Civil Rights Lawyers • Pennsylvania • New Jersey

In Texas, You Get Capital Punishment for Being Black

admin — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:58:10 +0000

Duane Buck is a convicted murderer. The jury did not doubt that he killed his ex-girlfriend and another man; crimes for which they convicted him and subsequently sentenced him to death for committing. The legal question that went all the way on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was not whether or not Buck deserves to be executed for the crimes he committed, but does he deserve to be executed because he is black?

Texas has an unusual provision in its sentencing laws: jurors are required to consider whether a convicted murderer would post a future danger if only sentenced to life imprison; and if so, then they must consider the death penalty.

Jurors were told by a psychologist, and reminded by the prosecutor, that Buck, who had no previous history of violence, posed a future danger to society because he is black, that, “blacks posed more of a danger than whites,” and the jury sentenced him to death based on the “race card.”

Texas Governor Rick Perry refused to stay the execution so an emergency appeal went to the U.S. Supreme Court. Perry, under his 11 years in office has carried out 235 executions, defended his position: “the state of Texas has a very thoughtful, very clear process in place.”

The U.S. Supreme Court felt differently, and ruled that a person cannot be executed based on their race. The ruling has stopped Texas officials from executing Buck, because racist information was cited in his sentencing; the death penalty was necessary to protect against future danger because he is black.

Since 2000, six black inmates on death row (including Buck) have appealed similar sentencing decisions and all but Buck were given new hearings. Former Texas Attorney General, John Cornyn, told the U.S. Supreme Court that Texas prosecutors had violated the civil rights of the six black inmates, by relying on race-based arguments to secure the death penalty in all six cases. All five who have now had new hearings have been resentenced to death.

The reprieve granted by the U.S. Supreme Court came only two hours into a six hour window when Buck could have been executed, but the reprieve comes only to allow Buck time for a new hearing. The Supreme Court’s decision will not stand in the way of Texas executing Buck should he, like the other five inmates who appealed, simply be resentenced to death at his new hearing.

Philly Man Falsely Accused of Rape Settles for $85k

admin — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 14:32:11 +0000

In August 2008, Eugene Robinson, a plumber in his late fifties returned home form work and was informed by his neighbors the police were looking for him. His photo and name also appeared in the “Week’s Most Wanted” section of the Philadelphia Daily News, stating he was wanted for rape. At the urging of a local politician and his own family, Robinson turned himself in, confident in his innocence, and believing he would be cleared of all charges.

But Robinson spent five months in jail for a crime he did not commit before police realized that they had made a very serious mistake: they had arrested the wrong man due to an oversight.

The real rape suspect, was also named Eugene (but who had a different last name) and, according to CNN, police did not double check the mug shot that was pulled for the rapist’s warrant.

Robinson, who had a mug on file due to an arrest for theft by deception, ended up spending eight additional months in jail because his incarceration caused him to fall behind on restitution payments. Further complicating his life, while incarcerated, he lost his job.

The city of Philadelphia has agreed to pay him $85,000 in a settlement for the police negligence that cost him eight months of freedom, his job, and his dignity.

EEOC Announces Changes in Regulations for the ADA Amendments Act

admin — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:55:08 +0000

PRESS RELEASE
3-24-11

EEOC Announces Final Bipartisan Regulations for the ADA Amendments Act

Regulations Implement Congressional Intent to Simplify Definition of Disability

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) final regulations to implement the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) are now available on the Federal Register website. Like the law they implement, the regulations are designed to simplify the determination of who has a “disability” and make it easier for people to establish that they are protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

“The ADAAA is a very important civil rights law,” said EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien. “The regulations developed by the Commission to implement the ADAAA clarify the requirements of the law for all stakeholders, which is one of the Commission’s most important responsibilities.”

“Based on the hard work we did at the Commission over the past months, I am confident that these regulations will work well for both people with disabilities and employers,” said Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who joined the EEOC in April, 2010. “It was our job as an agency to carry out the intent of this landmark law and I believe we have done so successfully.” Feldblum was one of the lead negotiators on the original ADA as well as on the Amendments Act.

“Just as the ADAAA was the result of a considerable bipartisan effort by Congress, the final rule represents a concerted effort of EEOC Commissioners representing both parties to arrive at regulations that hold true to that bipartisan Congressional intent,” said Commissioner Constance S. Barker. “I was pleased to have been able to vote in favor of the final rule.”

The ADAAA went into effect on Jan. 1, 2009. In the ADAAA, Congress directed the EEOC to revise its regulations to conform to changes made by the Act, and expressly authorized the EEOC to do so. The EEOC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on proposed implementing regulations on September 23, 2009, and received well over 600 public comments in response. The final regulations reflect the feedback the EEOC received from a broad spectrum of stakeholders.

The ADAAA overturned several Supreme Court decisions that Congress believed had interpreted the definition of “disability” too narrowly, resulting in a denial of protection for many individuals with impairments such as cancer, diabetes or epilepsy. The ADAAA states that the definition of disability should be interpreted in favor of broad coverage of individuals. The effect of these changes is to make it easier for an individual seeking protection under the ADA to establish that he or she has a disability within the meaning of the ADA.

The ADAAA and the final regulations keep the ADA’s definition of the term “disability” as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; a record (or past history) of such an impairment; or being regarded as having a disability. But the law made significant changes in how those terms are interpreted, and the regulations implement those changes.

Based on the statutory requirements, the regulations set forth a list of principles to guide the determination of whether a person has a disability. For example, the principles provide that an impairment need not prevent or severely or significantly restrict performance of a major life activity to be considered a disability. Additionally, whether an impairment is a disability should be construed broadly, to the maximum extent allowable under the law. The principles also provide that, with one exception (ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), “mitigating measures,” such as medication and assistive devices like hearing aids, must not be considered when determining whether someone has a disability. Furthermore, impairments that are episodic (such as epilepsy) or in remission (such as cancer) are disabilities if they would be substantially limiting when active.

The regulations clarify that the term “major life activities” includes “major bodily functions,” such as functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, and brain, neurological, and endocrine functions. The regulations also make clear that, as under the old ADA, not every impairment will constitute a disability. The regulations include examples of impairments that should easily be concluded to be disabilities, such as HIV infection, diabetes, epilepsy, and bipolar disorder.

Following the dictates of the ADAAA, the regulations also make it easier for individuals to establish coverage under the “regarded as” part of the definition of “disability.” Establishing such coverage used to pose significant hurdles, but under the new law, the focus is on how the person was treated rather than on what an employer believes about the nature of the person’s impairment.

The Commission has released two Question-and-Answer documents about the regulations to aid the public and employers – including small business – in understanding the law and new regulations. The ADAAA regulations, accompanying Question and Answer documents and a fact sheet are available on the EEOC website at www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adaaa_info.cfm.

The EEOC enforces the nation’s laws prohibiting employment discrimination. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov.

Top

N.J. Civil Rights division sues Ridgewood school over claims of student discrimination

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 08:50:50 +0000

Family files lawsuit against Ridgewood BOE for alleged student discrimination

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

BY KELLY EBBELS

The Ridgewood News

RIDGEWOOD — At the same high school that Tyler Clementi attended, the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights is suing the Ridgewood Board of Education over alleged sexual orientation discrimination against a student, according to a report on NorthJersey.com.

The lawsuit claims that a 16-year-old student faced months of bullying from both teachers and peers, including being asked by a teacher if he was out of the closet, and being told by another that homosexuality was caused by “abnormal genes,” the report said. An internal investigation last spring found that no staff member had done anything wrong, the school said.

Read Full Story

Race Discrimination Videos – Housing Discrimination Against Black Couple

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 08:12:00 +0000

Race Discrimination Videos – Black Couple Denied Home By White Couple

Video Title: Black Couple Denied Home By White Couple

Parental Advisory: Swearing.

News Story: A white couple who had trouble selling their home took it off the market when an African American couple offered them the highest bid. The realtor admitted that the white homeowners took the house off the market because they did not want to sell to a black family.

Racial Discrimination by Landlords and Homeowners

It is against the law for someone to refuse to rent or sell to you because of your gender, race or ethnicity. If you believe you were discriminated against and denied equal opportunities to housing, contact the civil rights lawyers of Hill & Associates, P.C. today for a free consultation to discuss your case.

We help victims of civil rights violations throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Top

Police Brutality Videos – John Compagne

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 06:56:08 +0000

Police Brutality Videos – Man Knocked Unconscious in Holding Cell

Video Title: Police Brutality in California, 03/18/2010

Viewer Caution: Violence.

This police brutality news video shows a Sacramento, California man, John Compagne, handcuffed and in custody in January 2009. A police officer in a holding cell slams his head into the wall knocking him unconscious. After reviewing the video, Sheriff John McGinness agreed that excessive force was used but defends the officer (who was disciplined) stating “there was never any intent to hurt Compagne,” and argued that the “suspect provoked the response,” calling the incident “unacceptable, but explainable.”

Pursue Your Rights that Police Have Tried to Deny You

Citizens should never have to live in fear of overzealous police officers. If you have been victimized by police brutality, contact our police brutality attorneys today for a free case evaluation with an attorney who cares. We represent people in Pennsylvania and New Jersey in cases involving excessive or deadly force by police officers.

Police Brutality Lawyers ● Pennsylvania ● New Jersey ● Toll Free 866-720-4699

Our Philadelphia, PA civil rights law firm litigates cases involving police brutality and police abuse of civilians and prison inmates throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey including the cities of Philadelphia, Doylestown, Media, West Chester, Norristown, Drexel Hill, King of Prussia, Darby, Sharon Hill, Bridgeport, Flourtown, Camden, Jersey City, Newark, and other communities in Bucks County, Montgomery County, Chester County, Delaware County and Camden County.

Top

Racial Profiling Videos – Harvard Professor Henry Gates Arrested

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 06:49:08 +0000

Racial Profiling Videos

Video Title: Do Police Use Racial Profiling?

This video cameos victims of racial profiling by police including Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr., who was arrested in his own home as a suspected burglar based on racial profiling.

Philadelphia, PA Civil Rights Attorney to Sue for Racial Profiling by Police

Police are not allowed to use racial profiling as a basis for stopping people. If you believe you were stopped, frisked, or subjected to invasive questions or vehicle search based on your race or ethnicity you may have a case. To find out, contact the civil rights lawyers of Hill & Associates, P.C. today for a free consultation to discuss your situation.

We help victims of civil rights violations throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

Top

Racial Profiling Video – Young Black Man Harassed by Police for No Reason

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 06:37:50 +0000

Racial Profiling Videos

Video Title: Police Racial Profiling Caught On Tape Detained and Searched For Not Saying Howdy?

Racial profiling by police caught on tape. A black man is harassed, threatened and roughed up by police outside his apartment based on racial profiling.

Racial Profiling by Police

If you were stopped and hassled or questioned by police based on your race or ethnicity you may be a victim of racial profiling. If you believe your civil rights were violated, contact our attorneys and share your story with us. We can advise you if your civil rights were violated and if you have a case.

We help victims of racial profiling by police in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Top

Racial Profiling Videos – Shopping While Black

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 05:38:57 +0000

Racial Profiling Shoppers

Video Title: What Would You Do? Racism In An Upscale Store

This video shows a staged experiment to demonstrate how discrimination in stores that profile minorities based on race is tolerated. Black shoppers are verbally insulted and harassed and frisked as other shoppers do little to protest or intervene. So common is the practice of racial profiling by stores that researchers have coined a new term, “Shopping While Black.”

Racial Profiling in Stores

If you were told to leave a store, following by store staff, questioned, or falsely accused of shop lifting because of your race or ethnicity you may be a victim of racial profiling. If you believe your civil rights were violated, contact our attorneys and share your story with us. We can advise you if your civil rights were violated and if you have a case.

We help victims of racial profiling in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Top

New Jersey Civil Rights Laws

admin — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 02:01:12 +0000

Laws in New Jersey to Prevent Discrimination in the Workplace

New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA)

Requires covered employers to grant eligible employees time off from work in connection with the birth or adoption of a child or the serious illness of a parent, child or spouse.

The New Jersey Equal Pay Act

Prohibits employers from discriminating against employees in any way in the rate or method of pay on the basis of the employee’s.

Conscientious Employee Protection Act

Prohibits employers from taking adverse employment actions against employees who disclose, object to, or refuse to participate in certain actions that the employee reasonably believes to be either illegal or in violation of public policy.

New Jersey Smoking Law

Provides that employers may not refuse to hire or otherwise discriminate against employees or job applicants because the individual does or does not smoke unless the action is related to the requirements of the job.

Domestic Partnership Act

The Domestic Partnership Act went into effect on July 10, 2004. It grants same sex couples who have entered into domestic partnerships and heterosexual couples over the age of 62 with protection under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. It also affords those covered with various tax, health, pension and retirement benefits.

New Jersey Civil Rights Act

Prohibits discrimination based upon an individual’s race, ancestry, national origin, marital status, color, creed, sex, or religion.

New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD)

Prohibits discrimination based upon an individual’s, age (if 18 or older), ancestry, sexual orientation, race, nationality, color, creed, religion, sex (gender), pregnant women, family or marital status, genetic information, atypical hereditary cellular or blood trait, physical or mental disability, or liability for services in the Armed Forces.

_{Sources: The New Jersey College and The New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety.}

Top