LSPC

Two New Ban the Box Bills in California!

lspcadmin — Mon, 20 May 2013 11:53:42 +0000

All of Us or None, the grassroots organizing component of LSPC, led by formerly incarcerated people, started working on the Ban the Box Campaign in 2004. The overall goal of Ban the Box is to remove all structural discrimination against people with conviction histories in employment, housing and the provision of other services. Since that time the campaign to end discrimination in employment practices has spread across the country. To date, 50 cities and 9 states have passed some sort of legislation that “bans the box” on employment forms that asks “Have you ever been convicted of a felony?” and delays criminal background checks till later in the application process. You can see a recent report (April 2013) outlining these developments here.

LSPC and All of Us or None are sponsoring two very important employment rights bills in the California legislature. These bills will open up employment opportunities for people with conviction records all over California.

AB 218 helps qualified Californians compete for jobs and promotes public safety by reducing unnecessary job barriers. The bill applies to state agencies and city and county employers by delaying a criminal background check inquiry until later in the application process.
AB 870 will apply these same protections to employment with state contractors (that is businesses that contract with the state to provide goods or services).

Currently, both bills are being held in “suspense” before the Assembly Appropriations Committee. This means that there is a presumed “cost” associated with these bills that needs to be considered. Well, we know the “cost” that is associated with not giving people with conviction histories a fair chance at employment; a cost that impacts entire families and communities. In fact, according to an economist’s estimate in 2008, the severe employment discrimination against people with conviction histories costs the US economy, including our communities, between $57 and $65 billion in reduced goods and services.

This Friday, May 24, a Committee hearing will decide whether these bills move forward for the Assembly floor vote. Assemblymember Mike Gatto, Chair of the Appropriations Committee, is the primary decision-maker about whether these bills will move ahead. He has not yet committed to remove these bills from suspense and allow a floor vote. You can help by calling him and urging him to let these bills move forward – click here for the easy action steps. Thanks!

Grassroots Leaders to Legislators: We Have the Right To Remain Unsilent!

lspcadmin — Thu, 09 May 2013 20:07:24 +0000

Media Advisory – May 9, 2013

CONTACT: Martha Wallner (510)388-7150 or Denise Mewbourne (on day of – May 13) (510)967-9821

What: Formerly Incarcerated People’s Quest for Democracy Legislative Briefing on bills that impact the ability of formerly incarcerated people to fully participate in society. Following the briefing, participants will conduct lobbying visits to their representatives to weigh in on bills that concern their right to vote, work and contribute to their communities.

Who: The Quest for Democracy day is organized by a number of organizations including All of Us or None, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, The Center for Young Women’s Development (San Francisco), Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice/CURYJ (Oakland), Project Safe Return (Richmond), Fathers & Families of San Joaquin (Stockton), the Youth Justice Coalition, A New Way of Life (Los Angeles) and others.

When: Monday, May 13, 2013

Where: 9:00-9:30 am: Gathering on west side of the Capitol – Sacramento, CA
10am: Legislative briefing on the 4th floor of the State Capitol Rm 4202

Background: On Monday May 13, grassroots leaders from throughout the state of California, many of them executive directors of community service organizations, will participate in a legislative briefing and day of lobbying on public safety issues. The Formerly Incarcerated People’s Quest for Democracy Legislative Briefing will include presentations on voting and employment rights as well as improving opportunities for incarcerated and re-entry youth.

The trip was organized in response to An Open Call that went out several weeks ago stating: As formerly incarcerated people we have been told on more than one occasion: “You have the right to remain silent!” However, when the suffering becomes too unbearable and negatively impacts all aspects of our personal, profession, family and community life, we have an obligation to speak up. The need to speak up is especially acute when it appears that this suffering is designed to outlast our jail or prison sentences.

“For many of us this is our freedom ride,” said co-organizer, Dorsey Nunn, Executive Director of Legal Services for Prisoners with Children. “Some of us have been on many bus rides going in the wrong direction. We are going to Sacramento to knock on doors to gain access to democracy. There’s a lot of talk about ‘reentry.’ We want re-entry into democracy, we pay taxes too. It is difficult to remain silent while current policies drain our resources to the disadvantage of our families, our community and ourselves” said Nunn. Co-organizer, Susan Burton, Executive Director of A New Way of Life, said ” The reason for this trip is nothing less than the full restoration of our civil and human rights. We contribute a lot to our communities and with better public safety policies we can contribute much much more.”

The Quest for Democracy briefing and lobbying visits are timed to coincide with the California legislature’s consideration of numerous bills that affect the participant’s right to vote, work and feed their families. These include two employment related bills, AB218(Dickinson) and AB870(Jones-Sawyer), designed to give people with conviction histories a fair chance when applying for a job. These bills build on “Ban the Box” policies that have already been implemented in over 50 cities and 5 other states across the country. AB 149 (Weber) would facilitate voting for people being held in county jails, 60-70% of whom, depending on the county, are being held in jail because they cannot afford bail. SB 283 Hancock would repeal California’s exclusion of people with felony drug convictions from receiving Cal-Fresh or CalWorks aid and follow 14 other states that have opted out of this exclusion. Youth advocates will speak out on several bills improving opportunities for incarcerated youth and youth reentry including SB 61(Yee) and AB915 (Jones-Sawyer).

Tentative Agenda: Formerly Incarcerated People’s Quest for Democracy Legislative Briefing - State Capitol, Rm. 4202

Building Authentic Partnership with formerly incarcerated people to craft policy that works
10:00-10:15am Welcome and Overview
Introductions of Formerly Incarcerated leaders and acknowledgement of elected officials in the room (30 seconds each) Name, Organization, Title, Legislative District & County

Voting rights – Restoring democracy for formerly incarcerated, AB 938 (Weber) 10:15-10:30am
Dorsey Nunn, Legal Services with Prisoners with Children
Susan Burton, A New Way of Life
Formerly incarcerated clergy member, PICO
Assembly member Dr. Shirley Weber, District 79 – invited

Youth Justice – Improving opportunities for incarcerated youth and youth reentry, SB 61(Yee) and AB915 (Jones-Sawyer) 10:30-10:45am
Tanisha Denard, Tyrone Sinclair, Kim McGill, Youth Justice Coalition
George Galvis, Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice
Sammy Nunez, Fathers and Families of San Joaquin
Senator Leland Yee Ph.D., representing San Francisco and San Mateo Counties – invited

Ban the Box -Building a stronger economy for CA by removing employment barriers for formerly incarcerated AB 870 (Jones-Sawyer) and AB 218 (Dickinson) 10:45-11:00am
Linda Evans, All of Us or None
LaVern Vaughn , Safe Return Project – CCISCO
Marlene Sanchez, Center for Young Women’s Development
Assembly member Reggie Jones-Sawyer, District 59 – invited
Assembly member Roger Dickinson, District 7 – invited

Q & A 11:00-11:10am

Closing 11:10-11:5 am

An Open Call To Support Formerly Incarcerated People’s Quest for Democracy!

lspcadmin — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 22:43:36 +0000

What: A day-long grassroots lobbying visit to the California State Capitol led by formerly incarcerated people.

When: May 13, 2013.

Why: As formerly incarcerated people we have been told on more than one occasion: “you have the right to remain silent!”

However, when the suffering becomes too unbearable and negatively impacts all aspects of our personal, professional, family and community life, we have an obligation to speak up. The need to speak up is especially acute when it appears that this suffering has been designed to outlast our jail or prison sentences.

We invite our brothers and sisters, supporters, allies, friends and comrades to join us and support the formerly incarcerated members of our community who have been rendered silent.

On several occasions we have been asked, why this year? Why not go to Sacramento some other time? Here’s why THIS is an opportune time. There are currently a number of bills being considered that directly relate to our capacity to thrive as human beings. The stakes are high: our right to vote, our right to work, our right not to languish in a gang-database for the rest of our lives, and our ability to seek expungement relief – all these issues are being considered. We are witnessing the greatest change in the criminal injustice system in over 50 years. If this is not the time, then when?

We are just now beginning to secure support for the buses that will be rolling out of both Northern and Southern California. We are lining up various legislators to support this effort. We are beginning to contact the various caucuses in the State House for support.

If you are formerly incarcerated – Please join us! And to all other people of good will, please come out and support formerly incarcerated people in our fight for inclusion. Come out and support us speaking in our own voice. Help us speak truth to power, regain our dignity and make California a better, safer place for all Californians.

For More Information Contact:
Jerry D. Elster                         Fanya Baruti
Organizer, All of Us or None                 Organizer, All of Us or None
(415)625-7042                                  (562)688-0472
jerry@prisonerswithchildren.org       Fanya@newwayoflife.org

Click here for a pdf version of An Open Call to Support Q4D May 13

SUPPORTING THE CALL:

All Of Us Or None (Statewide)
Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice / CURYJ (Oakland)
Project Rebound-Associated Students Inc (SFSU)
Center for Young Women’s Development /CYWD (San Francisco)
New Way Of Life (Los Angeles)
Fathers and Families of San Joaquin
Safe Return (Richmond)
Contra Costa County Interfaith Supporting Community Organization/CCISCO
PICO California
California Coalition of Women Prisoners / CCWP
OneFam (Oakland)
United Playaz (San Francisco)
Homies Unidos (Los Angeles)
Starting Over (Riverside)
Life Support Alliance (Sacramento)
San Francisco Bay View National
Black Newspaper
Occupy 4 Prisoners (Bay Area)
Youth Justice Coalition (Los Angeles)
Formerly Incarcerated and Convicted People’s Movement /FICPM (Nat’l)
Legal Services for Prisoners with Children (San Francisco)
Families to Amend Three Strikes (Sacramento)
Office of Restorative Justice of the Los Angeles Archdiocese
Justice Reform Coalition
Associated Prison Ministries
United for Change
NMT/The Ripple Effect
FYI Trilogy
Insight Prison Project
Prison Watch Network
California Families Against Solitary
Confinement /CFASC
CURB Coalition

Judge to Gov. Jerry Brown: Motion Dismissed!

lspcadmin — Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:41:20 +0000

The state of California’s effort to stop Legal Services for Prisoners with Children’s lawsuit against extreme isolation & solitary confinement in Pelican Bay has failed. With yesterday’s ruling by Chief District Judge Claudia Wilken our case on behalf of plaintiffs in Pelican Bay moves forward. Here’s the press release by co-counsels on the case, the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Judge Refuses to Dismiss Pelican Bay Solitary Confinement Case

press@ccrjustice.org

April 10, 2013, Oakland – Last night, a federal judge rejected the State of California’s attempt to dismiss a class action lawsuit challenging prolonged solitary confinement in California’s notorious Pelican Bay prison. The case was filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and partners on behalf of prisoners in the Pelican Bay Security Housing Unit (SHU) who have spent between 10 and 28 years in solitary confinement and who staged two widely publicized hunger strikes in 2011. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) had asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that the prisoners had failed to adequately allege cruel and unusual punishment and due process violations. CDCR also asked the court to find that the case was moot in light of a two-year pilot program that purports to reform the procedures CDCR uses before indefinitely placing a prisoner in solitary confinement. The Judge disagreed, ruling that the pilot program did not moot claims that California’s use of solitary confinement denies the prisoners’ right to due process, and finding that the case raised grave Eighth Amendment claims.

Said Center for Constitutional Rights President and lead attorney Jules Lobel, “Hundreds of prisoners have languished under inhumane, torturous and unconstitutional conditions at the Pelican Bay SHU for over a decade – and many for more than 20 years – without any meaningful way of securing their release. The court’s decision ensures that these prisoners will have their day in court, and will give them an opportunity to shed light on the devastating toll of prolonged solitary confinement.”

In March, the Center for Constitutional Rights argued that the reforms implemented as part of the pilot program contain the same constitutional problems challenged in the lawsuit and have not had any effect on the plaintiffs in the case. SHU prisoners spend 22 ½ to 24 hours every day in a cramped, concrete, windowless cell. They are denied telephone calls, any physical contact with visitors, and vocational, recreational and educational programming. As of 2011, more than 500 Pelican Bay SHU prisoners had been isolated under these conditions for over 10 years; more than 200 had been there for over 15 years; and 78 had been isolated in the SHU for more than 20 years. According to attorneys, solitary confinement for as little as 15 days is widely recognized to cause lasting psychological damage and is analyzed as torture under international law. The pilot program implemented by the CDCR still allows for prisoners to be confined in extreme isolation for decades.

The judge’s ruling states that “this case presents unique circumstances, given the length and severity of the deprivations alleged….Five of the Plaintiffs here allege that they have lived in the SHU, with minimal human contact, for more than twenty consecutive years: even within the ‘context of the prison system,’ this represents a significant deprivation of liberty.”

Said Carol Strickman of Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, “We are gratified to receive the court’s ruling today. We are now gathering the evidence to prove our claims. In May, we will be filing a motion to certify the case as a class action suit, which will expand the number of prisoners who will benefit from our ultimate victory.”

In addition to refusing to dismiss the case, the court denied California’s request to stay, for the duration of the pilot program, the case’s due process claim, which alleges that prisoners are denied meaningful review of their SHU placement, rendering their isolation effectively permanent. Attorneys say that under the pilot program prisoners can still be placed and held in the SHU absent any gang activity, violent conduct, or serious rule infraction; they may still be labeled gang “affiliates” and confined in isolation for activities such as reading about Black history, creating or possessing cultural artwork, or writing in Swahili; and they still must wait years between each opportunity for review. Moreover, they say, even since the pilot program was implemented, some of the plaintiffs have been denied release from the SHU explicitly under the old policy. The court wrote, “Although [Defendants] have submitted a hundred-page CDCR memorandum describing the new program, they have not shown that any of the program’s new procedures are permanent.”

SHU assignments disproportionately affect Latino prisoners. The percentage of Latinos in the Pelican Bay SHU was 85 percent in 2011, far higher than their representation in the general prison population, which was 41 percent.

Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, California Prison Focus, Siegel & Yee, and the Law Offices of Charles Carbone are co-counsel on the case.

The case is Ashker v. Brown, and it amends an earlier pro se lawsuit filed by Pelican Bay SHU prisoners Todd Ashker and Danny Troxell. The case is before Judge Claudia Wilken in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

The law firm Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP is co-counsel in the case.

Read last night’s decision here.

Pelican Bay Hunger Strike Set to Resume: The Con’t Struggle To End Solitary Confinement in California

lspcadmin — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 18:28:00 +0000

Tues. 3/19
starts at 6 pm- Come early to see the SHU
UC Hastings College of the Law
198 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA
Louis B. Mayer Lounge

Join us for a panel discussion revisiting the recent Pelican Bay Hunger Strikes which are set to resume July 8th 2013, and California’s continued use of extreme isolation in solitary confinement. Also, tours of a life-sized model SHU cell will be hosted ALL day at 198 McAllister.

Speakers include:

Charles Carbone, Esq., prisoner rights attorney
Jose Murillo, UC Berkeley, student formerly incarcerated in Pelican Bay State Prison SHU for 5 years
Terry Kupers, MD, forensic mental health expert
Marie Levin, PHSS Coalition member & family member of current SHU prisoner
Azadeh Zohrabi, JD, Soros Justice Fellow, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children and PHSS

Moderated by UC Hastings Professor Hadar Aviram, creator/author of California Correctional Crisis Blog

Will the Class Action Suit Against Solitary Confinement Go Forward?

lspcadmin — Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:58:40 +0000

LSPC is co-counsel (along with the Center for Constitutional Rights and several other law firms) on a class action lawsuit against the use of solitary confinement (aka the SHU) at Pelican Bay State Prison. March 14th marks one of the first court dates for this lawsuit. Here is CCR’s press release explaining what is at stake:

PRESS RELEASE: Court Must Intervene to End Solitary Confinement

Contact: Jen Nessel, CCR, (212) 614-6449, jnessel@ccrjustice.org

David Lerner, Riptide Communications, (212) 260-5000, david@riptidecommunications.com

March 14, 2013, Oakland – Today, lawyers from the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) urged a federal judge to reject California’s attempt to dismiss a class action lawsuit challenging prolonged solitary confinement in California prisons. The case was filed on behalf of prisoners in the Security Housing Unit (SHU) at the notorious Pelican Bay State Prison who have spent between 10 and 28 years in solitary confinement and who staged two widely publicized hunger strikes in 2011. It alleges that prolonged solitary confinement violates Eighth Amendment prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment, and that the absence of meaningful review of SHU placement violates the prisoners’ right to due process. CCR lawyers argued today that nominal, temporary reforms by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), which the defendants cited as grounds for dismissing the case, have had little to no effect on the conditions challenged in the lawsuit and, thus, the case must proceed.

“The CDCR’s reforms are nothing more than window dressing. They are riddled with the same constitutional problems challenged in this lawsuit, they have had no effect on any of the plaintiffs and, in any event, they are set to expire in two years,” said Center for Constitutional Rights President Jules Lobel, who argued today. “The most important similarity, however, is that this pilot program is the third time the CDCR has promised meaningful reforms and failed to deliver. At this point it is clear that a court must intervene.”

SHU prisoners spend 22 ½ to 24 hours every day in a cramped, concrete, windowless cell. They are denied telephone calls, any physical contact with visitors, and vocational, recreational and educational programming. As of 2011, more than 500 Pelican Bay SHU prisoners have been isolated under these conditions for over 10 years; more than 200 have been there for over 15 years; and 78 have been isolated in the SHU for more than 20 years. Solitary confinement for as little as 15 days is widely recognized to cause lasting psychological damage and is analyzed as torture under international law. The pilot program implemented by the CDCR still allows for prisoners to be confined in extreme isolation for decades.

Said plaintiff and Pelican Bay SHU prisoner Luis Esquivel, “I have joined this lawsuit as a named plaintiff because I am interested in the welfare and human dignity of all people in the SHU, not just my own situation. All SHU prisoners are in this struggle together. We all want to be treated like human beings, but are not.”

Additionally, CCR attorneys argued today that the pilot program does not ameliorate the due process violations alleged in the complaint, as it still does not provide any meaningful review of prisoners’ SHU placement, rendering their isolation effectively permanent. Prisoners can still be placed and held in the SHU absent any gang activity, violent conduct, or serious rule infraction; they may still be labeled gang “affiliates” and confined in isolation for activities such as reading about Black history, creating or possessing cultural artwork, or writing in Swahili; and they still must wait years between each opportunity for review. Moreover, even since the pilot program was implemented, some of the plaintiffs have been denied release from the SHU explicitly under the old policy.

Said attorney Charles Carbone, “The pilot program is already in a tail spin. The prisoners have rejected it and it does nothing to stop long term isolation or torture. The only real fix here is to end indefinite solitary confinement in California.”

SHU assignments disproportionately affect Latino prisoners. The percentage of Latinos in the Pelican Bay SHU was 85% in 2011, far higher than their representation in the general prison population, which was 41%.

“I’ve been in solitary confinement for 16 years,” said plaintiff and Pelican Bay SHU prisoner Gabriel Reyes. “I have learned here to hope for the best, expect the worst. I hope common sense and justice rule the day, so my family and loved ones can touch and hug each other and be a family again someday. My pillow keeps getting smaller and smaller from squeezing it so much.”

On March 12, 2013, CCR submitted written testimony on solitary confinement in the United States to an Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) thematic hearing on the use of solitary in the Americas. The testimony is available here.

Legal Services for Prisoners with Children, California Prison Focus, Siegel & Yee, and the Law Offices of Charles Carbone are co-counsel on the case.

The case is Ruiz v. Brown, and it amends an earlier pro se lawsuit filed by Pelican Bay SHU prisoners Todd Ashker and Danny Troxell. The case is before Judge Claudia Wilken in The United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

The Center for Constitutional Rights is dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Founded in 1966 by attorneys who represented civil rights movements in the South, CCR is a non-profit legal and educational organization committed to the creative use of law as a positive force for social change. Visit www.ccrjustice.org and follow @theCCR.

Build to Resist – March 14th – San Francisco

lspcadmin — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:09:36 +0000

Thursday March 14th 7pm
518 Valencia St. San Francisco, 94110

Hear from former prisoners who continue to organize for a better world and activists who organize support for loved ones inside prison.

Find out how to support the next hunger strike at Pelican Bay

The goal of this event is to promote movement building with a focus on prisoners. Each movement has prisoners in common and we value our prisoners voices. When we build bridges with each other our movements get stronger. We can create a culture of resistance that is supportive and ultimately more powerful together.

Azadeh Zorabi – Prisoner Hunger Strike Solidarity Coalition, Legal Services for Prisoners with Children

Jenny Esquivel – co-author of Government Repression, Prisoner Support and partner to political prisoner Eric McDavid

Josh Harper – spent 3 years behind bars for speech activity as part of the SHAC 7

Linda Evans – former anti-imperialist political prisoner, currently organizing with All of Us or None

Prison Nation Exhibit – Merced

sarah — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:43:34 +0000

This exhibit has ended. It is available FREE for exhibition in your town from the Center for the Study of Political Graphics – Contact them for more information http://www.politicalgraphics.org/home.html
Jan. 19 – March 9, 2013
Prison Nation: Posters on the Prison Industrial Complex
An Exhibition from the Center for the Study of Political Graphics
at the UC Merced Kolligian Library – 5200 N. Lake Road, Merced, CA 95343

Program: Prison Nation Jan 24 Program

Strong Minds, Strong Movements

lspcadmin — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:25:16 +0000

San Mateo County Residents Oppose Using New Tax to Fund New Jail

lspcadmin — Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:28:46 +0000

Redwood City – At the Feb. 12, 2013 San Mateo County Board of Supervisors meeting, residents will continue their battle against controversial jail construction in Redwood City by trying to dissuade Supervisors from wasting Measure A tax revenue on the new facility. During tomorrow’s meeting, the Board will take input to determine spending priorities for the new tax. Dubbed the “Jail Tax”, the recently passed Measure A has created much controversy. The language of the measure claimed a majority of the tax revenue would be used to widen healthcare infrastructure and other social services. But residents opposing the jail point out that at least half of the yearly revenue will be used to cover operation costs for the $160 million new jail. The county has yet to gather all the funding for construction and operation costs are expected to be at least $30 million a year. Those protesting the jail will demand that the county use its resources to fund community-based drug treatment programs, reentry services for people returning home from jails and prisons, job training, after-school programs, and other community-based services.

“People who agreed to this tax did so with hopes of increasing access to social programs for working people in the County, not to throw those people in jail,” says Emily Harris of Californians United for a Responsible Budget. “For months, the supervisors tried to dismiss us when we called this a Jail Tax. We are here to challenge them to prove us wrong.”

Prior to the November 6 election, Supervisor Don Horsley replied to outcry from hundreds of county residents by saying “Nothing could be further from the truth. This is not a jail tax.” He went on to say that Measure A funds would help preserve “the safety net for people who really need help.” But Board Vice-president Dave Pine has said using Measure A funding for the jail is at the top of his list.

“If they are serious about soliciting input from residents about how to prioritize using the county’s scarce resources, then the Board needs to listen closely to what people are asking for. And people are not asking for a new jail,” said resident Manuel La Fontaine, of All of Us or None, a key organization opposing the jail.

Residents opposing the jail have continued to point out that Black and Latino residents are being locked up in San Mateo County Jail at highly disproportionate rates. These same residents are also suffering the most from unemployment, lack of healthcare, and cuts to social programs and services. Jail opponents are calling on the county to abandon the jail project and instead expand community-based treatment options for individuals with substance abuse and mental health issues, reduce the number of people who are locked up because of minor parole and probation violations, expand programming and alternatives to incarceration, and work to dismantle barriers to employment, housing and social services for former prisoners.

See the News section on this site for times of the rally and meeting.

Press Contact: Isaac Ontiveros
Californians United for Responsible Budget
510-517-6612