Civil & Human Rights

U.S. Department of Justice sues Texas over Voter ID

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The U.S. Department of Justice has previously filed a Section 3 claim under the Voting Rights Act against the State of Texas for its discriminatory redistricting maps.

On Thursday, the U.S. Department of Justice dropped the other shoe, as anticipated, suing the State of Texas for its Voter ID law. You can read the DOJ complaint
Here.

The Washington Post reports Justice Department sues Texas over voter ID law:

The Justice Department on Thursday redoubled its efforts to challenge
state voting laws, suing Texas over its new voter ID measure as part of
a growing political showdown over electoral rights.

The move marked the latest bid by the Obama administration to
counter a Supreme Court ruling that officials have said threatens the
voting rights of minorities. It also signaled that the administration
will probably take legal action in voting rights cases in other states,
including North Carolina, where the governor signed a voter ID law this
month.

Rep. Matt Salmon on immigration reform – ‘no citizenship for you!’

by

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

At least one editor of The Arizona Republic appears to be OK with the Republican National Committee (RNC) position of "no citizenship for you!" in immigration reform. The Republic editorials have previously been supportive of the "Gang of Eight" comprehensive immigration reform bill sponsored by Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake.

Joanna Allhands, writes Does Salmon have the right immigration answer?

It’s becoming increasingly clear that the immigration reforms most
likely to pass the U.S. House won’t involve a path to citizenship for
adults. Too many in the GOP simply won’t go for it.

But can reform still be meaningful without that piece?

U.S. Rep. Matt Salmon, one of the Republicans who remains against the
path to citizenship, is pressing to grant undocumented adults a type of
provisional status that they can renew every few years. It would allow
them to get driver’s licenses and work here legally as long as they are
employed and don’t break the law. But it would just be that: presence,
not belonging.

When asked Wednesday during a meeting with The Republic‘s
editorial board if such a status would create a second class of
citizens, Salmon answered with a question: “Well, what are they now? …
They’re not really anything.”

Offering legal presence, he said, at least moves the ball up the field.

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.