Accused of throwing a grenade that killed Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer and participating in a terrorist conspiracy beginning when he was only 10 years old, Khadr literally has grown up at Guantánamo. Now 23, the full beard Khadr has grown since his imprisonment in 2002 obscures the fact that he was only 15 at the time he was shot and captured by U.S. forces.

Khadr has now spent a third of his life at Guantánamo, and after five years in the discredited military commissions, his trial began today. Khadr faces charges of murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, providing material support to terrorism, and spying. He faces a maximum life sentence if convicted.

Khadr’s is the first trial in the illegitimate military commissions under President Obama. The trial of an alleged child soldier who was abused in U.S. detention is a terrible case for the administration to open with, and yet here we are, in the middle of jury selection.

Guantánamo’s youngest prisoner, Khadr is the only one of the 176 remaining detainees who was a juvenile when transferred here. A Canadian, he’s also the only Westerner remaining at Gitmo. Khadr’s case is also unique because it will be the first prosecution in history for murder in violation of the laws of war (murder isn’t a recognized war crime; like the charges of spying and material suppport for terrorism that Khadr also faces, the charge was fashioned out of whole cloth for the purposes of the military commissions).

Omar Khadr’s trial flies in the face of international law and policy that recognizes child soldiers as victims and candidates for rehabilitation. The U.N. Special Representative on Children in Armed Conflict said in a statement today that Khadr’s trial sets a dangerous precedent that could endanger child soldiers around the world. She also said “juvenile justice standards are clear—children should not be tried before military tribunals.”

Since World War II, there hasn’t been a war crimes prosecution of a child soldier—until today. And that’s not because children don’t commit war crimes. Children committed some of the most heinous abuses of the Sierra Leonean civil war in the 90′s, including murder, rape, and amputation of limbs. But the U.N. war court convened to prosecute those responsible for wartime atrocities chose not to prosecute anyone under 18 at the time of their crimes, and instead entered these child soldiers in rehabilitatation programs and used them as witnesses in the war crimes trials against the adults who recruited or used them during the war.

The former chief prosecutor of the Sierra Leonean war court, former Defense Department official David Crane, has said that Khadr’s trial is “morally and legally wrong.” Author Ishmael Beah, a former child soldier from Sierra Leone who, like Khadr, was captured when he was 15, has also criticized Khadr’s prosecution. Beah admits that during the civil war he killed “too many people to count,” but since a stint in a rehabilitation center he has written a best-selling memoir, graduated from Oberlin, and served as a UNICEF ambassador. Beah has said he struggles to understand the dramatic difference between the compassion shown him and the lack of compassion shown Khadr.

(Originally posted on Daily Kos.)

Related posts:

1. What We Stand For Yesterday was a stark reminder that instead of closing the...
2. Standing before history Royal Dutch Shell brought to New York court over rampant...
3. A Win Against Warrantless GPS Tracking On Friday, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of...

If we think about all the details of our lives that would be exposed by tracking all of our movements for the past month, it might seem obvious that the Fourth Amendment should protect our privacy in that information. The government had argued, however, that under a Supreme Court decision from over a quarter of a century ago in which the police used a primitive beeper to help them follow a car during a single trip between two locations, individuals never have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements on public streets.

In a friend-of-the-court brief, the ACLU of the National Capital Area and the Electronic Frontier Foundation argued that times and context have changed since then. The court agreed. The GPS technology that is now available permits the police to easily and inexpensively track people’s movements 24 hours a day for indefinite periods of time, allowing them to watch over the totality of people’s lives as they move from place, to place, to place. And by tracking many people and plotting their movements on a map — as is now technologically possible — the government could easily learn whose lives intersect with whose, and when and where. The resulting invasion of privacy is far greater than that from the visual surveillance practices of the past. It’s truly a specter of Big Brother.

Friday’s decision is important because it strikes the right balance between technological progress and privacy by requiring the police to obtain a warrant to use GPS devices — and its reasoning should apply also, for example, to cellular technology that the police can use to track people’s whereabouts using their cell phones. The decision also recognizes that the whole package of data about us implicates greater privacy interests than the sum of its parts. This is a significant victory for privacy in the digital age, where more and more pieces of information about us are available in the public sphere.

Related posts:

1. What We Stand For Yesterday was a stark reminder that instead of closing the...
2. Making History Khadr has now spent a third of his life at...

Monday was Day One of the sentencing hearing in the case of Sudanese detainee Ibrahim al-Qosi. Al-Qosi was the first detainee to be convicted under President Obama, in a plea deal entered this June in which he admitted to being an al Qaeda cook and occassional driver. Yesterday sawjury selection of senior military officers, who would deliver a formal sentence in al-Qosi’s case. If the jury delivers a sentence longer than what was agreed to in the plea bargin, it will be moot. Unless the jury delivers a shorter sentence, al-Qosi’s true sentence will be what was hammered out in the plea agreement.

But in an unprecedented move, military judge Air Force Lt. Col. Nancy Paul ordered today that al-Qosi’s true sentence will be kept secret until he’s released. The judge said the government requested that the sentence be kept secret.

A fellow observer of the military commissions here, former Marine judge and law of war expert Gary Solis, here to monitor the commissions for the National Institute for Military Justice, says he has participated in 700 courts-martial and has never heard of a secret sentence.

Last month, the Al-Arabiya satellite news network cited two sources who have seen the plea agreement and say the plea deal would cap al-Qosi’s sentence at two years (beyond the eight years he’s already served). I’ve heard speculation here at Gitmo that the reason for concealing al-Qosi’s sentence from the public is to prevent political attacks portraying the Obama administration as weak on terrorism before the November mid-term elections. (There have been only three other convictions by the military commissions — all under former President Bush — and two of the three have already been released. Former Guantánamo detainee Salim Hamdan’s 2008 sentence of five months on top of time served drew fierce criticism from some.)

This country deserves more than election-year charade, in which a jury delivers a show sentence and the true sentence is concealed from the public because some may perceive it as too lenient.

A final pretrial hearing also took place Monday in the case of Canadian Omar Khadr, who will start trial today as the first test trial of the military commissions under President Obama. In a summary decision of only a few words, and with no explanation, the military judge in Omar Khadr’s case, Col. Patrick Parrish, denied defense motions to exclude self-incriminating statements Khadr made to interrogators because of torture and other abuse. The judge will issue a written decision, certainly after the trial begins and possibly after it’s ended, but for now he’s offered no explanation.

It boggles the mind that the military judge could find that Khadr was not coerced and gave these statements to interrogators voluntarily. Khadr, then 15 years old, was taken to Bagram near death, after being shot twice in the back, blinded by shrapnel, and buried in rubble from a bomb blast. He was interrogated within hours, while sedated and handcuffed to a stretcher. He was threatened with gang rape and death if he didn’t cooperate with interrogators. He was hooded and chained with his arms suspended in a cage-like cell, and his primary interrogator was later court-martialed for detainee abuse leading to the death of a detainee. During his subsequent eight-year (so far) detention at Guantánamo, Khadr was subjected to the "frequent flyer" sleep deprivation program and he says he was used as a human mop after he was forced to urinate on himself.

In closing arguments before the judge’s ruling, Khadr’s sole defense lawyer, Lt. Col. Jon Jackson, told the judge, "Sir, be a voice today. Tell the world that we actually stand for what we say we stand for."

Though President Obama promised that coerced evidence would not be used against detainees in the military commissions, today’s ruling suggests that as a country, we stand for abusing a 15-year-old teenager into confessing, and using those confessions against him in an illegitimate proceeding.

Not just Omar Khadr, but also the United States, is on trial starting tomorrow. We should show the world that we can provide a fair trial to Omar Khadr, after what is known about what we’ve done to him. But that simply is not going to happen in a Guantánamo military commisison designed to ensure quick convictions at the expense of due process and transparency, and structured to prevent the revelation of abusive interrogations engaged in by the U.S. government.

(Originally posted on DailyKos.)

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this post stated that Gary Solis “presided over 700 courts-martial.” That was incorrect. Solis presided over 400 cases as a judge, but participated in 760 as a lawyer or judge.

Related posts:

1. Making History Khadr has now spent a third of his life at...
2. On New York’s new Islamic Center, I stand with Russell Simmons As you may have heard, an Islamic cultural center is...
3. A Win Against Warrantless GPS Tracking On Friday, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of...

Writing on Shalom Rav, a website run by his rabbi, Brant Rosen, Hamer says he immediately went to the school’s principal who set up an emergency meeting where he convinced the committee to move the prom, even though it meant giving up a $3,000 deposit. The students are making up the $3,000 through fundraisers. Hamer writes:

I proceeded to relay some facts: i.e. that Congress workers made $8.80 an hour with minimal benefits while the standard is now $13.20 with significant benefits. Also, I made it clear to the committee members that having prom at the Congress would misrepresent Northside as a place where liberal thinking and cultured morals abound.

And there was the practical matter that supporters of the workers might put up a big picket line at the hotel and that the pool of teacher chaperons would immediately diminish since the teachers, who belong to the largest union in the city, probably would not cross the picket line.

Why would a teenager, whose thoughts at this time of the year turn toward graduation and senior parties, think about a group of mostly immigrant hotel workers? Here’s Hamer’s answer:

Everything in my religious spirit, my religious being, tells me that to stand by while injustice occurs would be the wrong thing to do. Thankfully, the discussion …ended with the decision that our own financial burdens should never take precedence over the daily struggles of working class families that are less fortunate than we. When I got home I said the Shema (an affirmation of Judaism and a declaration of faith in God).

Hamer also is an alumnus of Or Tzedek , the teen social justice summer program of the Jewish Council on Urban Affairs.  At Or Tzedek, he engaged with a variety of social justice issues, learned about organizing and gained tools to create social change. Since that summer, he has been taken on many endeavors through Or Tzedek, including the Congress strike.

Hamer’s commitment to justice comes naturally from his faith and training. Rabbi Rosen says the Jewish religious tradition is “rife with imperatives about protecting workers, paying a fair living wage and making sure workers’ rights are protected.” He adds:

It is foundational to who we are. And one tenant of our faith is worker and immigrant justice. We are well aware of our history in this country and the benefits of the union movement. Our job now is to realize that not long ago these were issues we dealt with as part of our common experience.

Related posts:

1. Moyers Highlights Jobs with Justice Organizer, Employee Free Choice Segment highlights James Thindwa, head of the Chicago chapter of...
2. More Religious Groups Back Employee Free Choice Christian, Muslim, and Jewish labor groups sign on to the...
3. What can the harm reduction movement teach us about reproductive justice? Drug policy has benefited from the harm reduction movement’s...

The segment follows Thindwa, a Zimbabwe-born community organizer who has worked for years to help workers in his community—from the nurses of Resurrection Health Care to the sit-in strikers at Republic Windows. He helps community members get involved in rallies, contact their elected leaders and participate in campaigns to improve their lives and those of their neighbors. As Moyers says, Thindwa’s tireless efforts are:

All in a day’s work for a man who spends his days organizing people to tackle issues they face in the workplace, from low wages and meager benefits, to corporate behavior.

Now Thindwa, like JwJ organizers and working families around the country, is taking part in the campaign to pass the Employee Free Choice Act—hosting rallies, gathering signatures, getting letters to elected officials and helping young leaders speak out in favor of the critical bill. He knows the importance of giving workers the freedom to form unions and bargain, and the role that unions can play in giving workers a stake in the economy, as well as giving them the tools to improve their own lives and participate in their communities.

Thimdwa understands how important unions are to a fair economy, where worker power  balances the overwhelming corporate power. He also knows the importance of good jobs to building strong families and strong communities. Says Thindwa:

The question of good wages, decent wages for workers, isn’t just a question of economic justice, isn’t just a question of fairness for that worker….It does have broad implications for social stability.

You can watch the entire segment here. It’s an inspiring story of one man’s effort to help make the economy work for everyone.

Related posts:

1. 100 Historians Sign On to Support Employee Free Choice Act Some of the nation’s top historians have signed a petition...
2. Grassroots Support for the Employee Free Choice Act Grows Stewart Acuff, special assistant to the president, reports on the...
3. Fight for Employee Free Choice Continues Despite Specter’s Flip AFL-CIO president highly critical of Sen. Specter's decision...

When the United States economy was more abundant, it was common for many of those who were affluent to denigrate government entitlement programs. Their contempt stemmed from two major sources: a doctrinaire commitment to an unfettered free market, and a profound objection to the expenditure of taxpayer funds for welfare, Medicaid, public housing, food stamps and other programs.

Many people believe that America is the land of opportunity, where the good life is available to everyone who works hard. They also believe that those who fail do so because of personal shortcomings. The natural corollary is that those who followed the rules and succeeded should not have to forfeit a portion of their hard-earned gains to benefit the losers.

Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the United States Federal Reserve Board

The present economic collapse has forced a reassessment of this cold-blooded ideology. Alan Greenspan, who served as chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, has been the longtime patron saint of anti-regulatory forces. In a 1994 congressional hearing on the regulation of financial derivatives, Greenspan said, “There is nothing involved in federal regulation per se which makes it superior to market regulation.”

Greenspan also refused to intervene by enacting regulations to temper the subprime mortgage problem. In April 2008, he wrote, “Bank loan officers, in my experience, know more about the risk and workings of their counterparties than do bank regulators.” While Greenspan claimed to have a feel for the financial markets, he seemed to have little understanding of the enormity of human greed.

Wealthy Americans have been concerned for some time that entitlement programs devour more than half of the budget. The mantra of the conservatives has long been to cut taxes, but they are aware that this policy is unwise without commensurate cuts in fiscal spending. Nonetheless, the costs of entitlements have proven to be intractable, and are actually projected to grow.

What was never predicted is that wealthy investors in the auto industry and financial institutions would one day be in line waiting for federal handouts to preserve their assets. Ironically, giving bailout-funded bonuses to AIG executives is sort of like allowing citizens to be on the dole. Perhaps now everyone can see that the role of government is to assure the welfare of all.

One thing to be learned is that greed has no morals. Wise regulations are necessary to hold this demon at bay. A free market system can function well only with restraints on the unfettered expression of greed.

Reprinted with permission from The Bay Street Banner, an African-American run periodical in Boston, Massachusetts.

Related posts:

1. They’re Not On Welfare There’s a woman in Chicago… She has 80 names, 30...
2. Here’s Why U.S. Job Loss Worse, Wider Than Previous Recessions The current economic downturn is the worst since the Great...

By Judith Browne-Dianis, Co-Director Advancement Project

For several months, the media has been pushing the fairy tale that the United States moved beyond racism with the election of President Obama. As untrue as that is, there are people who started acting on their post-racial fantasies years ago, eight years in fact, as the Bush Administration used that excuse to essentially stop enforcing the civil rights laws we already have. President Obama and his administration have the opportunity to take dramatic steps towards dismantling institutional racism and inequality by simply enforcing the laws that are already on the books. Rather than blindness or silence, taking this action requires us to live in reality so that we can change that reality.

On November 5th, 2008, we woke up in a nation where people of color are nearly twice as likely as Whites to live near toxic waste dumps. We woke up in a nation where healthcare inequities mean that a Black child is more than twice as likely as a White child to die before age one. We woke up in a nation where Black and Latino students are more than 20 percent less likely to graduate from school than their White classmates and more than twice as likely to be arrested when they are at school. All of these disparities exist with government support or permission.

Despite these glaring inequalities, for the past eight years the federal government did nothing, living in the comfort of the post-racial fairytale. Thus, our government largely pursued a “hear no evil, see no evil” approach to structural racism and injustice. The Supreme Court has refused to “hear” the evil of discrimination through decades of narrowing discrimination protections and taking away citizens’ rights to bring their complaints to the ears of the courts. In complicity with the Court, the Bush Administration willfully refused to “see” the discrimination around the country. Although the executive branch has broad power to intervene against structural racism and injustice, it turned a blind eye and stood idly as though nothing were wrong.

Related posts:

1. Balancing Race and Gender: LDF Women Pioneers African-American women made the Civil Rights Movement possible...
2. March 21: International Day for Elimination of Racism       The global economic crisis cannot be...
3. Honoring human rights icon Carlotta Walls LaNier By D. Carene Bull Some might wonder what I, a...

Much of the history of the Civil Rights Movement has focused heavily on the stories of great men like Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, Thurgood Marshall, and many others. These men are the embodiment of the movement. But the movement’s successes would not have been achieved without the support, dedication, defiance, intelligence and hard work of many women. Historically, black women especially had to contend not only with racial discrimination, but also with sexism from both white and black men within the movement itself and from the larger society. In spite of these challenges, black women at all levels of society continued to juggle women’ s work and race work. Here we showcase just a few women pioneers who have been instrumental to helping LDF fulfill its mission to defend, educate and empower African Americans and others seeking justice and equality in America.

Elaine R. Jones

As the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund’s first woman leader, Elaine Jones is a trailblazer known for her work as one of the first African-American women to defend death row inmates. The daughter of a Pullman porter and a teacher, Jones became the first black woman to enroll in and subsequently graduate from the University Of Virginia School Of Law in 1970. She turned down an offer to join a top Wall Street law firm and pursued her lifelong goal by joining LDF, where she spent all but two years of her career.

In 1977, Jones created the position of legislative advocate in LDF’s Washington, DC office, building a reputation as an expert negotiator and a passionate voice for the victims of injustice. She served as LDF President and General-Counsel from 1993 to 2004 Under her direction, LDF broadened its mission to include such emerging issues as environmental justice and health care reform, while continuing to work for educational equity, fair employment, voting rights, fair housing and an end to bias in the criminal justice system.

Marian Wright Edelman

America’s best-known and most highly-respected children’s advocate Marian Wright Edelman began her career with LDF. In 1963, after graduating from Yale Law School, Edelman worked for LDF first in New York, and then in Mississippi, where she became the first African-American woman to practice law in that state. After moving to Washington, DC, Edelman was instrumental in organizing the Poor People’s Campaign, leading her to focus on issues relating to child development and children in poverty. In 1973, Edelman founded the Children’s Defense Fund (CDF), which has become a leading voice for policies and programs to lift children out of poverty; protect them from abuse and neglect; and ensure their access to health care, a quality education and a moral and spiritual foundation. The author of several books, Edelman keeps CDF financed entirely with private funds. Among her many honors are a MacArthur Foundation Prize Fellowship; the Presidential Medal of Freedom; more than 65 honorary degrees; and the Robert F. Kennedy Lifetime Achievement for her writings, which include eight books.

Constance Baker Motley

One cannot consider civil rights in America without paying homage to Constance Baker Motley, who brought her legal brilliance to the most important civil rights cases for 20 years, and became the first African-American woman to serve as a federal judge and in the New York Senate, among other historic milestones. While attending Columbia Law School, Motley volunteered at LDF. After graduating in 1946, she accepted full-time work for LDF, fighting housing cases to break down barriers that barred blacks from white neighborhoods, for the salary of $50 a week. LDF assigned her the James Meredith case in 1961, and the nation saw her escort the young student as he braved a jeering crowd to integrate the University of Mississippi. She called the day Meredith graduated in 1963 “the most thrilling” in her life. She won cases that struck down segregation in Southern restaurants and lunch counters. She lent her expertise to the briefs in Brown V. Board of Education, the landmark school desegregation case fought by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF), led by Thurgood Marshall and Jack Greenberg. A key player in the struggle to desegregate the South, Motley hung out with the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. while he was in jail; sang freedom songs in bombed churches; and spent a night under armed guard with Medgar Evers before he was murdered. Throughout her career and until her death in 2005, Motley was renowned for the quiet but powerful way in which she prepared and presented the lawsuits that led to greater equality for black people.

Lani Guinier

Lani Guinier became the first black woman tenured professor when she joined the faculty of Harvard Law School in 1998. The Yale Law School graduate had chosen her life path when as a child, she saw pioneering civil rights attorney Constance Baker Motley on television escorting James Meredith through a hostile white crowd to desegregate the University of Mississippi in 1962. After graduating law school, she followed Motley’s example and joined LDF as Assistant Counsel. She left four years later to serve as special assistant to then Assistant Attorney General Drew S. Days in the Civil Rights Division in the Carter Administration. After Ronald Reagan was elected, Guinier returned to LDF, where she became head of the Voting Rights program, litigating cases throughout the South, helping to win major victories in voting rights cases in Alabama and other southern states. She became one of LDF’s top litigators, winning 31 out of the 32 cases she argued. Guinier was thrust into the spotlight when President Bill Clinton nominated her to the Justice Department’s top civil rights post in 1993, then withdrew the nomination. Guinier has authored several books and won numerous awards, and in 1996 she formed a nonprofit organization, Commonplace, to create a dialogue about issues regarding race between the media and academic sectors.

Constance Rice

Civil rights crusader Constance Rice is acclaimed for her success in addressing the issues of inequity and exclusion. She attended New York University School of Law on the prestigious Root Tilden Public Interest Scholarship. After graduating in 1984 and serving as law clerk to the Honorable Damon J. Keith, judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and at Morrison & Foerster as a litigation associate, Rice joined LDF in 1991. In 1996, she became co-director of LDF’s Los Angeles office. As a litigator, Rice is known for her work with class action civil rights cases redressing police misconduct, race and sex discrimination and unfair public policy in transportation, probation and public housing. At LDF, she filed a landmark case on behalf of low-income bus riders that resulted in a mandate that more than 2 billion dollars be spent to improve the bus system in Los Angeles. In 1999, Rice launched a coalition lawsuit that won $750 million to build new schools in Los Angeles, money that had been slated for more affluent, less crowded suburban school districts. Beyond her litigation work, in the 1990s, Rice served as counsel to the Watts gang truce and led a statewide campaign to save equal opportunity programs. Now co-founder of The Advancement Project, a public policy and legal action group that supports organizations working to end community problems and address racial and other barrier to equality and opportunity, Rice has received numerous awards for her work in expanding opportunity and advancing multi-racial democracy.

Sherrilyn Ifill

Recognized nationally as an advocate of civil rights, voting rights, and judicial diversity and decision-making, Sherrilyn Ifill is a Professor of Law at The University of Maryland School of Law who began her career as Assistant Counsel at LDF. She litigated voting rights cases, including Houston Lawyers’ Association v. Texas, in which the Supreme Court held that judicial elections are subject to the provisions of the Voting Rights Act. Ifill is renowned as an expert for her writings and work related to race, the need for judicial diversity and impartiality in judicial decision-making. Her writings on the history of racial violence and reconciliation efforts are widely praised, and her book, On the Courthouse Lawn: Confronting the Legacy of Lynching in the 21st Century, is widely respected. In the spirit of LDF, Ifill has continued to litigate and consult on cases involving low-income and minority communities throughout her tenure at The University of Maryland School of Law.

Cissy Marshall

Cecilia “Cissy” Marshall is the widow of Thurgood Marshall, the former director counsel and founder of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.  Over the years, Marshall has served as a member of LDF’s board and has helped the organization maintain ties to its founder, lending her name to and chairing many of LDF’s events. She was working as a secretary for LDF when the couple married on December 17, 1955. When Marshall Marshall, who is Filipino-Hawaiian, expressed her concern that an interracial marriage might attract negative attention to the LDF and to Thurgood, her husband-to-be replied, “So what?” The couple had two sons, Thurgood Marshall, Jr. and John Marshall, and they remained married until Thurgood’s death in 1993.

Vanita Gupta

Vanita Gupta was a young, talented attorney for LDF’s criminal justice practice division. She worked as the lead lawyer in the Tulia, Texas case in which more than a tenth of the town’s black population was arrested and wrongly convicted in a drug sting based the uncorroborated testimony of undercover officer. When the case came across her desk, Gupta organized a number of large law firms that worked with LDF on the case. Ultimately prosecutors conceded that they had made a catastrophic mistake, and led a Texas judge to recommend that every conviction be overturned because the detective was not a credible witness. The Tulia case garnered nation-wide attention and became a symbol of racial injustice in the country’s criminal justice system. After LDF, Vanita joined the American Civil Liberties Union, where she worked on a landmark case, which greatly improved conditions for immigrant children and their families in the T. Don Hutto Detention Center in Taylor, Texas.

Lia Epperson

Lia Epperson is an assistant professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, where her courses focus on constitutional law, civil rights, and education. She worked as the director of LDF’s education law and policy group. While at LDF, she litigated in federal and state courts, advocated for federal administrative and legislative reforms, and co-authored multiple amicus briefs to the United States Supreme Court in the areas of education and affirmative action. In addition, she represented LDF in several national civil rights leadership coalitions, including serving as chair of the Education Task Force for the Leadership Conference for Civil Rights, a coalition of nearly 200 national organizations. Epperson’s research centers on constitutional interpretations of educational equity and the role of public schools and universities in making manifest the Constitution’s promise of equal opportunity. She has served as an editor of the Stanford Law Review as well as  the Stanford Law and Policy Review. Epperson is also the wife of Benjamin Todd Jealous, who is the current president and chief executive officer of the NAACP, LDF’s sister organization.

Jean Fairfax

Jean Fairfax is the former head of the division of Legal Information and Community Service at LDF. She was responsible for establishing and maintaining relationships between LDF and community organizations and attorneys across the country. She was also a civic leader, with careers in academia and philanthropy. As a dean at Kentucky State College and Tuskegee Institute, she organized youth programs in social justice, peace and community service in Europe, Israel, Mexico and the USA. Participating with her students in the 1940s in the work of the YWCA in the South, she demonstrated the important role of women in challenging institutional racism. Jean is revered for her work with the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) in post-World War II Austria and in its southern civil rights program. A professional civil rights worker for almost 30 years, Jean developed programs to advance civil rights, to educate low income and minority communities about their rights, and to implement civil rights laws and court orders at national and grass roots levels. Highlights of her career include involvement in the first desegregation of Mississippi’s schools and the integration of higher education systems across the South. She organized an interfaith group of churchwomen to expose failure of schools to provide meals to needy children, leading to reform of the National School Lunch Program. Since 1970, Jean has built a national reputation for increasing the participation of women and minorities in grant making institutions as donors, policymakers and recipients.

Stacey Patton is Senior Editor/Writer of TheDefendersOnline and The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

Related posts:

1. Writing the Next Chapter on Race The fairy tale of a post-racial America...
2. U.S. women should be grateful for Obama I am writing this on March 8 -- International Women's...
3. The Stark Facts About Violence Against Women Shocking statistics on dating violence....

As most of you know, last summer Congress completed step one in a two step process to remove the HIV ban on travel and immigration by removing the ban from the language of the Immigration and Nationality Act. To fully remove the ban, however, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must issue regulations which remove HIV from its list of “communicable diseases of public health significance.”

Please take a minute to visit the PHR page and call these Senators.

Related posts:

1. TAKE ACTION: “Tell your senators to vote YES to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell!” The Senate is set to vote soon on "Don't Ask,...
2. TAKE ACTION: Help Raise the US HIV Travel Ban at HHS Senate Confirmation Hearings Act to end the US ban on the entry of...
3. TAKE ACTION: Help Keep Shelters Open and Expand Services to Survivors of Domestic Abuse The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, a vital source...

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is the second largest public school system in the United States and this year marks the first time its students will celebrate Cesar Chavez Day as an official holiday. A pretty big deal considering close to 73% of LAUSD students are Latino.

The observance didn’t come with out a struggle though, according to the LA Times “Two years ago, 500 middle school and high school students skipped classes in Boyle Heights and East Los Angeles and marched to demand that Cesar Chavez’s birthday become a holiday.”

Last week, the LAUSD Board of Education passed a resolution allowing the state holiday to become an official school holiday.

Related posts:

1. Obama Honors César Chávez’s Birthday The former Farm Workers president hailed by President Obama as...
2. Pink Slips and Protests for California Teachers Debbie Winsteen was one of 11 elementary teachers from Burbank...
3. Student Week of Action Focuses on Employee Free Choice Jobs with Justice’s Student Labor Action Project (SLAP) kicks off...