October, 28 2009, 04:40pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Inga Sarda-Sorensen, Director of Communications
(Office) 646.358.1463
isorensen@theTaskForce.org
Task Force: Signing of Hate Crimes Measure Is Historic
"Laws embody the values of our nation, and through the enactment of this hate crimes law, our country has — once and for all — sent a clear and unequivocal message that it rejects and condemns all forms of hate violence, including crimes motivated by hatred of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people."
WASHINGTON
President Obama today signed federal hate crimes legislation
into law. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes
Prevention Act will help protect people against violence based on
sexual orientation, gender identity, race, religion, gender, national
origin and disability by extending the federal hate crimes statute. It
will provide critical federal resources to state and local agencies to
equip local officers with the tools they need to prosecute hate crimes.
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Executive Director Rea Carey will
attend the commemorative event later today at the White House.
The Task Force has been a key leader in the effort to secure an
effective and full government response to hate crimes against lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in the United States,
beginning with the launch of its groundbreaking anti-violence project
in 1982, up to today's victory. Get more details here about the Task Force's longtime work on hate crimes.
Statement by Rea Carey, Executive Director
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
"Today marks a historic milestone for lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender people, and for the entire country. With the president's
signing of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes
Prevention Act, both sexual orientation and gender identity have, for
the first time in U.S. history, been explicitly included in federal law.
"It has taken over a decade of perseverance to get to this momentous
day, and we thank all those who have worked to achieve this incredible
victory. Laws embody the values of our nation, and through the
enactment of this hate crimes law, our country has - once and for all -
sent a clear and unequivocal message that it rejects and condemns all
forms of hate violence, including crimes motivated by hatred of
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.
"We look forward to the days ahead when we will join together again
to celebrate full equality and recognition of our community, including
in employment, the military and in the full recognition of our
families. The Task Force is committed to the work necessary to bring
full equality to the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
people. We know that we have much work ahead of us. Today, we must
pause and shine a light on this critical first step taken by Congress,
and the willingness of this president to follow through on his promise
to sign this legislation ensuring the laws of the land will protect all
of us."
More on the Task Force's work on hate crimes legislation
- Passage of hate crimes legislation stems from decades of work, much of it spearheaded by the Task Force, including:
- In 1982, the Task Force founded the groundbreaking
anti-violence project, the first national organizing project for
anti-LGBT hate crimes. - In 1990, the Task Force secured the Hate Crimes Statistics
Act, which included sexual orientation, in large part justified by the
Task Force's own statistics on hate crimes. The Hate Crimes Statistics
Act was pushed so that national data could build the foundation for a
hate crimes law. - Murders and arsons, some anti-LGBT and others based on race
and other characteristics, led President Bill Clinton to call for a
White House Summit on Hate Crimes in 1997, attended by then-Task Force
Executive Director Kerry Lobel, where she delivered a petition signed
by LGBT people all over the country asking for a serious response to
anti-LGBT hate crimes. Out of this meeting, the Hate Crimes Prevention
Act (the predecessor to today's legislation) was written; it fixed
several problems with the existing hate crimes law on race, religion
and national origin, and added sexual orientation, gender and
disability to the law. - In 2001, the Task Force started its work to add gender
identity to the bill. Over the course of years and bringing along
coalition partners, the Task Force secured a "gender identity" addition
into the House legislation in 2005, with the Senate bill becoming
transgender-inclusive in 2007. - The Task Force continued to advocate for the bill's passage, repeatedly activating its membership.
- In 2009, when the hate crimes bill was added to the Department
of Defense authorization bill and a death penalty provision was added
in the Senate, the Task Force spoke out about the immorality of
inclusion of the death penalty and activated its grassroots to urge the
provision be struck from the final language. The conference committee
ultimately removed the capital punishment language.
The National LGBTQ Task Force advances full freedom, justice and equality for LGBTQ people. We are building a future where everyone can be free to be their entire selves in every aspect of their lives. Today, despite all the progress we've made to end discrimination, millions of LGBTQ people face barriers in every aspect of their lives: in housing, employment, healthcare, retirement, and basic human rights. These barriers must go. That's why the Task Force is training and mobilizing millions of activists across our nation to deliver a world where you can be you. Join us!
LATEST NEWS
'End This War Crime': HRW Says Israel Is Starving Children to Death in Gaza
"The Israeli government’s use of starvation as a weapon of war has proven deadly for children in Gaza."
Apr 09, 2024
The Israeli government is starving children to death in the Gaza Strip with its deliberate and systematic obstruction of food aid, Human Rights Watch said in a report released Tuesday, citing firsthand accounts from doctors and families in the besieged enclave.
At least 32 people, including 28 children, have died of malnutrition and dehydration so far in northern Gaza, which is facing famine conditions due to Israel's illegal blockade.
HRW's new report builds on its December assessment that Israel was "using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare" in Gaza, with disastrous consequences for the territory's civilian population.
"The Israeli government's use of starvation as a weapon of war has proven deadly for children in Gaza," said Omar Shakir, HRW's Israel and Palestine director. "Israel needs to end this war crime, stop this suffering, and allow humanitarian aid to reach all of Gaza unhindered."
For its new report, HRW interviewed doctors who have treated malnourished patients and family members of children who have starved to death in recent weeks. The group also reviewed photographs and video footage showing emaciated children who have died of malnutrition.
Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, the head of the pediatrics unit of a northern Gaza hospital targeted by Israeli forces, said that 26 children in his facility alone have died from starvation-related health complications. Safiya told HRW that at least 16 of the children were under five months old, and one of them was just two days old.
The mother, he said, "had no milk to give him."
"Israel's allies like the U.S., U.K., France, and Germany need to press for full-throttle aid delivery by immediately suspending their arms transfers."
Already badly hindered by Israel's siege, aid deliveries to Gaza have been further disrupted by Israeli attacks on humanitarian workers and convoys. Israeli forces' killing of seven World Central Kitchen workers last week led several aid groups to suspend their operations in Gaza.
While Israel agreed in the wake of the deadly attack—and in the face of massive international pressure—to reopen a key border crossing in northern Gaza, aid groups say far more is needed to prevent mass starvation.
"Governments outraged by the Israeli government starving civilians in Gaza should not be looking for band-aid solutions to this humanitarian crisis,” Shakir said Tuesday. "Israel's announcement that it will increase aid shows that outside pressure works. Israel's allies like the U.S., U.K., France, and Germany need to press for full-throttle aid delivery by immediately suspending their arms transfers."
Israel's six-month war on Gaza has been catastrophic for the territory's children. According to one recent analysis, over 2% of Gaza's child population—nearly 26,000 kids—has been killed or wounded during the assault, with at least 1,000 children losing one or both of their legs.
The war has also taken a devastating psychological toll on Gaza's kids, many of whom have been displaced repeatedly and seen family members maimed or killed by Israeli bombs.
"The emotional distress of dodging bombs and bullets, losing loved ones, being forced to flee through streets littered with debris and corpses, and waking up every morning not knowing if they will be able to eat has also left parents and caregivers increasingly unable to cope," Save the Children said last month.
Speaking to HRW, the father of newborn twin girls said that one of his babies died of malnutrition at northern Gaza's Kamal Adwan Hospital eight days after she was born.
"He said that he struggled to feed his family prior to the girls' birth, but that they only had bread to eat, without meat or protein," the human rights organization noted in its new report. "He said that after the twins' birth, his wife could not produce milk to breastfeed the girls and that store-bought milk was scarce."
One mother of a 6-year-old boy with cystic fibrosis told HRW that "because of the Israeli blockade, she struggled to obtain the necessary medication and provide adequate nourishment."
"By mid-January, Fadi's health had deteriorated to the point where he could no longer walk, prompting his hospitalization," HRW said. Late last month, the boy was evacuated from Kamal Adwan Hospital to receive treatment at a facility in Cairo.
Lama Fakih, HRW's Middle East and North Africa director, said Tuesday that Israeli officials upholding the blockade that is starving children in Gaza "are committing war crimes."
"Governments should impose targeted sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes, against responsible officials," said Fakih.
But the U.S., Israel's top ally and arms supplier, is refusing to take concrete action even as damning evidence of Israeli war crimes mounts.
Asked during a Monday press briefing "how many Palestinian citizens should be killed, whether by fire or starvation, so you can seriously intervene," U.S. State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller said that "we do not want to see a single Palestinian killed."
"And that is why we have made clear that Israel needs to do more to improve its deconfliction and coordination measures," Miller said, brushing off the idea of imposing strict conditions on U.S. military aid. The Biden administration is currently pressing Congress to sign off on an $18 billion sale of F-15 fighter jets to Israel.
Earlier in Monday's briefing, Miller said the U.S. has "not yet at this time concluded that Israel has violated international humanitarian law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Supreme Court Urged to Reject 'Intolerable and Dangerous' Trump Immunity Claim
"Trump's legal theory defies common sense and would enable an almost limitless tyranny," warned Public Citizen's president.
Apr 08, 2024
Monday was the deadline for amicus briefs in Donald J. Trump v. United States, and several organizations and experts took the opportunity to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the former Republican president and current candidate's immunity claim.
Trump is claiming that because he was still in office when he engaged in actions that led to one of his federal indictments, he should be immune from criminal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 loss to Democratic President Joe Biden, which culminated in the January 6, 2021 insurrection.
Lower courts have rejected his argument. The nation's highest court—which has a right-wing supermajority that includes three Trump appointees and Justice Clarence Thomas, whose activist wife Ginni Thomas was involved in efforts to block Biden's win—agreed to take the case in February.
Ahead of arguments on April 25, the justices received friend-of-the-court briefs from the ACLU, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Common Cause, and Public Citizen as well as coalitions of law professors and constitutional scholars, former government and military officials, national security professionals, historians, and business leaders, among others.
"The former president seeks the power to engage in criminal activity and forever evade the accountability that all others must face."
"In this case, the former president seeks the power to engage in criminal activity and forever evade the accountability that all others must face," states the ACLU brief. "At root, it concerns nothing less than whether the United States is a government of laws in which all citizens, including the president, are subject to the nation's criminal laws, or one in which the president stands immune from criminal prosecution even for blatantly criminal conduct, and even after leaving office."
As one group of constitutional experts explained: "Trump argues that he enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions committed during his tenure as president, and that his acquittal at an impeachment trial bars his subsequent prosecution. Both arguments reflect a misreading of constitutional text and history as well as this court's precedent."
Public Citizen pointed out that "the president has no specific, constitutionally assigned role in the conduct of presidential elections. And any assertion that a president's authority empowers him to conspire to overturn the result of a valid election and retain power beyond his term in office would be absurd."
"Accepting a view of the outer limits of presidential authority that would sweep in a conspiracy to overturn an election and remain in office unlawfully would have exceptionally broad implications and threaten severe damage to our constitutional democracy," the watchdog warned. "Criminal prosecution... is the sole mechanism for holding an unscrupulous president accountable for unlawfully attempting to hold on to power."
As the group's president, Robert Weissman, summarized in a statement: "Trump's legal theory defies common sense and would enable an almost limitless tyranny. Nothing in the Constitution—which aims to prevent tyranny—supports Trump's theory."
The retired military leaders—including several admirals and generals—said that "the notion of such immunity, both as a general matter, and also specifically in the context of the potential negation of election results, threatens to jeopardize our nation's security and international leadership. Particularly in times like the present, when anti-democratic, authoritarian regimes are on the rise worldwide, such a threat is intolerable and dangerous."
The group of national security experts similarly stressed that Trump's "broad view of immunity would imperil U.S. national security, weaken the authority of the president, and throw confusion into the chain of command of the armed forces, which the president, as commander-in-chief, commands."
"This court must unequivocally reject the proposed doctrine of presidential immunity and leave no doubt in the minds of petitioner, the public, and all future occupants of the Oval Office that the president, like all individuals subject to the reach of the U.S. legal system, is not above the law," they continued.
Noting another global impact of the court's decision, the Leadership Now Project wrote that "American business leaders depend upon the rule of law as the anchor of stability and predictability in our economy."
"If criminal conduct by our highest officials goes unchecked and the rule of law is subverted, the conditions necessary to sustain the orderly free market that drives American prosperity and its economic competitiveness are destabilized," the group added. "If the challenged conduct was allegedly committed by a former president while in office, this fundamental threat is exacerbated. In this context, it is existentially important to uphold as unshakeable the sacrosanct American principle of equality and accountability under law."
In addition to the broad arguments and warnings, some groups highlighted specific issues that have come up. For example, CREW pointed out that Trump supporters are asking the high court to "find Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment invalid."
"This court lacks jurisdiction to consider that issue now and reaching it prematurely would compromise foundational public interests," said the organization. "Further, the special counsel's appointment is clearly valid."
After Trump confirmed he was running for president again, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, selected Smith to oversee the probes that led to the election interference case and another federal case involving classified documents.
Smith on Monday submitted a 66-page brief arguing that "a bedrock principle of our constitutional order is that no person is above the law—including the president. Nothing in constitutional text, history, precedent, or policy considerations supports the absolute immunity that petitioner seeks."
Along with the federal cases, Trump faces two state-level criminal cases: one in Georgia related to 2020 election interference and another in New York, resulting from hush money payments during the 2016 cycle. The trial for the latter is scheduled to begin April 15. He also has ongoing civil fraud and defamation cases in New York.
Throughout this election cycle, several groups and legal scholars have argued that Trump is disqualified from holding office again—under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—because he engaged in insurrection. After Colorado disqualified him from its primary ballot, the case reached the Supreme Court as Trump v. Anderson.
The justices last month ruled 9-0 that Congress is responsible for enforcing the relevant section of the amendment against federal officeholders and candidates—leaving a possibility of future legal challenges if Trump beats Biden in November.
Comparing that case with this one, Common Cause wrote Monday that "to date, the court has treated the two cases in dissimilar ways that seem to favor Mr. Trump. In Trump v. Anderson, where a state court had questioned Mr. Trump's eligibility for the ballot, the court acted decisively to reverse that decision and remove the cloud over his eligibility."
"In this case, however—where a criminal case against Mr. Trump, involving largely the same underlying facts as in Trump v. Anderson, has been stayed pending resolution of his appeals—the court has appeared to act much more slowly in its decision-making, with the potential effect of forcing Americans to vote on Election Day without knowing whether Mr. Trump is guilty or innocent," the group added, urging the justices to "decide this case rapidly" so a trial can occur before voters head to the polls.
"With barely six months between the date of oral argument and the election, this court is left with little margin for error," Common Cause emphasized. "But it does have a last, clear chance to prevent Mr. Trump's meritless immunity defense from derailing trial. The court should seize that opportunity."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Big Deal': Progressives Applaud New Biden Plan to Provide Student Debt Relief for Millions
"Progressives have led the fight for student debt cancellation, and Joe Biden has responded," said one advocate.
Apr 08, 2024
Organizers who have tirelessly pushed for student debt cancellation applauded on Monday as President Joe Biden—who years ago dismissed the proposal as "unrealistic"—announced a plan to help tens of millions of Americans burdened with educational debt.
Biden announced his new plan at Madison Area Technical College in Madison, Wisconsin, less than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down his previous program, which would have provided relief to 40 million borrowers by canceling up to $20,000 in debt per person.
Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director of the Student Borrower Protection Center (SBPC) credited Biden with publicly resolving to find a solution for struggling Americans "only hours after the Supreme Court callously struck down his original debt relief program."
The president's new plan would wipe out the entire debt amount held by about 4 million people, give debt relief of at least $5,000 to 10 million borrowers, and reduce the undergraduate and graduate student debt of 23 million people whose interest would be eliminated.
The plan would allow millions of young people to "finally get on with their lives instead of their lives being put on hold," said the president.
Student debt is "not just a drag on them, it's a drag on our local economies," Biden said in Madison. "When you can't afford to buy a home, start that small business, chase that career that you'd been dreaming about for a long time."
I said I wouldn't back down from using every tool at our disposal to get student loan borrowers the relief they need.
That's why today we're announcing new plans that, if implemented, would cancel student debt for millions more. pic.twitter.com/rNiCxzzlU3
— President Biden (@POTUS) April 8, 2024
Bañez said in addition to bringing "tens of millions of borrowers one step closer to realizing the life-changing impact of student debt cancellation," Biden's announcement "also offers a roadmap for how this administration should deal with a hostile Supreme Court majority captured by right-wing special interests."
"Call the high court's bluff by aggressively using the full power of the law and delivering for working people," she said. "For too long, student debt has blocked homeownership, inhibited savings, limited career opportunities and economic mobility, and choked at the promise of entire generations. Taken together, the Biden administration's actions are setting a path to a debt-free, brighter economic future for more than 30 million Americans."
"Now, the president must move fast and finish the job," she added.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said pressure from "borrowers, activists, and progressives in Congress" pushed Biden to develop a new plan after his original program was struck down.
"Progressives were the earliest and loudest champions of student debt cancellation, and this president is delivering—despite Republican obstruction," she said. "We are proud to continue our partnership with the Biden administration on its implementation of this and other pathways to cancellation."
The Biden administration said it expected Republicans to file legal challenges, which could prevent the new provisions from going into effect by the time Americans choose between Biden and former President Donald Trump in November.
"President Biden will use every tool available to cancel student loan debt for as many borrowers as possible no matter how many Republican officials stand in his way," Karine Jean Pierre, the White House press secretary, told The New York Times.
"At a time when young people across the country are struggling economically, President Biden's decision to reduce the outrageous level of student debt they face will be extremely helpful."
Americans who now owe more in student debt than the amount that they originally borrowed due to interest would have up to $20,000 in interest wiped out. People who make less than $120,000 per year could have all of their interest canceled.
People who took out federal loans for undergraduate degrees and began repaying them more than 20 years ago would have their debt automatically canceled. The same would apply for people who began repaying their graduate degree loans more than 25 years ago.
People who attended colleges that have since lost their certification or their eligibility to participate in federal student aid would have their debt wiped out, and Americans who are particularly burdened with other necessary expenses could apply to have their debt canceled.
The program "will change lives," said U.S. Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.) as she pledged to continue her push to "cancel student debt fully."
Andrew O'Neill, legislative director for progressive advocacy group Indivisible, noted that combined with the $146 billion in relief Biden has already provided to about 4 million borrowers through executive actions and other measures, "more than 30 million folks will now get relief from Biden's programs."
"Progressives have led the fight for student debt cancellation, and Joe Biden has responded," O'Neill told the Times.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime advocate of student debt cancellation and tuition-free college, applauded Biden for "using every possible tool to reduce student debt."
Astra Taylor, a filmmaker and leading student debt cancellation activist, noted that Biden's plan falls short of complete debt relief, but said the power of economic justice campaigners' advocacy is undeniable, considering the president's decision to prioritize student debt.
"A reminder that a U.S. president leaning into debt cancellation like this was unimaginable not that many years ago," said Taylor. "Do we need to keep pushing so actions match words? Yes. Do we need to keep fighting to win not only debt relief but free college? Of course."
"Organizing," she added, "is everything."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular