ThinkProgress Logo

Justice

Zimmerman Attorney Defends ‘Troubled’ Client: ‘It Must Be Frightening Not To Be Able To Go Into A 7/11’

By Faiz Shakir on Apr 11, 2012 at 7:43 pm

On the rainy night he was gunned down by George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin was walking back to his father’s house from a nearby 7/11 with a bag of Skittles and an iced tea. Zimmerman was advised by police not to confront Trayvon, but ended up shooting someone whom he referred to as one “these a**holes.”

In trying to portray his client in as sympathetic terms as possible, Zimmerman’s new attorney Mark O’Mara said this evening that Zimmerman is “troubled by everything that has happened.” O’Mara added, “Truly, it must be frightening to not be able to go into a 7/11 or into a store and literally to be in fact a prisoner wherever he was.” Watch it:

What is more frightening is to innocently die for going to 7/11.

Education

Report On UC Davis Pepper Spray Incident Finds Police Conduct ‘Objectively Unreasonable’

By Adam Peck on Apr 11, 2012 at 7:00 pm

Two reports commissioned by the University of California-Davis to investigate the infamous pepper spray incident from last fall have been released to the public, and they appear to verify most of the facts put forth by Occupy protesters and fly in the face of the allegations made by the university and its police department.

The Reynoso Task Force Report takes a close look at the events of November 18, 2011, when UC-Davis campus police moved to evict occupiers from campus. In an incident made instantly famous on YouTube, Lieutenant John Pike stepped over a line of peaceful students seated on the ground and calmly proceeded to douse them with military-grade pepper spray. The shocking video quickly went viral, and outrage over the conduct of the police department and UC-Davis’ failure to properly reprimand the officer spread nationwide.

Throughout more than 100 pages of the two reports — one conducted by the task force itself, the other by an outside company at the behest of the university — virtually all of the claims initially made by the police department and its defenders in the UC-Davis administration were debunked.

The task force found that the use of MK-9, the pepper spray discharged by Lt. Pike (and called a food product by Fox News’ Megyn Kelly), was not an authorized weapon for the department and its use “was objectively unreasonable.”

When asked why they felt the need to use the spray, officers initially told the task force that they felt the mob was hostile and needed to create a pathway for the officers to leave the quad. The task force concluded that “a detailed review of the evidence undermines this conclusion.”

The report is damaging to both the police department and to UC-Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi, who beat back calls for her resignation. The union representing the police department went as far as to seek judicial intervention in blocking the release of the report, but a judge ruled against them on nearly every count.

California State Senator Leland Yee issued a statement following the release of the report:

I am very pleased with the thoroughness of the task force report. As the report indicates, the pepper spray incident was a massive failure by the UC Davis administration and police force. This report allows President Yudof to hold his campus leadership accountable. It also lays the blue print for effectively handling such situations in the future and helps ensure such an incident never happens again. I commend the task force for recognizing the scope of this problem and respecting the free speech rights of students.

Just last week, students at Santa Monica College who were protesting increased tuition costs were similarly pepper sprayed by police, and observers immediately drew comparisons to the events at UC-Davis.

Justice

House Judiciary Chair Lamar Smith Joins The Judicial Activism Hypocrisy Club

By Adam Peck on Apr 11, 2012 at 6:40 pm

Politico yesterday ran an op-ed from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) in which he criticized President Obama’s statement cautioning against cases where “an unelected group of people . . . somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law.” According to Smith, “the president’s comments reveal a fundamental lack of respect for the judicial branch.”

Hitting President Obama for questioning the wisdom of judicial activism is especially bold for Rep. Smith, who one year ago this week said almost the exact same thing about marriage equality: “Who in our system of government has the power to decide fundamental questions like what marriage means; unelected judges, or the people?” Nor was this the first nor last instance of Smith engaging in the very same attacks on the courts that he accuses President Obama of:

On Marriage Equality: Immediately after a federal judge in California ruled Proposition 8 unconstitutional in August 2010, Smith issued a statement attacking him for failing to remain impartial — claiming that “Judge Walker’s ruling places personal political ideology above the right of the people to pass laws.” And then last year, after President Obama announced that his administration would no longer seek to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, Smith lambasted judicial activism during a hearing of the Subcommittee on the Constitution.

On Religion: Smith, along with two other House Republicans, was the driving force behind two amendments passed in 2003 that specifically forbade the enforcement of the ruling of a federal circuit court. A working group was co-created by Smith to “once and for all reassert [the] authority of Congress, and remind the judiciary of who they are, as outlined in the Constitution.”

On Judicial Activism of Any Kind: “Judges continue to substitute their own political views for the law, and we must push back,” Rep. Smith told attendees of the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration conference in 2005.

It’s unclear what in the last few weeks has led Rep. Smith to fully embrace the authority of the courts after years of threatening to defund the enforcement of their rulings, alleging misconduct and using every opportunity to invoke “judicial activism” as the greatest threat to our democracy. And Rep. Smith was equally unperturbed when Republican presidents George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon all criticized the judiciary during their administrations.

Security

Clinton Overrules Ros-Lehtinen’s Hold On U.S. Aid To Palestinians

By Ben Armbruster on Apr 11, 2012 at 6:30 pm

Various news outlets reported last November that Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), chair of the House Foreign Affairs committee, had lifted her hold on all U.S. aid going to the Palestinians. Ros-Lehtinen said she was blocking the funds until she received assurances from the Obama administration that they were in America’s national security interest. But last month the Florida congresswoman sent a letter Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying she would continue to hold $147 million because the Palestinian economy grew.

But the National Journal reports today that Clinton is bypassing Ros-Lehtinen’s hold and authorizing the aid anyway:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is allowing U.S. funds to flow to the West Bank and Gaza despite a hold by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., a rare display of executive-branch authority sure to anger the key lawmaker concerned about protecting her congressional oversight role.

A State Department official said that the letter was delivered on Tuesday to key members of Congress informing them of Clinton’s decision to move forward with the $147 million package of the fiscal year 2011 economic support funds for the Palestinian people, despite Ros-Lehtinen’s hold. Administrations generally do not disburse funding over the objections of lawmakers on relevant committees.

The State Department official told the National Journal that said that withholding the funding could “undermine the progress that has been made in recent years in building Palestinian institutions and improving stability, security, and economic prospects, which benefits Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

Alyssa

The First Promo for Charlie Sheen’s ‘Anger Management’ Is Out

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Apr 11, 2012 at 6:07 pm

Guess we’ll have to wait for a longer cut to see more of that long-touted journey towards redemption and self-reflection:

I get that this is a riff on how Charlie Harper was killed off on Two and a Half Men. But it also inadvertently reveals how silly it is to suggest that this is any sort of grand comeback narrative. Charlie Sheen has made too much money for too many people for him ever to have to struggle to find work if he wants it.

LGBT

BREAKING: White House To Delay Implementation Of Key Anti-Discrimination Order

By Igor Volsky on Apr 11, 2012 at 5:58 pm

After months of dodging questions about the progress of an executive order prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in federal contracting, the White House won’t issue the directive, but will instead study whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees require employment protections, ThinkProgress has learned. The news comes after White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett held a meeting with LGBT advocates to discuss the matter.

Existing studies suggest that 11 to 16 million additional employees would have gained protections as a result of the measure, since many “federal contractors do not currently have those policies, and they employ millions of workers.” Among them are Jarrod Scarbrough and Les Sewell, a gay couple who attended Monday’s Easter Egg Roll at the White House to ask Obama to sign the order. “Jarrod works for a company that the government contracts through, and we live in New Mexico — we’re actually protected, we don’t have to worry too much about being discriminated against. However, in June we’re moving to Florida where that protection, we’ll no longer have that,” Sewell explained during an appearance on MSNBC. “Without this administrative action, Jarrod could lose his job and then where would this family be?”

Equality advocates who had been working to advance the measure are asking similar questions. “Today’s news that the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors will launch a study to better understand workplace discrimination against gay and transgender Americans is confounding and disappointing,” said Winnie Stachelberg, the Executive Vice President for External Affairs at the Center for American Progress. “The President should use his executive authority to extend existing nondiscrimination requirements of federal contractors to include sexual orientation and gender identity,” she added.

Earlier this month, 72 Congressional lawmakers urged the administration to enact the order, noting that it would “extend important workplace protections to millions of Americans, while at the same time laying the groundwork for Congressional passage of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA).” Data show that “43 percent of LGB people and 90 percent of transgender people have experienced workplace discrimination” and that the overwhelming majority of Americans — 73 percent — would have supported a measure prohibiting it.

The delay represents a departure for the president who committed to supporting a “formal written policy of non-discrimination that includes sexual orientation and gender identity or expression…for all Federal contractors” as a candidate in 2008 and pledged to fight for the community in 2009 and 2011. “I’m here with a simple message: I’m here with you in that fight,” Obama told the Human Rights Campaign in 2009, adding, “Nobody in America should be fired because they’re gay, despite doing a great job and meeting their responsibilities. It’s not fair. It’s not right. We’re going to put a stop to it.”

Security

Time For The National Review To Take A Stand Against Islamophobia

By Eli Clifton on Apr 11, 2012 at 5:48 pm

The National Review has been cleaning house over the past week. Last week the conservative publication fired John Derbyshire for a racist rant and today the magazine terminated its relationship with Robert Weissberg for his ties to a white nationalist group.

But while the National Review has decided to very publicly purge itself of white supremacists and racists, bigotry toward Muslims appears to go unchallenged in the pages of the magazine and on its blog, National Review Online (NRO). NRO contributing editor Andrew McCarthy, who accused President Obama of standing with the Muslim Brotherhood against 9/11 families in his post “The President Stands With Sharia,” told Rep. Peter King’s (R-NY) hearing on the radicalization of American Muslims:

What “radicalizes” Muslims is Islam — the mainstream interpretation of it. The “radicals” propagating it do not need the “captive audience” provided by the prison environment. The “radicalization” is happening in plain sight.

The denigration of Islam and Muslim Americans isn’t limited to McCarthy’s screeds. A number of noted Islamophobes are regularly given free rein to guest post on NRO’s site or write in the magazine, including:

  • Robert Spencer, who just last month concluded that “Islamic supremacists” may have subverted the “U.S. defense against jihad terror,” because the man who heads the Central Intelligence Agency’s Counterterrorism Center — and is credited with crippling Al Qaeda and other militant networks in Pakistan — was identified as a Muslim in a Washington Post profile.
  • David Horowitz, who, in an interview last year, stated, “What has the Arab world contributed except terror?…The theocratic, repressive Arabic states do no significant science, no significant arts and culture.”
  • Daniel Pipes, who, in the pages of The National Review in 1990, wrote, “All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”

    • The National Review has been notified of the Islamophobic statements made by a number of their contributors in the past. To date, they appear to have decided to do nothing. Perhaps now is the time for The National Review to take a hard stance against all bigotry, intolerance and racism.

    NEWS FLASH

    George Zimmerman To Be Charged With Second Degree Murder, Is Now In Custody | The AP reports that Trayvon Martin’s shooter George Zimmerman is currently in police custody and will be charged with murder in the second degree, a more serious crime than the manslaughter charge many analysts speculated Zimmerman might face. Under Florida law, second degree murder is defined as “[t]he unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual.” Zimmerman faces life in prison.

    Update

    Zimmerman’s new attorney Mark O’Mara conceded in an interview last month that some people have called Florida’s “stand your ground” law a “license to murder” statute “because it doesn’t require actions to avoid the confrontation.” O’Mara will likely be asserting that defense on behalf of Zimmerman in a court of law. Watch it:


    Update

    Trayvon Martin’s family watches the announcement of a second degree murder charge against George Zimmerman. (Accessed from Twitter via @trymainelee)


    Update

    View the charging document here:

    NEWS FLASH

    Study: Parental Support Greatly Improves Long-Term Health For LGBTs | Coming out may prove a boon to long-term health, especially when your parents support the decision, new research from Boston University School of Public Health suggests. The study, published in the Journal of Homosexuality, surveyed 5,658 adults ages 18-64 years old in Massachusetts and found that 75 percent of gay, lesbian, and bisexual adults had “come out” to their parents. In incidences where parents expressed open support of the decision, reports of mental health and substance abuse were considerably lower than in cases where parents were unsupportive. In fact, bisexual and lesbian females whose parents did not support them were five times more likely to develop serious depression and 11 times more likely to indulge in illicit drug use, while bisexual and gay males had six to seven times the odds of serious depression and binge drinking. Although the report discovered that the act of coming out most often resulted in better health for lesbian and bisexual women, the same was not true for gay and bisexual men, who “may be able to conduct their sexual lives apart from their parents with less stress.” — Fatima Najiy

    By Guest Blogger on Apr 11, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    Economy

    How A Goldman Sachs Mortgage Servicer Foreclosed On Homeowners After Losing Their Documents In India

    By Pat Garofalo on Apr 11, 2012 at 5:30 pm

    Several of the nation’s biggest banks have gotten themselves into hot water for their inability to get homeowners into sustainable loan modifications. Bank of America, for instance, routinely lost homeowners’ paperwork, dragged the modification process out for months, and even foreclosed on one homeowner just days after approving him for a mortgage modification. And this was when the bank wasn’t intentionally denying homeowners federal mortgage aid.

    Adding to the list of horrors, ProPublica found that Litton Loan Servicing, which was owned by Goldman Sachs at the time, denied many troubled homeowners mortgage modifications after sending their paperwork to India and losing it:

    When homeowners faxed their documents, they didn’t go to Litton, [former employee Chris Wyatt] says. They went to India, where a low-cost company scanned and filed the documents — but often misfiled or lost them. Wyatt says Litton routinely denied modifications because homeowners had not sent their documents when, in fact, they had.

    In a process internally referred to as a “denial sweep,” Litton’s computers would automatically generate denial letters for every homeowner who, according to Litton’s records, hadn’t sent their documents. But untold numbers of those documents had been lost on another continent. Wyatt complained about the practice in multiple meetings with senior management, he says, but managers were chiefly worried about reducing the overwhelming backlog.

    Behavior of this sort is part of the reason that the Obama administration’s mortgage modification programs came up so woefully short of their goals. The programs depended far too much on providing incentives to the banks to modify mortgages, despite the shoddy state of those banks’ modification processes, and therefore only a fraction of the people at whom the programs were aimed actually received any help.

    Older

    Switch to Mobile
    ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

    Sign Up