The website features the quote "it's about family" at the top of the page and allows visitors to send a letter or fax to their state senator asking them to support marriage equality. It also provides the phone numbers of state senators so that supporters can urge their state senator to support marriage equality.
Jennifer Carnig, who serves as NYCLU's communications director, provided insight as to why NYCLU decided to create this website.
To deny lesbian and gay couples the right to marry is to label them second-class citizens unworthy of the 1,324 state rights and responsibilities that marriage creates. As the Connecticut Supreme Court pointed out, marriage fairness is about protecting families, and in particular, children. And as former New York State Chief Judge Judith Kaye observed in her dissent to the ruling in Hernandez v. Robles, the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples has especially harmful physical and emotional effects on their children.
"Depriving these children of the benefits and protections available to the children of opposite-sex couples," wrote Chief Judge Kaye, "is antithetical to their welfare."
We will advocate for marriage no matter what happens this session. We commend the Assembly for passing the Marriage Fairness bill in 2007 and again in 2009, and we recognize these votes as historic victories for civil rights in the state. The re-election of every member who voted for the bill in 2007 is strong indication that New Yorkers recognize the legislation, at its core, is about fairness, justice, equality and acceptance. It is time for the senate to follow the important legislative precedent established by the Assembly. We are hopeful that MarriageNY.com can help apply that pressure. The families featured on MarriageNY.com come from key senate districts across New York, and we hope hearing from people in those districts will help convince any senators on the fence. We're also leading lobby visits, phone banking, and doing letter drives in those areas. We are so close to victory here, we are confident that the voices of New Yorkers will make the difference and encourage the senate to do the right thing and pass this bill.
Marriage equality is close to become reality in New York. The sponsor of the Marriage Equality Act in the Senate, Sen. Tom Duane, believes that he has the votes needed, according to PolitickerNY's Jimmy Vielkind:
"I don't want to seem overconfident, but I'm confident it's coming to the floor, I'm confident it's going to win, I'm confident we're going to have the vast majority of Democratic votes and several Republican votes as well," Duane said.
He was asked which Republicans support the measure, because none have gone on the record in favor.
"I would not want to deny them the pleasure of telling you themselves. That would just be wrong and really impolite of me to do that," Duane replied.
How many votes exactly do you have?
"A good elected official would never give up their vote count," he replied.
What will you say to Smith if it doesn't come to a vote this session?
"It's coming to the floor, it's passing," Duane replied.
Duane's confidence is worth noting, given the uncertainty that has surrounded the passage of this bill in the New York State Senate. Passage in the Assembly was easy and guaranteed, but the Senate has always been up in the air. It requires Republican support and if they have that support (and if a Democrat or two has switched their previous positions) then the bill has a very real chance of passing.
We need to keep working though. We need to keep the Senate on their feet. Let's make sure they, at the very least, bring this to a vote. Then we can know who is supportive and who isn't.
According to WSYR-9 in Syracuse, the search was for drugs and tobacco. The 23 students who were searched were told to, among other things, fold over their waistbands. These students also had to take off their socks and shoes during the search.
Out of the 23 students who were searched, all the search found was a marijuana pipe on one student. That student has been charged for possessing the pipe.
The New York Civil Liberties Union has called on the Red Creek Central School District in upstate New York to publicly apologize to high school students subjected to illegal, humiliating and invasive searches by state police and school officials.
In a letter to Superintendent David Sholes, the NYCLU also urged the district to take steps to prevent invasive searches and protect students' rights. Students subjected to the April 9 searches were passengers on a school bus parked outside of Red Creek High School. Every student was pulled off the bus and searched.
"This was one of the most humiliating moments of my life," said 18-year-old graduating senior Stephanie Schultz, who is attending college in the fall. "My school taught me about the Constitution and about my rights, and then pushed them both aside and made me feel like my rights didn't matter."
Schultz and at least 17 other students on a Williamson BOCES school bus were removed from the bus in mixed gender pairs and ordered to the Red Creek High School principal's office by a uniformed state trooper. In the principal's office, the students, male and female, were subjected to invasive searches in full view of each other.
You can read the NYCLU letter to the superintendent here.
These types of searches at schools aren't out of the ordinary. My local high school, where my sister is a senior, recently had a search that involved police officers with drug-sniffing dogs going from car to car in the parking lot looking for drugs. I'm not sure what, if any, reasoning these officers had to conduct such a search, but it's not the first time a search of that nature has taken place.
New York Gov. David Paterson and legislative leaders have agreed to ease drug laws that were once among the harshest in the nation and led a movement more than 30 years ago toward mandatory prison terms.
The agreement rolls back some of the tougher sentencing provisions pushed through the Legislature in 1973 by then-Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, a Republican who said they were needed to fight a drug-related "reign of terror."
Critics have long claimed the laws were draconian and crowded prisons with people who would be better served with treatment.
Paterson says Friday that judges will now be able to use techniques like treatment and counseling that have proven more effective than prison for low-level offenders. At the same time, penalties will be toughened for drug kingpins.
It's long overdue and I'm very curious to see the reactions to the details from those who have been following this decades long tragedy closest.
The full press release from the Three Men is in the extended entry.
UPDATE: Senator Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan) just released this statement:
"I am very proud to be a part of history today and finally see the Rockefeller Drug Laws reformed. The reforms announced today will restore judicial sentencing discretion and substantially expand alternatives to incarceration for non-violent drug offenders.
It has been a long hard fight to reform these archaic drug laws and today is the culmination of decades of hard work and advocacy from countless people, all of whom deserve praise for helping to achieve these needed reforms."
The NYCLU has just released a must read report with loads of very informative maps about who we lock up, where they live and what it costs us. It's a hell of a piece of scholarship and it should shame those in Albany who are dragging their feet in the effort to repeal these draconian and often racist laws. From the introduction:
There has emerged over the last decade a broad consensus among policy experts, criminal justice scholars and lawmakers that the War on Drugs, with its singular emphasis on incarceration, has failed.
In 1993, on the 20th anniversary of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, New York State Corrections Commissioner Thomas Coughlin, III, said the state was "lock[ing] up the wrong people ... for the wrong reasons."
Former Republican state senator John Dunne was a sponsor of the state's mandatory sentencing scheme for drug offenses. He subsequently organized a coalition that has advocated for fundamental reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. In 2004 he observed, in a television spot, "the Rockefeller Drug Laws have been a well-documented failure."
Yet, as the 36th anniversary of these laws approaches, the state continues locking up the wrong people for the wrong reasons.
This report presents and marshals the empirical evidence that demonstrates New York's mandatory-minimum drug sentencing scheme has failed, utterly, to accomplish its stated objectives. It has not reduced the availability of drugs or deterred their use; it has not made us safer.
The overwhelming majority of those serving time for drug offenses have been convicted of low-level, nonviolent offenses. Many of those individuals have substance abuse problems, and many suffer from a range of disabilities that will not be addressed in prison.
They leave prison prepared for little else but failure and re-incarceration. These individuals are all but guaranteed a vastly diminished earning capacity, if any at all. Families come apart. And because prosecution of drug offenses targets neighborhoods that are already under great social and economic stress, the drug war destabilizes entire communities.
For this dysfunctional approach to criminal justice policy, New York taxpayers pay dearly. Based on cost estimates calculated by the New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform, taxpayers will pay about $600 million to incarcerate drug offenders in 2009 alone.
The costs are not only fiscal. The selective enforcement of the drug laws has done great damage to the integrity of the criminal justice system. The state's drug sentencing laws are the legacy of a grim racial history. And the nature of the injustice worked by these laws can only be fully understood in this historical context.
From the late 19th Century into the 1960s, Jim Crow laws were enforced with the objective of denying blacks equal protection of the laws and full participation in civil society. By the late 1960s the legal infrastructure of Jim Crow had been dismantled. But over the subsequent decades a successor was revived in statutes prohibiting drug use. Prosecution under these statutes has led to massive, unprecedented rates of incarceration - and prisons populated almost exclusively by people of color.
The Rockefeller Drug Laws are the Jim Crow laws of the 21st Century. This report includes demographic maps of urban centers throughout the state that depict in bold relief the racial and ethnic bias that informs the state's drug-law policy.
The Rockefeller Drug Laws are unjust, irrational and ineffective. Period.
The racial and ethnic profile of the population sent to prison for drug offenses is particularly striking. It is well established in scientific literature that the demographics of those who use or sell illicit drugs reflect the demographics of the general population. In other words, there are greater numbers of whites - as compared with blacks and Latinos - who use and sell drugs. However, nearly 90 percent of those incarcerated for drug offenses in New York State are black or Latino. And in this respect the year 2007 was unexceptional. Gross racial and ethnic disparities among those sent to prison for drug offenses have become statistical constants - both in New York State and nationwide.
The enactment of the Rockefeller Drug Laws in 1973 was a bold, albeit simplistic, political response to a complex public policy problem. The politics of this initiative were driven in part by then-Governor Nelson Rockefeller's aspiration for national office. Any such candidate must demonstrate a commitment to upholding law and order. And in the early 1970s there was concern among New Yorkers, and Americans generally, that a sharp rise in heroin use and property crime posed a growing threat to public safety. The governor responded by promoting, and ultimately signing into law, the nation's most harsh and inflexible drug sentencing statutes.
Here's a map of NYC from the report.
Twenty-five percent of NYC adults sent to prison in 2006 came from neighborhoods with just 4 percent of the adult population. More than half were admitted for drug offenses, and 97 percent were black or Latino - even though whites use and sell drugs in far greater numbers than blacks or Latinos
...
Community District 5, which includes East New
York, is populated largely by people of color. Just 5 percent of residents are non-Latino white. In 2006, at least 400 residents of the district were incarcerated; 40 percent of those individuals were sent to prison for drug offenses.
Community District 12, which includes the neighborhoods of Kensington and Borough Park, is 63 percent non-Latino white. In 2006, just 39 people living in the district were sent to prison. Approximately 25 percent of those individuals - about 10 - were sent to prison for drug offenses.
There's tons more data in the report and I really can not recommend it highly enough.
As reported on Sunday, a bill in the New York State Assembly could be passed as early as today. The bill, A06085, will bring much needed reforms to the Rockefeller drug laws that have been considered "draconian" by many.
But do these reforms go far enough? While the New York Civil Liberties Union praises the Assembly bill as a "good first step", the NYCLU says that more needs to be done to realize true reforms.
In anticipation of the passage of a bill later today, the New York Civil Liberties Union applauded the State Assembly for taking the first significant step in dismantling the draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws.
"New York State is closer to justice today than we were yesterday," said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "By passing this bill, our state's Assembly is letting go of 36 years of failure and moving toward meaningful reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws."
Enacted in 1973, the Rockefeller Drug Laws mandate extremely harsh prison terms for the possession or sale of relatively small amounts of drugs. Though intended to target drug kingpins, most of the people incarcerated are convicted of low-level, nonviolent offenses. Many of the thousands of New Yorkers in prison under these laws suffer from substance abuse problems; many others struggle with issues related to homelessness, mental illness or unemployment.
For decades, the NYCLU, criminal justice advocates and medical experts have fought to untie the hands of judges and allow addiction to be treated as a public health matter. As noted in the New York State Sentencing Commission's recent report, sentencing non-violent drug offenders to prison is ineffective and counterproductive, and has resulted in unconscionable racial disparities: Blacks and Hispanics comprise more than 90 percent of those currently incarcerated for drug felonies, though most people using illegal drugs are white.
"The Rockefeller drug laws have failed by every measure - cost, drug use, public safety,"said Robert Perry, NYCLU legislative director. "With the passage of Jeff Aubry's bill, the Assembly has acted on Governor Paterson's directive to fundamentally reform the state's failed drug policy. The bill shifts the paradigm, away from mass incarceration and toward a public health model."
The NYCLU found that the bill does "restore the authority of a judge to divert some people into substance abuse treatment or other community-based programs that best address the person's needs" and "provides for retroactive relief for those sentenced under the old Rockefeller sentencing scheme." The bill also provides re-entry assistance to those already in prison and establishes a "crime reduction fund" to help fund prevention and treatment services.
However, the NYCLU also found that the bill still leaves in place a sentencing system that allows for harsh and lengthy sentences for low-level, non-violent offenders. The bill also disqualifies people from treatment who might need it the most and "creates an unnecessarily burdensome procedure for sealing a criminal record after someone has completed a substance abuse program."
While there is a lot more that can still be done, this is a good starting point. Reforming the Rockefeller drug laws requires a few different approaches, so having a piece of legislation to lay the foundation for more is a good thing. That's what this bill has the potential to do. Hopefully, more can be done in the future.
But the NYCLU made a great argument in their response to the commission's report. In their response, the NYCLU calls for reforming the Rockefeller Drug Laws and said that the commission's report fell short of making those reforms.
The New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform's final report, released today, falls short of Governor Paterson's call for a complete overhaul of the notorious Rockefeller Drug Laws.
The New York Civil Liberties Union urges fundamental reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, which mandate extremely harsh prison terms for the possession or sale of relatively small amounts of illegal drugs. Intended to target major drug traffickers, the drug laws have instead caused the large-scale incarceration of low-level, nonviolent drug users. As noted in the Sentencing Commission's report, the laws have produced unconscionable racial disparities: Blacks and Hispanics comprise more than 90 percent of those currently incarcerated for drug felonies, though most people using illegal drugs are white.
"The State Sentencing Commission claims to embrace the principles of drug law reform, but its proposals just perpetuate the status quo. Sadly, the commission has squandered a historic opportunity to address this shameful blight on our criminal justice system," said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "New York cannot correct its unjust, cruel and wasteful drug sentencing scheme without overhauling the laws that created it. We encourage Governor Paterson to improve on the commission's report by supporting reforms that provide true judicial discretion in drug sentencing, expand and fund alternative to incarceration programs, and provide long-sought justice to the thousands of families that have been torn apart by the Rockefeller Drug Laws."
The commission's report acknowledges that sentencing non-violent drug offenders to prison may be ineffective and counterproductive; but the report's proposals would preclude judges from considering alternatives to incarceration for thousands of individuals who would benefit from treatment and rehabilitation. Specifically, the committee's recommendations would:
· Preclude youthful offenders with certain prior convictions from diversion to rehabilitation.
· Require a "certification of addiction" procedure that will result in a complex and costly factual dispute that prosecutors will always be better armed to win.
· Exclude from eligibility for diversion those who are not addicted but could nevertheless be better served by community based rehabilitation programs. Successful diversion models employed across the country and in New York State demonstrate that providing mental health, vocational and educational services offer the best outcomes.
The Rockefeller Drug Laws' mandatory minimum sentencing scheme compels judges to hand out fixed sentences regardless of the circumstances surrounding an individual's arrest. The criteria for guilt is not the offender's role in the drug transaction or whether the offender poses a genuine threat to others, but simply the quantity of drugs in his or her possession at the time of arrest. The discretion to impose sentences based upon the unique circumstances of each case and to divert nonviolent offenders into suitable alternative-to-incarceration programs should be returned to the judiciary in order to ensure fair and appropriate sentences.
Enacted in 1973, the Rockefeller Drug Laws were intended to target drug kingpins, but most of the people incarcerated under these laws are convicted of low-level, nonviolent offenses, and many of them have no prior criminal record.
"The Rockefeller Drug Laws are destroying lives and wasting tax dollars, and have neither curbed drug use nor enhanced public safety," Lieberman said. "Unfortunately the Sentencing Commission's report will result in more of the same."
The Rockefeller drug laws are a top priority in the New York State Legislature. Governor David Paterson mentioned the laws in his State of the State Address when he said, "I can't think of a criminal justice strategy that has been more unsuccessful than the Rockefeller drug laws."
It is time for reform. The Rockefeller drug laws were created by Nelson Rockefeller who, in an attempt to come off as a hardliner on drugs, created stiff punishments for drug offenders. He did this so that he could woo members of the Republican Party. I think it's safe to say that it worked to his benefit, but it left New York with a huge mess.
It is time to clean up that mess and reform the Rockefeller drug laws.
Nearly two weeks ago, a gathering of the LGBT community was held in the Bronx. Not only were members of the LGBT community on hand, but a few elected officials were in attendance.
This event was held in his district, but as we know from the literature on Diaz's senate website, Diaz is a staunch opponent of marriage equality and homosexuality.
So the good folks at the New York Civil Liberties Union thought it would be fun to not only show what Sen. Diaz missed at this event, but also took the opportunity to wish him Happy Holidays. They produced the video you can see below which consists of clips from the event a couple of weeks ago.
On Diaz's website, there is a letter he sent to constituents that says he will be against budget cuts and "homosexual marriage." It is an interesting tie-in considering a lot of people oppose the budget cuts that will impact many people all over the state but not everyone opposes marriage equality.
One fact should haunt Diaz when he runs for re-election in 2010: The Bronx has more LGBT families than any other borough. That should make Diaz very vulnerable in two years.
Last month, one of the more disgusting and disturbing scenes occurred in Kings County Hospital when 49 year old Esmin Green collapsed and died in the hospital's psychiatric emergency room. This AP video will tell the story.
The lawsuit and call for a criminal investigation announced today by the family of Esmin Green have been expected given the 49-year-old Brooklyn woman's shameful death last month on the floor of Kings County Hospital's psychiatric emergency room, said advocates who filed a major civil rights lawsuit against the hospital last year. They also renewed their call for an overhaul of the entire hospital system, and warned that scapegoating low-level hospital employees does not ensure an end to an ingrained culture of abuse.
"The crass indifference displayed by hospital personnel and the abysmal lack of care and treatment Ms. Green received in the last hours of her life are an affront to human dignity," said Donna Lieberman, NYCLU executive director. "But also shocking is that there are thousands of New Yorkers who have been, and are still, subject to deplorable treatment at Kings County Hospital's psychiatric facilities. We are committed to transforming the tragedy of Ms. Green's death into a catalyst for long overdue reform."
...
The hospital is the subject of a lawsuit filed in May 2007 by the New York Civil Liberties Union, Mental Hygiene Legal Service, and Kirkland & Ellis LLP. The lawsuit describes the hospital's psychiatric emergency room and inpatient unit as "a chamber of filth, decay, indifference and danger," and seeks an end to abusive treatment in the hospital's psychiatric facilities where patients are regularly ignored and those that dare advocate for themselves are punished with forcible injections of psychotropic drugs.
...
After more than a year of litigation and the death of the Brooklyn woman, New York City finally agreed in court last week to a series of stop gap measures at the hospital intended to prevent another death. Among those measures are:
* That every patient be checked every 15 minutes.
* That there be no more than 25 patients at any time in the psychiatric emergency ward.
* That detailed records on the ward be turned over every week to the advocates involved in the lawsuit.
* And that the advocates be active participants in the search for a new deputy executive director and emergency room director for Kings County Hospital's Behavioral Health department.
When I saw this on video, it was and is disturbing. Is this really America? Is this really the greatest country in the world? If it is, we should really start acting and behaving like it really is.
The New York Civil Liberties Union today applauded Gov. David Paterson's leadership in recognizing the marriages of gay and lesbian couples entered into outside of New York State. In response to a NYCLU victory in the case Martinez v County of Monroe (read more at http://www.nyclu.org/node/1088), the governor has directed all state agencies to begin to revise their policies and regulations to recognize marriages of same-sex couples performed in other jurisdictions, including Massachusetts, California and Canada.
"This is a milestone in the fight for fairness in New York," said Donna Lieberman, the NYCLU's executive director. "For the first time, couples in New York who have never known true security for their families will be officially entitled to treatment by our state government that respects their rights. They should now finally get a taste of the family protections other married couples and their children enjoy."
Martinez v. County of Monroe was brought by the NYCLU with cooperating attorney Jeffrey Wicks on behalf of Patricia Martinez. Martinez, an employee of Monroe Community College in Rochester, sought health care benefits for her wife whom she married in Canada in 2004. The case was filed in 2005 in State Supreme Court.
In February of this year, an appellate court unanimously affirmed the couple's marriage the first appellate court decision in the state and the first known decision in the country to hold that a valid same-sex marriage must be recognized. Monroe County then requested that the state's highest court review and overrule the Fourth Department's decision.
Earlier this month, the state's highest court declined to review the case, allowing the appellate court's decision to remain the statewide law in New York. Paterson's directive codifies that ruling even further.
"Now it's time for our legislature to allow all of New York's families to live with dignity," Lieberman said. "New Yorkers shouldn't have to leave the state to protect their families."
I am proud of my state tonight. Governor Paterson has forwarded a progressive agenda that is key to the livelihood of many New Yorkers. I have believed that gay couples do not love any differently than straight couples. You cannot discriminate against love. Marriage is the epitomy of love and to recognize this in New York is important to our ultimate goal: Same sex marriages in New York.
The historic California Supreme Court victory overturning the state's ban on marriages of lesbian and gay couples was applauded today by New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman.
Lieberman noted that page 71 of the decision cites with approval New York Chief Judge Judith Kaye's important observation in the Hernandez v. Robles dissent: "[F]undamental rights, once recognized, cannot be denied to particular groups on the ground that these groups have historically been denied those rights."
The following can be attributed to Lieberman:
"We hope the California decision will prompt our political leaders to recognize the merits of taking this issue out of the courts and legislating in a way that supports the core American value of fairness. New Yorkers should not have to go to California to protect their families."
This was a big win, especially for San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. The San Jose Mercury Newshas the story.
The rookie mayor, just one month into the job, even got heat from longtime allies, including Dianne Feinstein. The senior California senator said the intense focus on same-sex marriage during a presidential election year contributed to the party's defeat.
Newsom would forever be linked to the image of more than 4,000 same-sex couples exchanging vows at City Hall, a link that threatened to doom his aspirations for higher office.
But he swiped those concerns aside, arguing that same-sex marriage was a fundamental issue of civil rights. The city eventually joined other groups in suing California for violating the state constitutional rights of gays and lesbians-the issue decided Thursday.
"I've been accused of taking this a little too personally, and I accept that critique," Newsom said.
"I do personally defend Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin when people attack their rights," he said. "I'm about to get married, and no one's criticized my decision-making, but the fact they can criticize their decision making and they've been together 52 years is remarkable."
This is an important ruling. Everyone should have the right to get married. You cannot legislate the love for another individual. You cannot tell someone who to love and what sex that person should be in order to love them. Marriage is the ultimate symbol of love and to keep gay couples from reaching that milestone is a travesty.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of New York Post reporter Leonardo Blair, who was subjected to the NYPD's "stop-and-frisk program." He told his story in this video:
Ironically, Blair's employer has an editorial in today's paper that refers to the NYCLU, New York Times and Rev. Al Sharpton as "anti-cop radicals" and, in a way, arguing against their very own employee's case.
Nor is there any evidence of bias. The data "show a relationship between the percentage of individuals stopped and the descriptions of suspects," an NYPD spokesman, Assistant Chief Michael Collins, explained. In other words, the cops stop people who match the descriptions (race included) reported for criminals.
Of course, no one should be surprised by the allegations of racism - or even wacky suggestions for police, in essence, to disband as a result of the Bell verdict.
You would think that the right-wing views would halt for awhile, especially when this happens to one of their own reporters. But that was not the case. Listen to Blair's story and remember this: He is a graduate of Columbia University and is the crime reporter for Rupert Murdoch's New York City rag.
For the record, here are some numbers put together by the NYCLU regarding this:
- In 2007, the NYPD stopped about 469,000 New Yorkers - almost 1,300 people every day. Eighty-eight percent were completely innocent. Though they make up only a quarter of the City's population, more than half of those stopped were black. Another 30 percent were Latino. Though whites make up more than 35 percent of New York City's population, they were only 11 percent of those stopped. In 2006 and 2007, blacks and Latinos were the target of about 90 percent of the nearly one million stop-and-frisk encounters.
This practice should stop. Some apparently see this as proactive policing but when there is such a huge racial and ethnic divide in who the NYPD "stops" and "frisks", that's where the problem exists.
According to data released earlier this week, New York City police officers stopped more people on the streets during the first three months of 2008 than during any quarter in the six years the Department has reported the data.
In 2007, the NYPD stopped about 469,000 New Yorkers - almost 1,300 people every day. Though they make up only a quarter of the City's population, more than half of those stopped were black. Another 30 percent were Latino. Though whites make up more than 35 percent of New York City's population, they were only 11 percent of those stopped. In 2006 and 2007, blacks and Latinos were the target of about 90 percent of the nearly one million stop-and-frisk encounters.
Patricia Martinez married her lesbian partner in Canada and also a civil union in Vermont. But when she moved to Monroe County and got a job with Monroe Community College, they denied her and her spouse the benefits that are supposed to be afforded to married couples.
The case of Martinez v. Monroe made it all the way to New York's highest court and today, the Court ruled today that it would respect a lower court's ruling that would recognize valid, out-of-state same-sex marriages.
"Today's decision represents another step in the ongoing fight for human rights," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union. "Each time a gay or lesbian couple's marriage is recognized, it is a victory for familes and for fairness in New York State."
The case, Martinez v. County of Monroe, was brought by the NYCLU and cooperating attorney Jeffrey Wicks on behalf of Patricia Martinez. Martinez, an employee of Monroe Community College in Rochester, sought health care benefits for her wife whom she married in Canada in 2004. The case was filed in 2005 in State Supreme Court.
In February of this year, an appellate court unanimously affirmed the couple's marriage - the first appellate court decision in the state and the first known decision in the country to hold that a valid same-sex marriage must be recognized. Monroe County then requested that the state's highest court review and overrule the Fourth Department's decision.
This is a huge victory, to say the least. The next step would be to bring same-sex marriage to New York. With this decision today, that looks even more possible.
Here are some of the findings as stated in the press release.
- During the last two years the NYPD reported the race of those shot by police, nearly 90 percent of the people shot at by officers were black or Latino. In 1998 the Department stopped reporting the race of civilian targets and started reporting the breed of dogs being shot.
- The NYPD command structure remains almost entirely white. At the end of 2002, 85.3 percent of the 735 members of the NYPD at or above the rank of captain were white males, with blacks holding only 3.9 percent of those positions. At the end of 2007, after five years of a large number of retirements and promotions, 84.3 percent of leadership positions were held by white males, with the numbers of blacks actually shrinking to 3.7 percent.
- In 77 percent of the incidents where officers fired their weapons at civilians between 1999 and 2006, the officers were the only ones shooting, with officers often shooting at unarmed civilians (like Sean Bell and Amadou Diallo).
- In 2006 (the most recent year for which there is information), police officers fired an average of five shots per incident when they were the only ones shooting, which is the highest number for the entire eight years for which these figures have been reported.
That third point is disturbing. In over three quarters of all incidents where officers fired their weapons at civilians, the officers were the only ones with a gun.
Not as disturbing but disappointing is the command structure of the NYPD. In one of the more diverse cities, the NYPD's top cops are mostly white.
Here is what members of the NYCLU had to say about these findings:
"These numbers scream out for serious review by the City Council," said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "As with the hundreds of thousands of stops and frisks and the hundreds of thousands of marijuana arrests, being black should not make people a target for a police shooting."
"In the aftermath of the Sean Bell verdict, it is particularly important that there be full disclosure about every aspect of NYPD shootings, including the role that race may be playing," said NYCLU Associate Legal Director Christopher Dunn, who delivered this morning's testimony. "We are deeply concerned about the figures showing that virtually everyone shot at by the police is black or Latino. Equally troubling is the fact that the NYPD leadership remains almost entirely white, with only a tiny number of black supervisors. The NYPD will never shake concerns about racial insensitivity unless it becomes more diverse at the top."
This report (or reports) was amazing. The NYPD's reputation is slipping by the day if it wasn't completely tarnished already.
This is what the NYCLU said in their press release about the release of this report.
The report, The Marijuana Arrest Crusade in New York City: Racial Bias in Police Policy 1997-2007, is the first ever in-depth study of misdemeanor marijuana arrests in New York City during the Giuliani and Bloomberg administrations.
Researched and written by Prof. Harry G. Levine, a sociologist at Queens College, and Deborah Peterson Small, an attorney and advocate for drug policy reform, the report is based upon two years of observations in criminal courts as well as extensive interviews with public defenders; Legal Aid and private attorneys; veteran police officers; current and former prosecutors and judges; and those arrested for possessing marijuana.
"The massive, organized and relentless pursuit of these arrests under two mayors and three police commissioners represents a crusade by law enforcement," Levine said. "But that term does not capture other important characteristics of these arrests - including the harm they inflict on black and Latino young people and their families."
Between 1997 and 2007, police arrested and jailed about 205,000 blacks, 122,000 Latinos and 59,000 whites for possessing small amounts of marijuana. Blacks accounted for about 52 percent of the arrests, though they represented only 26 percent of the city's population over that time span. Latinos accounted for 31 percent of the arrests but 27 percent of the population. Whites represented only 15 percent of those arrested, despite comprising 35 percent of the population.
Government surveys of high school seniors and young adults 18 to 25 consistently show that young whites use marijuana more often than young blacks and Latinos. The arrests also are heavily skewed by gender. About 91 percent of people arrested were male.
"The numbers speak for themselves," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the NYCLU. "The NYPD routinely targets young men based on their skin color and where they live. Arresting and jailing thousands for marijuana possession does not create safer streets. It only fosters distrust between the police and community and strips hundreds of thousands of young New Yorkers of their dignity."
The arrests, which cost taxpayers up to $90 million a year, are indicative of the NYPD's broken windows approach to law enforcement, in which police focus on minor offenses as a method of reducing crime. This approach, also called quality of life policing, has caused a dramatic spike in stop-and-frisk encounters between police and city residents.
The report is astonishing. The press release opens your eyes to some of the report's findings but you need to read the full report to get the whole story.
