enlarge

Happy Saturday night, folks! It's Blue Gal from The Professional Left Podcast, bringing you this week's podcast round up. Be aware that these podcasts are also available on i-Tunes, and may not be safe for work.

Tomcast from Tom Dispatch: Barbara Ehrenreich, author of the acclaimed Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America, talks about her latest project to fund investigative journalism focused on poverty in the United States and the financial reality of being part of our nation's working poor.

The Dinner Party: Satirist Christopher Buckley on international (etiquette) relations.

Lee Camp (video): 15 Crucial Facts Never Heard on the Mainstream Media.

Open Thread below....

Ok folks, comin to you live(kinda) from WC&L. The new Bonnie Raitt. First release in 7 years. And our own Mike Finnigan (formerly of Mike's Blog Round Up) backing up on the Hammond Organ. Tell us what you think, and add to this. Lets see what you got folks. On the slide.

Slipstream, Bonnie Raitt
	Artist: Bonnie Raitt Price: $8.69 (As of 05/19/12 05:45 pm details)

enlarge

Credit: Acme

1936 Democratic Convention - some things are destined never to change. Ballyhoo is one of them.

Click here to view this media

On this evening there were seconding speeches, and pleas from the Chairman to keep the hyperbole down to five minutes apiece. On this evening too, there was sufficient boredom going on in the broadcast studio that such journalistic greats as H.V. Kaltenborn and Edward R. Murrow were reduced to interviewing delegates to find out which was the youngest at the convention - and in Murrow's case, interviewing the on-site barber to get the "scoop" on "just what goes on in a barber shop during a convention". Pretty weighty stuff, but no less strange than the endless trivia and human interest stories we deal with now.

So here is the last hour of the convention day for June 26th 1936, the seconding speeches, as presented by CBS Radio, hosted by Robert Trout.

Occupy Wall Street protester, Jessica Hall, was arrested by the NYPD last November 17th and faced the same charges as Alexander Arbuckle, who was acquitted on Tuesday in the first Occupy arrest case to go to trial.

Again, just as in Arbuckle's case, Hall was acquitted after the NYPD's own surveillance video showed that police lied were mistaken in their testimony.

Via:

On the stand, Hall's arresting officer, Sgt. Michael Soldo, said he arrested her because she was blocking traffic. But as Soldo admitted under cross-examination, and as the NYPD's own video documentation confirmed, it was actually the NYPD metal barricades running all the way across William Street that was preventing vehicles from passing.

At the time of her arrest, Hall was about a foot away from the police barricades.

After Soldo's testimony, Hall's lawyers, Marty Stolar and Elena Cohen, moved to dismiss. Judge Matthew Sciarrino agreed that the prosecution hadn't made its case.

"The police arrested people willy-nilly without any determination that they had actually committed the offenses that they were charged with," Stolar told the Voice afterwards. "That's what tends to criminalize protest activity."

Much like the Blackwater private security contractors, the police have "qualified immunity," making it unlikely that they'll face any consequences for lying misrepresenting the facts regardless of how many of these arrests come to trial and clear the protesters of any legal violations.

I keep mulling this over, and I can't think of any way even Republican judges can make this constitutional. But it's mindboggling that they would even try to give the legislative branch the power to decide whether a state AG is permitted to bring a prosecution without the approval of the politicians. Imagine if it was illegal for the state AGs to go after bank fraud without the permission of the politicians they've bought! They already own almost everything, I guess this is their way of trying to snatch that final crumb:

A year ago, even a divining rod would have been tempting to a reporter trying to tease out details about the workings of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). The group?s corporate, ideological and lawmaker members wouldn?t admit to an association, much less describe the model bills cooked up at its cushy confabs.

Today, it?s like shooting fish in a barrel. One need only pick up one of the 4,000 documents recently obtained by Common Cause, which has filed complaints against the group here and at the national level, and out tumble nuggets of political chicanery.

Exhibit A: The agenda from last week?s ALEC meeting in Charlotte, N.C., where its task forces polished proposed bills that are likely to pop up in the next legislative session here and around the country.At the meeting, ALEC?s Civil Justice Task Force considered a proposal entitled the ALEC Attorney General Authority Act. The boilerplate is pretty impenetrable -- one more reason lawmakers don?t write these themselves -- but the summary attached for members? advance consideration lays out the gist pretty neatly:

?Just as a private attorney cannot bring a suit on behalf of a client without the client agreeing and authorizing such action, and then only within the guidelines allowed by the client, so it should be with the attorney general. Rather than an attorney general deciding on his or her own what authority the office may have to bring a lawsuit, the authority should be defined by the state as reflected by the specific decisions of the legislature via statute. The legislature, not the attorney general, is best positioned to balance the competing concerns that go into the decision of whether to allow a cause of action and under what circumstances.?

In even plainer English: AGs, who are typically the consumer?s lone public advocate these days, may not file suit against, say, a tobacco company, a mortgage fraudster or a national company flaunting state law, unless the legislature passes a bill saying he -- or in our case, she -- can.

"This legislation would have prevented [an attorney general] from suing tobacco manufacturers in the ?90s for tobacco-related health costs associated with the Medicaid program,? said Mike Dean, head of Common Cause of Minnesota. ?It is easy to see why corporations would want to stop these types of lawsuits because tobacco manufacturer were forced to pay $6.1 billion in a settlement to the state of Minnesota."

[...] The proposed law would also force the AG, when she does take action, to first exhaust all administrative remedies: ?For example,? explained the summary the group sent to members in advance of last week?s meeting, ?just as a citizen would usually have to go before the state Public Service Commission to challenge the reasonableness of a utility rate, so should the Attorney General when the Attorney General is suing on behalf of the citizens of the state to challenge the reasonableness of utility rates.?

It probably goes without saying that a legislature that would tie its AG?s hands thusly probably would not be terribly quick to enact statutes directing the state?s attorney to take action against the corporate interests that wrote the model bill in the first place.

Lucky sky-watchers in the western U.S. are in for a treat Sunday: an annular eclipse. [More]

Earthquakes often precede explosive volcanic eruptions such as the devastating outburst from Mount St. Helens in 1980. But attempts to use tremors to predict the timing and force of such explosions have proved unsuccessful for decades. Now multidisciplinary teams of researchers have developed models that could help warn of disastrous eruptions hours to days before they happen.

The spiral-shaped organ of Corti, found in the cochlea, houses the sensitive hair cells that convert sound vibrations into nerve impulses. These signals then travel along the auditory nerve to the brain.

Today is International Fascination of Plants Day , so I wanted to share some plant science that I have recently been fascinated by. I’ve become a bit obsessed with research on growing plants in space, how plants respond to microgravity , and the potential for space agriculture. Plant research in space focuses on growing plants for long-term space flight, where the plants can not only feed the astronauts but also scrub the air of carbon dioxide, produce oxygen, and recycle water. The exchange of nutrients and wastes between plants and astronauts can form the cornerstone of a bioregenerative life support system (BLSS) for orbiting space stations and perhaps even future space colonies.

Figure from "Seeds in Space" by Mary Musgrave, Seed Science Research, 2002.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

WASHINGTON - A federal appeals court today upheld a major provision of the Voting Rights Act in a case involving Shelby County, Alabama, affirming the need for legislation that helps protect minorities’ right to vote.

“This important ruling recognizes the need to uphold the Voting Rights Act in order to ensure every eligible American citizen can vote, regardless of race or language ability,” said Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project. “Our cherished right to vote is under a continuous attack in Alabama and across the country, and millions of voters could be blocked from voting in upcoming elections. It is crystal clear that we must have these protections in place so that does not happen.”

The ACLU had intervened in the case, Shelby County v. Holder, on behalf of the Alabama State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and four Shelby County voters.

Today’s ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirms that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act – which protects racial and language minorities’ access to voting – should remain in place. Section 5 requires certain jurisdictions like Shelby County that have a history of discriminatory voting practices to get advance approval from the federal government before changing their election laws. Shelby County attempted to circumvent this requirement by implementing election plans that dilute the minority vote.

To read the court’s opinion, go to: www.aclu.org/voting-rights/shelby-county-alabama-v-holder-opinion-us-cou...

To read more about the case, including the original motion to intervene, go to: www.aclu.org/voting-rights/aclu-moves-intervene-alabama-voting-rights-ac...

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org

WASHINGTON – An amendment that would have explicitly banned indefinite detention in the United States and repealed a controversial section of last year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was voted down by the House of Representatives today. The final vote was 182-237.

Today’s amendment, introduced by lead sponsors Reps. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Justin Amash (R-Mich.), was offered on this year’s NDAA. It was supported by a broad coalition of groups, which ranged from the ACLU to the Gun Owners of America to the United Methodist Church.

The vote for the Smith-Amash amendment was bipartisan, with 19 Republican members backing the amendment.

“Congress today rejected a chance to start to clean up the mess that it made last year with the NDAA indefinite detention provisions,” said Christopher Anders, ACLU Senior Legislative Counsel. “No president should ever have the power to order the military to imprison civilians located far from any battlefield. By rejecting this amendment, the House of Representatives failed in their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law.”

The coalition letter in support of the Smith-Amash amendment is here: www.aclu.org/national-security/coalition-memo-house-urging-yes-vote-smithamash-amendment-fy2012-national-defense
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org

WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice (DOJ) today released federal regulations implementing the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA), representing the first time that the federal government has issued national standards to help end sexual abuse in prisons, jails and youth detention centers.

The ACLU supports the DOJ’s efforts to prevent sexual abuse. While these regulations represent strong national standards to protect child and adult prisoners, including LGBT inmates, they have left unclear whether there will be adequate protection for immigration detainees.

Protections for Child and Adult Prisoners

The following statement can be attributed to Amy Fettig, senior staff counsel, ACLU National Prison Project:

“Sexual abuse should never be a penalty for any crime – and today’s regulations are the first step to ending the shameful history of prison rape in our country.

To uphold Congress’s intent in passing PREA, regulations are not enough on their own. DOJ must ensure the regulations are enforced through regular and independent oversight. The administration must develop a proper national monitoring tool and work with state and local correctional systems and the federal Bureau of Prisons to ensure full implementation of the PREA standards.”

Protections for Immigration Detainees

The following statement can be attributed to Joanne Lin, ACLU legislative counsel:

“By tasking the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to promulgate its own PREA regulations, the administration has further delayed and left unclear whether hundreds of thousands of immigration detainees – overwhelmingly Latinos – who are annually confined in DHS detention facilities will receive adequate protection.

"DHS has an abysmal track record of preventing and investigating the serious and systemic problems of sexual assault and abuse in its facilities. With the continuing problem of rampant sexual assault in immigration detention facilities across the country, it’s highly questionable whether DHS is able to police itself, particularly because its own internal standards that will serve as a blueprint for PREA compliance fall far short of PREA’s protections for detainee safety.

"DHS has asserted that it will promulgate regulations consistent with PREA in eight months that will go above and beyond its model internal standards. The ACLU will continue to press DHS to ensure it fulfills its obligation to extend PREA protections to all immigration detainees."

Protections for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex and Gender Non-Conforming Inmates

The following statement can be attributed to Leslie Cooper, senior staff attorney, ACLU LGBT Project:

“The rule includes significant protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and gender non-conforming inmates, who the DOJ recognizes are at greater risk of sexual abuse in confinement. We are especially pleased that the rule requires that the determination of whether to house transgender and intersex inmates in male or female facilities must be made on a case-by-case basis, and bans searches of these inmates for the sole purpose of determining their genital status.”
 

Legislature’s Revision Leaves Worst Aspects of Draconian Law Intact

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

MONTGOMERY, AL – Alabama lawmakers today approved a slightly revised version to its notorious anti-immigration law, which the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama said did nothing to address the many flaws in the measure.

The bill was passed by both houses of the Alabama legislature and will now go to Governor Robert Bentley for signature.

“Alabama took a step backward in approving this ill-conceived measure,” said Olivia Turner, executive director of the ACLU of Alabama. “Lawmakers were deaf to the concerns of many residents, business owners and police who realize this law is a bad idea. Alabama will continue to pay a severe price for a law that is almost impossible to enforce properly and blatantly unconstitutional.”

Instead of meaningful reforms, Turner said, the bill:

• Maintains the requirement from the original bill, HB56, that schools check the citizenship status of their students.
• Continues to require police to detain and arrest people based only on a reasonable suspicion that they are undocumented immigrants. Turner said that would further tax overcrowded jails and strain the resources of law enforcement agencies already strapped for funds.
• Undermines public safety by failing to provide adequate protection for crime victims after they cooperate with law enforcement, thereby discouraging them from reporting crime for fear of being questioned about their immigration status.
• Continues to ban landlords from renting to undocumented immigrants.
• Creates a “Scarlet Letter” provision that would require the state Department of Homeland Security to publish on its website the names and locations of undocumented immigrants who have appeared in state courts.

“The Alabama Legislature has done virtually nothing to solve the civil rights disaster they created,” said Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “Two federal courts have already blocked key provisions of the law from going into effect, because they violate the U.S. Constitution.  If the Alabama legislature wants to avoid a loss, they should repeal the law.”

The federal 11th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked two provisions of HB56 on March 8. One voided contracts signed by undocumented immigrants. The other bans undocumented immigrants from obtaining licenses and certain other services from Alabama. The appeals court and a lower court had previously blocked other provisions of the law from going into effect.

The ACLU and a coalition of civil rights groups appeared before the 11th Circuit on March 1 and argued that HB56 and a similar law in Georgia endanger public safety; invite racial profiling of Latinos, Asians, and others who appear foreign; and interfere with federal law. The court said it would not rule until after the U.S. Supreme Court issues its decision in the challenge to Arizona’s anti-immigrant law, SB 1070. That ruling is expected in late June.

Judge Again Rules for Civil Libertarians in Struggle Over TRU-ID

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

Judge Paul Innes of Mercer County Superior Court today upheld a temporary restraining order obtained by the ACLU-NJ to suspend TRU-ID, New Jersey's implementation of the federal Real ID Act. This decision means that New Jersey citizens who do not wish to comply with TRU-ID may opt to obtain their licenses using the existing 6-point ID system instead, at least until a more complete hearing for a preliminary injunction scheduled for August 3. The ACLU-NJ expects the State to appeal today's ruling.

During today’s hearing, Judge Innes recognized the TRU-ID implementation as "a wholesale change in the requirement for issuance of a New Jersey driver’s license."

The ACLU-NJ filed its lawsuit against the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission on May 4 because the MVC failed to issue accompanying regulations as required by law, denying the public a chance to comment on the new licensing standards. The MVC first made its news public in early April.

The ACLU-NJ and many other groups have concerns about the national Real ID and New Jersey-based TRU-ID programs based on privacy, costs and personal safety.

ACLU-NJ Executive Director Deborah Jacobs issues the following statement in response to today's ruling:

"Today’s decision reaffirms the fact that New Jersey can't impose a unilateral decision that affects the lives of all residents without first hearing citizens' concerns. Democracy means consent of the governed, not acquiescence to the government."