[mpen-dayton4] FW: "WATCH: They are stealing votes" & "Why Bernie???" & "Panama Papers by abagond" & "What Happened to the Jews?" and more

FYI.   Best, Munsup

P.S. Please reply back to me with ‘unsubscribe’ on the subject line if you no longer want to receive my e-Newsletters. The convenient link to unsubscribe is no longer available due to security reasons to protect my email servers.
P.P.S. "He who dares not offend cannot be honest" - Thomas Paine
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

·        FW: admissions concerning voter suppression

·        FW: WATCH: They are stealing votes

·        FW: Feeling the Bern?

·        FW: Why Bernie???

·        FW: Supreme Court Denies 'DC Madam' Attorney Request to Release Records 'Relevant to 2016 Presidential Election'

·        FW: The Panama Papers by abagond

·        FW: Salon: "Inside the Panama Papers: Massive leak shows just how extensive corruption is worldwide, implicating politicians, human traffickers and drug dealers"

·        FW: "As Americans Rioted for a Ball Game, Iceland Took to the Streets and Forced their PM to Resign – The Free Thought Project

·        FW: "What Happened to the Jews?" | Truthdig

·        FW: Supreme Court hands conservative challengers a loss in a key voting rights case.

·        FW: ACTION ALERT! Join us for the Adoptee Citizenship Act Day of Action!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Andrew Tierman
Subject: admissions concerning voter suppression

Such rare admissions in direct evidence of GOP voter suppression should be widely disseminated. This is the shame of the GOP, which should be held responsible in lawsuits to stop this destruction of the people's right to vote in a democracy.

In particular, conservative judges and lawyers, and people of integrity who may identify themselves as Republicans should become aware to a level beyond denial that voter suppression is continuing across the U.S., pushed by GOP State legislators and Governors.

See http://forums.talkingpointsmemo.com/t/discussion-ex-staffer-wisconsin-gopers-cheered-voter-id-bill-for-what-it-could-do-for-us/36024

 

 

From: Robert Reich via MoveOn.org Civic Action
Subject: WATCH: They are stealing votes

In 2013 the Supreme Court effectively gutted many of the protections inherent in the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

As a result states are finding new ways to stop more and more people—especially African Americans, low income Americans, and young people—from reaching the polls.

But there are some straightforward steps we can take that would protect everyone's access to the polls.

Will you take three minutes to watch my latest video with MoveOn, Voter Suppression (and how it works)? And please share it with your family and friends.

Voting rights are too important to be left to partisan politics.  We must not allow anyone’s vote to be taken away.

Thanks for watching and sharing Voter Suppression (and how it works).

P.S. As part of the Democracy Awakening, MoveOn is joining over 250 progressive organizations to organize for voting rights, to get money out of politics, and to urge the Senate to vote on the current Supreme Court nominee. I'm thrilled that Voter Suppression (and how it works) will have its first public screening as part of this massive effort. Learn more about Democracy Awakening here!

Want to support our work? MoveOn member contributions have powered our work together for more than 17 years. Hundreds of thousands of people chip in each year—which is why we're able to be fiercely independent, answering to no individual, corporation, politician, or political party. You can become a monthly donor by clicking here, or chip in a one-time gift here.

 

 

From: Don Hazen; Executive Editor - AlterNet  
Subject: Feeling the Bern?

It has been an extraordinary political season filled with hopes and fears. Bernie Sanders has been spectacular in bringing progressive ideas to a huge audience, raising more than $100 million and exciting many young people as well as old. AlterNet has covered the Bernie campaign as well as any media in America -- and also exposed how bad the corporate media coverage has been. And we are reader supported, so we need your help to keep going.

Hillary Clinton may very well be our next President, and she is certainly qualified for the job. But it is important to consider what happens to Bernie's army, and the progressive future. As a nonprofit, we can't endorse candidates. But, we will closely cover the next stage in this progressive revolution.  Please, while supporting Bernie, we need you give us money too.  When the campaign is over, we need to be ready for the future.  We need to raise $30,000 more this Spring to meet our budget.  Please help us with a 100% tax-deductible contribution right now.

AlterNet | 1881 Harmon St. Berkeley CA 94703

 

 

 

From: Eric Kramer
Subject: Why Bernie???

In a stunning upset in 1981, Sanders wins the mayoral race in Burlington, Vermont's largest city, by a mere 10 votes. Running as an independent, he shocks the city's political establishment by defeating a six-term, local machine mayor.

~During his tenure as mayor, he balanced the city budget, drew a minor league baseball team to Burlington, turned the formerly industrial waterfront into a mixed-use district featuring housing, parks, and public space. Burlington is now reported to be one of the most livable cities in the nation.

~In 1991, he was the first independent elected to the House in 40 years. He will be re-elected by the people of Vermont to serve eight terms.

~Votes against a measure providing President George H. W. Bush with authorization to use military force in the Gulf War. "I have a real fear that the region is not going to be more peaceful or more stable after the war," he says at the time.

~Co-founded the Congressional Progressive Caucus and chaired the group for its first 8 years.

~In 1992, Congress passes Sanders' first signed piece of legislation to create the National Program of Cancer Registries. All 50 states now run registries to help cancer researchers gain important insights.

~Voted against the Clinton-era North American Free Trade Agreement, which we now know sent millions of American jobs overseas.

~Sanders is one of only 67 votes against the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples legally married. It took 17 years to overturn this Act.

~Standing up against the major pharmaceutical companies, Sanders becomes the first member of Congress to take seniors across the border to Canada to buy lower-cost prescription drugs. The congressman continues his bus trips to Canada with a group of breast cancer patients the following April. These women are able to purchase their medications in Canada for almost one-tenth the price charged in the States.

~Thanks to Sanders' efforts, IBM agreed to a $320 million legal settlement with some 130,000 IBM workers and retirees.

~About 10 years before the 2008 Wall Street crash spins the world economy into a massive recession, Sanders votes "no" on a bill to undo decades of financial regulations enacted after the Great Depression. The House passed the bill 362-57 over Sanders' objection.

~Sanders votes against the USA Patriot Act. "All of us want to protect the American people from terrorist attacks, but in a way that does not undermine basic freedoms," Sanders says at the time.

~Sanders votes against the Bush-Cheney war in Iraq. He warns at the time that an invasion could "result in anti-Americanism, instability and more terrorism." We now know that that war was one of the worst foreign policy decisions in our history.

~Sanders passes an amendment in the House to stop the government from obtaining library and book-buying records on Americans.

~Sanders defeats Vermont's richest man, Rich Tarrant, to be elected to the U.S. Senate. Sanders, running as an Independent, is endorsed by the Vermont Democratic Party and supported by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

~Sanders' authored energy efficiency and conservation grant program passes into law. He later secures $3.2 billion in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for the grant program.

~Thanks to Sanders' efforts, funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program funding doubles, helping millions of low-income Americans heat their homes in winter.

~Sanders works with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley to pass an amendment to an economic recovery bill preventing Wall Street banks that take taxpayer bailouts from replacing laid-off U.S. workers with exploited and poorly-paid foreign workers.

~Sanders passes language in the Affordable Care Act to allow states to apply for waivers to implement pilot health care systems by 2017. The legislation allows states to adopt more comprehensive systems to cover more people at lower costs.

~In 2010, President Barack Obama signs into law the Affordable Care Act with a major Sanders provision to expand federally qualified community health centers. Sanders secures $12.5 billion in funding for the program which now serves more than 25 million Americans. Another $1.5 billion from a Sanders provision went to the National Health Service Corps for scholarships and loan repayment for doctors and nurses who practice in underserved communities.

~Sanders works with Republican Congressman Ron Paul in the House to pass a measure as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill to audit the Federal Reserve, revealing how the independent agency gave $16 trillion in near zero-interest loans to big banks and businesses after the 2008 economic collapse.

~In 2012, he becomes Chairman of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee.

~Sanders, backed by seniors, women, veterans, labor unions and disabled Americans leads a successful effort to stop a "chained-CPI" proposal supported by Congressional Republicans and the Administration to cut Social Security and disabled veterans' benefits.

~Sanders introduces legislation to break up major Wall Street banks so large that the collapse of one could send the overall economy into a downward spiral.

~A bipartisan $16.5 billion veterans bill written by Sanders, Sen. John McCain and Rep. Jeff Miller is signed into law by President Barack Obama.

~In 2015, Sanders takes over as ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, using the platform to fight for his economic agenda for the American middle class.

~Sanders votes against the Keystone XL pipeline which would allow multinational corporation TransCanada to transport dirty tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.

~Both the NAACP and the NHLA (National Hispanic Leadership Agenda) have given Sanders 100% voting scores during his tenure in the Senate. Earns a D- from the NRA.

 

 

From: CLG_News
Subject: CLG: Supreme Court Denies 'DC Madam' Attorney Request to Release Records 'Relevant to 2016 Presidential Election'

News Update from CLG on 06 April 2016
All links are here: http://www.legitgov.org/#breaking_news

Previous edition: In Syria, Militias Armed by the Pentagon Fight Those Armed by the CIA, which I sent twice. On the first send, Microsoft declared it 'ph-shing' and blocked it. Google stripped all links from the newsletter, and 'warned' readers that it contained content 'typically used to steal personal information.' [NSA best bud Google should know all about 'stealing personal information,' btw.] Google has yet to deliver my re-send of the original, sent over six hours ago. True story.  If you want that copy with the links and/or didn't receive it, please feel free to write: lori at legitgov.org and I'll forward it.

Breaking: CLG: Supreme Court Denies 'DC Madam' Attorney Request to Release Records 'Relevant to 2016 Presidential Election' --Attorney Sibley will attempt 'procedural second bite at the apple' By Lori Price, www.legitgov.org | 06 April 2016 | Citizens for Legitimate Government (CLG) has learned that Montgomery Blair Sibley, the attorney for the late 'DC Madam' (Deborah Jeane Palfrey), has been refused by the U.S. Supreme Court to remove the restraining order imposed on him regarding the release of Palfrey's escort service records. Recently, numerous articles and social media posts have prompted wide speculation that the name and/or phone number of Republican presidential candidate, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, is in Palfrey's sealed escort service records.

Mr. Sibley sent the following statement to CLG early Wednesday:

Montgomery Blair Sibley and the D.C. Madam Records

As you asked me to keep you in the loop, here is the latest on the D.C. Madam's records:

Yesterday, Chief Justice Roberts denied my Application to remove the Restraining Order which prohibits me from releasing the D.C. Madam's Escort Service Records I believe relevant to the Presidential Election. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 22, I am now renewing that Application to Justice Thomas - a procedural second bite at the apple so to speak. I will wait upon his decision - which in the normal course should come by the middle of next week - before taking any further action regarding those Records. The Renewed Application can be found on my blog: http://amoprobos.blogspot.com/...

I have reviewed the putative D.C. Madam records released on-line and can state they are not the Records I seek to release. Instead, they appear to be those that I released publicly in 2007... [See also: CLG's 'DC Madam' Phone Records posted September 2007.]

Respectfully, I have sought to answer all your questions, so now I am going to ask you a few of my own: With the Wisconsin Primary now in the books and more primaries on the horizon:

    1.    Will the Press begin to "press" Chief Justice Roberts as to why he denied my Application in Supreme Court Case No. 15A1016? Is he a Caesar at the Coliseum turning his thumb up or down as the whim strikes him or does he have to account-through-legal-analysis for his decision to allow my First Amendment Political Speech to be muzzled by explicitly approving the refusal of the lower courts in his administrative jurisdiction to allow me to file my Motion to Modify the Restraining Order? (I trust you know for time sensitive or urgent questions, reporters can contact the Supreme Court Public Information Office at 202-479-3211, press 1.)

    2.    When will the Press begin to "press" D.C. Circuit Court Chief Judge Garland as to why his Court has refused - since March 9, 2016 - to address my Petition which seeks an order directing the District Court Clerk to file my Motion to Modify the Restraining Order. Notably, in Case No.: 16-3007, I requested Expedited Consideration which the Circuit Court also has refused to grant or deny creating in effect a judicial pocket veto without explanation and thus denying me the ability to appeal such a decision. (Such an inquiry can be directed to: Tracy Hauser Scarrow, (202-216-7460) Special Assistant to Chief Judge Garland.)

Breaking: Bernie Sanders defeats Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin | 05 April 2016 | Bernie Sanders defeated Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin's primary Tuesday, with Fox News and NBC News projecting the Vermont senator as the winner shortly after polls closed...With his win in the Badger State, he'll have pocketed six of the past seven contests. His campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, says it's proof the candidate can still close the gap in pledged delegates, which stood at 263 entering Tuesday's primary, according to the Associated Press.

Breaking: 'Zodiac Ted' Cruz Wins Wisconsin GOP Primary | 05 April 2016 | [Alleged 'DC Madam' client] Sen. Ted Cruz won the Wisconsin Republican presidential primary Tuesday, dealing a setback to front-runner Donald Trump and increasing the odds the party will have a contested convention in July...Mr. Trump was in second and Ohio Gov. John Kasich lagged behind in third. The result was a hard-won victory for anti-Trump forces [such as Koch-owned Scott Walker] who had seen the Wisconsin primary as their last, best hope to slow the front-runner's momentum toward the Republican nomination. [Is Ted Cruz the Zodiac Killer? #CruzSexScandal]

Your tax dollars at work: In Syria, Militias Armed by the Pentagon Fight Those Armed by the CIA | 28 March 2016 | Syrian militias armed by different parts of the U.S. war machine have begun to fight each other on the plains between the besieged city of Aleppo and the Turkish border, highlighting how little control U.S. intelligence officers and military planners have over the groups they have financed and trained in the bitter five-year-old [US-created] civil war. The fighting has intensified over the last two months, as CIA-armed units and Pentagon-armed ones have repeatedly shot at each other while maneuvering through contested territory on the northern outskirts of Aleppo, U.S. officials and rebel leaders have confirmed. In mid-February, a CIA-armed militia called Fursan al Haq, or Knights of Righteousness, was run out of the town of Marea, about 20 miles north of Aleppo, by Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces moving in from Kurdish-controlled areas to the east.

CLG needs your support. http://www.legitgov.org/donate.html
Or, please mail a check or m*ney order to CLG:
     Citizens for Legitimate Government (CLG)
     P.O. Box 1142, Bristol, CT 06011-1142
Contributions to CLG are not tax deductible.

Feel free -- and CLG encourages you -- to forward this newsletter to your lists and friends!
Those who wish to be added to the list can go here: http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg and add your name.

 

 

From: Thomas Scott
Subject: Fw: The Panama Papers by abagond

FYI: As "Deep Throat" said over 40 years ago..."Follow the Money"   - TAS

The Panama Papers
Wed 6 Apr 2016 by abagond

The Panama Papers (2016) are the 11.5 million files of Mossack Fonseca, a law firm based in Panama that hides money for the rich and powerful. It names names. It cover the years 1977 to 2015.

It is the biggest data leak to date: it is Edward Snowden times ten, WikiLeaks times a thousand.

Among Mossack Fonseca’s customers:
    

·        past and present leaders (or those close to them) of 25 countries: Argentina, Azerbaijan, Britain, China, Egypt, Georgia, Ghana, Guinea, Iceland, Iraq, Ivory Coast, Jordan, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Syria, UAE, Ukraine.

·        128 public officials throughout the world and

·        29 billionaires.

The prime minister of Iceland has already resigned.

The US: So far no US president, presidential candidate or even public official has been named (at least in the US press).

China has blocked news of the Panama Papers. The Economist, at least in its early reporting, failed to point out that Ian Cameron, father of the British prime minister, is among the named.

ICIJ: The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), made up of reporters from 78 countries, got the files about a year ago. Since then they have been going through them, their first reports appearing in the press on April 3rd 2016. There is still more to come. It is only day four!

Offshore banking: It has long been known that dictators, drug lords and the rich hide much of their money offshore in places like the British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands – to avoid taxes or the law. But the Panama Papers names names and amounts – and makes it clear that the Western press more readily reports the corruption of non-Western leaders than their own.

Mossack Fonseca: If you, say, rob Heathrow Airport of 3.5 tons of gold, as one of their customers did in 1983, or take a huge bribe, the lawyers at Mossack Fonseca can help. They can set it up so that you can spend your fortune without the authorities (or ex-wives or voters) being able to know much if anything about it. Mossack Fonseca has offices all over the world. It is one of the four largest such companies.

Shell companies: Mossack Fonseca hides money mainly by creating shell companies. It has created hundreds of thousands of them, mainly in the British Virgin Islands and Panama. Shell companies hide where their money comes from and who it benefits. Well, it hides it till there is a data leak!

Brought to you by Mossack Fonseca:

Higher taxes/poor public services: The US loses some $100 billion in taxes from offshore banking. Poor countries, though, are harder hit since they can ill afford to lose any taxes.

War, refugees: Mossack Fonseca maintains its innocence, but it is clear from emails that it knew it was helping Syria avoid international sanctions so that it could keep its planes and helicopters in the air in the civil war, a war that has killed hundreds of thousands and driven millions from their homes.

Syrian refugees at the Iraqi border, 2015 (Image: UNHCR).

– Abagond, 2016.

 

 

From: Judy Burnette

Subject: "As Americans Rioted for a Ball Game, Iceland Took to the Streets and Forced their PM to Resign – The Free Thought Project

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/americans-riotted-ball-game-iceland-streets-forced-pm-resign/?utm_source=getresponse&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=savoymatt&utm_content=The+Free+Thought+Project+Newsletter

 

 

From: Judy Burnette
Subject: Salon: "Inside the Panama Papers: Massive leak shows just how extensive corruption is worldwide, implicating politicians, human traffickers and drug dealers"

salon.comhttp://www.salon.com/2016/04/04/inside_the_panama_papers_massive_leak_shows_just_how_extensive_corruption_is_worldwide_implicating_politicians_human_traffickers_and_drug_dealers/?source=newsletter

Inside the Panama Papers: Massive leak shows just how extensive corruption is worldwide,
implicating politicians, human traffickers and drug dealers

Ben Norton


King Salman bin Abdulaziz, David Cameron (Credit: Reuters/Gary Cameron/Joshua Roberts)

“My life is in danger,” read an anonymous message. “No meeting, ever.”

“Why are you doing this?” a German newspaper asked.

“I want to make these crimes public,” the whistleblower wrote.

An enormous cache of documents was just released, exposing how political and economic elites from around the planet are stashing their money in secretive tax havens.

The Panama Papers is one of the biggest leaks in history. Substantially larger than WikiLeaks’ 2010 release of U.S. diplomatic cables or Edward Snowden’s 2013 release of NSA files, the leak consists of 11.5m documents from the world’s fourth-largest offshore law firm, Mossack Fonseca. At a massive 2.6 terabytes in size, the Panama Papers reveal information about 214,000 companies.

An anonymous source leaked the trove to the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. The publication subsequently shared these files with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, which subsequently collaborated with news outlets worldwide.

In what is being called “the largest cross-border media collaboration ever undertaken,” at least 370 journalists working for more than 100 media organizations in 80 countries sifted for over a year through the documents, which show just how widespread corruption is throughout the world.

Among those implicated in the scandal are arms traders, human traffickers, drug dealers, con artists and 143 politicians — a veritable Who’s Who of global leaders, including 12 current or former heads of state, along with their families and friends.

Many Western media reports on the Panama Papers framed the story around Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose close friends are involved in the corruption, but he is just one small part of the much larger scandal.

King Salman of Saudi Arabia and Petro Poroshenko, president of Ukraine, both of whom are close Western allies, are directly implicated in the corruption.

A slew of other leaders are involved, including Nawaz Sharif, the prime minister of Pakistan; Ayad Allawi, the ex-interim prime minister and former vice-president of Iraq; Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson, the prime minister of Iceland; Alaa Mubarak, the son of Egypt’s former Western-backed dictator; and the children of Ilham Aliyev, the president of Azerbaijan.

Joining them are a key member of the ethics committee of international soccer association FIFA, family members of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and even the son of former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan.

British lawmakers and the father of U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron are also implicated, along with donors to political parties. So too are the families of members of China’s ruling body, the politburo.

Mossack Fonseca is based in Panama, but operates globally. It has at least 600 employees working in 42 countries. Its leaked records show dealings with 14,000 clients, and it is a registered agent for more than 200,000 companies connected to 200 countries.

The company is one of the top creators of shell companies, institutions that allow corporations to make transactions without having to claim ownership of assets.

The tax havens the Panamanian law firm operates in include the British Virgin Islands, where approximately half of the corporations are registered, along with Switzerland, Cyprus, Hong Kong, Nevada and others. More than half of the corporations involved are registered in British-administered tax havens.

Major banks have pushed hard for the creation of these opaque companies, the Panama Papers reveal. Economic and political elites collaborated in order to keep the corruption as difficult as possible to trace.

Even more shocking in the documents is the revelation that, in some cases, fixers and middlemen tried to protect themselves and their clients by not only hiding questionable transactions, but also by backdating and even destroying documents.

Nearly 40 years of records are included in the release, from the late 1970s through the end of 2015.

Mossack Fonseca firmly denies that it has been involved in any illegal activity, and refuses to comment on the cases, citing client confidentiality. Use of offshore tax havens are in some countries perfectly legal. In others, it may be in a murky legal gray area for elites to hide their wealth there.

“Most of the services the offshore industry provides can be used for legal purpose and are by law-abiding customers,” the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists explained. “But the documents show that banks, law firms and other offshore players often fail to follow legal requirements to make sure clients are not involved in criminal enterprises, tax dodging or political corruption.”

This is actually not the first time Mossack Fonseca has been exposed. Investigative journalist Ken Silverstein released a report in December 2014 detailing how the law firm works with oligarchs, money launderers and dictators. A year and a half later, however, the release of a gargantuan cache of the company’s records show just how far this network of corruption spreads around the globe.

The release of the Panama Papers comes mere days after the revelation of another scandal involving the shadowy company Unaoil. An explosive investigation found that the Monaco-based company exploits the widespread corruption in the Global South, charging multinational corporations multi-million dollar fees and then bribing government officials in oil-rich countries in order to get good deals for these companies.

In the process, the little-known firm fuels inequality and helps destabilize natural resource-rich conflict areas in these countries, some of which are also implicated in the Panama Papers scandal.

Both leaks shine further light on the international schemes of economic and political elites.

"Behind every great fortune there are great crimes"  - Balzac

 

 

From: Judy Burnette

Subject: "What Happened to the Jews?" | Truthdig

http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/what_happened_to_the_jews_20160402

 

 

From: Jerome Reide;  Regional Field Director, NAACP Midwest Region III
Subject: Fw: Supreme Court hands conservative challengers a loss in a key voting rights case.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/04/politics/conservatives-lose-key-supreme-court-voting-rights-case/index.html

Conservatives lose key Supreme Court voting rights case www.cnn.com The Supreme Court handed conservative challengers a loss Monday in a key voting rights case.

Supreme Court upholds 'one person, one vote'
 Richard Wolf, USA TODAY10:52 a.m. EDT April 4, 2016


(Photo: J. Scott Applewhite, AP)

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court refused Monday to change the way state and municipal voting districts are drawn, denying an effort by conservatives that could have increased the number of rural, mostly white districts at the expense of urban, largely Hispanic ones.

The "one person, one vote" case was among the most consequential of the high court's term, and once again the court's liberal wing won out. The ruling left intact Texas' method -- followed by all states -- of drawing districts with roughly equal numbers of residents.

Challengers had argued only eligible voters should be counted, a method that would have allowed states to ignore non-citizens and others who do not vote, including children. In most cases, that would have helped Republican candidates and hurt Democrats.

If the court had ruled that districts should be based on eligible voters rather than total population, states with large numbers of non-citizens would have seen the biggest change -- Texas, California, New York, New Jersey, Arizona and Nevada among them. Cities such as Chicago and Miami also would be affected.

USA TODAY

'One person, one vote' case could upend politics

Six justices signed on to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's decision, and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas -- the most conservative members of the court -- concurred in the judgment.

"Total-population apportionment meets the equal protection demand, by rendering each representative alert to the interests and constituent-service requests of all who dwell in the representative's district," Ginsburg said.

 

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the 'one person, one vote' plurality opinion for the court. (Photo: Michael Dwyer, AP)

Because challengers had sought to force a change to counting only eligible voters, the court did not rule on a lesser possibility -- that states merely be allowed to switch to voters. But no states currently do so, partly because of the difficulty in counting voters rather than all people.

Thomas and Alito agreed that Texas cannot be forced to switch to using only eligible voters in drawing districts, but they said the Constitution does not require that approach.

"The choice is best left for the people of the states to decide for themselves how they should apportion their legislature," Thomas wrote.

"Whether a state is permitted to use some measure other than total population is an important and sensitive question that we can consider if and when we have before us a state districting plan that, unlike the current Texas plan, uses something other than total population as the basis for equalizing the size of districts," Alito wrote.

During oral argument in December, a majority of justices appeared to agree that the standard by which election districts are drawn is imperfect. But they couldn't come up with a better way.

Supreme Court justices divided on 'one person, one vote'

Debating a case that threatened to upend the political balance in the nation from New York to California, the more conservative justices indicated they were open at least to incorporating voter population into the mix. The more liberal justices opposed going to eligible voters, which would render non-citizens invisible when drawing districts — along with children, prisoners, some ex-felons and some people with intellectual disabilities.

Those justices warned that incorporating voter population likely would jeopardize other goals, such as drawing compact districts and respecting municipal boundaries. They also noted that congressional seats already must be apportioned based on population, and that survey data on eligible voters is less reliable.

Perhaps most important, they said, is the need to keep districts relatively equal in terms of population so that all residents have the same access to their elected officials. "There is a voting interest," Justice Sonia Sotomayor acknowledged when the case was debated. "But there is also a representation interest."

The challengers' argument boiled down to this: Texas' population-based system puts more voters in districts with fewer non-citizens and others who cannot vote, thereby diluting the weight of their votes. In heavily Hispanic districts or others with large numbers of non-voters, the remaining residents' votes carry greater weight.

The equal protection clause of the Constitution is supposed to guarantee each person the same political power. The problem is that the Supreme Court has never decided who should be counted — all people, or just voters.

The case pitted scores of civil rights organizations, who wanted to protect the interests of minorities, against a lesser number of conservative and libertarian groups who wanted the metric changed so that voting comes before representation.

It was the brainchild of Edward Blum, director of the Project on Fair Representation, which has filed several Supreme Court challenges to racial and ethnic preferences in voting and higher education.

Blum brought the challenge to the University of Texas affirmative action plan that also came before the justices in December, as well as a challenge to the Voting Rights Act that resulted in the court's 2013 decision striking down the requirement that mostly Southern states and municipalities get federal approval for any changes in voting practices.

 

 

From: NAKASEC
Subject: ACTION ALERT! Join us for the Adoptee Citizenship Act Day of Action!

ACTION ALERT: Adoptee Citizenship Act Day of Action



ACTION ALERT! Join us for the Adoptee Citizenship Act Day of Action!
#citizenshipforalladoptees

On Tuesday, April 19th, community members from across the country will gather in Washington DC for the first Adoptee Citizenship Act Day of Action (ACA). They will be meeting with representatives to support the bill’s passage in both the Senate and House of Representatives. The Day of Action also will include a press conference, which will feature adoptees who do not have citizenship, and a call-in day for those who are not able to join us in DC.

The Day of Action is being co-sponsored by National Korean American Service and Education Consortium (NAKASEC), 18 Million Rising, Gazillion Strong, and the Adoptee Rights Campaign (ARC).

In 2001, the Childhood Citizenship Act (CCA) was signed into law, which granted automatic U.S. citizenship to all international adoptees. Unfortunately, the CCA only included adoptees who were born after January of 1983. It left out thousands of international adoptees from Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa. The Adoptee Citizenship Act of 2015 (ACA) will grant retroactive U.S. citizenship to all of these internationally adopted individuals, regardless of when they were adopted.
The movement to pass the ACA is an adoptee-led effort, and now we need YOUR help to build momentum and secure U.S. citizenship for ALL international adoptees.

Take Action Now by contacting us if:
          

1. You are an adoptee without citizenship with a story to share! Make your voice heard by sharing your story with your community and elected officials.
2. You can come to DC! Join us in DC on the Day of Action on April 19th to speak with legislators about the ACA.
3. You want to participate! Join us for a Call in Day on April 19th to urge your senators and representatives to support the ACA.

If you are interested in participating in the above actions or more information, please contact us at adopteedefense@gmail.com.

 

End of MPEN e-Newsletter