Civil & Human Rights

Nationwide strike by fast-food employees on August 29

by

Posted  by AzBlueMeanie:

A coalition of labor, religious and other groups are calling for a nationwide strike by fast-food employees on August 29. Erik Sherman at CBS MoneyWatch reports, Fast-food workers urged to stage nationwide strike:

The call for a strike came this week from a public relations agency
that counts both the Service Employees International Union and United
Food & Commercial Workers as clients. Both labor groups are among
dozens of local and national religious, political, and union groups
supporting the call for strikes. Last month, the same groups supported walkouts in some fast-food restaurants
across seven cities. Others that have supported the event are the
United Auto Workers, the Presbyterian Church USA, individual churches
and synagogues like St. John's Catholic Church of St. Louis, and some
members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, including Minnesota
Congressman Keith Ellison.

The groups are calling for a
minimum wage of $15 an hour for fast-food workers, along with more
protections for employees wishing to unionize. According to the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average hourly wage last year for the
nation's roughly 505,000 fast-food cooks was $9.03 an hour, which amounts to $18,780 per year. The 2.9 million food preparation and serving workers had an average hourly wage of $9, or annual income of $18,720.

For many fast-food employees, even those low wages overstate their pay.
The annual wage estimates assume full-time employment of 2,080 hours a
year, or 40 hours a week, for a full 52 weeks. Many franchises limit
workers to working part-time, which keeps them from qualifying for
health care and other benefits.

Arizona follows Justice Antonin Scalia’s advice

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Back in June, the U.S. Supreme Court in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona struck down part of Arizona's Prop. 200 (2004) — the part which required proof of citizenship to register to vote, even when using the federal voter registration form which only requires an attestation of citizenship under penalty of perjury — on the grounds of federal preemption of state law.

You may recall that Justice Antonin Scalia in his opinion was helpful in providing a roadmap to the state of Arizona on how to proceed further with litigation in a manner that would meet with his approval. Scalia practically invited Arizona to try again.

Arizona has been following Justice Antonin Scalia's advice, and is now ready to file yet another lawsuit at taxpayer expense. Attorney General Tom Horne, Secretary of State Ken Bennett, and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the actual author of Prop. 200 and SB 1070 (not Russell Pearce), are set to file the suit today in U.S. District Court.

Democrats’ 50 state voting rights project

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Washington Post reported on Tuesday Dems
fire back in voting wars:

Last week, operatives tied to the Democratic Legislative Campaign
Committee launched what they call a 50-state initiative to promote
voting reforms that would make it easier to cast a ballot. [See Voting Rights Project.] The effort is
being run by American Values First, an outside group organized under
Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and run by Michael
Sargeant, the DLCC’s executive director. Democrats will push legislation
similar to a Colorado measure signed into law earlier this year that
requires all elections to be conducted by mail.

Legislators in at least seven other states will propose bills that
would tweak election laws in other ways. In some states controlled by
Democrats, the measures have a good chance to pass. In other states with
divided control or that operate under Republican control, Democrats
plan to use the measures as political cudgels, painting the GOP as
opposed to basic voting rights.

The man who would kill comprehensive immigration reform

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Steve Benen reports Key House Republican looks to kill immigration reform:

GoodlatteHouse Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) rejected comprehensive reform in February, but left himself some wiggle room ever since.

That is, until yesterday.

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) didn't breed much optimism on Monday about
his plans for comprehensive immigration reform, telling a town hall
crowd that the House would act, but not on a "special pathway to
citizenship" that Democrats support. […]

Goodlatte said he sympathized with young undocumented immigrants who
wanted to gain legal status so they can work and attend college more
easily. But he said he would not support moving forward before other
border security and enforcement mechanisms were in place. He said he
also opposes allowing a special pathway to citizenship for other
undocumented immigrants — such as Dreamers' parents — that he feared
may encourage more unauthorized immigration.

‘North Carolina’s new voter suppression law shows why the Voting Rights Act is still necessary’

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Professor Richard L.
Hasen is Chancellor’s Professor of Law and Political Science at the
University of California, Irvine. Hasen is a nationally recognized
expert in election law and campaign finance regulation, and is co-author
of a leading casebook on election law. He is editor of the Election Law Blog.

Hasen writes at Slate today that "North Carolina’s new voter suppression law shows why the Voting Rights Act is still necessary." Supreme Error:

Usually it takes years to judge when the Supreme Court gets something very wrong. Think of Justice Kennedy’s opinion for the court in the 2010 campaign-finance case, Citizens United,
freeing corporations to spend money on elections. He wrote that the
“appearance of [corporate] influence or access will not cause the
electorate to lose faith in our democracy,” a point that remains hotly
debated even as the amount of money in federal elections skyrockets.

But the conservative justices’ decision this past June in Shelby County v. Holder, striking down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, has already unleashed in North Carolina the most restrictive voting law we’ve seen since the 1965 enactment of the VRA. Texas is restoring its voter ID law
which had been blocked (pursuant to the VRA) by the federal government.
And more is to come in other states dominated by Republican
legislatures.