Review, family planning services are indispensable for many women, particularly marginalized populations like poor and low-income women.

In “The Numbers Tell the Story: The Reach and Impact of Title X,” Susan Cohen states as a result of the federal Title X family planning program, which subsidizes contraceptive services and provides support to create and sustain the large network of health centers, there are fewer teenage pregnancies and abortions, which saves both the federal government and the states billions of dollars in medical costs that would have been paid for by Medicaid. Cohan contends that “it’s completely irresponsible and illogical that the House of Representatives voted to defund Title X…Title X is precisely the kind of government program that should be strengthened, not gutted.”

According to “The Role of Family Planning Centers as Gateways to Health Coverage and Care,” written by Rachel Benson Gold, family planning centers provide services to more than 7 million women per year, boosting maternal and newborn health, lowering the rate of unplanned births and abortions, and providing sexual health care, as well as contraceptive services. Moreover, one in four women who obtain contraceptive services do so at one of the 8,000 publicly funded centers.

These centers provide an avenue into the US health care system for women who may not have another outlet for medical care, as 60 percent of women who receive care at a family planning center say it is also their primary source of medical care.

US District Court Judge Carlos Murguia blocked a law that would have shut down all but one abortion provider, Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, in the state. Murguia said there was evidence the clinics would “suffer irreparable harm” by being forced to close, and questioned whether the rules “rationally related” to patient health.

The law requires that abortion providers be licensed by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, which is authorized to regulate buildings and equipment for abortion clinics and to conduct inspections of the clinics twice yearly. The new regulations were sent out in mid-June by Governor Sam Brownback’s administration to abortion providers, which were then required to comply by July 1. The list of requirements is approximately 36 pages and stipulates hundreds of details including the minimum square footage of janitors’ closets and the temperature range for procedure and recovery rooms (68 to 73 degrees and 70 to 75 degrees, respectively).

Anti-Abortion activists in Kansas have not slowed in their effort to impose a de facto ban on abortion. Kansas Coalition for Life started collecting signatures on a petition Tuesday calling for a special session of the legislature to prohibit abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detectable. Since that happens at around the seventh week, when many women do not even know they are pregnant yet, the law would directly challenge the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which allows women to obtain abortion services until fetal viability at 22-24 weeks.

Today Federal District Court Judge Same Sparks is scheduled to hear arguments in a case filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) on behalf of Texas medical providers challenging Texas’ new abortion ultrasound law. The law, scheduled to take effect September 1, requires that women seeking abortion services forced to obtain and view an ultrasound.

The Center for Reproductive Rights claims that the law violates patients’ and doctors’ First Amendment Rights by requiring “physicians to violate basic standards of medical ethics by compelling them to disregard the wishes of patients who do not want to receive this information.” Bebe Anderson, lead attorney from CRR stated that the law is “most definitely the most extreme of this kind in the country. [It is] an intrusive hijacking of the doctor-patient relationship.”

The law requires that doctors show the woman the ultrasound. If the woman refuses to view the image, the doctor must describe it in detail and play the sound of the fetal heartbeat, if a heartbeat is present. Following the ultrasound, the woman must then wait a 24 hour period before obtaining an abortion. Women who live over 100 miles away from an abortion provider would only be required to wait two hours.

US District Court Judge Karen Schreier blocked a law in South Dakota requiring that women undergo a 72 hour waiting period and mandatory counseling from a crisis pregnancy center (CPC) before obtaining an abortion. Schreier’s preliminary injunction will prevent the law, scheduled to take effect July 1, from becoming effective while it is being challenged in court. Attorneys from Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed the lawsuit in late May against the law.

Judge Schreier found the provision requiring that women receive counseling at a CPC was likely unconstitutional, stating, “Forcing a woman to divulge to a stranger at a pregnancy help center the fact that she has chosen to undergo an abortion humiliates and degrades her as a human being. The woman will feel degraded by the compulsive nature of the Pregnancy Help Center requirements, which suggest that she has made the ‘wrong’ decision, has not really ‘thought’ about her decision to undergo an abortion or is ‘not intelligent enough’ to make the decision with the advice of a physician.”

South Dakota is the first state in the country to mandate a 72 hour waiting period, although 25 states currently require a 24 hour waiting period. If the law takes effect, women seeking abortions could have to make multiple trips to South Dakota’s only abortion provider in Sioux Falls.

Currently, there are an estimated 3,500 CPCs nationwide, most of which are affiliated with one or more national umbrella organizations. CPCs often pose as comprehensive health centers and offer “free” pregnancy tests. Some CPCs coerce and intimidate women out of considering abortion as an option, and do not offer women neutral or comprehensive medical advice. Often CPCs are run by anti-abortion zealots who are not licensed medical professionals.

Kansas has closed two of its three abortion providers after they failed to comply with a long list of arbitrary and hastily-imposed state regulations for abortion providers. The third provider, run by Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, received a last-minute approval after initially being told that it too had been denied a license.

The Center for Women’s Health, operated by Dr. Herbert Hodes, Md and his daughter, Dr. Tracie Nauser, MD, is in court today seeking an injunction in an effort to keep their medical practice (which has been operating over 30 years at the same site in Kansas City) open. Dr. Hodes and Dr. Nauser in a long interview last night on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show said they were given the new regulations on June 13. They then submitted their application for a license on June 14. One June 20, they were given new architectural regulations, issued not by the Department of Health but by the Attorney General. They considered these “sham” regulations and “restrictions no one could comply with.” In the words of Dr. Nauser, “[they are] trying to keep the Kansas legislature and Brownback out of women’s uteruses and lives.”

As a result of a new state law, signed by Governor Sam Brownback (R) in May, abortion providers must now be licensed by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, which is authorized to regulate buildings and equipment for abortion clinics and to conduct inspections of the clinics twice yearly. The new regulations were sent out in mid-June by Brownback’s administration to abortion providers, which were then required to comply by July 1. The list of requirements is approximately 36 pages and stipulates hundreds of details including the minimum square footage of janitors’ closets and the temperature range for procedure and recovery rooms (68 to 73 degrees and 70 to 75 degrees, respectively).

Milwaukee public schools sent layoff notices to 519 public school employees, including 354 teachers yesterday. Superintendent Gregory Thornton attributes the layoffs to the $84 million cut to Milwaukee public schools in the two-year state budget, which Republican Governor Scott Walker signed last weekend. The budget cuts will amount to approximately $200 less per student in the school district.

Dr. Thornton said in a press statement, “This is a difficult time for the employees affected, for their families, for the City of Milwaukee, and for us. We are losing good people.” He indicated that the cuts will likely result in larger class sizes and the use of older textbooks. The district also cut school summer options and halted all “noncritical” building maintenance.

At a press conference, Thornton issued a request that members of the Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association contribute 5.8 percent to their annual pensions. Bob Peterson, president of the Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association, indicated the group’s opposition to this.

According to a study done by Sian Cutris et. al. of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill entitled “Contraceptive Discontinuation and Unintended Pregnancy: An Imperfect Relationship,” more than 40 percent of women in six developing countries – Bangladesh, the Dominican Republic, Kazakhstan, Kenya, the Philippines and Zimbabwe – discontinue use of their contraceptive method within one year. The study, published in International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, found that the three most common reasons for contraception discontinuation in each country were the desire to get pregnant, contraceptive failure, and side effects.

The researchers propose that increasing the proportion of couples who successfully use a contraceptive method or switch to a successful method is critical in preventing unintended births, as well as reducing induced abortions. The study recommends that in order to keep the unintended pregnancy rate low, it is necessary to identify women who want to avoid an unintended pregnancy and help them to continue to use a contraceptive method successfully.

Today, 12 jurors in Charlotte, N.C., found anti-abortion extremist leader Flip Benham guilty of criminally stalking a Charlotte-area physician who performs abortions. This is the second time Benham, who is director of Operation Rescue/Operation Save America, was convicted for conduct that caused a person to fear for their safety or the safety of their family.

“For too long, Benham and his organization have been able to stalk and terrorize abortion providers and their families with impunity,” said duVergne Gaines, legal coordinator for the Feminist Majority Foundation, who attended the 5-day trial. “They have distributed WANTED posters and engaged in other outrageous conduct in an attempt to intimidate doctors out of providing safe, legal abortions for women here in Charlotte,” continued Gaines.

“This trial and its outcome are important,” said Katherine Spillar, executive vice president of the Feminist Majority Foundation. “We hope this verdict will encourage other district attorneys and the Department of Justice to prosecute extremists who, like Benham, are terrorizing abortion doctors across the country,” continued Spillar.

In addition to the guilty verdict, the Judge entered an extensive protective order preventing Benham from entering the residential community where the doctor lives, and from coming within 500 feet of the doctor’s office and the two women’s health clinics where he performs abortions. Additionally, Benham is prevented from contacting in any manner the doctor and his family, and from publishing WANTED posters or other materials, including on his website or online, that reference the doctor or his home or office address. Benham has entered a notice of appeal of the verdict. However the protective order will remain in force until the appeal is heard.

See the press release for more information.

Catherine Ferguson Academy announced Thursday just hours before a scheduled protest of its proposed closing that its doors will remain open. After an order by Detroit Public Schools’ Emergency Manager, the Catherine Ferguson Academy (CFA) was set to permanently close today, June 17. CFA is a high school for pregnant teens and young mothers and is one of only three like it in the country. It boasts a graduation rate of 90% with all graduates continuing on to college. Established in 1986, CFA also provides early education and day care. The young women maintain a farm on school grounds and receive parenting classes as well as support to graduate and continue with higher education.

The school is now set to become a charter school and was purchased yesterday by Evans Solutions. Blair Evans, who runs the charter, promises to keep all programs intact. Two other public schools were purchased by the company, while seven public schools had to close permanently.

In April, Detroit’s Emergency Financial Manager, Roy Roberts, called for closure of the school, along with 17 others. Facing a $327 million deficit, Detroit Public School were targeted for budget-saving measures. On Friday, April 15, several students were arrested while peacefully occupying the school after hours in protest.

According to Principal Asenath Andrews, there has been tremendous support from the community in Detroit “I am overwhelmed with relief that I didn’t have to start over,” Andrews said. Later, she told students and staff at the school: “I want to give credit to everybody. … This school will be available to girls in the future.”

Not all supporters of Catherine Ferguson are happy about the school’s chartering. Some teachers say that because they will no longer be a part of the teacher’s union, they may no longer be able to afford to continue teaching there. Detroit school board member Elena Herrada said “This could have been left a public school if they hadn’t let so much money go out over the years. The fact is we shouldn’t be celebrating this.”

Despite two recent scandals involving child sex abuse by priests, the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops voted to make only minor changes to the church’s abuse policies at a gathering in Bellevue, Washington on Thursday.

“The changes are paltry, belated and largely insignificant,” David Clohessy, Executive Director of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, told Reuters before the vote.

“Unfortunately, like almost everything the hierarchy does on abuse, there are no penalties whatsoever for ignoring or concealing child sex crimes. Bishops continue to try to depict this crisis as being isolated cases in isolated places, rather than what it is: a truly widespread, ongoing crisis.”

The church adopted the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People in 2002 after a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation by the Boston Globe uncovered a long history of abuse and cover-ups by the Catholic hierarchy. More than 5,000 priests in the US have been accused of sex crimes involving children, according to BishopAccountability.org.

Earlier this month a bishop in Kansas City apologized to parishioners for failing to take action against a priest suspected of sexual improprieties. Rev. Shawn Ratigan was arrested on May 19 on child pornography charges. A Catholic school principal had sent a memo to diocesan officials detailing her concerns about Ratigan a year before. In Philadelphia, a grand jury accused Cardinal Justin Rigali of allowing at least 37 priests accused of improprieties to remain in the ministry. Both church leaders failed to report the allegations to sex abuse “review boards” set up under the 2002 rules.

The New York State assembly approved a same-sex marriage bill on Wednesday and is likely to face a vote in the Senate on Friday. Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) introduced the bill where the Assembly voted 80-63 in favor of the marriage equality bill. The bill faces a much closer vote in the Senate, where support from only one more senator is necessary for it to pass. The state Senate had rejected a similar bill in 2009.

The bill, called the Marriage Equality Act, would grant same-sex couples the right to marry “as well as hundreds of rights, benefits and protections that are currently limited to married couples of the opposite sex,” according to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office. New York does not currently grant same-sex marriages, though a 2008 appellate court upheld the right of same-sex marriages to be recognized if they are performed in other states. A recent Siena poll found that 58% of New Yorkers support same-sex marriage. Assemblyman Charles Lavine, a Democrat who voted in favor of legalizing gay marriage, said “Only second-class states have second-class citizens.”

Same-sex marriage licenses are currently granted by five states – Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire – and the District of Columbia, and several other states allow civil unions. The issue is also currently being debated in California and New Jersey.

Yesterday the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4 to 3 to overturn Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi’s decision to strike down a state law limiting the collective bargaining power of public sector unions to negotiate for benefits, hours, and working conditions. The state Supreme Court ruled that the state Legislature had not violated the Wisconsin Constitution.

The Wisconsin AFL-CIO issued a statement against the ruling: “The inability of the Wisconsin Supreme Court to separate partisan politics from the well-being of Wisconsinites is the latest indication that citizens do not have a voice in the state.”

In May, Sumi stated in her decision that Republican lawmakers violated the Wisconsin Open Public Meetings Law requiring that 24 hours’ notice be given prior to a meeting. At the time, the Republican senators voted in conference to strip the House bill of its spending measures to bypass the Senate 60 percent quorum. The Republican senators then voted 18-1, with only Republicans voting because, in protest, the Democrat senators left the state in an effort to prevent the vote.

Yesterday the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a federal class action lawsuit on behalf of Texas medical providers challenging Texas’ new abortion ultrasound law, which requires that women seeking abortion services obtain and view an ultrasound. The Center for Reproductive Rights claims that the law violates patients’ and doctors’ First Amendment Rights by requiring “physicians to violate basic standards of medical ethics by compelling them to disregard the wishes of patients who do not want to receive this information.”

The law requires that doctors show the woman the ultrasound. If the woman refuses to view the image, the doctor must describe it in detail and play the sound of the fetal heartbeat, if a heartbeat is present. Following the ultrasound, the woman must then wait a 24 hour period before obtaining an abortion. Women who live over 100 miles away from an abortion provider would only be required to wait two hours.

Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, stated, “This law barges in on the doctor-patient relationship. When you go to the doctor, you expect to be given information that is relevant to your particular medical decision and circumstances, not to be held hostage and subjected to an anti-choice agenda…This law is patronizing to women in Texas. It is based on outdated stereotypes that women are too immature or too incompetent to make important decisions.”

In Vermillion Parish, Louisiana, the school board voted unanimously to end a program at Rene Rost Middle School (RRMS) that separated girls and boys in core curriculum classes for the past two years. The school board announced that because not enough parents had enrolled their children in single-sex classes, it would discontinue the program. The school board’s decision came just as the ACLU was about to file with the District Court to suspend the program on the grounds that RRMS lacked adequate justification for segregating students by sex and violated Title IX, a law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in all levels of education.

ACLU of Louisiana Executive Director Marjorie Esman clarified, “The law is clear that educational opportunities for students cannot be determined by gender without an exceedingly persuasive justification. Just as students may not be divided by race, they must not be forced into sex-segregated classes, because equal opportunity means that all must be treated equally.”

In 2009, the ACLU Women’s Rights Project, the ACLU of Louisiana, and the law firm of Debevoise and Plimpton filed a lawsuit in Vermilion Parish on behalf of two girls placed in sex-segregated classes at Rost against their parents’ wishes. The Feminist Majority Foundation is currently working to rescind the 2006 Bush-era Title IX regulations that make it significantly easier to allow single-sex classrooms in public schools (pdf).