Tonight's Rescue is brought to you by Louisiana 1976, aloha_and_mahalo, HoosierDeb, grog, Alfonso Nevarez, and dadanation, with vcmvo2 editing.

• The gorgeous pictures matching mole shares with us in his Biodiversity Adventures I: Southern Florida Photodiary are a glimpse of a paradise which is in peril from climate change. (Louisiana 1976)
• Given the tone and tenor of the language used to deride President Obama, gjohnsit carefully explains just how deliberate and wrong this framing is when writing Words Mean Things: Fascism. (dadanation)
• Mayfly delivers the eulogy for an Irish friend, and in such a way that you'd think you were down' the Pub with her, clinking glasses and enjoying A tribute on St. Patrick's Day. (aloha and mahalo)
• If you haven't heard of Henrietta Lacks, jimstaro explains why you should in Making Billions{?} on Health, Yet Sources Of Not Compensated! (dadanation)
• In a thought-provoking essay,hepshiba offers some Reflections on Right Wing Rhetoric #1: The Talismanic Word. (Louisiana 1976)
• jellyyork looks at ongoing studies about the irrational voting behavior resulting from conservative moral framing in Democracy at Risk--What's Really Driving the Wingnuts. (grog)
• Less than 5% Unemployment? RenaRF argues that, in the absence of irresponsible personal borrowing, such a high rate of employment will never again be possible, unless we get serious about revitalizing American manufacturing. (Alfonso Nevarez)
• Muskegon Critic can barely contain his excitement over an impending step forward in creating new, green jobs - part of which includes a Major Wind Developer Giving Presentation to...our Facebook Group. (HoosierDeb)

jotter has High Impact Diaries: March 14, 2010.

virgomusic brings Top Comments - Choral Marathon Edition.

Enjoy and please join us by suggesting your own favorite diaries from the past twenty-four hours in this Open Thread!

Beware the Ides of March! And, while you are doing that, take the time to read the Wrap, which actually (and mercifully, from where I sit and type) ducks back under the 10,000 word limit for the first time in weeks....

THE U.S. SENATE

CA-Sen: Right-Wing Groups Start Crusade to Crush GOP Frontrunner
From the moment he switched from a prospective gubernatorial race to a bid for the U.S. Senate, Tom Campbell has moved to the front of the polls. Clearly, this has the far-right a bit concerned (Campbell has a reputation as a moderate, particularly on social issues). One of their numbers, the folks at NOM (National Organization of Marriage), is taking to the air in order to paint Campbell as insufficiently conservative on the issue of gay marriage.

CO-Sen: PPP Finds Reasonably Open Primaries on Both Sides of Aisle
Both incumbent Democratic Senator Michael Bennet and presumed GOP frontrunner Jane Norton have to be at least a bit concerned about their primaries, if new numbers from PPP are to be believed. Bennet, on the Democratic side, leads former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff by six points (40-34), according to the poll. Meanwhile, Jane Norton clocks in at a thoroughly unimpressive 34%. Her lead over Ken Buck is seventeen points, as he sits at 17%. Buck, however, is somewhat closer to Norton among conservatives, trailing 34-21. They also poll the GOP gubernatorial primary, but the result is so insignificant it does not merit its own spot in the Wrap: Scott McInnis leads 58-8.

NC-Sen: Marshall Poll Shows Big Primary Lead, But High Undecideds
There is something for everyone in a slightly dusty (mid-February) internal poll for Democratic Senate candidate Elaine Marshall, which was recently released by Team Marshall. Marshall's poll shows her with a twenty-six point lead, with 31% of the vote versus 5% for former state legislator Cal Cunningham and 4% for attorney Ken Lewis. Team Marshall will undoubtedly tell you that this means that they have a commanding lead, and neither of their rivals have managed to launch. Ask Team Cunningham and Team Lewis, and they will almost certainly tell you that even in Marshall's own internals, she is not close to sniffing 50% of the vote, despite being a statewide officeholder. Both of these hypothetical analyses are, of course, correct.

PA-Sen: Sometime-GOP Pollster Has Toomey Leading Specter
Here is kind of a peculiar counterweight to the spate of recent polls (by Research 2000 and Quinnipiac) showing Democratic Sen. Arlen Specter leading likely GOP nominee Patrick Toomey. A new poll from Susquehanna Research, a pollster that has worked both for media outlets and GOP candidates in the past, gives Toomey a six point edge (42-36) over Arlen Specter. Interestingly, they did not release a trial heat for a potential Sestak-Toomey showdown.

THE U.S. HOUSE

KY-03: Yarmuth Has 4-Point Edge Among Committed Voters, Says SUSA
Here is a rather strange poll, but one worth reporting, as it concerns a member of the Democratic class of 2006. SurveyUSA, who has been unusually quiet this election season, comes out of hiding to poll the Louisville Mayoral race, and tosses in a strangely-worded question about the electoral viability of John Yarmuth, who has represented KY-03 since 2007. 27% of voters will vote for Yarmuth no matter what, while 23% of voters will vote against him, no matter what. Most, perhaps not surprisingly, are waiting to see who the GOP candidate is. A quintet of Republicans, although arguably none of them are "first-tier" candidates, are vying for the nod.

PA-07: Could Cleared GOP Field Actually Be Blessing in Disguise?
Most folks, myself included, figured that Patrick Meehan, the likely GOP nominee in the open-seat race in the Pennsylvania 7th, caught a break when former TV news anchor Dawn Stensland decided not to make a bid for the GOP nomination. As it turns out, Stensland might have only ruled out a Republican bid for Congress. According to the Philadelphia Daily News, Stensland has not ruled out an Independent bid for Congress. Stensland, who would bring name recognition into the contest, could cause a mountain of troubles for Meehan were she to run to his right (hat tip: DC's Political Report).

THE GUBERNATORIAL RACES

MI-Gov: Bernero Locks Down AFL-CIO Endorsement
It is hard not to consider Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero the Democratic frontrunner after the news that the AFL-CIO had decided to endorse his candidacy. He had already locked down the UAW. Bernero's leading Democratic challenger is state House Speaker Andy Dillon. The GOP has a multicandidate field, although it seems as if Congressman Peter Hoekstra has moved into the front of that field.

NM-Gov: Is Another Presumptive GOP Frontrunner In Deep Trouble?
Another day, another supposed top-tier Republican candidate looking at the painful prospect of political elimination within his own party. In something of a surprise, Pete Domenici Jr. finished way back in the pack at the state's GOP Convention this weekend. Not only did Domenici falter badly in finishing dead last among the five candidates, he logged a pathetic 4.6% of the vote. His team is dismissing it as a meaningless straw poll, but it has a practical impact--because Domenici scored less than 20% of the convention vote, he must gain twice as many signatures to qualify for the ballot than the two candidates who met that standard--Allan Weh and Susana Martinez.

PA-Gov: Susquehanna Poll--Corbett Leads By Double Digits
The same Susquehanna poll that had Specter trailing Toomey on the Senate side also, perhaps not surprisingly, has the presumed GOP nominee up big on the gubernatorial side. Most polls, to be fair, have Republican state AG Tom Corbett leading his Democratic challengers. Susquehanna, however, has the margins a touch wider, with Corbett up 37-26 over Democratic state Auditor Jack Wagner, and up fifteen (39-24) on Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato.

Via TWI, House Republicans say they can't block the House procedurally in their plan to pass the reconciliation bill with a self-executing provision considering the Senate bill "deemed" as passed.

House Republicans say they cannot block a Democratic maneuver that would allow Members to avoid a separate vote on the Senate health care bill.

“There is nothing that can prevent it,” said Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the Rules Committee. “It’s something they can clearly do if they have the votes."

Of course, that's not preventing Dreier from attacking it.

Dreier ripped the plan as “trying to avoid the accountability of an up-or-down vote” and said it violated Pelosi’s pledge of an open and transparent Congress. “It pains me to see,” he said.

You know what's coming next, right?

When Republicans were in the minority, they railed against self-executing rules as being anti-deliberative because they undermined and perverted the work of committees and also prevented the House from having a separate debate and vote on the majority's preferred changes....

When Republicans took power in 1995, they soon lost their aversion to self-executing rules and proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). There were 38 and 52 self-executing rules in the 104th and 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent and 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) there were 40, 42 and 30 self-executing rules in the 106th, 107th and 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent and 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in the 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.

On April 26, [2006] the Rules Committee served up the mother of all self-executing rules for the lobby/ethics reform bill. The committee hit the trifecta with not one, not two, but three self-executing provisions in the same special rule. The first trigger was a double whammy: “In lieu of the amendments recommended by the Committees on the Judiciary, Rules, and Government Reform now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the Rules Committee Print dated April 21, 2006, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the House and the Committee of the Whole.”

And which Republican was chairing the Rules Committee in April, 2006? Why, David Dreier, of course.

What an asshole:

In an amendment presented on the Senate floor Wednesday afternoon, Sen. Steve Russell, R-Oklahoma City, gutted a bill that had been filed to create a task force to study the Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association, and inserted language to make changes to the state's hate crime statutes.

Under the new provisions of Senate Bill 1965, reports that were collected during investigations of possible hate crime that did not end in a conviction would be destroyed or kept by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.

What does that mean? It means that Sen. Russell wants to make sure the big, bad federal government can't come barging into Oklahoma to investigate hate crimes. And lest you think Sen. Russell is an anomaly, he's not. The measure passed by a vote of 39-6 and now heads to the House.

And why do Sen. Russell and pals want to protect Oklahoma from the big, bad federal government?

Russell said because the government has decided to intervene on issues of morality, he is worried that religious leaders who speak out against any lifestyle could be imprisoned for their speech. "The law is very vague to begin with," Russell said. "Sexual orientation is a very vague word that could be extended to extremes like necrophilia."

Um, Steve? First of all, "sexual orientation" is two words. And second, you're an asshole.

When asked about whether the state of Oklahoma should reject the $5 million in federal funds that the federal government would give to law enforcement agencies to help prosecute hate crimes, Russell said he thought about finding a way to pass his law while taking the money, but said it would be a compromise in the values of his bill.

Of course. Because Sen. Russell wants the big, bad federal government to stay the hell out of Oklahoma so that Oklahomans can commit hate crimes against gay people without fear of retribution. But he still wants the big, bad government to hand out the big bucks.

Those brave members of Congress who believe the biggest problems in health care are government-funded abortions, death panels, and lawsuits might want to take a look at this problem:

The report, titled "Deadly Delivery," notes that the likelihood of a woman's dying in childbirth in the U.S. is five times as great as in Greece, four times as great as in Germany and three times as great as in Spain. Every day in the U.S., more than two women die of pregnancy-related causes, with the maternal mortality ratio doubling from 6.6 deaths per 100,000 births in 1987 to 13.3 deaths per 100,000 births in 2006.

...

"In the U.S., we spend more than any country on health care, yet American women are at greater risk of dying from pregnancy-related causes than in 40 other countries," says Nan Strauss, the report's co-author, who spent two years investigating the issue of maternal mortality worldwide. "We thought that was scandalous."

The report from Amnesty International found a number of systemic problems with health care for pregnant women, including:

• Obstacles to care are widespread, even though the US A  spends more on health care than any other country and more on pregnancy and childbirth-related hospital costs, $86 billion, than any other type of hospital care.
• Nearly 13 million women of reproductive age (15 to 44), or one in five, have no health insurance. Minorities account for just under one-third of all women in the US A  (32 percent) but over half (51 percent) of uninsured women.
• One in four women do not receive adequate prenatal care, starting in the first trimester. The number rises to about one in three for African American and Native American women.
• Burdensome bureaucratic procedures in Medicaid enrollment substantially delay access to vital prenatal care for pregnant women seeking government-funded care.
• A shortage of health care professionals is a serious obstacle to timely and adequate care, especially in rural areas and inner cities. In 2008, 64 million people were living in "shortage areas" for primary care (which includes maternal care).
• Many women are not given a say in decisions about their care and the risks of interventions such as inducing labor or cesarean sections. Cesarean sections make up nearly one-third of all deliveries in the USA  – twice as high as recommended by the World Health Organization.
• The number of maternal deaths is significantly understated because of a lack of effective data collection in the USA.

The report concludes that these problems -- most of which are preventable -- aren't just a health care issue; they're a human rights issue.

The report recommends seven ways to address this crisis:

• Ensure access to quality health care for all
• Ensure equitable access to health care without discrimination
• Remove barriers to timely, appropriate, affordable maternal health care
• Ensure access to family planning services and information for all women
• Ensure access to adequate, appropriate, quality maternal health care provision
• Ensure that all women receive adequate post-natal care
• Enhance and improve accountability
• Fully recognize the human right to health and integrate a human rights perspective

Guess they just forgot to mention tort reform and tax cuts.

You can read the full study here.

In this instance, I actually like the plugged version of "Plush" better.

Which songs sound better to you unplugged, or plugged, and why?

It's a music-only open thread.

PS Massive Attack fans, don't miss the concert from last Thursday (two hours of free music!) at our sister site, Newstalgia. [Massive Attack recorded the theme music for House, MD, by the way.]

DOWNLOADS: (88)

PLAYS: (152)

When Bob Schieffer asks Sen. Lamar Alexander if the Republicans are at risk for being seen as purely obstructionists if the health care bill passes, Alexander responds by saying that it will be "a political kamikaze mission" for the Democrats if they pass the bill and vows they're going to run on repealing it. I think Lamar Alexander is the last person the Democrats should be taking any political advice from.

SCHIEFFER: Critics have said that the President has really put his whole presidency on the line. He?s put all the chips on the line. By putting everything he can muster against health care-- for health care and getting it passed. I guess, I would ask the other side of the question. Aren?t Republicans also putting everything up on the line by just being universally, totally against this? I mean, I?m thinking about November. Is it-- can a-- can a party get elected just by saying no? Is-- Is that a successful campaign tactic?

ALEXANDER: No-- no, it?s not. It is not what we?ve done. I mean, a hundred and seventy-three times, and I had my staff count them in the congressional record. Republicans went to the floor of the Senate and offered our step-by-step plan to reduce cost,including small-business health plans, buying insurance across state lines, stopping junk lawsuits against doctors, reducing waste, fraud, and abuse. That?s a different direction. What the President is trying to do is to expand a health care system that everybo-- body knows is unaffordable. What we want to do is reduce the cost of the health care system. And I?m willing to put it to a vote. I hope we don?t have to for the country. I mean, the most important words the President may have uttered in the summit were "that?s what elections are for." And he also said last year that the health care debate?s not just about health care, it?s a proxy for the larger issue of the role of government in American lives. And we think he?s right about that.

SCHIEFFER: Senator, you have said, I believe, that it would be catastrophic for the Democrats if this legislation passes. From just the standpoint of straight politics, why wouldn?t it be a good idea for Republicans to let it pass?

ALEXANDER: Well, if-- if-- if we were completely irresponsible that-- that?s what we would do. I think it?s a political kamikaze mission for the-- for-- for the Democrats to insist on this. I believe if they jam this through-- remember, no big piece of social legislation, Pat Monahan used to say this, the late Democratic Senator, no big piece of social legislation?s ever been jammed through just by a partisan vote. I mean, Lyndon Johnson had the Civil Rights bills written in the Republican leader Everett Dirksen?s office. Social security, Medicare, Medicaid--all had seventy votes. I think, from the day this passes, if it should, there will be an instant, spontaneous campaign to repeal it all across the country. It?ll define every Democratic congressional race in November. And it will be a political wipeout for the Democratic Party. That?ll be bad for the country but it will change the leadership of the country.

SCHIEFFER: Just quickly. Robert Gibbs said next Sunday we?ll all be sitting here talking about how health care reform passed. Do you agree with that?

ALEXANDER: I hope he?s wrong. And I hope that the first part of your show is wrong, too. I hope this is not-- this won?t be the end of health care. If it passes, it?ll define the rest of the year in terms of political contests.

SCHIEFFER: All right.

ALEXANDER: If it fails it?ll just begin a different debate.

UPDATE: John Amato

I guess sushi is in style of GOP because Goober Graham is the latest one to use Japanese analogies:

Graham: Pelosi has House Dems 'liquored up on sake' ready for 'suicide run'

Howard Kurtz has an interesting piece today about how some Fox News employees seem to think Glenn Beck taints their brand. Isn't this sort of like the madam in a brothel worrying about her reputation for virtue? The real shock in this story is that there are people at Fox News who still consider themselves "journalists" - funny, considering how they must already work within the ideological confines of Roger Ailes' famous daily memos:

In just over a year, Glenn Beck's blinding burst of stardom has often seemed to overshadow the rest of Fox News.

And that may not be a good thing for the top-rated cable news channel, as many of its staffers are acutely aware.

With his celebrity fueled by a Time cover story, best-selling books, cheerleading role at protest rallies and steady stream of divisive remarks, Beck is drawing big ratings. But there is a deep split within Fox between those -- led by Chairman Roger Ailes -- who are supportive, and many journalists who are worried about the prospect that Beck is becoming the face of the network.

By calling President Obama a racist and branding progressivism a "cancer," Beck has achieved a lightning-rod status that is unusual even for the network owned by Rupert Murdoch. And that, in turn, has complicated the channel's efforts to neutralize White House criticism that Fox is not really a news organization. Beck has become a constant topic of conversation among Fox journalists, some of whom say they believe he uses distorted or inflammatory rhetoric that undermines their credibility.

We are finding a faith inside ?Environmentalism? and ?Earth Justice? and ?Climate Change Activism.?  A faith can support multiple movements, and carry hundreds of issues. A single belief system can sweep across culture and change us all.  Christianity did this, and Marxism.  And in the 60?s we witnessed Zen Buddhism meet and unite with indigenous faith [...]

This post was originally published on Daily Kos. Those brave members of Congress who believe the biggest problems in health care are government-funded abortions, death panels, and lawsuits might want to take a look at this problem: The report, titled “Deadly Delivery,” notes that the likelihood of a woman’s dying in childbirth in the U.S. is ?ve [...]

This post was originally published on the Booman Tribune. Wow, Alan Grayson called Sarah Palin a wild Alaskan dingbat while mocking her relentlessly on his website. Some other choice words: In response to Palin’s attack on Rep Grayson, Grayson actually complimented Palin. Grayson praised Palin for having a hand large enough to fit Grayson’s entire name on it. [...]

Climate change is already happening, but scientists need to do a better job of getting that message to the public, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration chief Jane Lubchenco said Friday.

"I think scientists have seriously underestimated the importance of explaining what we know about climate change and climate variability in ways that are understandable to most people," Lubchenco told reporters in a wide-ranging interview to mark her first anniversary on the job.

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

The Texas Board of Education has long promoted the teaching of creationism in schools instead of actual science. It’s former chairman and current member Don McLeroy uttered this immortal line when confronted with numerous actual scientists urging that evolution be discussed accurately in the curriculum: “I disagree with these experts. Somebody’s gotta stand up to experts that are just…I think, I don’t know why they’re doing it, they’re wonderful people.”

This stuff is important nationwide. Because Texas buys so many textbooks. So textbook publishers tailor their products so that they’ll be marketable in Texas. And many places around the country get stuck with the same books.

[More]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE               
CONTACT: media@aclu.org

ELON – The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation (ACLU-NCLF) today announced the successful resolution of a federal lawsuit filed on behalf of John W. Paylor, a resident of Elon and a 55-year-old grandfather who was shot twice with a Taser by Elon police officers on June 18, 2006. The officers had surrounded the home of Mr. Paylor in order to serve him with a misdemeanor arrest warrant for using profanity on a public highway and for reckless driving. A videotape of the incident shows that Mr. Paylor was unarmed, in his underwear, and presented no threat to the officers. Nevertheless, an Elon police officer shot Mr. Paylor with a Taser, causing him to fall from his porch. Then, while Mr. Paylor was lying on the ground, unable to move from the shock of being tased and from the fall down his steps, the officer tased him a second time. Mr. Paylor has sustained permanent physical scarring from the incident. The ACLU-NCLF filed a lawsuit against the Elon Police Department and the individual Elon police officers involved on behalf of Mr. Paylor for excessive use of force in March 2009.    

A settlement agreement was finalized and executed this morning, and cooperating attorneys for the ACLU-NCLF have filed papers in court ending the lawsuit. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the Elon Police Department will implement measures designed to prevent excessive and unnecessary use of Tasers in the future. In particular, Elon police officers will undergo improved annual training on a new Taser policy and on Elon's more general use-of-force policy.  Elon's new Taser policy must be consistent with policies in place in other North Carolina localities that include protections the ACLU believes are important to safeguard against excessive use of Tasers. For example, these policies prevent the use of Tasers against individuals, such as Mr. Paylor, who are not actively resisting officers. These policies also prohibit the use of Tasers against individuals, such as Mr. Paylor, who could potentially receive a secondary injury resulting from falling off an elevated location, and they also limit the number of times an individual can be tased.  Other settlement terms include the following: (1) the officer who tased Mr. Paylor will undergo additional use-of-force and Taser training at the North Carolina Justice Academy; and (2) the Elon Police Chief will instruct all officers that anyone with a personal interest relating to the subject of a misdemeanor warrant shall refrain from serving such warrant in person, unless safety or exigent circumstances require that person to be present. Additionally, the Elon Police Department made a $50,000 settlement payment to Mr. Paylor for his physical, emotional and constitutional injuries.

"I am happy with this outcome," said John Paylor. "What these officers did to me was wrong, and my hope is that this settlement will prevent others from having to suffer what I suffered at the hands of Elon police."

The lawsuit named as defendants certain individual police officers of the Elon Police Department, including Officer Harold T. Dunn, and contended that the officer used his Taser to retaliate against Mr. Paylor for a verbal exchange that occurred between him and Mr. Paylor the day before. The lawsuit further alleged that the other officers who were present failed to intervene to stop Officer Dunn's unlawful actions and therefore likewise violated Mr. Paylor's constitutional right to be free from excessive force. Finally, the lawsuit contended that the Town of Elon bears responsibility for its failure to properly train its officers in the use of Tasers and for a pattern and practice of permitting its police officers to employ Tasers in an excessive and reckless manner. After the lawsuit was filed, other Elon residents came forward and described instances in which they too had been tased unnecessarily by the Elon Police Department.

"We are happy with the settlement, as this was a flagrant abuse of authority by members of the Elon Police Department," said attorney Mark J. Prak, Cooperating Attorney for the ACLU-NCLF, who represented Mr. Paylor. "John Paylor did nothing to deserve this treatment as the police videotape clearly demonstrates. This was a case of an officer abusing his position as a police officer to satisfy his own ego."

The ACLU-NCLF is a founding member of the North Carolina Taser Safety Project, a coalition of nonprofit organizations advocating for the proper use of Tasers by law enforcement and for better training for officers on the weapons' potential risks. These risks are especially pronounced when used on certain vulnerable populations, such as children, the elderly, the disabled, obviously pregnant women, and people in certain situations that place them at greater risk of harm, such as people standing atop a flight of stairs – as Mr. Paylor was here – who are at risk of injury from falling if shot with a Taser. The Taser Safety Project produced a report in 2008 which can be found online at http://acluofnc.org/files/NotThereYet.pdf.
 
"Tasers are becoming increasingly common in North Carolina and across the country," said Katy Parker, Legal Director for the ACLU-NCLF. "It is important that as officers employ these potentially deadly weapons, they do so only when necessary and that they exercise restraint. These weapons are not toys."

Mr. Paylor was represented by Mark J. Prak, Charles E. Coble and Charles F. Marshall of Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard, L.L.P. in Raleigh, North Carolina, and C. Scott Holmes of Brock, Payne & Meece, P.A. in Durham, North Carolina, as Cooperating Attorneys for the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation, as well as by Katherine Lewis Parker, Legal Director of the ACLU of North Carolina Legal Foundation. A copy of the settlement agreement is available upon request.

Deliberate Indifference And Longstanding Culture Of Brutality Lead To Epidemic Violence At Privately-Run Idaho Correctional Center

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

BOISE, ID – The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Idaho today filed a class action federal lawsuit charging that officials at the Idaho Correctional Center (ICC) promote and facilitate a culture of rampant violence that has led to carnage and suffering among prisoners at the state-owned facility operated by the for-profit company Corrections Corporation of America (CCA).

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, the lawsuit charges that epidemic violence at the facility is the direct result of, among other things, ICC officials turning a blind eye to the brutality, a prison culture that relies on the degradation, humiliation and subjugation of prisoners, a failure to discipline guards who intentionally arrange assaults and a reliance on violence as a management tool. 

"In my 39 years of suing prisons and jails, I have never confronted a more disgraceful, revolting and inexcusable case of mass abuse and federal rights violations than this one," said Stephen Pevar, a senior staff attorney for the ACLU. "The level of unnecessary human suffering is appalling. Prison officials have utterly failed to uphold their constitutional obligation to protect prisoners from being violently harmed and we must seek court intervention."

According to the lawsuit, a deeply entrenched culture of brutality has resulted in higher levels of violence at ICC than at Idaho's eight other prisons combined. The lawsuit highlights 24 different cases of assault that have occurred at ICC since November 2006, all of which were entirely preventable and the direct result of failures by ICC officials to protect prisoners despite being placed on notice that these prisoners faced a substantial risk of serious harm. The cases highlighted in the lawsuit are not exhaustive, but instead are merely representative of the scores of additional assaults that have occurred at ICC during the past four years.

The cases of prisoner-on-prisoner violence highlighted in the lawsuit include a prisoner who was hit in his ear so hard that it partially detached from the side of his head, a prisoner who, in anticipation of being brutally assaulted, removed his eyeglasses to protect them prior to receiving a pummeling, a prisoner who was beaten so badly that his teeth were pushed through his lower lip causing effusive bleeding that took an officer more than two hours to clean up, a prisoner who required eight screws to put his jaw back into place after being savagely beaten in the face and a prisoner whose requests for X-rays on the heels of being beaten were met by laughter from a prison guard who callously informed him there was no need for x-rays since his nose was so obviously broken.

Marlin Riggs, one of six named plaintiffs in the lawsuit, entered ICC in May 2008 and was targeted by a group of prisoners he believed were associated with a gang that prison officials knew had a history of threatening and extorting money from other prisoners. Despite his pleas, prison officials refused to move Riggs to a safer living area and he was violently assaulted and left lying in a pool of his own blood with a broken nose and a crushed cheekbone.

"The levels of violence and gross indifference of staff are shameful," said Monica Hopkins, Executive Director of the ACLU of Idaho. "People are sent to prison as punishment, not for punishment. The administrators of ICC are ignoring their constitutional duty to protect prisoners from violence at the hands of other prisoners."

The lawsuit also claims that guards at ICC, in an effort to shield themselves from any complaints of misconduct for having set up many of the assaults, file disciplinary charges against victims. The Commission of Pardons and Parole then has used these fabricated charges as grounds to deny parole to a number of prisoners, including Riggs, creating additional unfair punishment.

Among other things, the lawsuit seeks a court order setting strict deadlines by which ICC must develop and implement adequate policies, as well as hire and train a sufficient number of guards, to safeguard prisoners from assault. The lawsuit argues that if ICC officials continue to ignore their constitutional obligation to protect the prisoners in their care, all prisoners should be removed from the facility.

CCA, which boasts of being the largest owner and operator of private correctional and detention facilities in the U.S. with 63 facilities in 20 states housing approximately 76,000 prisoners, has faced hundreds of lawsuits in recent years, including two ACLU lawsuits challenging overcrowding and unconstitutional medical care at the San Diego Correctional Facility, an immigration detention facility in San Diego.  

A copy of today's complaint is available online at: www.aclu.org/prisoners-rights/riggs-et-al-v-valdez-et-al-second-amended-complaint

Additional information about the ACLU is available online at: www.aclu.org

Additional information about the ACLU of Idaho is available online at: www.acluidaho.org

Government Continues To Suppress Key Information About Hundreds Detained At Secretive Prison

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

NEW YORK – The American Civil Liberties Union today asked a federal court to order the government to stop suppressing key information about the hundreds of prisoners at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan.

In response to an ACLU Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records related to the detention and treatment of prisoners at Bagram, the Defense Department in January released for the first time a list of the people imprisoned at the notorious detention facility. The list contains the names of 645 prisoners who were detained there as of September 2009, but other vital information including their citizenship, how long they have been held, in what country they were captured and the circumstances of their capture has been redacted. Today's brief charges the Defense Department is improperly withholding these basic facts about Bagram prisoners and their detention.

Today's ACLU filing also asks the court to order the CIA, another defendant in the lawsuit, to process the FOIA request. The CIA has refused to process the request, claiming it cannot acknowledge whether it has Bagram-related rendition and interrogation records – even though its rendition of prisoners to Bagram and its interrogation of prisoners there is acknowledged and well-known.

The following can be attributed to Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project:

"While the Defense Department took a step in the right direction when it released the names of Bagram prisoners, the Department continues to withhold every other piece of vital information from that document. Information such as how long Bagram prisoners have been held, where they were captured and how they ended up in U.S. custody is vital to the public's understanding of what is going on at this secretive prison. The Defense Department has released volumes of this kind of information about Guantánamo prisoners but is baselessly hiding the same basic facts about Bagram prisoners. As long as the government improperly suppresses this information, there is no way to know if prisoners are being held for excessively long periods of time or if they should even be there at all, since they may have been seized far away from Afghanistan and rendered to Bagram or arrested under circumstances that do not warrant military detention. The court should order the government to stop hiding this vital information."
 
More information about the ACLU's FOIA lawsuit, including today's filings, is online at: www.aclu.org/national-security/bagram-foia

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

OXFORD, MS – The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit today against a Mississippi High School that has canceled prom rather than let a lesbian high school student attend the prom with her girlfriend and wear a tuxedo to the event. In papers filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi, the ACLU asks the court to reinstate the prom for all students at the school and charges Itawamba County School District officials are violating Constance McMillen’s First Amendment right to freedom of expression.

“All I wanted was the same chance to enjoy my prom night like any other student. But my school would rather hurt all the students than treat everyone fairly,” said McMillen, an 18-year-old senior at Itawamba Agricultural High School in Fulton, Mississippi. “This isn’t just about me and my rights anymore – now I’m fighting for the right of all the students at my school to have our prom.”

Today’s filing comes after Itawamba County School District issued a statement yesterday saying they were canceling prom, following a letter from the ACLU and the Mississippi Safe Schools Coalition demanding that they reverse their decision. McMillen said that before that happened, school officials had told her that she could not arrive at the prom with her girlfriend, also a student at IAHS, and that they might be thrown out if any other students complained about their presence at the April 2 event.

“Itawamba school officials are trying to turn Constance into the villain who called the whole thing off, and that just isn’t what happened. She’s fighting for everyone to be able to enjoy the prom,” said Kristy Bennett, Legal Director of the ACLU of Mississippi. “The government, and that includes public schools, can’t censor someone’s free expression just because some other person might not like it.”

In today’s legal complaint, the ACLU asks the court to reinstate the prom for all students and charges that the First Amendment guarantees students’ right to bring same-sex dates to school dances and cites cases holding that other parties’ objections don’t justify censorship. The ACLU also said that the school further violates McMillen’s free expression rights by telling her that she can’t wear a tuxedo to the prom.

“It’s shameful and cowardly of the school district to have canceled the prom and to try to blame Constance, who’s only standing up for herself. We will fight tooth and nail for the prom to be reinstated for all students,” said Christine P. Sun, Senior Counsel with the ACLU national LGBT Project, who represents McMillen along with the ACLU of Mississippi.

The ACLU will ask the court in the next few days to grant McMillen a preliminary injunction ordering the school to reinstate the April 2 prom, let McMillen and her girlfriend go to the prom together, and let McMillen wear a tuxedo to the event.

McMillen is represented by Bennett and Sun, as well as by Norman C. Simon and Joshua Glick of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP.

The case name is Constance McMillen v. Itawamba County School District, et al. Also named as defendants are Superintendent Teresa McNeece and Itawamba Agricultural High School Principal Trae Wiygul and Vice Principal Rick Mitchell. Additional information, including a copy of today’s legal complaint, is available at http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/fulton-ms-prom-discrimination. There is also a Facebook group for people who want to support McMillen, “Let Constance Take Her Girlfriend to Prom,” at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Let-Constance-Take-Her-Girlfriend-to-Prom/357686784817.