ACLU – RI Future

October 17, 2016October 21, 2016

RI arrests black people for drugs almost three times as often as white people

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Black Rhode Islanders are almost three times as likely to be arrested for drug charges than white Rhode Islanders, according to a new analysis by the American Civil Liberties Association of Rhode Island.

“The glaring racial disparities in enforcement of these laws have been going on for too long and must be addressed,” said Steven Brown, executive director of the RI ACLU. “This report is yet another wake-up call about both the overcriminalization of private conduct and the significant racial disparities that permeate our criminal justice system at just about every level.

The report looks at all 50 states done by the ACLU and Human Rights Watch that showed black adults are arrested 2.5 times more often than white adults. In Rhode Island, that ratio is even higher, with 2.9 Black adults arrested for every white adult that is arrested.

Brown said this was “especially troubling” because the report also shows Rhode Island has one of the lowest arrest rates in the nation “per overall population.”

While almost three black Rhode Islanders are arrested for every one white Rhode Islander, there are more than 14 white Rhode Islanders for every one black Rhode Islander. According to the 2010 census, there are 856,000 white Rhode Islanders and only about 60,000 black Rhode Islanders.

Rhode Island has the 21st highest ratio of black-to-white drug arrests in the nation, according to the report. Nearby Vermont has the third highest ratio at 6 to 1 black-to-white drug arrests. Connecticut has the 16th highest average at just over 3 to 1. Massachusetts has the second lowest ratio in the nation at just over 1.5 to 1, second only to California, which is 1.5 to 1.

The national report indicates drugs are the most common reason for arrest made in America and that one of every nine arrests are for drug charges.

“Calling the war on drugs a complete failure that is destroying lives and communities, the report called for decriminalization of personal drug use and possession,” according to a RI ACLU press release. “Instead, the report said, there should be a stronger investment in public health, emphasizing evidence-based prevention; education around the risks of drug use and dependence; and voluntary, affordable treatment and other social services in the community.”

Brown said the new data confirms what the RI ACLU learned when it studied 10 years worth of marijuana arrests in Rhode Island that showed 2.6 to 3.6 black Rhode Islanders were arrested for every white Rhode Islander arrested between 2001 and 2010.

“We hope this report will not only encourage more positive consideration of the marijuana ‘tax and regulate’ bill, but will promote broader efforts by police departments to reconsider how they enforce these particular laws,” said Brown.

Rhode Island continues to take a wait and see approach to legalizing cannabis while Massachusetts voters will decide that question at the ballot this November.

September 20, 2016September 20, 2016

Panhandling and human dignity

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Who among us has never asked for help? Who among us is so self-sufficient that they have never relied on the kindness of strangers? And when we ask for help, or lean on our friends, family or even strangers for support, have we given up our dignity, or are we simply demonstrating our humanity? What, after all, is more human than relying on our greatest strength, each other?

“There is nothing dignified about standing on street corners, or venturing into the middle of the street, dressed in dirty, shabby clothes, in all sorts of weather, with a crude cardboard sign, begging passersby for help,” wrote Bishop Thomas Tobin in a letter to the Providence Journal last week, but he was wrong. Dignity, the state or quality of being worthy of honor or respect, is, by Catholic principle, “inherent and inviolable.” Human dignity has been called the “cornerstone of all Catholic social teaching.”

Humanists affirm the dignity of every human being. A cornerstone Humanist document is the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 1 states, “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” No distinction is made in the declaration based on class or property.

I’ll avoid the sexist term “brotherhood” (the Declaration was written in 1948 after all) and call it our “spirit of kinship.” This idea, that we are one large human family, reminds us to rely on each other when things go wrong in our lives. Our kinship is a fundamental part of what makes us human, and without it, our society and our lives fracture.

Through this fracturing, people end up on the street, homeless, hungry and alone with their demons. The truth of human dignity means that it should not be the responsibility of the downtrodden to ask for our help. Our own human dignity requires us to offer it.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights also affirms the human right to expression, the human right to freely move within our cities and as a consequence, affirms our right to ask for assistance.

“The problems [associated with panhandling] have spread since Mayor Jorge Elorza, responding to the threat of action from the American Civil Liberties Union and others, directed that the police should no longer enforce ordinances dealing with panhandling and loitering,” said Tobin in his letter. “The ACLU, while presumably well-intentioned, has done no one a favor.”

In defending the human and constitutional rights of panhandlers, the ACLU respected human dignity in a way Bishop Tobin seems unprepared to do. The “favor” the ACLU did was to remind us that rather than sweeping people in need out of sight, it is far better to provide the things they need to live their lives comfortably.

Some religious leaders understand this, but many others don’t get it, even as they wonder why their moral authority is crumbling.

September 14, 2016

Press conference presents a glimpse of our dystopian future

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

On Wednesday morning, reporters and activists were prevented from attending real estate developer Joseph Paolino’s press conference where he was to announce his plans regarding the issue of homelessness. The behavior of the security guards and police officers at the Providence Convention Center, where the press conference was held, became a preview of what many fear might become the norm if the wrong policies are instituted in downtown Providence.

As activists and reporters entered the convention center, a security guard raised his hand and stopped everyone cold. “I don’t know where you guys are trying to go,” said the guard, “but I can’t let you guys go anywhere.”

A Providence police officer added that only “designated” people were allow to go up to the fifth floor where the press conference was taking place. It became quickly apparent that the activists and some reporters were not the “right kind of people” for the exclusive press conference.

Calls upstairs to the people in charge were useless. It didn’t matter to the convention center security guards or to the police officers that reporters and city residents were being denied access to a public meeting pertinent to their lives. What mattered, it seemed, was how one was dressed, who you knew, and how security perceived you.

People who were dressed in nice suits and ties, wearing nice clothes and carrying briefcases – or, let’s face it, white and upper class people – were allowed access. If you didn’t fit that bill, you were stopped in the lobby.

WPRO reporter Anita Baffoni was allowed upstairs with another woman who claimed she was a reporter, but RI Future’s Bob Plain was denied. Security claimed that the women had “credentials.” This is a matter in dispute.

Soon, people came downstairs from where the press conference was taking place and started approving some people and turning down others. Again, this was done either from familiarity, i.e. people in positions of authority recognizing each other, or through profiling along racial and class lines.

“It’s a private meeting,” said a man, who suddenly seemed in charge. “We’re trying to treat everyone like ladies and gentlemen,” he said. I countered that he was treating people like “second-class citizens” but he doubled down, saying that that “was absolutely not true.”

Some people were allowed to take the escalator without having so much as a single word or objection from security lobbied at them. These people were white and dressed nicely. For others it became necessary to storm past security and risk arrest if they wished to attend the press conference.

Convention center security eventually admitted that they couldn’t accost people. That didn’t stop them from threatening arrest. The Providence Police who were present were not arresting people, however, even when some activists made it all the way up to the fifth floor and began chanting outside the room where Paolino was holding court.

Is this the future for Kennedy Plaza? Access for some, as long as they look rich and white and have the right connections, while others become subject to ruthless regulations meant to keep us always on the edge of arrest?

Ordinances, such as “banning the distribution of anything to occupants of vehicles” are being proposed to the Providence City Council and being seriously considered. The ACLU’s Steve Brown calls this proposed ordinance “a direct attack on individuals who are struggling with homelessness or poverty and who seek to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights to solicit donations.”

To his credit, Paolino said that restricting access to some reporters was inadvertent. He said he had no intention of preventing RI Future, the Providence Journal, RINPR and the Providence Business News from attending. But he did want to keep the activists and protesters away. He didn’t want his press conference disrupted.

When we hide our public meetings and press conferences behind security guards and police officers, restricting access to only the “right” people and the proper, embedded media, we set up a system that respects the rights of the rich over the rights of the poor. We set up a two tiered class system of the kind that lifts up some people by stepping on others.

Not unlike what some people would like to see in Kennedy Plaza.

May 25, 2016May 26, 2016

Johnston is RI’s third city to stop enforcing aggressive panhandling law

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Johnston is the third city in Rhode Island to stop enforcing its aggressive panhandling ordinance after the ACLU of Rhode Island sent the city a letter threatening a lawsuit. Providence and Cranston did so earlier this year.

“The police chief made the decision not to enforce that ordinance at this time,” said Pawtucket/East Providence Senator Bill Conley, who is also the city solicitor for Johnston. “We’re going to look at how these cases play out in court and revisit the issue.”

The city agreed via a letter not to enforce the anti-panhandling law after receiving a letter from the ACLU.

“We believe that the Town ordinance raises significant constitutional concerns by impinging on the First Amendment rights of the homeless and the poor,” said the letter from ACLU Executive Director Steven Brown dated May 10. “In the past year, in fact, at least three courts elsewhere have struck down laws very similar to the Town’s “aggressive begging” ban. See Thayer v. City of Worcester, 2015 WL 6872450 (D. Mass. 2015); Browne v. City of Grand Junction,2015 WL 5728755 (D. Colo. 2015); and McLaughlin v. City of Lowell, 2015 WL 6453144 (D.Mass. 2015). The unsuccessful defense of these laws has come at great financial expense to those cities.”

ACLU volunteer attorney Marc Gursky hailed the city’s quick decision to suspend the law. “I commend town officials for acting promptly in recognizing their constitutional obligations and in saving taxpayers from the expense of an unnecessary lawsuit,” he said.

“I am optimistic that as municipalities are compelled not to criminalize homelessness and poverty, they will instead collaborate with constituents and other advocates on solutions to these issues, including affordable housing and adequate income supports,” said Megan Smith, an outreach worker with House of Hope, an organization that helps homeless people.

Conley said it would be up to the city council to repeal the law. He doesn’t think Johnston police officers will still enforce it. “If that happened I think the chief would remind that officer that department policy is not to do that,” he said.

Providence agreed to stop enforcing its aggressive panhandling law in February – a move that drew the ire of downtown business interests. Courts have recently struck down laws targeting aggressive panhandling, saying panhandling is constitutionally protected speech and noting other laws cover aggressive behavior.

The ACLU, in its press release, said, it “is engaged in ongoing efforts to challenge and repeal laws that disproportionately affect the rights of the homeless” but said no further actions are planned at this time. RI Future is researching whether other communities have such laws.

Correction: An earlier version of this post neglected to mention that Cranston stopped enforcing its aggressive panhandling ordinance.

March 20, 2016March 20, 2016

Say no to PARCC with the Caucus of Rank and File Educators

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

This month Rhode Island students will again be subjected to the PARCC testing regime. Here are some tools used by others to resist and refuse the testing regime.

Screen Shot 2016-03-08 at 8.52.50 PM — RI Department of Education website screenshot.

Out in Chicago, the Caucus of Rank and File Educators has created a treasure trove of anti-testing materials we want to share with parents and students who in turn can share it with peers. This is certain to annoy people like Andy Moffit, the charter school champ and husband of Gina Raimondo, Edward Achorn, the Providence Journal editor whose wife is a charter school proponent, and a slew of others who make a career out of advocating for the privatization of our public schools.

Saying no to PARCC is a pro-union, pro-child, pro-teacher act that would make the rich and powerful look bad.

It is worthwhile to repeat what was said by the RI ACLU in November 2015 regarding the previous school year’s test results: Though not surprising, the test results released this week show that using PARCC as a graduation requirement would have barred the vast majority of Rhode Island students from receiving a diploma. Worse, and just like the NECAP, it would have disproportionately affected students of color, students with disabilities, and ESL students in a devastating manner.

In a statement regarding this year’s testing the ACLU said:

The ACLU of RI does not oppose the implementation of PARCC testing per se. We recognize that standardized assessments can, if prepared and used properly, provide information to school districts and to students that can help target appropriate support services. However, we strongly oppose the use of PARCC, or any other standardized written test, as a high school graduation requirement or for any other punitive purpose, such as grading students. This high-stakes testing has a clear discriminatory impact on students of color, English Language Learners, and students with disabilities. Further, students’ grades or graduation prospects should not be based on flawed standardized tools that cannot take into account an individual student’s actual work in school. They should serve as a guide, not punishment. We are currently examining the policies of each school district to find out whether they plan to use the test for such purposes.

The ACLU does not take a position on refusal to take the test but, “it is critical that schools make clear to parents whether there are any potential adverse consequences that flow from taking the test.”

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO ERIC DRAITSER’S EXCELLENT PODCAST WITH JIA LEE OF CORE AND MERCEDES SCHNEIDER, EDUCATION SCHOLAR AND ACTIVIST!

February 19, 2016February 19, 2016

Become a civil liberties advocate

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

If you’ve ever wanted to make a difference in the fight to protect and promote civil liberties right here in Rhode Island, advocating at the State House is a great way to make your voice heard.

The 2016 General Assembly is in full swing and lawmakers are considering hundreds of important pieces of legislation that could have serious impacts on our rights. The ACLU of Rhode Island is at the State House nearly every day to weigh in on these bills, and having civil libertarians like you behind us truly makes a difference. That’s why we want to teach you how to be a better advocate!

This Saturday, February 20, advocates and two former lawmakers will lead an ACLU Advocate Training Session at the Warwick Public Library at 2:30 PM to share their experiences and advice on how to make your voice heard in Rhode Island. After the afternoon session, you’ll be ready to follow important civil liberties legislation; reach your legislators; connect with fellow advocates; and testify before committees. If you can’t make it this Saturday, the ACLU will host another training at the Rochambeau Library on Saturday, February 27 at 1 PM.

You don’t need any prior experience to learn how you can make Rhode Island a better place for your family, friends, and neighbors!

Join ACLU advocates and volunteers on:

Saturday, February 20, 2016

2:30 to 4 PM

Warwick Public Library

600 Sandy Lane Warwick, RI 02889

Saturday, February 27, 2016

1 to 2:30 PM

Rochambeau Library

708 Hope Street Providence, RI 02906

No experience necessary. All are welcome.

February 11, 2016

Patients poised to lose everything under Raimondo’s medical marijuana tax

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Rhode Islanders who use medical marijuana to help manage chronic and debilitating medical conditions spoke out today against a proposal in Governor Gina Raimondo’s 2017 budget that would levy heavy taxes on medical marijuana plants grown by patients and caregivers.

At a news conference held by the American Civil Liberties Union of Rhode Island (ACLU) and the RI Patient Advocacy Coalition, patients said this “sick tax” on medical marijuana would be devastating to them and many other patients and caregivers, making it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to access the medicine they need to manage their pain and other medical symptoms. The proposed tax, the groups said, has generated a palpable fear in the patient community and should be struck from the proposed budget.

“If these changes become law, I will be effectively forced out of the medical marijuana program,” said Peter Benson, an East Greenwich resident and medical marijuana patient who is paraplegic and uses medical marijuana to control painful and persistent muscle spasms. Benson broke his neck in a bicycle accident when he was 17. He is confined to a wheelchair. Benson called the governor’s tax “an absolutely cruel proposal.”

“Medical marijuana gave me my life back and my relationship with my wife and daughter,” said Benson. Marijuana controls the painful spasms and allows him to hold his daughter in his lap.

According to a fact sheet prepared by the Governor’s office, the new tax would impose a $150 per plant charge on patients lawfully growing marijuana for medical purposes, and a $350 per plant charge for caregivers volunteering their time and energy to grow plants for sick patients. The proposal also reduces the number of plants that patients can grow.

Ellen Smith, from Scituate, is both a medical marijuana patient and a caregiver for five other patients. She said of the proposed tax: “It would add more than $8,000 a year to the cost of growing medicine for my patients. They can’t afford it and neither can I. It is breaking our hearts.”

Smith remembers meeting candidate Raimondo who promised that she supported the medical marijuana law. Voting for Raimondo is a vote she regrets. Under the Governor’s proposal “gifting” the donation of excess marijuana to those who cannot afford to purchase it, will be taken away. Smith does all she can to care for the patients she provides for, and gifts all excess marijuana to the needy. Now she literally fears for her life and the lives of her patients.

“I will not only lose my patients, I will lose my purpose in life,” said Smith, who says the anxiety over this proposal has contributed to her suffering. One night, during a particularly bad breathing episode, she comforted herself that perhaps her death might be used to convince the Governor to change her mind.

The Governor’s fact sheet claims that each marijuana plant is “estimated to generate an average of $17,280 of annual revenue for a caregiver,” and that therefore the tax “amounts to just 2 percent of the value of marijuana produced.” But JoAnne Leppanen, executive director of the RI Patient Advocacy Coalition, noted that patients and caregivers are growing the plants for medical purposes only and make no money from the plants. “These plants produce medicine, not money,” said Leppanen.

Leppanen pointed to the difficulties and costs patients already face in growing marijuana, and said: “This is a draconian proposal based on fictional numbers that undermines the purpose of the medical marijuana program. It will wreak havoc on the lives and health of thousands of Rhode Islanders.”

“If one marijuana plant was worth $17,000 we’d be having this meeting in Hawaii,” said Benson.

A plant big enough to be worth $17,000 would be the size of the State House Holiday Tree, said Leppanen.

Bobby Brady-Cataldo was the second patient in Rhode Island to be legally able to used medical marijuana. All the marijuana she gets to treat her symptoms of MS is gifted. 80 percent of my money goes to my mortgage, she said, and she would not be able to afford medical marijuana otherwise.

The Governor’s proposal means, “people can’t give me medicine that literally saved my life. Is this ignorance or cruelty?” asked Brady-Cataldo. “They’ll give me Vicodin or Oxy, they’ll give me a drug habit, but they won’t help me.”

Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island, added: “Having a medical marijuana program means little if the state makes it impossible for all but the wealthy to actually participate in it. The patients and caregivers affected by this proposal grow medical marijuana to ease their symptoms and to help others; they are not running a lucrative drug trade. The state should treat them just as they would any other patient using legal medication. Imagine charging sick patients prescribed codeine a special tax based on the street value of the medication if they illegally sold it. We fervently hope the Governor will take this troubling tax proposal off the table.”

The ACLU has long supported the availability of medical marijuana for patients who could benefit from its use.

February 2, 2016

Watch Citizenfour with the ACLU

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

oin the ACLU of Rhode Island and the Brown University Chapter of ACLU-RI on Thursday, February 4, for a free screening of Citizenfour and a discussion of surveillance and privacy in the digital age.

Academy Award-winning documentary CITIZENFOUR follows whistleblower Edward Snowden as he shares for the first time the classified National Security Agency documents that would expose the U.S. government’s illegal and indiscriminate mass surveillance programs. The camera rolls as Snowden meets with journalist Glenn Greenwald to explain the extent of the federal government’s dragnet surveillance, and then handles the political and personal ramifications of the leak.

Watch the story behind the headlines and learn why Snowden, an ACLU client, wanted to protect the privacy rights of all.

A Public Screening of Citizenfour

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Film starts at 6 PM

Discussion to Follow

Smith-Buonanno Hall at Brown University

95 Cushing St., Providence, RI 02906

January 8, 2016

Progressive Dems urge Raimondo to issue executive order on driver’s licenses

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

During the 2014 gubernatorial race, Gina Raimondo made a campaign promise to the Immigrants in Action Committee that she would sign an executive order within her first year, issuing licenses to undocumented immigrants within Rhode Island. Raimondo further made her support clear in an ACLU questionnaire, that asked: “Do you support providing driver’s licenses to undocumented immigrants?”, to which Raimondo responded: “YES. I was the first candidate in the gubernatorial race to explicitly call for driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants. This is an issue of fairness and public safety.” However, January 6 has gone by, marking the end of Raimondo’s first year as Governor, and instead of issuing an executive order, Raimondo has responded with inaction.

Speaker Mattiello encouraged the Governor to bring up the issue “legislatively,” so that public comment could be heard, and that legislators could then form a position on the issue. However, it is very unlikely that the General Assembly will act on this issue. In 2014, for instance, H 7262 was referred to the House Judiciary, and the hearing on it was postponed at the request of the bill sponsor. In the Senate, a similar fate befell its version of the bill: S 2241 was sent to the Judiciary Committee, and was simply not heard. In 2013, S 422 was referred to the Judiciary Committee, and sent to “further study” – effectively killing the bill. Thus, judging by these prior attempts, Raimondo’s choice to pursue the legislative route to address this “issue of fairness and public safety” is unlikely to result in meaningful legislative action, especially when the Judiciary Committees and Speaker Nicholas Mattiello remain determined to obstruct any opportunity of passing legislation to correct this longstanding wrong in the State of Rhode Island.

The Rhode Island Progressive Democrats continues to urge Governor Raimondo to issue an executive order, as she promised Rhode Island’s voters and the immigrant community during her campaign.

[From an RIPDA press release]

October 12, 2015October 13, 2015

ACLU to honor RI Coalition for the Homeless, Megan Smith at annual celebration

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The ACLU of Rhode Island works tirelessly to defend fundamental rights here in the Ocean State. Now, it’s time to celebrate that work. Join us on Thursday, October 22, at the Providence Biltmore to take part in our Annual Meeting Celebration and raise a glass to another year of protecting civil liberties. This year, the ACLU of Rhode Island is honoring the Rhode Island Coalition for the Homeless and homeless rights advocate Megan Smith as the 2015 “Raymond J. Pettine Civil Libertarian of the Year” award recipients.

The ACLU of RI is honoring the Coalition and Ms. Smith for their unyielding advocacy for the civil rights and liberties of individuals experience homelessness, and for the invaluable support and resources they provide. The RI Coalition for the Homeless works to promote and preserve the dignity and quality of life for men, women, and children by pursuing comprehensive and cooperative solutions to the problems of housing and homelessness. Ms. Smith is an outreach worker and case manager with PATH, a program of the House of Hope CDC that works primarily with individuals experiencing street homelessness. Both are also tireless advocates for policies and reforms that affirm the rights of the homeless and protect individuals experiencing homelessness from discrimination.

ACLU supporters will mix, mingle, and enjoy hors d’oeuvres and cocktails while they celebrate the civil liberties successes of the past year and recognize the hard work of these two honorees dedicated to protecting the rights of the homeless.

ACLU of RI volunteer attorneys Sonja Deyoe, Carly Iafrate, and Neal McNamara will also provide updates on their ongoing and important court cases.

Celebrate your rights and freedoms, honor the RI Coalition for the Homeless and Ms. Smith, and support the ACLU of Rhode Island by purchasing your ticket today!

Tickets for the evening are $65 and are available for purchase online or by calling the ACLU office (401-831-7171). RSVP by October 14.

COCKTAILS & CONVERSATION

ACLU of Rhode Island’s Annual Meeting Celebration

Thursday, October 22 at 6 P.M.

(Registration begins at 5:30 P.M.)

Providence Biltmore

11 Dorrance St., Providence, RI 02903

Complimentary valet parking provided to all guests.

September 29, 2015September 29, 2015

Celebrate banned books this week with the ACLU

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The freedom to read is the freedom to learn, to imagine, to challenge your own beliefs, and to see the world from a new point of view. Too often, that freedom is challenged by individuals who would censor important and challenging books rather than embrace them.

As part of our ongoing work to fight against censorship in all its forms, the ACLU of Rhode Island is celebrating the freedom to read at our annual Banned Books Week Celebration on October 5.

Join us, the East Providence Public Library, and Living Literature for dramatic readings of Young Adult books that have been banned or challenged over the years.

Living Literature, a collective of Rhode Island-based artists and educators who teach literature through a unique and imaginative process, has created a 25-minute readers theater program exploring the question: “Why are Young Adult books challenged more frequently than any other type of book?”

Hear them perform selections from Harper Lee, Roald Dahl, Sherman Alexie, Lois Lowry, and Shel Silverstein and see if your favorite childhood book was ever banned or censored.

Banned Books Celebration: Young Adult Authors

October 5, 2015 at 6:30 PM

East Providence Public Library

41 Grove Ave., East Providence, RI 02914

This event is free and open to all. Light refreshments will be served.

September 15, 2015September 16, 2015

ACLU celebrates Constitution Day with downtown Providence scavenger hunt

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

As the state’s strongest defender of your rights and freedoms, the ACLU of Rhode Island is excited to announce our plans to celebrate Constitution Day this week by hosting a family-friendly scavenger hunt highlighting Providence’s civil liberties history. Constitution Day marks the anniversary of the signing of the United States Constitution on September 17, 1787. Americans across the country observe the anniversary by teaching students about the Constitution and Bill of Rights. This year, the ACLU of Rhode Island is hosting a Constitution Day Scavenger Hunt on Saturday, September 19, to teach Rhode Islanders of all ages about civil liberties and local history.

The family-friendly scavenger hunt will highlight Providence’s civil liberties history, and we hope the event educates the public, and especially children and teenagers, about the Bill of Rights and importance of knowing one’s rights.

So, think you know your Rhode Island history? Want to learn how the Constitution applies to everyday life? Put on your walking shoes and head to downtown Providence on your own or with your friends and family on Saturday, September 19, to start the hunt!

We’ll start sharing clues on our Facebook and Twitter at 1 p.m. (Rain or shine). Use them to start a self-guided hunt for landmarks around the city. Once you arrive at a stop, snap a photo (selfies are encouraged!) and share it on Facebook or Twitter with the hashtag #ConstitutionHunt. Make it to the final location to earn bragging rights and a small souvenir.

Constitution Day Scavenger Hunt

(RSVP On Our Facebook Page Here)

Saturday, September 19

1 to 3 P.M.

Downtown Providence

For more information and official rules, click here.

September 14, 2015

RI ACLU urges PVD to reject exclusionary zoning

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The ACLU has written the City Council of Providence and Mayor Jorge Elorza calling for the rejection of Jo-Ann Ryan’s exclusionary zoning provision.

The zoning, as proposed, would limit students to three-to-a-house occupancy in Zones 1 and 1A of Providence’s zoning code. Affecting areas with large single-family homes, many of the buildings in question can house far more than three people. Exclusionary zoning has major downsides for equity, and is also a big problem for transit, biking, and other non-single-occupancy-driving modes of transportation.

The proposal passed its first test last week when City Council voted 10-3 for the provision. Zoning provisions must pass twice, and either have veto proof majorities or gain the support of the mayor, to become law. Knocking just one vote off the victory margin would allow a mayoral veto, though the prospects of such a veto are unclear.

Read: Ten PVD City Councilors voted for exclusionary zoning

As of this weekend, a tweeted email reply from Elorza representative Evan England suggested that the Mayor Elorza’s administration was leaning towards support of the provision, though the language was vague enough to leave the administration open to changing its position (Hat-tip, Patrick Anderson, Projo).

The ACLU joins critics of the zoning provision, which have included the three “no” voters on City Council, Transport Providence, Greater City Providence, and Eco Rhode Island News.

In the letter to the Council, ACLU of Rhode Island executive director Steven Brown stated that, “The ordinance’s undue stigmatization of Providence’s students is contrary to the City’s reputation as a robust host to the local colleges and universities. The focus on this one criterion is unfair and extremely unlikely to help resolve any of the legitimate concerns prompting calls for action in the first place.”

The letter cites rejection by Rhode Island courts of similar laws, citing a 1994 Narragansett zoning provision that attempted to keep non-related persons from cohabitating (This answers a question I had had–a reader pointed out that Providence indeed also has such a law, preventing more than three unrelated persons from living together, and wondering whether the zoning law was ever enforced. It must be left over from before such provisions were struck down in the courts). Quoting the judge who rejected the provision, the ACLU letter shows how arbitrary many zoning provisions truly are:

“It is a strange—and unconstitutional—ordinance indeed that would permit the Hatfields and the McCoys to live in a residential zone while barring four scholars from the University of Rhode Island from sharing an apartment on the same street.”

The City Council is scheduled to vote on second passage of this ordinance at its meeting this Thursday, September 17.

A full copy of the RI ACLU’s letter is here.

If you haven’t contacted your city councilperson and the mayor, contacts for both along with voting records are in the original RI Future profile on this issue, here.

~~~~

September 4, 2015

Fighting for voting rights in RI

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

“Before the Voting Rights Act of 1965,” said Jim Vincent, president of the NAACP Providence, “the majority of Black Americans were unable to vote. That’s what was happening in the Jim Crow south… Civil Rights activists fought, bled and died for these rights, and they are being rolled back every day.”

Vincent was speaking at an ACLU panel discussion held at the Providence Public Library in August entitled, “The Voting Rights Act at 50: The Promise and The Struggle.” Hilary Davis of the ACLU directed the event, and in addition to Vincent, Kate Bowden of the RI Disability Law Center and Lee Ann Byrne of the RI Coalition for the Homeless attended.

The history of voter disenfranchisement was briefly discussed, as was the Voter ID laws that the RI General Assembly passed a few years ago. Many politicians feel that having to show a picture ID at the polls is not an undue burden, but Hilary Davis pointed out that years ago, many thought poll taxes, now seen as exclusionary, were not a big deal. Poll taxes, Jim Vincent added, “were designed to disenfranchise a whole group of people so that they couldn’t participate in our democracy.”

After the Voting Rights Act was passed 50 years ago, the percentage of registered black voters rose from 25 to 62 percent. More than that, the Voting Rights Act “provided the right to assistance in the voting booth. This allowed the illiterate, or the disabled, to vote,” said Kate Bowden.

For 47 years or so the Voting Rights Act was doing great. “Then states began to role back voting rights,” said Davis, adding that the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the VR Act when they struck down key provisions. “Over night… states started to enact laws to limit access… It was within a number of hours of Supreme Court decision that laws were introduced to limit voting rights.

And these laws are racially biased. Before Obama was elected President, seven states had laws restricting voter rights,” said Vincent. The number is around 25 now, and Rhode Island is not exempt.

“Rhode Island rushed to pass a [Voter ID] law,” said Davis, “Unlike most laws this is based on a couple of anecdotal incidents… Stats show their is virtually no evidence of voter fraud. Mail ballots became easier to obtain, the only place where fraud was found…No one thought that a Democratic [Party majority] state would manage to do that.”

Lee Ann Byrne said that for the homeless population though, “obtaining an ID is important to access many services… it comes at a major expense” and “despite the availability of the free IDs, it doesn’t make sense to get one that is good only for voting.”

Furthermore, said Byrne, “Poll worker training is a bit spotty” on the issue of voting without a permanent address. “We have a highly mobile population, our constituents almost never have an ID that matches their address.” And denying someone the right to vote or forcing them to cast a provisional ballot under these conditions, is not the law.

People can become embarrassed or caused distress at the polls if they can’t be certain about their right to vote. “There is a concern about being challenged or turned down when they make the effort,” said Byrne. To date only about 900 voter IDs have been issued by the Secretary of State’s office. Before the introduction of voter ID in Rhode Island, there were “zero prosecutions for in person voter impersonation’” but since the passage of the law, said Davis, otherwise qualified voters have been turned away.

Being forced to get a photo ID in order to vote, said Vincent, “is a form of poll tax.”

Another issue of voting concern to the ACLU is “prison based gerrymandering.” Right now the 4000 inmates at the ACI are counted as living in Cranston, on Howard Ave. These people are unable to vote, meaning that the citizens in this district have more voting power than people in the rest of the state. Their vote counts as more because there are less people voting in their district.

The state Senate passed legislation to correct this problem, which would count those people at the ACI as living at their home address, but it has not moved in the House.

The panel discussed other issues, such as long lines and long waits at the polls in some districts, which may cause people to lose out on their chance to vote if time is scarce, broken voting machines, lack of childcare at polls, mail ballot fraud, the need for early voting and issues regarding the Board of Elections.

The ACLU recommends two things needed immediately for the needed reform of our elections. First, the ACLU needs people to volunteer as poll monitors. Poll monitors would note when voters are turned away, when equipment malfunctions or when other irregularities occur. Secondly, the ACLU would like to see the voter ID law repealed.

To accomplish the second goal the public needs to talk to our legislators. Too many people think showing an ID at the poll is no big deal, but for the homeless, the disabled or the poor, securing an ID can be a terrific burden. Thoroughly discouraged, eligible voters may decide to skip voting all together, and this can’t be good for our putative democracy.

August 18, 2015

RI ACLU calls behavior detection testing at T.F. Green ‘junk science’

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has come out in opposition to the behavioral testing conducted at T.F. Green Airport by the Department of Homeland Security. The field test is for a “behavior detection” program that is meant to determine whether or not passengers have “mal-intent.”

Photo courtesy of http://www.warwickri.gov/index.php?option=com_content&id=954:tf-green-airport&Itemid=261

Steven Brown, the executive director of the RI ACLU, issued a letter to Kelly J. Fredericks, the President of the RI Airport Corporation, asking that they cease their involvement in the program, and not support any such programs in the future.

“I am writing to express the ACLU of Rhode Island’s deep concerns about the Rhode Island Airport Corporation’s apparent decision last month, with no public input, to work with the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA) in field testing the expansion of a largely discredited program that attempts to identify travelers who might pose a potential security risk through questionable “behavior detection” techniques,” Brown wrote.

The field test, which is called “Centralized Hostile Intent,” will use actors to mimic behaviors that the TSA should be able to screen and identify. They will be asked to identify these behaviors through a video feed, rather than in person. Because actors will be used during the field test, the ACLU recognized that the effect on travelers’ privacy will be minimal, but they still opposed the overall intent of the study.

“But one cannot ignore what the ultimate goal of this project is- to make it easier and more routine to target innocent travelers for intrusive incursions on their privacy, all based on what have thus far been largely discredited “behavior detection” activities,” Brown wrote.

Brown also wrote that the current “behavior detection” patterns that officers look for are arbitrary and random at best, such as being late for a flight, excessive clock watching, strong body odor, sweaty palms, among other signs. These monitoring activities have been criticized since a 2013 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office recommended that the TSA limit their funding for behavior detection, since there was no scientific evidence to prove whether or not these activities actually work. According to the report, “the human ability to accurately identify deceptive behavior based on behavioral indicators is the same or slightly better than chance.”

The program being tested at T.F. Green also seeks to develop a tracking algorithm so officers can follow on-camera anyone they believe to be suspicious, and identify those with them as well.

“The anticipated future applications of this project are disturbing, as they promise to be just as ineffective as TSA’s existing efforts. At bottom, this effort is junk science, but one with serious civil liberties and privacy implications,” Brown said. “We all want to ensure proper security measures are in place at our airports, but it is time to end, not expand, ineffective programs like this that use up limited resources, and that open the door to more intrusive privacy invasions and increased racial profiling, while doing little to keep us safe.”

August 12, 2015August 12, 2015

Judge Licht allows medical marijuana discrimination case to move forward

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Photo courtesy of http://marijuanaindustrygroup.org/

Rhode Island Superior Court Judge Richard Licht refused to dismiss a case in which a University of Rhode Island graduate student alleged that she was denied employment due to her status as a medical marijuana user.

The case, which was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in November of 2014, concerns URI grad student Christine Callaghan, who is working towards a masters’ degree in textiles. Callaghan is also a registered medical marijuana user in order to deal with frequent migraine headaches. In July of last year, Callaghan was slated to begin a paid internship with Darlington Fabrics in Westerly, which she needed to finish her degree. After disclosing her status as a medical marijuana user, the company withdrew her internship.

In the lawsuit, the ACLU argues that Darlington has violated the Hawkins Slater Medical Marijuana Act. Callaghan’s attorney, Carly Beauvais Iafrate, said that because the company had no other reason to withdraw their offer from Callaghan, they are breaking the law.

“Under the Hawkins Slater Medical Marijuana Act, when the General Assembly put that really critical employment language in, which essentially says that no person will be not hired or denied any privileged in employment because of their cardholder status,” she said. “They didn’t then put any language in there that says if someone violates that section, you can sue them. That’s called a private right of action. So what [Darlington’s lawyer] was saying was there’s nothing in the statute that says you can sue anybody over it, and so therefore, you shouldn’t be allowed to.”

Iafrate said the defendant’s argument relies on what is normally written into other disability laws, that lay out penalties for those who violate the law, be it a fine or the right to sue. The Hawkins Slater Medical Marijuana Act lacks that language. In other situations, the Rhode Island Supreme Court has not assigned a remedy and implied a private right of action, but Iafrate says that this case is different from the precedent that has already been set.

“Those other situations are different, because in this statute, the General Assembly said liberally construe this to make sure that the purpose is effectuated, so that it doesn’t become meaningless,” she said. “Think about it. If there’s no remedy, what meaning does it have that they say that no employer can refuse to hire? They can just do it anyway, because there’s no remedy.”

The ACLU is also arguing that by refusing to hire Callaghan, Darlington has discriminated against a disabled person, and is in violation of the Rhode Island Civil Rights Act.

Licht did not approve Darlington’s motion to dismiss for a number of reasons, but his biggest reason dealt with the Medical Marijuana Act, and Darlington’s argument that there is no private right of action, and that they should be allowed to not hire Callaghan to ensure a drug free workplace.

“It’s inconceivable to me that the General Assembly meant to say discriminate against for the use of marijuana, even though you can’t discriminate against them because they hold a card that allows them to use it,” Licht said. “I doubt there are many people who sought out a medical marijuana card that don’t use it.”

While Callaghan is seeking compensatory and punitive damages, Iafrate said she had other reasons to sue as well.

“One of her main purposes, which is why she went to the ACLU, is because this is an important issue, and it needs to be decided. People who are engaging in the medical use of marijuana in the state need to know whether they have employment protection or not. And they need to know whether it’s just words on paper or if it actually means something,” Iafrate said.

In a press release from the ACLU, Callaghan said that she would like companies to treat medical marijuana patients just as they would any other employee who may take medication for a chronic illness.

The next step is for the case to go to summary judgment and for both parties to engage in discovery of evidence and facts. Iafrate said this should happen within the next year.

July 15, 2015July 15, 2015

ACLU sues Providence for violating street musician’s free speech rights

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The Rhode Island American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Providence street musician, saying that the city has infringed upon his First Amendment rights. 62-year-old Manuel Pombo has been harassed by Providence Police for playing in a public space on multiple occasions, even though he had a permit to perform.

Pombo said that he has been playing in Providence for over two decades, and it wasn’t until the past few years that he was even concerned about being arrested.

“It was rare to have a policeman tell me to stop,” he said. “Over the last few years, it’s become an every day thing, and I’m constantly worried about if I’m going to get arrested for playing music.”

Pombo has played near the Dunkin Donuts Center as well as the Providence Performing Arts Center for years, but police have continually chased him away from those areas.

“I have permission from the Dunkin Donuts Center director to play on their sidewalk, and after over 15 years at playing at Dunkin Donuts hockey games or concerts, I get positive feedback. Some of the fans have come by and said “You’re part of the hockey experience,” Pombo said. “Recently, at the Dunkin Donuts Center, a policeman was coming out, and he said “Get out of here with that.”

Pombo added that he has not had these troubles in other cities within the state, or in other cities outside of Rhode Island. He has even been harassed on his way home, when he is not playing his saxophone at all.

“I think it’s the individual officer, for whatever reason, doesn’t like what I’m doing,” he said of the harassment, linking it to specific policemen rather than the city’s administration.

“I’m not blanketing the entire police department. There are officers that support me, even tip me,” he said.

Pombo’s troubles don’t end at harassment, though. In July of 2013, he was arrested for playing his saxophone on a public sidewalk and charged with disorderly conduct and refusal to exhibit a peddler’s license. One of Pombo’s lawyers, Shannah Kurland, said that the charges were arbitrary.

“He was originally told he was being arrested for failure to move. One of the charges, that they put initially, was failure to show a license or badge, and then they added in disorderly conduct, which is kind of the charge that they throw out when they don’t have a real reason to arrest somebody,” she said.

The permission to perform license that Pombo has gives the police complete discretion as to who can play and who cannot play- it even says so on the sign he must have with him.

“It’s a no brainer, that that’s not allowed,” Kurland said. “To have that blanket, unbridled discretion.”

“The First Amendment protects the speech we hate, as well as the speech that’s nice,” said Pombo’s second lawyer, John Dineen. “Mr. Pombo doesn’t have to prove that the majority of people like his music or how good he is.”

“We’re hoping that the city will respond to this by immediately agreeing to stop the harassment, while the litigation is pending, rather than being ordered to do so by the court,” Kurland said.

“I think it’s notable that a big municipality like Providence would have so little regard for what are really basic exercises of First Amendment rights,” Steven Brown, the executive director of the RI ACLU said. “These are not complicated, complex First Amendment issues, they’re very fundamental, and it’s somewhat surprising and disappointing that a major municipality would show so little regard for allowing people to exercise their free speech rights in this way.”

Pombo’s lawsuit was filed by the ACLU in the U.S. District Court, and directly challenges the legality of the permission to perform license he must carry. Along with the broad discretion that the license gives the police to prevent him from playing, Pombo is also barred from soliciting money for his performances.

This is the third lawsuit that the ACLU has filed against Providence in the past several years. Two years ago, a federal judge sided with the ACLU and stated that Providence police violated the free speech rights of a Providence woman after barring her from peacefully distributing leaflets on a public sidewalk in front of a building where former Mayor David Cicilline was speaking. They sued the police department again last year for violating the free speech rights of protesters at a fundraiser for Governor Gina Raimondo.

June 5, 2015

RI schools over-suspend students with disabilities

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Students with disabilities across Rhode Island are suspended from school at rates more than twice as high, on average, as their representation in the student body, an ACLU of Rhode Island report has found. These disproportionate suspension rates, like those that impact racial minorities, begin in the earliest grades, and are often for low-risk behavioral issues that could be addressed in other ways. During the 2013-2014 school year, every school district in Rhode Island and all but two charter schools over-suspended students with disabilities.

The ACLU report, “Suspended Education: The Over-Suspension of Students With Disabilities in Rhode Island,” found that students with disabilities comprised 32.90% of all suspensions between 2005 and 2014. This is more than twice what is expected, given that they made up just 16.11% of the student body population on average during that time. The report further noted that students with disabilities are over-suspended at the highest rates when they are in elementary school—a particularly vulnerable time when they should be receiving much-needed individualized support, not punishment.

Among our other findings:

Despite nationwide recommendations that suspensions carry significant risks and should be used only for the most serious infractions, suspensions of students, and students with disabilities, are often issued for low-risk, behavioral infractions. Further, nearly 36% of suspensions for such offenses over the years studied were given to children with disabilities, 2.23 times the rate expected given their representation in the population.
Twenty school districts and eight charter schools suspended students with disabilities at rates twice, or more than twice, as high as would be expected during the 2013-2014 school year alone.
Suspension disparities against students with disabilities begin, and are at their highest, in elementary school. Thirty-eight percent of suspensions for elementary school students were issued to students with disabilities, 2.58 times higher than expected given their representation in the population. High school students with disabilities were suspended nearly twice as often as expected.
The labels assigned to the behavior of even the youngest students call into question the overreliance on suspensions for normal childhood roughhousing. During the 2013-2014 school year, 266 suspensions for fighting or assault were issued to students between kindergarten and the second grade; 21.05% of these suspensions were issued to students with disabilities.
Altogether, 14.45% of students with disabilities were suspended at least once between 2005 and 2014, compared to just 6.65% of students without disabilities.

From the report: “The figures suggest that, while students with disabilities are supposed to be given myriad services, they are being removed from school not because of their behavior, but because of the failure of schools to meet their needs. Worse, they are being disproportionately suspended for relatively minor, and often subjective, infractions.”

In the report, we offer a series of recommendations to keep students in the classroom, including passage of legislation currently before the General Assembly that would limit the use of out-of-school suspensions for only the most serious offenses. We further recommended that the Rhode Island Department of Education and local school districts examine their data to identify disparities in the suspension rates of students with disabilities, develop plans to reduce those disparities, and investigate alternative evidence-based disciplinary methods.

Suspensions have for too long been a first response to children’s behavior instead of a last resort. That Rhode Island’s children with disabilities are suspended even when federal law requires they be given particular behavioral supports only underscores the overreliance on suspensions to address the behavior that comes with being a child. Children with disabilities deserve better than a ‘troublemaker’ label and a trip down the school-to-prison pipeline, and Rhode Island must work to do better by them.

June 4, 2015June 4, 2015

Community organizations file petition to delay high stakes testing

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The ACLU of Rhode Island and a coalition of 11 other organizations representing youth, parents, the disability community, and civil rights activists Tuesday filed a formal petition with the state Council on Elementary and Secondary Education to initiate a public rule-making process to bar school districts from using high-stakes testing as a graduation requirement or grading tool before 2020.

After the Rhode Island General Assembly approved a moratorium last year on the use of high-stakes testing until at least 2017, the Council, with support from the Commissioner of Education, proposed to continue the moratorium until 2020 in order to ensure students, parents, and teachers had adequate time to prepare for the new PARCC test. However, in adopting final regulations, the Council reversed itself and instead gave school districts the authority, if they chose, to institute high-stakes testing with the class of 2017. Shortly thereafter, the Commissioner unilaterally advised districts that they could also begin using PARCC scores as a component of students’ grades as early as this coming year. These developments prompted our petition.

Under the Administrative Procedures Act, the Council has 30 days to respond, either by denying the petition or by initiating a rule-making process where the public can testify and the Council can consider whether to accept, modify, or reject the proposal. Accepting the petition would provide the public with its first real opportunity to discuss the Council’s expedited schedule for use of the PARCC.

In the letter accompanying the petition, we pointed out that across the country school districts are encountering problems with the implementation of statewide standardized testing; more parents, teachers, and students are opposing such testing; and the number of states using PARCC had declined from 25 to 13 in just a few years. Waiting until 2020 to use PARCC scores against students was necessary in order to give RIDE and school districts “adequate time to put the instructional and other supports in place to give every student a fair chance to pass the PARCC.”

In addition to the ACLU of RI, the Coalition to Defend Public Education, George Wiley Center, NAACP Providence Branch, National Association of Social Workers/RI Chapter, Parent Support Network of Rhode Island, Parents Across Rhode Island, Providence Student Union, Rhode Island Disability Law Center, Rhode Island Teachers of English Language Learners, Tides Family Services, and Young Voices signed on to the petition.

We emphasized to the Council that it did not need to take a definitive stand on the merits of the petition in order to initiate rule-change proceedings. “Although we hope to ultimately convince you of the merits of this rule change, we trust you agree it is at least worthy of a full public discussion, and of one sooner rather than later,” our letter stated.

Jean Ann Guliano, from Parents Across Rhode Island, said: “Once again, the state has implemented a top down mandate without providing parents a meaningful mechanism to hold districts accountable. Districts are simply not providing students – particularly those living in poverty, or with special needs or limited English proficiency — the supports that RIDE requires districts to provide and that students need to do well on the PARCC. Students should not be the ones held accountable for poor testing preparation. This policy needs to change.”

For more on the ACLU’s efforts to halt high-stakes testing in Rhode Island, visit our issues page here.

May 28, 2015May 28, 2015

Committee considers driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Representative Anastasia Williams testifying for H6174

“We are not just nomads looking for benefits.”

That’s what Jose Chacon, an undocumented immigrant living in Rhode Island, said to the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, in support of H6174, which proposes giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.

“It’s just a human thing to do,” he said.

In its current state, the bill allows undocumented immigrants a valid Rhode Island driver’s license if they can provide documents that reliably establish their name, date of birth, place of birth, and Rhode Island residency, among other pieces of information. Those who are under 18 are still required to undergo driving education.

Representative Anastasia Williams (D-District 9), the primary sponsor of the bill, in her testimony, said the bill has been a long time coming.

“I do believe we are going to come to a crossroad where we address the issues before us,” she said. One of those issues, according to Williams, is safety. If illegal immigrants are granted driver’s licenses, then they will have further access to auto registration and insurance, should they get into a car accident.

“It’s about responsibility, accountability, and a duty,” Williams said, citing that it is state legislature’s duty to ensure that everyone is as safe as possible on the road. “It is time for us to do our due diligence to make sure that these individuals on the road have the proper documentation,” she said.

When asked who would pay for these licenses, Williams responded that the process would operate much like the processes for giving a license to a US citizen.

“Time and resources is something that this General Assembly puts forth for many other things,” she said. “We are not giving out free licenses. These individuals will have to pay for them just like you and I.”

Even with supporters like Chacon, many of which attended the hearing, H6174 still has its fair share of opposition. Terry Gorman, the president of Rhode Islanders for Immigration Law Enforcement, came to testify against the legislation. Gorman found many parts of the bill to be unclear, and even called H6174 an “illegal aliens benefit act.”

“Passing this bill would in effect hold all of you in violation of 8 USC 1324, which prohibits aiding and abetting illegal aliens,” he said. “People said they’re doing it anyway, they’re going to continue doing it. There are child molesters, wife beaters, and bank robbers, doing crimes. Should we just ‘Oh they’re doing it anyway, they’re going to continue doing it?’”

Gorman’s main objection to the bill was that many of the documents that undocumented immigrants would be asked to provide are not valid forms of government identification.

“That needs some sort of clarification as to who is going to verify that information, and what the cost will be to verify it,” he said.

Steven Brown from the RI chapter of the ACLU testifying in support of H6174

Currently, H6174 is subject to amendment, but one that has caused some controversy is whether or not undocumented immigrants applying for a driver’s license would be required to submit to a national criminal background check. A major concern is whether or not such information would make its way to United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

“If you do have a national criminal record check, innocent people will be fearful, and understandably so,” said Steven Brown of the Rhode Island ACLU. Brown mentioned that the state Senate version of this bill has an explicit confidentiality provision that prevents the sharing of illegal immigrant’s information without issuing a subpoena.

“I don’t believe that particular provision is in this bill, and we would encourage that it be added,” he said. “We would encourage the committee, in considering this bill, to reject that option, because of its consequences.”

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387