Justice Department Sues AZ Community College System
The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a discrimination lawsuit against the Maricopa Community College District in Arizona on Monday. The suit is based off of an 18-month DOJ probe that revealed "a pattern or practice of discrimination" by Maricopa, which required approximately 250 job applicants that were not US citizens to present documentation, including green cards, beyond what federal law requires.
Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez, who leads the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, said in a statement that the anti-discrimination clause of the Immigration and Nationality Act "makes it unlawful to treat authorized workers differently during the hiring process based on their citizenship status,"
According to the Washington Post, the suit was filed on behalf of Zainul Singaporewalla, a permanent resident who had a job offer from Maricopa withdrawn after he failed to present his green card. Singaporewalla had already presented all paperwork that is required by federal law, including his driver's license and social security card. The suit is seeking that the college pay a civil penalty of $1,100 per applicant effected.
The DOJ also has a lawsuit pending against the state of Arizona’s new immigration law. DOJ filed this lawsuit in July on the grounds that Arizona's new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives and violates the Constitution's supremacy clause, which states that federal law trumps state statutes, legally referred to as "preemption." The law in question would allow law enforcement officials in Arizona to request proof of legal immigration, residency, or citizenship of anyone they suspect might be an illegal immigrant. A DOJ brief in the case argues that "Arizona's immigration policy exceeds a state's role with respect to aliens, interferes with the federal government's balanced administration of the immigration laws, and critically undermines US foreign policy objectives."
Media Resources: Politico 8/31/10; Washington Post 8/31/10; Feminist Daily Newswire 7/6/10, 7/26/10
10/31/2014 Federal Judge Exempts Another Catholic University from Birth Control Coverage - A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Ave Maria University, a Catholic university in Florida, does not have to comply with federal rules meant to ensure that covered employees can exercise their right to obtain birth control at no cost.
The Affordable Care Act requires all new health insurance plans to cover all FDA-approved contraceptives - such as the pill, emergency contraceptives, and IUDs - without charging co-pays, deductibles or co-insurance. . . .
10/31/2014 Women of Color in Tennessee Are United in Opposition to Amendment 1 - Just days before the general election in Tennessee, a coalition of community leaders, clergy, and advocates led a press conference encouraging women of color to vote no on Amendment 1, a dangerous and far-reaching measure on the state's ballot.
SisterReach, a grassroots organization focused on "empowering, organizing, and mobilizing women and girls in the community around their reproductive and sexual health to make informed decisions about themselves," organized the press conference "to call attention to the unique concerns Black and poor communities throughout Shelby County and across the state of Tennessee face on a daily basis" and to emphasize how the upcoming election "could further limit [black women's] reproductive, economic, political, and social autonomy."
"We assemble today to impress upon black women and women of color, many of whom are heads of households, to get out and vote," said SisterReacher Founder and CEO Cherisse Scott at the event.
SisterReach has been educating voters about the particularly dangerous impact of Amendment 1 on women of color. . . .
10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1.
The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .