Categories
Law

President Obama writes about the president’s role in advancing criminal justice reform and the significance of second chances

In its investigation of the police department in Ferguson, Missouri, the U.S. Department of Justice found that the city relied heavily for revenue from fines for such minor offenses as jaywalking or untended lawns that it enforced most often against members of African-American communities. The city issued arrest warrants not based on public safety needs, but as a routine response to fine payments, investigators found.

We are reminded of that more recently by President Obama, who in an article for the Harvard Law Review discusses the president’s role in advancing criminal justice reform. The 50-page article summarizes many of the statistics that may be all too familiar to people in communities of color.

Roughly 2.2 million U.S. adults were housed in federal, state or local jails at the end of 2015 (the most recent year for such data), down about 2% from a year earlier. While blacks and Hispanics constitute roughly 30% of the population, they comprise half the prison population. As the president notes, though evidence suggests no statistically significant difference in drug use across races and ethnicities, the arrest and conviction rate for African-Americans is much higher.

For similar offenses, the president writes, “members of African American and Hispanic communities are more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, convicted, and sentenced to harsher penalties.”

The U.S. has 5% of the world’s population but incarcerates nearly 35% of the world’s prisoners. That’s four times the world average and more than the 35 largest European countries combined. About one-third of adults – an estimated 70 million Americans – have a criminal record, which brings with it barriers to voting, employment, housing and the safety net.

“We simply cannot afford to spend $80 billion annually on incarceration, to write off… one in three adults… to release 600,000 inmates each year without a better program to reintegrate them into society, or to ignore the humanity of… men and women currently in U.S. jails and prisons,” Obama writes. “In addition, we cannot deny the legacy of racism that continues to drive inequality in how the justice system is experienced by so many Americans.”

The president outlines a series of changes that would make the criminal justice system fairer and more effective. They range from reform of sentencing laws and improvements in the system of public education and juvenile justice, to curtailing use of solitary confinement, reducing gun violence and restoring rights of those who have paid their debts to society.

He also notes his commuting the sentences of more than 1,000 people, the vast majority of whom had already served much more time than the sentence they would receive today and each of whom had obtained a GED, addressed substance abuse that led to their conviction or learned skills for future employment.

“This is an effort that has touched me personally, and not just because I could have been caught up in the system myself had I not gotten some breaks as a kid,” the president writes.

In 1990, Barack Obama, then 28, was elected the first black president in the 104-year history of the Harvard Law Review. The law review’s current president, Michael Zuckerman, along with its articles chair, invited Obama to contribute the article.

As it happens, Zuckerman was arrested and pleaded guilty to criminal trespass 16 years ago, at age 13, for trying to steal alcohol from a family he knew was away. The court assigned him to community service, which included doing art projects with homeless children who lived in motels.

The experience, Zuckerman told The Washington Post, underscored for him his privilege and taught him to redirect his energy into more productive things than stealing liquor. “So being able to publish a piece in which the president of the United States talks about the importance of second chances is very meaningful to me personally,” Zuckerman said.

Categories
Sports

Happy Birthday, Willie Mays

Willie Mays turned 84 years old on Wednesday.

Over a career that spanned 22 years beginning in 1951, the “Say Hey Kid” amassed a .302 batting average and 3,283 hits, the fifth most of all time in the National League and 11th overall in baseball.

Mays smacked 600 home runs, third best in the league and tied for fourth best of all time.

According to Leo Durocher, who managed the Giants during Mays’ first four years with the club:

He could do the five things you have to do to be a superstar: hit, hit with power, run, throw, and field. And he had that other magic ingredient that turns a superstar into a super superstar. He lit up the room. He was a joy to be around.

As one who lives five blocks from the site of the former Polo Grounds, I feel a connection to Mays, who played the first six seasons of his professional career there before the Giants decamped to San Francisco.

On autumn days, one can imagine the crowd spilling out of the Polo Grounds in 1951, after Bobby Thomson’s walk-off home run to win the National League pennant. Or “The Catch,” Mays’ over-the-shoulder grab in deep center field in the first game of the 1954 World Series.

Mays, who was inducted into the Hall of Fame in 1979, also logged:

1,903 runs batted in, fourth best in the league and 10th best of all time

2,062 runs, fourth best of all time in the league and seventh best of all time

1,323 extra base hits, fourth best of all time in the league and fifth best of all time

2,992 games, fourth best of all time in the league and ninth best of all time

10,881 at bats, fourth best of all time in the league and 12th overall in baseball

6,066 total bases, third best of all time in both the league and in baseball

12,493 plate appearances, sixth best of all time in the league and 12th best of all time

11 consecutive NL Rawlings Gold Glove seasons starting in 1958

Mays also holds the record for hitting home runs in the most different innings.

On July 15, 2009, Mays accompanied President Obama aboard Air Force One for a flight to St. Louis, where the president threw the first pitch for the All-Star game.

“I’m so proud,” Mays told the president, referring to Obama’s election. “I didn’t go to bed until maybe 7:15 that morning. I just want to thank you.”

“Let me tell you, you helped us get there,” the president replied. “If it hadn’t been for folks like you and Jackie [Robinson], I’m not sure I would get elected to the White House.”

Categories
Law

Eric Garner’s death is an American problem

Protestors in Times Square (Photo by Brian Browdie)
Protestors in Times Square (Photo by Brian Browdie)

About 50 yards from where hundreds of people massed Wednesday evening in Times Square to protest the decision by a grand jury not to indict a police officer in the death of Eric Garner, about two dozen tourists gazed up at themselves on a video display sponsored by Revlon.

The tourists chatted away in languages other than English and snapped photos of themselves snapping photos of themselves on the giant display that looms above Broadway.

Whatever selfies they snapped at street level may reveal in the background a sea of signs held aloft by protestors who had come to register the injustice of the chokehold death of a black man by a police officer on Staten Island last summer for allegedly selling loose cigarettes. As transgressions go, Garner’s offense roughly rivaled staring at oneself on a video display in the threat it posed to the general welfare.

(Photo by Brian Browdie)
(Photo by Brian Browdie)

“This is a clear-cut case of death by broken windows policing,” Stan Williams, a labor organizer from Brooklyn, told a reporter. “Was he selling loosies that day? If he was, take him to jail.”

As if the death of Garner, 43, who stood six feet three and whom locals described as a gentle giant, were not tragedy enough, the death of another black man at the hands of police suggests that America itself suffers from an illness of injustice that undermines the ideal that draws people here from around the world to snap selfies and pursue their dreams.

Protestors stage a die-in at Grand Central Terminal (Photo by Brian Browdie)
Protestors stage a die-in at Grand Central Terminal (Photo by Brian Browdie)

On Wednesday, beneath the LED displays for Dunkin Donuts, Stella Artois and a multitude of other products that illuminate Times Square, a series of signs penned in Sharpie spoke of a reality that has characterized America for far too long. “We want an indictment,” read one. “I can’t breathe,” read another, quoting Garner’s words as he lay dying.

(Photo by Brian Browdie)
(Photo by Brian Browdie)

“Mr. Garner’s death is one of several recent incidents across the country that have tested the sense of trust that must exist between law enforcement and the communities they are charged to serve and protect,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement Wednesday announcing that the Department of Justice will proceed with a federal civil rights investigation.

“This is not a New York issue or a Ferguson issue alone,” Holder added. He’s right of course. As President Obama said Wednesday, “This is an American problem.”

“We can’t imagine we’re the city on the hill or a country where equality reigns when people are being brutalized,” said Williams. As another protestor remarked to a reporter from Europe 1 radio: “I just feel like everyone should give a shit about this.”

Categories
Law

House GOPers vote to sue President Obama, but legal hurdles await

The House of Representatives is not letting a lack of legal authority stand in the way of handing President Obama a political setback.

On July 30, the House voted to file a federal lawsuit against the president for allegedly exceeding the bounds of his constitutional power.

The resolution authorizes the House to “initiate litigation for actions by the President or other executive branch officials inconsistent with their duties under the Constitution of the United States.”

In a report that accompanied the vote, the Republican members of the House Rules Committee accuse the president of “executive overreach” in a series of policy areas, including the administration’s implementation of the Affordable Care Act, the president’s transfer of five prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay to the Taliban in return for the handover of Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, and the administration’s ordering the Department of Homeland Security to defer action on deportation of certain children who enter the U.S. illegally.

The resolution passed by a vote of 225-201, with no Democrats voting for the measure and five Republicans voting against it.

Though one can debate the political motives of the resolution’s proponents, they likely will be unable to satisfy the prerequisites for filing a lawsuit in federal court.

The Supreme Court has ruled that members of Congress lack standing, which requires parties who seek to file a lawsuit in federal court to show that they have suffered a concrete injury. In that case, the court held that six members of Congress lacked a basis for alleging in a federal lawsuit that the law authorizing the line-item veto was unconstitutional. Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (1997).

In Raines, the  court based its decision on a finding that the members of Congress did not have a sufficient personal stake in the dispute to file suit, and that other avenues for challenging the law existed. As Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote for the majority,

We also note that our conclusion neither deprives Members of Congress of an adequate remedy (since they may repeal the Act or exempt appropriations bills from its reach), nor forecloses the Act from constitutional challenge (by someone who suffers judicially cognizable injury as a result of the Act).

In the resolution that passed the House on July 30, the resolution’s proponents acknowledge the problem that a lack of standing presents. However, the majority leans on an analysis by several law processors, including Elizabeth Price Foley, a professor at Florida International University School of Law.

According to the majority, in Professor Foley’s analysis of the case law:

The House would have Article III standing if it (a) were acting as an institution rather than a small group of aggrieved members and (b) if it suffered an institutional injury in the sense that the President’s executive action caused Congress’ vote on a particular issue to be `nullified.’ In addition, Professor Foley stated that the courts will likely analyze whether `prudential factors’ bolster or weaken the case for granting congressional standing. These factors include: (a) whether the institution has explicit authorization to bring the lawsuit; (b) whether there has been a `benevolent suspension’ of law in which no private plaintiff has been harmed and in which case only Congress would have standing; and (c) whether the legislature has exhausted its legislative remedies against the executive.

Many experts disagree. Tara Grove, a law professor at William and Mary, told the Wall Street Journal, that she “would be very surprised” if the court grants standing. “We’re in uncharted waters, and I think any judicial court would want to avoid weighing in,” said Grove.

Thomas Mann, a congressional scholar at the Brookings Institution. noted that because the House isn’t actually harmed, a federal judge would be inclined to toss out the lawsuit. “I don’t see how [House Speaker John] Boehner, authorized by a vote of the House, could possibly get standing as an injured party under the court’s cases and controversies jurisdiction,” Mann told the Scripps Howard Foundation.

House Democrats forced a series of votes on related resolutions that opponents of the resolution hope will underscore what they charge is the partisan nature of the suit. The votes, which the Rules Committee defeated along party lines, would have required, among other things, the House’s general counsel to disclose how much is spent on the lawsuit each week, to prevent the hiring of any law firm that lobbies on implementation of the Affordable Care Act, and to require the House’s lawyers to explain the likelihood of success in the lawsuit or how they think they will overcome the legal obstacles presented by Supreme Court precedent.

For his part, President Obama, a former constitutional law scholar, dismissed the resolution as “a political stunt.”

“Every vote they’re taking like that means a vote they’re not taking to actually help you,” the president told an audience in Kansas City, Missouri. He went on to urge Republicans to “stop just hating all the time.”