HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » StarfishSaver » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 117 Next »

StarfishSaver

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Apr 22, 2019, 03:26 PM
Number of posts: 18,486

Journal Archives

A simple guide to Manchin's voting rights proposal

https://twitter.com/votesaveamerica/status/1405668016751263745
Posted by StarfishSaver | Thu Jun 17, 2021, 07:43 PM (32 replies)

NYT: Garland ends Trump-era policy limiting asylum for victims of domestic abuse and gang violence

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland on Wednesday reversed a Trump-era immigration ruling that made it all but impossible for people to seek asylum in the United States over credible fears of domestic abuse or gang violence, marking one of the Justice Department’s most significant breaks with the previous administration.

Mr. Garland vacated a decision made in 2018 by former Attorney General Jeff Sessions that had argued that asylum claims had incorrectly expanded to include victims of “private violence,” like domestic violence or gangs.

People fleeing persecution on account of their membership in a “particular social group” can seek asylum in the United States, and previous administrations have considered those fleeing domestic abuse and gang violence to fall under that definition. In vacating the Trump administration’s stance, Mr. Garland said that the Justice Department should follow the earlier precedent.

His decision came in a closely watched case known as A-B for the initials of the woman seeking asylum. The department’s Board of Immigration Appeals found in 2016 that she was part of a particular social group, saying that the government of El Salvador does little to protect people in violent relationships. That assessment qualified the woman for asylum, but Mr. Sessions overruled the appeals board.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/16/us/politics/justice-dept-asylum-gangs-domestic-abuse.html
Posted by StarfishSaver | Wed Jun 16, 2021, 05:24 PM (3 replies)

Biden Education Dept. reverses Trump transgender discrimination policy

Title IX Protections Extend to Transgender Students, Education Dept. Says

A year after the Supreme Court ruled that protections in the Civil Rights Act against discrimination in the workplace extended to gay and transgender people, the Education Department plans to say on Wednesday that it has interpreted the ruling to mean that those protections also extend to students.

The department will say that discrimination against gay and transgender students is prohibited under Title IX, a 1972 law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in federally funded schools. The law has become a political cudgel in the culture wars over sex and education.

“We just want to double down on our expectations,” Miguel A. Cardona, the education secretary, said in an interview. “Students cannot be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation or their gender identity.”

The Education Department’s interpretation of Title IX is the opposite of the stance taken by the Trump administration, which maintained that transgender students were not entitled to protections and threatened last year to withhold federal aid from schools that allowed transgender athletes to participate in scholastic sports. During the last weeks of the Trump administration, the Education Department issued guidance saying that the Supreme Court ruling did not offer transgender students protections.

Since Inauguration Day, the Biden administration has conducted a sweeping effort to rescind, revise or revoke a number of Trump-era policies that rolled back transgender rights. The Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, the Justice Department and the Department of Health and Human Services have all issued guidance affirming the rights of transgender Americans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/16/us/politics/title-ix-transgender-students.html?smid=url-share
Posted by StarfishSaver | Wed Jun 16, 2021, 01:10 PM (0 replies)

Another simple but excellent way to understand what "white privilege' is.



"Privilege isn't the presence of perks and benefits. It's the absence of obstacles and barriers. That's a lot harder to notice. If you have a hard time recognizing your privilege, focus on what you don't have to go through. Let that fuel your empathy and action."

A few days ago, this board was inundated with people demanding Garland and DOJ DO something!!!

But now that they're DOING something, the board is filled with shrugs and lots of "So what? It's not going to make any difference" and "I'll believe it when I see it" posts.

What's up with that?
Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jun 11, 2021, 09:48 PM (37 replies)

Right now, federal grand juries are investigating the insurrection

If one or more of them subpoenaed phone records of Marjorie Taylor Greene or Paul Gosar or other Republican Members as part of the investigation to determine whether they were involved in it, would anyone here want Apple or Google to refuse to comply?
Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jun 11, 2021, 06:08 PM (20 replies)

Giving a shout-out and a lot of love to Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Kristen Clarke

Kristen Clarke is a brilliant civil rights lawyer and activist who was confirmed and started working just two weeks ago. She promised to hit the ground running and it's clear that she did. It's also evident that AG Garland and other DOJ leadership made sure that Kristen was in place and fully involved before finalizing and announcing their plans to launch an all out fight to protect voting rights.

Thank you, Kristen Clarke, thank you, and thank you, AG Garland and President Biden for putting this amazing woman in charge of civil rights at DOJ!


Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jun 11, 2021, 05:10 PM (4 replies)

Merrick Garland just annouced DOJ is going to war on voting rights

Apple isn't the bad guy in the Trump spying scandal

Some have been going after Apple for turning over phone records of the Congresspersons the Trump DOJ investigated, suggesting that they should have refused and their failure to refuse suggests complicity.

However, this was not a case of Apple just docilely going along with an obviously corrupt request. In this instance, Apple was served with a grand jury subpoena, something very different than a simple request. Grand jury subpoenas are serious things and failure to comply can result in criminal sanctions, including immediate incarceration for contempt of court.

In addition, they were placed under a gag order, which prohibited them from speaking publicly or disclosing anything about the subpoenas. Defiance of that order would also result in criminal penalties.

Moreover, Apple had no way of knowing what the purpose of the subpoenas was or whether or not the investigation was legal or appropriate or not. It was not within their ability or right to question - or to even know - the nature, purpose or target of the underlying investigation.

Put the shoe on the other foot. Current investigations are ongoing into Trump's criminality and surely the grand jury is issuing subpoenas for testimony and records. It's possible that telephone service providers have been ordered by the grand jury to turn over phone records of various people being investigated. If Verizon received a subpoena to disclose Devin Nunes' or Jared Kushner's phone records in connection with a grand jury investigation into their activities, would you want Verizon to refuse to turn them over or to publicly reveal the request or to disclose the subpoenas to Nunes and Kushner what was going on?

Apple was not the bad guy here. All of the blame and responsibility are solely on Trump and his henchmen. Let's keep the focus on them.
Posted by StarfishSaver | Fri Jun 11, 2021, 10:12 AM (46 replies)

Anybody actually believe the Trump DOJ wasn't also spying on Republican lawmakers?

I definitely don't.

That sure helps explain a lot ...
Posted by StarfishSaver | Thu Jun 10, 2021, 09:52 PM (9 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 117 Next »