PROP 8 CASE MAKES IT PAST 9TH CIRCUIT (AGAIN)
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied an appeal on the February ruling that California’s Prop 8 was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. This follows a ruling against DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) by the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. Both cases are key milestones in the battle for gay rights and are advancing toward a SCOTUS decision next year.
Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick has a particularly interesting take on the story. Here’s how it opens:
Last week a three-judge panel of the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals found a central provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. This morning, the entire 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to disturb a ruling by a panel of that court that Proposition 8—California’s anti gay marriage initiative—also violated the Constitution. Both cases represent big wins for the gay rights movement. And both appeals now turn to the Supreme Court for ultimate answers. The two cases are on parallel tracks to get to the court next fall, to be briefed and argued next spring, and to be decided by next June. The question now becomes which appeal the court will hear, and why.
It’s important to emphasize that the two appeals raise different issues. The DOMA case out of Massachusetts challenged the federal law denying federal marriage benefits to gay couples. It doesn’t implicate the right to marry per se but how states define marriage, thereby affecting whether gay couples receive the same federal benefits as heterosexual couples. The Prop 8 case, on the other hand, was filed by opponents of the statewide referendum banning same-sex marriage. Judge Vaughn Walker struck that law down in 2010. It was then deemed unconstitutional on more limited grounds by a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals last winter. Both cases have been handcrafted to mirror the analysis in the Supreme Court’s 1996 decision in Romer v. Evans, authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, which struck down a Colorado constitutional amendment that did away with state laws protecting homosexuals.
LA Times’ Maura Dolan also reports on the issue.
LAWSUIT AGAINST LAUSD’S TEACHER PROTECTIONS
A lawsuit against LAUSD and California officials claims teacher protections are a violation of kids’ constitutional rights to an equal education. The lawsuit, Vergara v. California, has the potential to change LAUSD’s hiring and firing policies, to be now based on teacher seniority, not competency.
KPCC’s Adolpho Guzman-Lopez has the story. Here’s a clip:
“Our California constitution says every child has a fundamental right to education that will prepare them for society, prepare them to be effective participants in democracy and the economy,” Olson said.
The lawsuit argues that access to such an education depends on a student’s race and wealth. It blames an unspecified number of grossly ineffective teachers who disproportionately teach in predominately poor Latino and African-American neighborhoods. The suit targets laws that it claims protect these teachers.
One gives teachers permanent employment after a year and a half on the job. Three others grant teachers greater protections against dismissal than other public employees. Another state law orders that school districts lay off teachers starting with the least senior ones, not the least effective.
REPORTER EXPLAINS BROKEN LOUISIANA PRISON SYSTEM
Recently, WitnessLA posted about New Orleans Times-Picayune’s Cindy Chang’s expose on Louisiana’s prison system. NPR Air Talk’s Terry Gross interviewed Cindy on the investigative series and what makes Louisiana the prison capital of the world.
It’s absolutely worth listening to. Here’s a clip:
Conditions at the [for profit] rural sheriffs’ prisons differ remarkably from those in larger state institutions, says Chang.
“They’re usually dormitories, and there’s typically 80 or 90 women or men sleeping in a large room in bunk beds,” she says. “And the difference is that people are just lounging around that dorm. They will literally sit there day after day, year after year, until their sentence is over. Whereas in a state prison, which is where most states house almost all of their inmates, you’re busy whether you like it or not — you have a job or you take classes or you’re learning a trade that will help you get a job when you get out.”
Each inmate is worth $24.39 a day in state money. Housing the inmates cheaply and providing few services means there’s more money left over for the sheriff’s department, says Chang.
“It’s kind of a vicious cycle,” she says. “If you can reduce the prison population, then hopefully you’ll have more money to give the ones who are in the system more help. [But] the Sheriff’s Association is one of the most powerful lobbies in the state. And they’ve consistently opposed any change that would reduce the prison population.”
Photo by Beck Diefenbach for REUTERS.
EDITOR’S ELECTIONS NOTE: As you may have seen, at 1:30 a.m., with 25 percent of the vote tallied, the surprise in the DA’s race is that Jackie Lacey is leading with 31 percent of the early returns, Alan Jackson and Carmen Trutanich battling for second, with 24 and 23 percent, respectively.
We’ll know more in a few hours.
UPDATE: In a surprising upset, Lacey, with 32 percent, easily won the first slot in the runoff, with Alan Jackson still appearing to take the second slot, Trutanich, running a close third. The results are still unofficial although 100 percent of the districts have reported.