billl4's blog

Police identify suspects in alleged hate-crime killing
One has fled, one is arrested
By Dorothy Korber and Crystal Carreon - Bee Staff Writers
Last Updated 7:15 pm PDT Tuesday, August 7, 2007

The prime suspect in the hate-crime killing of Satender Singh has fled to Russia, Sacramento sheriff's investigators said Tuesday, while another suspect in the case is in county jail on $25,000 bail. The first public identification of the two suspects marks a major step forward in the explosive case, said Sheriff John McGinness. The news came a month after the death of the 26-year-old Singh, a native of Fiji, who died of head trauma after being punched in an altercation on a Lake Natoma beach. Singh's friends and supporters say the July 1 assault was fueled by homophobia and hate, coming after a prolonged exchange of racial slurs and anti-gay jibes at the state park.

"It is important to make a statement that we as a society will not tolerate this kind of behavior," McGinniss said at a press conference Tuesday.

ACLU: US Constitution in Grave Danger
United Press International | Wednesday 25 July 2007

Washington - The American Civil Liberties Union Wednesday said it is "do or die time" to save the U.S. Constitution.

The ACLU in a statement urged the U.S. Congress to "vote to hold White House officials in contempt for refusing to cooperate with legitimate congressional subpoenas."

The ACLU statement said the issue had become "a constitutional crisis that threatens to destroy the separation of powers."

"Presidents have tried in the past to overreach in claiming executive privilege," said Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "However, Congress has long served as a check to such abuses of power, slapping the president's hand when needed and pursuing contempt or enforcement actions that eventually resulted in the release of crucial information. Today's Congress must do the same if it wishes to remain a meaningful and independent branch of government."

The ACLU said it "rejected claims that Congress' responsibility to conduct oversight or investigate executive misconduct was somehow less important than its legislative function and therefore not worthy of compulsory enforcement."

Federal Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Anti-Immigrant Law in Hazleton, Pennsylvania (7/26/2007)

ACLU Applauds Decision

HAZLETON, PA - In the first trial decision of its kind, a federal court has declared unconstitutional a local ordinance that sought to punish landlords and employers for doing business with undocumented immigrants. The landmark decision in the closely-watched challenge to Hazleton's anti-immigrant ordinance held that the ordinance cannot be enforced.

"We are grateful the court recognized that municipal laws like those in Hazleton are unconstitutional. The trial record showed that these ordinances are based on propaganda and deception," said Vic Walczak, Legal Director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania and a lead attorney in the case. "Hazleton-type laws are designed to make life miserable for millions of immigrants. They promote distrust of all foreigners, including those here legally, and fuel xenophobia and discrimination, especially against Latinos."

Tragedy of hate crime, murder rallies community
By Darrell Steinberg - Special to The Bee
Published 12:00 am PDT Sunday, July 22, 2007

America has always represented hope for a better life to people around the world, but for some new Americans, that dream can become a nightmare.

Satender Singh was attacked on July 1 in an apparent hate crime at Lake Natoma and removed from life-support four days later. Singh came to this country of freedom in peace and with a desire to build his life. But tragically his new life ended just as it was beginning. He died because a group of people expressed their hatred and their bigotry in the way most bigotry eventually expresses itself, through violence.

The murder of Singh, and the reaction to the death of the 26-year-old immigrant from Fiji, showed the worst and best of the Sacramento community in one stroke.

Public Safety Committee Refuses to Vote on Key Police Accountability Bill

For Immediate Release: June 26, 2007

For more information on restoring public oversight of police, please visit our webpage on the issue.

SACRAMENTO - The Assembly Public Safety Committee refused to vote on SB 1019 today, dealing a serious blow to efforts to restore police accountability in California. Earlier this month, SB 1019 (D-Romero) was passed in the state Senate in a 22-11 vote, despite threats by police associations of torpedoing unrelated term limit reform if the bill was passed.

SB 1019 would have overturned the state Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in Copley Press v. San Diego, which blocked public access to records about police complaints and effectively stopped police commissions from holding open hearings.

“By not even allowing a vote on this important bill, the Assembly Public Safety Committee has given the police unions exactly what they want: a cloak of secrecy over police misconduct and a lack of public accountability,” said Mark Schlosberg, Police Practices Policy Director of the ACLU-NC. “By remaining silent our elected officials favored police secrecy over the public interest. “

Court extends rights in car stops

Ruling in Sutter case says passengers, too, are immune to search without due cause.

By Michael Doyle - Bee Washington Bureau
Published 12:00 am PDT Tuesday, June 19, 2007
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/229567.html

The Constitution protects vehicle passengers as well as drivers from illegal search and seizures, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in an important case arising out of the Sacramento Valley.

The court agreed that passengers enjoy the same constitutional guarantees as drivers. When a car is stopped, both driver and passenger are in police hands and therefore can't be searched without due cause, the court ruled unanimously.

"A person is seized by the police and thus entitled to challenge the government's action under the Fourth Amendment when the officer by means of physical force or show of authority terminates or restrains his freedom of movement," Justice David Souter wrote.

Claim in disputed deportation questioned
By PETER PRENGAMAN - Associated Press Writer
http://www.sacbee.com/827/story/229821.html
Published 11:22 pm PDT Monday, June 18, 2007

The U.S. government challenged claims that a man who authorities are accused of wrongly deporting to Mexico was mentally disabled, citing the man's own mother.

Pedro Guzman, 29, was jailed on a misdemeanor trespassing violation and then deported to Mexico on May 11 after telling immigration and sheriff's officials that he was an illegal immigrant, according to federal officials.

I'm thrilled to report a victory today in our campaign to Restore Access to Police Records!

In a 21-10 vote, the California State Senate passed SB 1019, a critical bill authored by Senator Gloria Romero, which would overturn the Copley Press decision and restore public access to police misconduct records.

This victory would not have been possible without ACLU-NC activists and our coalition partners. Thank you for calling, faxing, and visiting your senators! Your activism truly made all the difference.

Bill would make it easier for men to take wives' surnames
By SAMANTHA YOUNG - Associated Press Writer
Published 6:27 pm PDT Monday, May 7, 2007

When couples marry in California, the bride simply signs a marriage certificate to take her husband's surname. The other way around? Not so easy.

Under legislation approved Monday, men would be granted the same rights to change their surnames as women. It would eliminate the often time-consuming and costly process of going to court to change a man's last name.

High court gets another chance to review bad law
By Daniel Weintraub -
Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, May 3, 2007

The U.S. Supreme Court, which only four years ago upheld a law Congress passed to limit political speech in America, is about to revisit one of the worst aspects of that ruling.

The court last month heard oral arguments in a Wisconsin case that illustrates what folly it is for government officials to try to decide what kind of political speech is acceptable and what kind should be outlawed.