Zachary Hammond, 19, was on a date on July 26 when he was fatally shot twice by a police officer during a drug bust in South Carolina.

Hammond was driving his car when police attempted to make a stop. The undercover officers staged a drug bust with Hammond’s 23-year-old date, Tori Morton, who had ten grams of weed on her person ready to sell. During the encounter, Morton was arrested and charged with possession, and Hammond was shot twice, in the shoulder and in the torso. The police officer who shot him claimed it was in self defense. He claimed Hammond was driving toward him with his vehicle when he fired the two shots.

However, the autopsy report seems to clearly disprove the police officer’s claim of self defense. The family’s attorney, Eric Bland, stated,

The shots were so close in proximity to each other that it would be physically impossible unless the car was stopped and the officer came up very close to an open window.

Hammond’s death has prompted numerous questions, few answers, and, surprisingly, no national outrage. Hammond’s family wants to know why there hasn’t been much coverage, and looked to the so-called #AllLivesMatter advocates for answers. Bland told The Washington Post this week:

It’s sad, but I think the reason is, unfortunately, the media and our government officials have treated the death of an unarmed white teenager differently than they would have if this were a death of an unarmed black teen. The hypocrisy that has been shown toward this is really disconcerting…The issue should never be what is the color of the victim. The issue should be: Why was an unarmed teen gunned down in a situation where deadly force was not even justified?”

While it is extremely unfortunate what happened to Zachary Hammond, the reason there are no advocates responding in outrage to Hammond’s death is because the #AllLivesMatter movement does not really exist. Instead, the #AllLivesMatter movement serves as a detraction from the acknowledgement of black lives being targeted by the police. That is not to say those who advocate for “all lives matter” do not care about Hammond’s death, but there is no reaction because the movement does not really exist. As a result, the response from the #BlackLivesMatter movement has been in many ways focused on pointing out the lack of attention from #AllLivesMatter.

Hammond’s death however, does raise continued questions about the way police officers respond to what they classify as “dangerous situations.” What does this say about the way police officers have been trained? In the situations where their responses have resulted in the loss of black lives, it was very easy to assume their motives–usually proven through series of incidents with police officers who have histories of racist behavior, recordings that show intentions, and many deaths that often seemed staged or unclear. But in this specific case, the motive for killing Hammond is not clear at all. Police officers are now being faced with even more questions in regard to how they effectively execute their jobs. Now that these white parents are asking the questions, maybe everyone will get the answers they deserve.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Unarmed White Teen Fatally Shot by Police Officer: Do #AllLivesMatter? appeared first on Law Street.

On Tuesday, Netflix announced an upgrade to its parental leave policy that will allow employees to take unlimited maternity and paternity leave during the first year of their child’s life or after an adoption.

During that first year, Netflix employees will be able to take off for however long they feel they need to. They can return on a full or part time basis, and even take subsequent time off later in the year if needed. Netflix has decide that this will be a paid leave, to avoid the hassle of having to switch to disability leave.

Tawni Cranz, Netflix’s Chief Talent Officer, in a statement, said:

We want employees to have the flexibility and confidence to balance the needs of their growing families without worrying about work or finances.

This new policy, combined with our unlimited time off, allows employees to be supported during the changes in their lives and return to work more focused and dedicated.

The company already offers an unlimited time off policy.”Experience shows people perform better at work when they’re not worrying about home,” said Cranz. 

This policy exceeds typical leave at corporations in the United States, where there are very few federal policies aimed at working parents. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 provides employees at companies of  a certain size 12 weeks of unpaid leave. Because the Act only requires companies to provide employees with protected unpaid leave, many companies do not provide paid leave. In the past year, Netflix has made a number of changes that have benefited both their customers and employees. Cranz said in a blog post on the company’s website:

Netflix’s continued success hinges on us competing for and keeping the most talented individuals in their field.

Tech companies in the Silicon Valley and San Francisco, however, have often been among the most progressive when it comes to paid family leave. Twitter offers up to twenty weeks of paid maternity and ten weeks of paid paternity leave. Facebook offers four months of paid leave for both mothers and fathers, as well as $4,000 for each newborn and adopted child. It also subsidizes daycare and programs for adoption, egg freezing, or surrogate parenting and sperm donation programs. Google extended its paid maternity leave to 18 weeks from 12 weeks in 2007. After the extension, the company found that returning mothers left Google at half the rate they previously had, said Roya Soleimani, a company spokeswoman. New parents, regardless of gender, “who plan to take an equal or primary role in their child’s care during the first year can receive up to 12 weeks of paid baby bonding time, including adoptive/surrogate caregivers,” she said.

Netflix’s unlimited parental leave is the latest perk created for employees of big name tech companies as they push to attract the best talent. Among some of the perks enjoyed by employees include free meals, massages, and laundry services. The day Netflix made its announcement, the company’s shares rose to a new high, at $122.79. It seems Americans recognize the need for smart policies to attract the top talent. 

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Netflix Announces Game-Changing Parental Leave Policy appeared first on Law Street.

Monday, President Obama announced what he has noted as the “biggest, most important step we’ve ever taken” in the fight against climate change. He introduced America’s Clean Power Plan, aimed toward a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the nation’s coal-burning power plants.

Obama said Monday from the White House:

Today after working with states and cities and power companies, the EPA is setting the first ever nationwide standards to end the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from power plants…Washington is starting to catch up with the vision of the rest of the country. 

Essentially, America’s Clean Power Plan is a set of environmental rules and regulations that will focus on pollution from the nation’s power plants, setting limits on power-plant carbon emissions for the first time. The goal of the revised Clean Power Plan is to cut greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power stations by nearly a third within 15 years. The measures will place significant emphasis on wind and solar power with other renewable energy sources, transforming America’s electricity industry. Obama said on Monday: “we’re the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and the last generation that can do something about it.”

The most aggressive of the regulations require existing power plants to cut emissions 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, an increase from the 30 percent target proposed in the draft regulation. The new rule also demands that power plants use more renewable sources of energy like wind and solar power. Under the plan, the administration will require states to meet specific carbon emission reduction standards, based on their individual energy consumption. The plan also includes an incentive program for states to get a head start on meeting standards with early deployment of renewable energy and low-income energy efficiency. Obama said in the video:

Power plants are the single biggest source of harmful carbon pollution that contributes to climate change. Until now, there have been no federal limits to the amount of carbon pollution plants dump in the air.

President Obama also claims that the plans will lead to lower energy bills in the future for Americans, create jobs in the renewable energy sector, and ensure more reliable energy services.  Power plants account for roughly 40 percent of U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide–the most common greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. Regardless of these benefits, there are still many critics that are opposed to this new plan. 

Many Republican opponents dispute the existence of global warming, questioning whether or not humans are to blame for the issue. Critics also claim that the plan will bring an unwelcome increase in electricity prices. Opponents in the energy industry believe that president Obama has declared a “war on coal.” Power plants powered by coal provide more than one third of the U.S. electricity supply. Many states plan to fight the new regulations, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell urging states not to comply with the plan in a letter to all fifty governors. Vice President of  Communications for the National Mining Association Luke Popovich stated: 

This plan is all pain and no gain. That’s why state leaders across the country are coming to the same conclusion — that we should not sacrifice our power system to an unworkable plan built on a faulty interpretation of the law.

However those that are arguing against the new plan appear to be overlooking the benefits it can bring. According to the World Health Organization, research in Italy suggests that 4.7 percent total of mortality, or 3,500 deaths annually in a population of 11 million, are caused through cancer and respiratory and cardiovascular diseases attributed to air pollution. Many argue that reducing green house gas emissions doesn’t hurt the economy, but can in fact benefit the economy by saving businesses and consumers money, as well as improving public health.

It is unclear how this new plan will develop during President Obama’s remaining time in office, as well as the presence it may or may not have as campaigns begin to really take off. But, it’s certainly a big move in the right direction.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post President Obama Makes Historic Move to Combat Climate Change appeared first on Law Street.

Celebrities are constantly in the spotlight, with cameras watching their every move. Magazines speculate over the details of celebrities’ lives like vultures, working to photograph every moment that they can. For those who enjoy following the lives of their favorite celebrities, the paparazzi can be seen as a good thing because they provide an inside look at our favorite stars. But the celebrities being followed often don’t agree. Over the years, celebrities have gotten very creative in the ways that they have tried to get rid of the paparazzi. Naomi Campbell definitely falls into that category, and she recently got into a lot of trouble in Italy for that creativity.

Campbell was just convicted of assault by a Sicilian court after scratching paparazzo Gaetano di Giovanni’s eye with her purse in August 2009. The English model had reportedly just gotten to the Sicilian island of Lapri when the photographer began to immediately snap photos of Campbell and her then-boyfriend, Vladimir Doronin. Di Giovanni then continued to take photos of her as she walked the streets, and she proceed to hit him with her purse, scratching and bruising his eye in the process. The photographer reportedly sought medical treatment and took three days to recover. In 2013, when Campbell was ordered to stand trial, di Giovanni said, “I had just started taking some shots of her and I did not expect such a violent reaction.”

Campbell’s lawyer was able to reach an agreement with the photographer so that he withdrew the charges against her, but prosecutor Francesco Massara ordered the trial to go ahead for public interest reasons because of the gravity of the charges against her, Italy’s national news agency Ansa said. She was recently found guilty of assault and received a six-month suspended prison sentence. Essentially that means she probably won’t actually face jail time, unless she gets in trouble again during that time period or fails to finish her community service requirements. However, Campbell has also said that she will be appealing her sentence.

This isn’t the first time that Campbell has had to defend her actions in court. In the past, the model has faced legal troubles due to her quick temper, as early as 2002. In addition, she has been arrested and sued for different acts of violence and abuse, including assaulting police officers in 2008, and throwing her phone at her personal assistant and maid on different occasions.

But while Campbell has had a history of aggression, that doesn’t mean the paparazzi is completely innocent. Di Giovanni originally dropped the charges because he was not distraught by the situation, but ended up pursuing the lawsuit anyway, possibly because he wanted to take advantage of her being a public figure.

The entire situation is certainly messy, and does say a lot about the expectation of privacy that celebrities simply don’t have. There have been many who have spoken out about the way they’re treated by the paparazzi–for example, last year Kristen Bell created an anti paparazzi campaign, calling for the paparazzi photographing children to stop. Campbell was probably in the wrong for hitting di Giovanni, but there’s two sides to this story, and the harassment that celebrities have to undergo certainly does deserve to be taken into account. Campbell’s appeal is now pending, so this fight, and the overall question of celebrity privacy, is far from over.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Naomi Campbell Be Walking the Runway in Italian Prison? appeared first on Law Street.

How would you feel if someone took control of your car while you were driving it? Well that’s exactly what happened to Wired’s Andy Greenberg when he let two hackers remotely take control of his car while he was driving it. While the experiment was obviously done in good faith, the ordeal sheds some light on the remote capabilities of hackers to mess with vehicles as driving software continues to improve.

Hackers Chris Valasek of IOActive and Charlie Miller, a former NSA staffer, accessed Greenberg’s Jeep’s computer brain through its Uconnect infotainment system. There are issues in the Uconnect software system that powers the connected infotainment and other internet-powered systems in Fiat-Chrysler automobiles. Because of this, they were able to create an attack that could connect to the system and use a chip powering the in-vehicle entertainment to rewrite the firmware. From there, their exploit code sent commands across the car. They were able to do all this simply by using a MacBook connected to a cell phone.

To test their hacking skills, Greenberg drove the Jeep Cherokee down the expressway, gearing up to about 70 mph. Once the hackers were able to take control of the car, they began to test some of its features. This included playing with the car’s air conditioning, blasting loud music, and even killing the transmission and brakes. Despite being in on the “test,” Greenberg was freaked out when the vehicle began to drive itself even though he was still behind the wheel and on the expressway. He was able to gain control of the car again, only after he turned the car off and back on. Once he exited the expressway and tried to park the car in a parking lot, his brakes were hacked as he parked directly in front of a ditch, and was forced into it.

Even more notably, once the hackers were able to access Uconnect, they were also able to scan for other vulnerable vehicles. After repeated scans, they believe as many as 471,000 vehicles are carrying the same vulnerabilities that would allow them to get hacked. They have only actually tested their hacking skills on this Jeep Cherokee, but they believe any Chrysler vehicle with Uconnect manufactured in late 2013, all of 2014, or early 2015 is affected.

As crazy as this sounds, Miller and Valasek aren’t the first to hack a car over the internet. In 2011 a team of researchers from the University of Washington and the University of California at San Diego showed that they could wirelessly disable the locks and brakes on a sedan. 

Regardless of how funny the act may have been in this context, Miller and Valasek’s demonstration should alert drivers to the potential danger they could be facing if their car was hacked while they were driving a vehicle.  The entire automotive industry has been repeatedly criticized for various systems’ lack of security over the last year. Former National Security Agent, Charlie Miller says,

If consumers don’t realize this is an issue, they should, and they should start complaining to carmakers. This might be the kind of software bug most likely to kill someone.

Other researchers have demonstrated attacks on vehicles from afar, while highlighting vulnerabilities in widely-used insurance dongles. At a recent Senate Commerce Committee hearing on The Internet of Things, senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) announced legislation that would direct the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Federal Trade Commission to establish federal standards to secure our cars and protect drivers’ privacy.

So what does this say about the types of vehicles we drive and their vulnerabilities that provide hackers access? Even though it was just a demonstration, Greenberg was clearly extremely uncomfortable not being in control of his car. In 2011, the team of researchers from the University of Washington and the University of California San Diego took a more discreet approach in their research, keeping the identity of the hacked cars a secret and only sharing the details with the carmakers. Now, carmakers who failed to take heed of polite warnings in 2011 have been exposed for their vehicles’ security flaws. The result could be product recalls or even civil suits, says UCSD computer science professor Stefan Savage, who worked on the 2011 study. While it is fortunate all cars are not subject to these vulnerabilities, it is clear that car manufactures must finally address the potential dangers of car hacking.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Car Hacking: Funny or Dangerous? appeared first on Law Street.

Bobbi Kristina Brown, the daughter of late superstar Whitney Houston and singer Bobby Brown, died Sunday at the age of 22, a representative of the family said in a statement. The statement read:

Bobbi Kristina Brown passed away Sunday, July, 26 2015, surrounded by her family. She is finally at peace in the arms of God. We want to again thank everyone for their tremendous amount of love and support during these last few months.

She was treated in a hospital, and then an Atlanta-area hospice facility, nearly six months after she was found unresponsive and face down in the bathtub of her Rosewell, Georgia home. She was found on January 31, nearly three years to the day of her mother’s death.

Just days before she was found,Brown tweeted in excitement about new projects she was working on. So when she was found unresponsive just a few days later, it raised a lot of eyebrows for her friends, family, and fans.

https://twitter.com/REALbkBrown/status/561009982720983040

Now Brown’s death is being investigated as a homicide, with the 22-year-old’s boyfriend Nick Gordon as a suspect. Police officials are reportedly confident there was foul play involved.

Police had been called to Brown’s home on January 23 after someone reported a fight there, but no one answered the door, and officers found no evidence of an altercation. After first responders found injuries on Brown’s body when they discovered her, authorities launched a criminal investigation. A family friend said police questioned her live-in boyfriend, Nick Gordon, about her chest bruisings, and he told them it was a result of the CPR he gave her. There was also a history of violence reported between the couple.

Since Brown’s hospitalization in January, Gordon has allegedly gotten access to Brown’s account and stole more than $11,000. On July 12, Gordon reportedly was served with a $10 million lawsuit filed by Brown’s family on June 24. The lawsuit accuses Gordon of punching Brown in the face, and of controlling her finances after she was placed in a medically induced coma. Brown’s best friend, Alex Reid, opened up about Gordon’s alleged abuse on July 1. Reid said:

I don’t know when he started hitting her. But I know of at least four occasions when he struck her. She also told me about he had tried to choke her once. She was definitely scared. She had some friends, but not many. One time, I remember she called me for three hours. She was hyperventilating. I could barely understand what she was saying because she was so distraught. When she could finally get the words out, she told me he had been physically abusive. He had hit her in the face and thrown her against a wall.

After learning about the history, Brown’s family banned Gordon from visiting her while she was hospitalized and in hospice, even though he is distraught over the news of her death, according to one of Gordon’s close friends. The friend stated:

Even though Bobbi Kristina was in that condition, Nick always had hope that she would pull through […] All he wanted to do was see her, hold her hand, talk to her. He was not allowed to do that.

When Brown’s family learned that Gordon had abused her, they immediately cut off all ties. Gordon continuously claimed that he had nothing to do with her death, and is reportedly now on suicide watch because he is so broken up about her death. But police continue to investigate Brown’s homicide with Gordon as a primary suspect. An initial autopsy has not found an obvious cause of death, but a final ruling isn’t expected for several weeks. Whether or not Brown will actually be arrested or charged is most likely pending the results of that autopsy.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bobbi Kristina Brown’s Death: Accident or Homicide? appeared first on Law Street.

There’s a new police chief in Ferguson, Missouri and his name is Andre Anderson. Ferguson leaders have introduced him as the city’s first African-American head of the police, because they believe he’s the right man for the very tough job.

Anderson is taking a six month leave from his Glendale, Arizona commander post to take on the new role of the city’s interim police chief. If all goes well, this is a role that could potentially become permanent by the end of his service.

Anderson told reporters his first priority would be “simply to build trust” and enhance the city’s recent efforts to get officers to develop positive relationships with people in the areas they patrol. Anderson explained this is not something the force can do on its own. He said to the residents “we cannot do this without you. I believe together, we can forge better relationships.” In addition, Anderson also plans to train his officers to guard against bias and escalation, and focus on hiring more qualified Black officers.

While the effort for a change within this department is appreciated, this does not mean the problem has been solved. Change will not come with just a new temporary police chief who is Black and has plans to hire more Black cops and work with the community. Yes, these are all steps in the right direction, but change will not come until our society, which includes police officers, respect Black lives.

After the August 9 shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown, an unarmed Black teenager who died at the hands of a white Ferguson police officer, the Ferguson Police Department was suddenly under the microscope. Brown’s killing sparked a revolution in Ferguson, creating weeks of fiery protests and threw a national spotlight on the St. Louis suburb of 21,000. The protests only increased when Wilson was not indicted by a grand jury.

Darren Wilson made comments describing what he did as the “right thing to do,” because he wasn’t quite sure what Brown could be capable of. He claimed that during their scuffle, Brown was abrasive, and tried to lunge at him more than once. He also claimed that Brown told Wilson he was “too much of a p– to shoot him.” But many people question the accuracy of his story, as well as Wilson’s reasoning. Even though he claimed the outcome would have been the exact same had Brown been white, this is something many are uncertain of, as Brown was also unarmed. The controversy has continued, as the department  saw many resignations after the release of a report from the Justice Department that found a culture of racism in the police department and municipal offices. Former Police Chief Tom Jackson was among the city officials who resigned.

A large issue between police officers and minority communities is that community members fear or do not respect white police officers. If there are more Black police officers in the community, this relationship could change, but it’s not enough. This is a great step in the right direction, but that does not mean the problematic culture doesn’t still exist. There’s still a long way to go to ensure that everyone is treated fairly by the law.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Ferguson’s New Interim Police Chief: Step in the Right Direction, But Still Not Enough appeared first on Law Street.

President Obama recently acknowledged that his failure to pass common sense gun control laws in the U.S. has been his greatest frustration in his presidency. In a Thursday interview with BBC, President Obama claimed that it was distressing not to have made progress on the issue, even in the face of repeated mass killings.

His comments came hours before another mass shooting took place in Lafayette, Louisiana Thursday night. John Houser killed two people and wounded nine others at the Lafayette multiplex Thursday night before he turned his gun on himself and took his own life, police said.

However Obama signaled that he would continue to work on gun laws during his remaining time in the White House. He stated: 

It is the fact that the United States of America is the one advanced nation on earth in which we do not have sufficient common-sense, gun-safety laws. Even in the face of repeated mass killings.

If you look at the number of Americans killed since 9/11 by terrorism, it’s less than 100. If you look at the number been killed by gun violence, it’s in the tens of thousands. And for us not to be able to resolve that issue has been something that is distressing. But it is not something that I intend to stop working on in the remaining 18 months.

Nationally, guns kill 33,000 Americans and injure 80,000 a year. The total cost of gun violence is $229 billion a year, almost as much as we spend on Medicaid. The Harvard Injury Control Research Center recently found that there’s a substantial evidence that indicates more guns means more murders. But despite the high levels of gun violence, Congress has no plans to investigate a solution.

In regard to gun control laws in the United States, Louisiana has some of the weakest gun laws in the nation. It does not require gun dealers to obtain a state license. The state also has no laws that restrict assault weapons or .50 caliber rifles.

One week after the shooting at Charleston’s Emmanuel AME Church, the House Appropriations Committee voted 32-19 against an amendment that would reverse a 19-year-old ban on funding for the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to research the causes of gun violence in public health. Their reasoning is that gun violence is not a disease, and therefore does not fall under the CDC’s research domain.

The CDC had been conducting research into gun violence as a “public health phenomenon” and began publishing studies that indicated a strong correlation between the presence of guns and firearm-related deaths. Prior this, the CDC’s budget was cut in 1996 by $2.6 million, the exact amount they had spent on researching gun facilities in 1995. As a result of that cut, many scientists stopped doing gun research, and the number of publications on firearm violence decreased dramatically. Reuters has reported that government research into gun mortality has shrunk by 96 percent since the NRA’s campaign in the 1990s.

Although Obama has claimed that he will work to address gun violence in the United States during his remaining time as president, it is unclear how he will go about endorsing these big changes without the support of Congress. That being said, last week’s events show that some sort of common sense change is clearly necessary.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Rallies Against Lack of Common Sense in American Gun Control Laws appeared first on Law Street.

James Holmes was found guilty of first degree murder last Thursday for the deaths of 12 people in the July 2012 Aurora, Colorado shooting. The insanity defense that his team tried proved unsuccessful, and Holmes will now be sentenced for his crimes.

Holmes faced two counts of first degree murder for each of the twelve victims killed during the shooting. The jury found him guilty on all 24 counts. The jury also found Holmes guilty of attempted murder on all of the 140 counts against him for the 70 people wounded in the shooting. Additionally, he was found guilty of one count of possession or control of an explosive or incendiary. He faced a total of 165 charges, a decision that took the jury 12.5 hours to reach. Now the same jurors are faced with the task of sentencing him to death. This process began yesterday. His attorneys are expected to raise his mental illness again during the penalty portion.

Holmes who had pleaded not guilty by reasons of insanity, but admitted to the killings, showed no reaction as the verdict was announced. His attorneys were pushing for him to be committed to a mental hospital for the rest of his life, while state prosecutors were seeking the death penalty.

Even though Holmes did not take the stand, the jury did hear from him via the 22 hours of recorded psychiatric interviews he had at both the Colorado Mental Health institute in Pueblo and at the jail where he is being held. Two defense psychiatrists testified that Holmes suffered a psychotic break the night of the murders and could not discern between right and wrong, but two-court appointed psychiatrists told the jury the defendant was mentally ill, but not insane. While those sound interchangeable, there’s actually important distinctions under the law.

In pleading not guilty by reason of insanity, James Holmes attempted to do something no accused mass shooter in America has done in more than 20 years–win a case with the insanity defense. Holmes faced long odds for a defense that studies show is raised in only about one percent of all felony cases nationally and successful in only about a quarter of those.

Mass shooters very rarely survive their crimes to face court charges. According to a database of American mass shootings in the last 30 years, suspects in only 19 of 61 mass shootings examined were arrested. Others either committed suicide or were killed during the shooting. Of those 19, only four, including Holmes, pleaded insanity.

The reason for the low success rate is the high bar that laws set for the insanity defense. In Colorado, it is not enough for defendants to be mentally ill. Instead, the law defines insanity as having judgment so impaired by mental illness that the defendant could not tell right from wrong. Given Holmes’ vivid plan, this did not appear to be the case.

The primary factor in determining insanity is the intensive mental health evaluations that a defendant pleading insanity is required to undergo. The judge overseeing the case this week ordered Holmes to be evaluated at the Colorado Mental Health Institute in Pueblo. After several hours of evaluations, it was determined that his insanity plea was not plausible.

Evidence shows that Holmes’ plan, to some degree, was thought out beforehand. Holmes bought a ticket 12 days before the July 19 showing, and walked into the theater screening of the “The Dark Knight Rises” like any other movie goer. He then walked out through a rear door, which he left propped open. Just after midnight, about 20 minutes after the movie began, he returned wearing a ballistic helmet, a gas mask, black gloves, and protective gear for his legs, throat and groin. A tear gas canister exploded in the theater, then gunfire erupted from an AR-15 rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun and at least one .40 caliber handgun. The shooting stopped with Holmes’ arrest outside the theater about seven minutes after the first 911 calls were made to police.

Given that evidence of his plan, it was not hard for members of the jury to believe that Holmes did not meet the bar for the insanity defense. “Look at the evidence, then hold this man accountable,” Arapahoe County District Attorney George Brauchler said. “Reject this claim that he didn’t know right from wrong when he murdered those people and tried to kill the others…that guy was sane beyond a reasonable doubt, and he needs to be held accountable for what he did.”

With the jury certain that Holmes does not fit the bill for the insanity defense, it is not clear where their decision will fall in terms of Holmes receiving the death penalty. As one of the largest mass murderers in American history awaits his fate, we will have to see what the jury ultimately decides.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Guilty Verdict for James Holmes: Does the Insanity Defense Ever Work? appeared first on Law Street.

Sandra Bland was found dead in a Texas jail cell from what authorities believe was suicide. But friends and family of the victim are outraged, and claim that she had no reason to take her own life. The entire story of her arrest and subsequent death raise a lot of questions about her treatment in the justice system.

“I do suspect foul play,” a friend, Cheryl Nanton, told ABC 7. “I believe that we are all 100 percent in belief that she did not do harm to herself.” Bland, 28, had just landed her dream job, when she was arrested for allegedly assaulting an officer, police said.

On June 29, Bland drove down to Texas from Illinois to begin a new job with her alma mater, Prairie View A&M. On July 10, police stopped Bland just outside of the school’s campus for failing to signal while changing lanes. Police officers claim that during this stop, Bland became combative, and was thrown to the ground, arrested, and charged with “assault on a public servant.”

But, the recently released video from the policeman’s dashboard camera show that the stop that led to her arrest was anything but routine.

While Bland is being combative in the above video, she had plenty of reason to be. The situation escalated rapidly–but her questioning of the police officer was valid. In these situations, people sometimes say the best thing to do is be polite and respectful to police officers so they have no reason to accuse you of anything, but that shouldn’t preclude someone who is pulled over from asking questions about the reason why. This was not a routine traffic stop, and that is very clear. He was extremely forceful with Bland, to the point where you can hear her wincing at the pain he is causing her. The video below captures their interaction after he removed her from the car and it doesn’t seem to get better.

“After he pulled her out of the car, forced her and tossed her to the ground, knee to the neck, and arrested her,” says her friend Malcom Jackson.

In the second video, Bland is heard saying, “You just slammed my head into the ground. Do you not even care about that? I can’t even hear!” Then, as she is taken into custody, she repeats, “You slammed me into the ground and everything.”

Reports claim that jailers saw Bland at 7 AM Monday when they gave her breakfast, and again at 8 AM when they spoke to her over the jail’s intercom about making a phone call. She was found in her cell one hour later. Waller County Sheriff’s Office Captain of Patrol Brian Cantrell claimed that Bland strangled herself with a jail cell trash bag. CPR was reportedly done immediately, but she was pronounced dead shortly after.

Waller County Sheriff Glenn Smith, who made the first public announcement about Bland’s death, was suspended for documented cases of racism when he was chief of police in Hempstead, Texas in 2007. After serving his suspension, more complaints of racism came in, and he was fired from this position shortly after. Smith made his way to Waller County, where he was then elected as sheriff of Waller county. While this connection to her death is not certain, there are questions about the role that her race could have played in the incident. 

Bland’s family held a news conference last Thursday afternoon in the Chicago Loop, but no details have been released. They are firm in their belief that foul play is suspected, and looking for answers. “She was planning for the future, and she came here to start for that future, so to say that she killed herself is totally absurd,” said her friend Lavaghn Mosley. 

But her friends and family are not the only ones who suspect something is amiss. With the popular hashtag #WhatHappenedtoSandraBland trending on Twitter, there are several people wondering what happened to Sandra Bland in that jail cell.

Reporters are working around the clock tonight to find out if Sandra Bland's babysitter's boyfriend's cousin ever broke a law. #SandraBland

— JRehling (@JRehling) July 16, 2015

Dear white people, any of you EVER been pulled over for a lane change? Did you end up dead? #SandraBland #WhatHappenedToSandraBland

— Jessica Fish (@Fishica) July 16, 2015

Don't tell me that #SandraBland could be my sister, friend, mother. It is enough that she was a human being! #WhatHappenedToSandraBland

— Ntombizikhona (@valavoosh) July 16, 2015

You stay. You run. You submit. You resist. It doesn't matter. They will kill you anyway. Your skin is black. #SandraBland #BlackLivesMatter

— Amarlie (@marabout40) July 16, 2015

These questions make a lot of sense, and Bland’s story does fit into the continued narrative of #BlackLivesMatter, because it highlights the way that our society continues to treat Black lives as lesser than others. What needs to happen to ensure that all of our citizens are safe when in the hands of the justice system? After all, it didn’t matter how loud Bland screamed, because she still wasn’t being heard.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Death of Sandra Bland: More Questions Than Answers appeared first on Law Street.

President Obama announced on Wednesday the development of a pilot program to expand broadband access for people who live in public housing. This is the latest effort to bridge the “digital divide” between the rich and the poor.

The plan, called ConnectHome, will launch in 27 cities nationwide. With assistance from mayors, internet service providers, and other companies and nonprofits, the Department of Housing and Urban Development will make it cheaper and easier for more than 275,000 low-income households with almost 200,000 children to get internet at home, the White House said in a statement Wednesday.

The plan is consistent with a broader White House goal to upgrade the nation’s technology infrastructure, bringing high speed internet to every corner of the country.

There are already a few internet service providers that have committed to ConnectHome. Google in Atlanta, Durham, Kansas City, and Nashville will provide free internet internet connections in some public housing. Sprint Corp will offer free wireless broadband access to families with kids in public housing. In Seattle, CenturyLink will provide broadband service for pubic housing residents for $9.95 a month for the first year. Cox Communications is offering home internet for $9.95 a month to families with children in school in four cities in Georgia, Louisiana, and Connecticut. President Obama spoke about the program in Durant, Oklahoma where the Choctaw Tribal Nation is working with four local providers to bring internet to 425 homes.

The program is an extension of the president’s ConnectED initiative, which was announced in 2013 and aims to link 99 percent of students from kindergarten through 12th grade to high-speed internet in classrooms and libraries over the next five years. 

The announcement was timed to coincide with the release of a report from the White House Council of Economic Advisers, which highlights how low-income families in America do not benefit from high-speed broadband, despite the recent increase in internet usage in the past few years. Nearly two-thirds of the lowest income households own a computer, but less than half have a home internet connection. A news release about the report said:

While many middle-class U.S. students go home to Internet access, allowing them to do research, write papers and communicate digitally with their teachers and other students, too many lower-income children go unplugged every afternoon when school ends. This ‘homework gap’ runs the risk of widening the achievement gap, denying hardworking students the benefit of a technology-enriched education.

At the peak of the digital age, those who cannot access the internet are unintentionally falling behind. They are falling victim to the “digital divide” that occurs when lower income families aren’t able to utilize the same resources as families in higher income brackets. The internet is used for everything these days–it is used to stay in contact with family and friends, complete homework assignments, play games, go shopping, apply for jobs, read books, play music, and expand our worlds. Low income families who don’t have access to these tools will hopefully soon be able to close that gap as a result of ConnectHome and similar programs.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will Internet Access in Public Housing Bridge the Digital Divide? appeared first on Law Street.

This Thursday, President Obama will become the first sitting president to visit a federal prison. He is scheduled to visit with inmates and officials at the El Reno Federal Correction Institute near Oklahoma City. This is just the latest of many steps taken by the Obama administration in an attempt to reform the American prison system.

At the prison, Obama will also conduct an interview with VICE that will be a part of a documentary airing this fall on HBO focusing on America’s broken criminal justice system. The Federal Bureau of Prisons website confirms that El Reno is a medium security federal correctional institution, housing more than 1,000 inmates. Another 248 inmates reside at an adjacent minimum-security camp.

The visit is a part of a week focusing on criminal justice reform, beginning with a speech on Tuesday for the NAACP’s annual convention in Philadelphia. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said that Obama will:

Outline the unfairness in much of our criminal justice system, highlight bipartisan ideas for reform, and lay out his own ideas to make our justice system fairer, smarter, and more cost-effective while keeping the American people safe and secure.

Obama has a long history of speaking out about prison system reform. The White House has posted a video of conversation between the president and David Simon, writer of the HBO television show, “The Wire,” in which Obama discusses the massive trend toward incarceration, for even nonviolent drug offenders, which began in the 1990s. He said:

Folks go in at great expense to the state, many times trained to become more hardened criminals while in prison, [and] come out and are basically unemployable.

In Obama’s State of the Union Speech in January, he highlighted criminal justice reform, connecting it to high profile clashes between law enforcement and minority communities.

While there have been years of discussion on the issue, we are just now really starting to see a change With 2.3 million Americans behind bars, the United States has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. Despite containing less than five percent of the world’s population, the United States incarcerates nearly a quarter of the world’s prisoners. With a criminal justice system that is marred by racial and class based disparities, these instances of inequality are visible at every step of the criminal process. They often lead to wrongful convictions and inconsistent sentencing that disproportionately affect people of color and low-income individuals. There are also many allegations of racial profiling, which specifically targets minority individuals of color. Finally, the criminal justice system has massive hidden economic and societal costs that reverberate throughout society, affecting us all.

The Executive isn’t the only branch getting in on criminal justice reform. The House has also introduced a new bipartisan bill–the SAFE Justice Act–proposing to reduce the United States prison population, while also cutting crime and saving money. The bill proposes a broad set of reforms to the U.S. justice system, including increasing the use of sentencing alternatives such as probation of certain non-violent offenders; encouraging judicial districts to operate mental health, veteran and other problem-solving courts; and prioritizing prison space for violent and “career” criminals by expanding the release of geriatric and terminally ill offenders. It would also expand earned-time policies to inmates who participate in programs to reduce their recidivism rates, introduce mental health and de-escalation training programs for prison staff, and require performance-based contracting for halfway houses, among other reforms.

The SAFE Justice Act has a lot of potential, as does Obama’s push for reform. But there’s so much more to be done, including a need to change the way we perceive felons. They are so quickly written off as criminals, murderers, or drains on society. They are separated from the rest of society as soon as they are released. So many are falsely convicted or just wait in prisons for months or years before they can even receive a trial. Changes to the system don’t just involve policies–they involve redefining how we treat prisoners as well. So while Obama is taking steps in the right direction by visiting prisons and speaking out about equality, there remains a long road ahead.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Obama Continues to Push for Criminal Justice Reform appeared first on Law Street.

When I learned I had the opportunity to go to TedxPennsylvaniaAvenue, I wasn’t quite sure what to expect. The event promised a noteworthy variety of speakers ranging from senior staffers at the White House to the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, all promising to open up a number of enlightening discussions. The event fulfilled that promise and more, by bringing up questions about important societal issues such as youth prisons, the benefits of Medicaid, being homeless in America, and urban youth development programs. As we struggle to address these ideas in our society, forums like TED are becoming increasingly important.

Held in the Newsuem’s Forum theater on June 24, an audience of about 500 gathered to listen to some of the world’s most innovative thinkers and doers share their ideas centered around the topic of “What Works?” at the local, national, and international levels. Some of the more prominent speakers included Elizabeth Birch (former president of the Human Rights Campaign), Paul Ryan (R-WI), Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), and Robert Rubin (former Secretary of the Treasury and former chairman of Citigroup). With catered meals and special musical guests in between speakers, TEDxPennAve goers were able to take in each speaker at their leisure throughout the day. During lunch, I stood and took in an exhibit inspired by TED Senior Fellow Candy Chang. An artist, designer, and urban planner, Chang created an interactive wall on the side of a home in New Orleans for people to share their hopes and dreams. It prompted people to think about their secrets and wishes and to share them. Chang explained her inspiration:

This neglected space became a constructive one, and people’s hopes and dreams made me laugh out loud, tear up, and they consoled me during my own tough times. It’s about knowing you’re not alone; it’s about understanding our neighbors in new and enlightening ways; it’s about making space for reflection and contemplation, and remembering what really matters most to us as we grow and change.

Image courtesy of Katherine via Flickr

I added my secrets and wishes to one of the boards in the exhibit, forced to face issues I had been ignoring. Like the talks, this exhibit really made you think and look in the mirror–adding to the overall feeling of reflection noticeable at the event. 

Another highlight was listening to Patrick McCarthy, President & CEO of the Annie E. Casey Foundation. McCarthy’s talk centered around the issue of youth prisons. He claimed that these prisons undermine the development of young people who get into trouble with the law, expose them to grave dangers, and ultimately fail to improve public safety. McCarthy has worked for the past 23 years to reform juvenile justice systems through the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative, and is launching an effort to close youth prisons. Like all of the speakers at the day’s event, McCarthy’s talk contained such strong passion and empathy for his cause that I quickly was able to understand his problem with youth prisons and found myself taking a side on an issue I honestly hadn’t thought much about beforehand.

That was a theme constant throughout the event. Each talk contained such a compelling argument, and opened up new questions I hadn’t considered. That’s essentially the goal of TED events–creating specific conversations from broad topics like “What Works?”

TED began in 1984 as a conference where technology, entertainment, and design converged. Beginning as a conference, TED now runs multiple platforms for these independent thinkers. Between 2001-2006, TED added three major additions to its organization including a sister conference known as TEDGlobal held in locations around the world, the TED Prize–which grants winners one wish to change the world, and releases many of the talks online. 

Today it exists as a nonprofit devoted to spreading ideas in the form of short powerful talks discussing many topics, from science to business to globalization, in more than 100 languages. TEDx events–the x indicates that it was independently organized–help share ideas in communities around the world. Overall, the organization aims to provide a platform for speakers so that people around the globe can gain a better understanding of some of the most pressing international issues and feel a desire to help create a better future. Through these talks, audiences are exposed to speakers who are engaging in cutting edge work for numerous causes. The speakers often demonstrate constructive ways that people can help with these causes on a personal level.

For me, the impact this TED Talk had was challenging me to re-think my view of the world and brainstorm new ideas for how I can make a difference outside of my field of choice. I was reminded that no act is too small, because any energy put toward an issue can help make a difference. Each speaker did such an exceptional job of connecting diverse issues rather than creating dividing lines. This fall, a TedxTalk will be held at my school, Beloit College, and while the talks are supposed to be specific to the growth and positive change of the city of Beloit and surrounding areas, I am curious to see what other types of dialogue it will open where I live. We have a lot to change in this world–Ted Talks present an innovative platform to do so.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post TED Talks: A Platform for Social Change? appeared first on Law Street.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently announced that Cuba is the first county in the world to eliminate mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis.

“Eliminating transmission of a virus is one of the greatest public health achievements possible,” Dr. Margaret Chan, the WHO director-general, said in a Tuesday press release. “This is a major victory in our long fight against HIV and sexually transmitted infections, and an important step towards having an AIDS-free generation.”

Preventive treatment for mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis is not 100 percent effective, so the WHO defines elimination as a reduction of transmission to a level that it no longer constitutes a public health problem. So the country must demonstrate that it has seen less than 50 infections from this particular route of transmission per 100,000 live births for at least one year. Cuba has surpassed those requirements. In 2013, only two babies were born with HIV and five with syphilis. Officials claim that this recent milestone shows that an end to the AIDS epidemic is possible, and that they expect more countries to seek validation from the WHO.

There are 16 million women worldwide who are living with HIV, and each year, about 1.4 million of them will get pregnant. The risk of passing the virus to the child is only around 1 percent if anti-HIV drugs are provided during phases of potential infection, which span through the pregnancy until breastfeeding. However if completely untreated, the risks are much greater, with a 45 percent chance of the child being infected during one of the pregnancy stages. Even though syphilis does not receive as much attention, infection during pregnancy and the absence of antibiotics can lead to stillbirth or neonatal death.

In order to reduce the mother-to-child transmission rate, the WHO and Pan American Health Organization began to work with Cuba and other countries back in 2010. The initiative worked to improve testing and treatment for these infections, caesarian deliveries, prenatal care, and breastfeeding substitutes. Some of their services also include prenatal care. Maternal and child health programs are integrated with HIV and STD programs. Similar services, which are a part of Cuba’s universal health system, are being implemented in a number of other countries to help work toward the global target of less than 40,000 new infections annually.

Worldwide, the number of children born with HIV dropped to 240,000 in 2013 from 400,000 in 2009, the WHO reported. In order to reach the target of no more than 40,000 new child infections in 2015, officials say more efforts will be needed around the world. But while Cuba may have been the first country to receive the WHO validation, that does not mean other countries have not reach elimination status. According to the Pan American Health Organization’s Director Carissa Etienne, it’s likely that the U.S. and Canada have already eliminated mother-to-child transmission of both of these infections, but haven’t sought validation.

So what do Cuba’s recent medical advances mean for the United States now that a relationship has been formed?

Cuba has one of the most advanced medical biotechnology industries in the world and invests heavily in the production of new treatments and medications. The Cuban biotech industry is said to hold around 1,200 international patients, and markets pharmaceutical products and vaccines in more than 50 countries–but not in the United States. For the 26 million people in the United States who have diabetes and the 80,000 Americans who suffer from diabetics amputations a year, this has significance. Because of the government’s continuous funding, Cuba has developed a safe and effective medication that reduces the risk of amputation by 78 percent.

This is just one example of how Americans can benefit from all of Cuba’s medical advances. Cuba’s medical prowess is impressive–eliminating HIV and syphilis transmissions are just one example of its potential. Even with the new relationship recently announced, Cuba and the United States have a lot of work to do to improve their relationship. But hopefully this new relationship will encourage Cuba to share its medical advances, and improve health worldwide.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Cuba Becomes First Country to Eliminate Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV and Syphilis appeared first on Law Street.

The Girl Scouts of Western Washington were more than thrilled when they recently received a $100,000 donation to fund activities for girls participating in the organization. However after seeing the note that came attached to the donation, the program made a hard call–to send the money back. According to Seattle Metropolitan magazine, the note read:

Please guarantee that our gift will not be used to support transgender girls. If you can’t, please return the money

This past May the Girl Scouts of America clarified its  longtime policy of allowing transgender girls to be Girl Scouts. While that decision resulted in applause from some, it also garnered protest–presumably the people who sent the note and donation fall into that camp.

The Chief Executive Officer of the Western Washington Chapter, Megan Ferland, claimed to feel very sad after receiving the letter, but sent it back without any hesitation. She said: Girl Scouts is for every girl. And every girl should have the opportunity to be a Girl Scout if she wants to.

With $100,000 covering nearly a third of the organization’s financial assistance program for the year, returning the gift was a big loss. So in an effort to replace the donation, the Western Washington council set up an Indigogo fundraiser, and received significantly more than the original donation. The “Girl Scouts is #ForEVERYGirl” page was able to raise more than $175,000 from more than 3,200 donors in one day, and more than $249,000 from over 4,900 donors in two days.

This is reportedly the second time the Western Washington Girl Scouts under the leadership of Megan Ferland have taken a stand to support transgender individuals, even though the organization has received some controversial feedback in regards to the issue. “Our position is not new,” Andrea Bastiani Archibald, the Girl Scouts USA’s chief girl expert, told CNN. “It conforms with our continuous commitment to inclusivity.”

However, as much as various arms of the Girl Scouts organization have stood up for transgender individuals, Boy Scouts of America has taken a different road when it comes to acceptance of LGBTQ individuals. After long debate, the Boy Scouts of America’s National Council was finally able to vote and ease a long-standing ban and allow openly gay young men in the organization in 2013. The policy took effect in January 2014. Although the vote was considered a milestone, there were some who were distraught with the outcome. There was talk of a new organization being formed, but that has yet to come to fruition. “This has been a challenging chapter in our history,” the BSA chief executive, Wayne Brock, said after the vote. “While people have differing opinions on this policy, kids are better off when they’re in Scouting.”

With a long road ahead, it seems both organizations are taking the necessary steps to ensure Boy and Girl Scouts of America include all people, although the Boy Scouts are clearly trailing behind the Girl Scouts somewhat. This move toward equality is certainly a good thing–whether it means extending membership or not taking donations that don’t go to further equality. 

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Girl Scouts Reject Anti-Transgender Donation appeared first on Law Street.

Najee Harmon is a 20-year-old man, and the primary suspect in the shooting of a Wauwatosa, WI detective on June 19. He’s been charged with three counts of attempted first degree intentional homicide and one count of felony possession of a firearm. After investigating a recent burglary, officers were on foot observing reported stolen vehicles, when Harmon fired several shots at Detective Jeffrey Griffin, injuring the officer. A manhunt took place for 24 hours, and he was finally found hiding in the basement of a long-time friend, Stephanie King.

But what struck me was what happened when King was interviewed; her comments raise a lot of questions about the “us vs. them” mentality that has begun to take hold between Black communities and the police.

While the focus from the media was on Harmon’s violent acts, King defended him saying, “To me he ain’t do no wrong, he just shot a cop. Everyone comes around when they shoot the cop. But when the cops shoot people, do they come around?”

While it’s never ok to shoot someone–particularly an innocent someone, what frustrates me so much about this interview is that she is partially right. Given recent events involving instances of police brutality many Black people are afraid for their lives. Recent events have proven that you can be the best looking, speaking, well-mannered, and respectful Black person and still be killed for the color of your skin. So, King’s logic makes some sense, although it certainly doesn’t make Harmon’s actions right. But you can’t fully blame her for this logic–this is what the newest frontier in the race war has come to look like in the United States. 

The tension between minority communities and the police is neither a small nor a dying issue. #BlackLivesMatter protests across the country have called for reforms and increased accountability surrounding police shootings and a reduction in the use of military equipment by local police departments.

“The system of policing has earned our mistrust,” said Opal Tometi, a New York-based activist and co-founder of the #BlackLivesMatter campaign.

It seems like every day you turn on the news and hear a story of yet another Black male who has died at the gun of a White police officer. There are tensions between communities and police officers, particularly when stories of corrupt police officers stealing drugs or money abound. Stigmas develop as these stories are passed throughout communities. This anger has built up to an all-time high. Black Americans are frustrated, sick of being mistreated, and it has gotten to the point where they believe the only solution is to take matters into their own hands. Black communities often feel like the people who are supposed to protect them are becoming those who victimize them instead. 

There are some understandable explanations for this. Police officers do not always understand the communities they are patrolling. Sometimes they enter these communities, and don’t know what they’re dealing with or how community members are feeling. There are many factors that can contribute to problems with the police, but this is a common problem with police officers in minority communities. This does not, of course, excuse genuine wrong they’ve done, but can be a starting point for a discussion about the issues they face as officers of the law.

On the other hand, in the defense of the police officers, their jobs require them to risk their lives regularly. In interviews with media outlets, officers often speak of being afraid during particular incidents and discharging their weapons because they feel it’s the best way to protect themselves. Granted, there are police officers who lie about this to cover something they’ve done, but  fear can certainly affect how a police officer does his job. It’s easy to forget that our police officers may genuinely be scared in some instances–after all we don’t want to picture our protectors fearful. But they’re certainly not perfect–just like the rest of us experience personal problems and pressures outside their jobs, they do too.

Arguably the biggest issue between minority communities and police officers is a lack of respect. Minority communities do not respect police officers, and because police officers know there is disrespect, they have the potential to act out of anger and frustration. So how can we improve this growing issue? One way is to advocate and speak up. For example, Black Lives Matter has given national attention to the growing mistreatment African-Americans face. People usually turn the other cheek because it’s not their problem, but this really is a problem for all of us. 

There is some potential for improvement–by investing in solutions like community policing, we can hope to build that mutual respect. Through partnerships with community organizations, community members can feel heard, respected, and empowered to help police control crime in their neighborhoods. Developing these relationships, while not a complete solution, is certainly a step in the right direction, and may break the us vs. them narrative. Harmon’s actions and King’s statements are just one example of the compelling need to fix this horrible division in American society. 

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post An Us Vs. Them Mentality Won’t Fix the Problem of Police Brutality appeared first on Law Street.

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is now worrying about how it will handle the newest influx of drugs on Baltimore streets. Following the death of Freddie Gray, some Baltimore citizens rioted the streets, attempting to loot as many stores as possible. Over thirty pharmacies and clinics were targeted during that time, and enough doses of Oxycodone, Suboxone, Morphine, Fentanyl and other drugs were taken to keep the city’s drug users high for a year.

In a city with a large population of heroin addicts, this increase of drugs on the street may add to the problems police and city officials face in dealing with the rise of shootings and murders. With more than 175,000 doses of opiates and other prescription drugs stolen, law enforcement officials believe the new flow of prescription pills will breed new addicts and more violence. They also believe that many of those addicts will turn to cheaper heroin once the prescription drugs dry up. 

In response to the city’s plea for help, the Drug Enforcement Administration and other federal agencies are seeking to prosecute the leaders of gang and drug dealing organizations.

Gary Tuggle, former Assistant Special Agent in Charge of DEA Baltimore District and former Baltimore cop, led the DEA’s efforts in Baltimore in drawing up a list of potential suspects. The DEA is currently circulating photos of about 60 people they believe to have looted these drugs.

Tuggle recalls his time as a police officer and how the drug market has changed since that time:

The street purity of heroin was 2-5%. Today we are seeing purity levels up to 80-85% and then some cases, a kilo of heroin would cost $140-160,000. Today you can get it for between $65 and $70,000 so you see the economics of it when you have a level of supply and level of demand that uses that inventory its literally bringing the cost down and purity levels up.

According the DEA, the influx of drugs on the streets has created a series of turf wars between gangs and independent drug dealers who are competing for territory. Tuggle says:

In some cases you have the gangs taxing other gangs or independent drug dealers. Other times, gangs feel their territory is being threatened, which leads to a disruption in the balance of power and that’s only going to lead to violence.

Police say it is the violence inflicted by the influx of drugs that is partially responsible for the large spike of murders in May.

DEA agents claim to know which areas of town are best for heroin or other drugs. They identified specifically the Sandtown area of Baltimore as having an active heroin market, and the Lexington Market downtown as a location where a circulation of prescription opiates have recently developed. Those most affected by the drug dealing are victims of drug users who come from all over the city. Tuggle stated:

At the end of the day these communities have very, very decent people, hardworking people who want to work and educate their families and support their families […] But a lot of these people dealing in these neighborhoods are not from these neighborhoods. Some of them have nice homes in the suburbs or they live in high rise apartment sin downtown Baltimore. So they come into these communities to take advantage of these communities.

Police believe prescription drugs to be at least partially responsible for Baltimore’s deadliest month in decades–there were 43 murders in the month of May alone. Police are currently working to arrest potential suspects responsible for the recent violent streak, but do not believe the problem will be solved quickly. 

With a limited number of buyers on the street, drug dealers are competing for every dollar and creating turf wars. These turf wars are primarily between gangs and independent drug dealers; these groups are more likely to settle disputes with violence leading to that spike in shootings and murders.

“We’re talking about people. These are not numbers. These are human beings who’ve lost their lives in the streets of Baltimore,” said Police Commissioner Anthony Batts.

So, what does this mean for the residents of Baltimore? Even though the city has had a long history of drug abuse, it seems to recently be getting worse. Now community members that may not be associated with drugs are suddenly right in the middle of a turf war because the dealers have no concern for the lives they are putting at risk. You would think it would be easy to just encourage community members to reach out to police officers when they see suspicious activity, but with the tensions between police officers and minority communities, that’s a completely different battle. With these new drugs on the streets of Baltimore, it seems like they are in for a year of heartache unless the Baltimore Police Department can do something to change it.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Prescription Drug Influx Doesn’t Bode Well for Baltimore appeared first on Law Street.

The d, the i, the d, the d, the y, the d, the I, the d is diddy just got arrested. Again.

Sean “Diddy” Combs was arrested by the UCLA Police Department on Monday afternoon on a charge of assault with a weapon–a kettle ball. He was released several hours after his arrest by posting bail, but he wasn’t able to Diddy Bop out of there with just a slap on the wrist.

The hip-hop music legend has officially been charged with three counts of assault with a deadly weapon, one count of making terrorist threats, and one count of battery.

According to Bruin Report Online, the incident began early that morning when Diddy’s son, Justin Combs, was attending an off-season workout on UCLA’s field. After Combs missed some recent workouts and a few other minor offenses, one of the team’s coaches kicked him out.

“I don’t care if your dad’s here,” Coach Sal Alosi said. “This is UCLA. I’m going to treat you just like I treat everyone else.”

Diddy was reportedly upset with Alosi’s behavior, because he felt that the coach was trying to humiliate both him and his son in front of the entire team. So when he went to the coach’s office to discuss the issue, the coach refused to see him, and threatened to call security if he didn’t leave. The coach’s diss set Diddy OFF.

Reports claim Diddy replied, “Fine, I’ll call police,” and Alosi snapped–going after Diddy with his hands. It was reported that Diddy then grabbed a kettlebell and held it up in a defensive position, but did not attack with the intent to injure the coach.

When Alosi instructed interns outside of his office to alert campus security, an unclear riff-raff between the two went down, which resulted in scratches on Alosi’s face and a ripped shirt. While interns were able to remove Diddy from the office and into the next room, it was there that Diddy reportedly picked up a kettle bell and swung it at one of the interns.

When UCPD arrived and the situation had calmed, everyone believed nothing would come of the incident. But with the UCLA training facility security cameras, police were able to watch the altercation and subsequently arrested Diddy.

According to TMZ reports, this is not Diddy’s first altercation that has resulted in police presence. In 2011, he settled a lawsuit from a shooting that occurred in a night club in 1999 that left about three victims injured.

While Puff had no right to assault the coach for giving his son some tough criticism, we all know Diddy has a temper. I bet the coach thought he was handling the situation appropriately by immediately asking him to leave, but we all know Diddy doesn’t play that way. Whether or not Diddy will actually have to pay a price for his actions however, remains to be seen.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Diddy Did It Again: Rapper Arrested After Altercation at UCLA appeared first on Law Street.

Taylor Swift recently wrote a controversial open letter to Apple Music about its new music streaming feature. Apple Music was offering a free three month trial as one of the new streaming site’s hottest features, but during that period artists and record companies would not be paid. That policy sparked Swift’s wrath, and opened up a conversation about the ethics of streaming sites.

Swift said on her personal Tumblr account:

I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service.

I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months. I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.

Apple acquired Beats Electronics last year for $3 billion, and on June 8 it announced details about its new streaming music service and radio station at the Worldwide Developers Conference. 

One day after Swift’s letter, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Internet Software and Services, Eddy Cue, tweeted a response that Apple will change its royalty policy. 

#AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming, even during customer’s free trial period

— Eddy Cue (@cue) June 22, 2015

We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists. Love, Apple

— Eddy Cue (@cue) June 22, 2015

Swift responded in  kind to the policy change:

I am elated and relieved. Thank you for your words of support today. They listened to us.

— Taylor Swift (@taylorswift13) June 22, 2015

While Swift and Apple Music got rid of their “Bad Blood” pretty quickly, this isn’t the first time that she has challenged streaming services. Back in November 2014, Swift famously pulled her music from Spotify and kept “1989” off of steaming services.

I’m all for making money and handling it in whatever way you want, but to me, Swift seems a little selfish. She’s one of the most prominent artists to remove her music from Spotify, and certainly one of the richest. Her letter went so far as to say,

This is not about me. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success.

But Swift may be in the wrong with that argument. When the issue between Swift and Spotify arose, Spotify stated that the purpose of its streaming site was to prevent music lovers from downloading music illegally. Although artists aren’t being paid as much as they would if they were selling a song or album, they certainly receive more money through sites like Spotify than if their songs were pirated.

So, it’s easy to question whether Swift’s intent is truly so generous. Furthermore, it’s easy to imagine that she removed the music for her personal gain because she wasn’t making as much money–just because Apple played along and fixed the problem for everyone doesn’t absolve her. If she gets into any other arguments with streaming sites down the road, hopefully she uses her prominent status to benefit all artists involved, not just for her own personal gain.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Taylor Swift: Continued “Bad Blood” With Streaming Sites appeared first on Law Street.

Update: 5:09pm

Hundreds of people gathered at the South Carolina capitol Saturday evening to advocate for the removal of the Confederate flag from near the state capitol building. The “Take the Flag Down” event was held in response to the recent massacre of nine people at Mother Emanuel AME Church, an African American church in the heart of Charleston. Several pictures released after the shooting portray the suspect, Dylann Roof, displaying a Confederate flag. The police believe the shooting to be a hate crime, and protestors are now crying out for the removal of the flag.

South Carolina State Representative Doug Brannon, a Republican, referred to the flag as a symbol of both hate and “a symbol of pride in one’s hatred” when speaking with the Associated Press. He stated:

I just didn’t have the balls for five years to do it. But when my friend was assassinated for being nothing more than a black man, I decided it was time for that thing to be off the Statehouse grounds.

At Saturday’s rally many hoped for unity, as the event included a variety of speeches and many chanted the slogan “take it down.” “The country is calling for togetherness instead of division, so if the country truly wants togetherness then this is a way to bring it down,” said Angie White, one of the participants, stating:

My heart has been pierced by the tragedy that happened in Charleston, South Carolina, overwhelmed with grief and the hate that has permeated our country. I want to see anything that can make things better, including taking the flag down from the State House grounds. Anything that can make us a better nation, a better people, a people that the forefathers intended us to be, I want it to be done and I choose to be a part of that change.

The Confederate battle flag has long proved to be one of the most divisive issues in state politics, as it has consistently served as a symbol of intolerance and white supremacy. President of the South Carolina NAACP, Dr. Lonnie Randolph stated:

We all know what it stands for: colored bathrooms, separate and unequal, hostile treatment of people, lynching, murdering of people, raping women and children. That’s what it stands for.

Past protests, boycotts, rallies, and movements have all failed to remove the flag from the building’s grounds. While many are not opposed to the idea of removing the flag, many believe that this weekend was not the best time, as the family and friends of the Emmanuel AME Church victims are still grieving.

In light of the recent rally, South Carolina Governor Nikki Hayley is expected to address the public this Monday afternoon. It is said that she’ll call for the removal of the flag, although it will be up to the state legislature to make the final call.

State Representative Doug Brannon is planning to introduce a bill in December to move the flag to the Military Museum. Brannon acknowledges that this will likely cost him re-election, but plans to introduce the bill as early as he can, which won’t be until December.

While many argue this weekend’s rally didn’t leave family and friends proper time to grieve for the loved ones they lost in the massacre, this weekend’s rally does show the continued need to fight for an end to racism in the United States.

Update: 5:09pm: In a 4PM press conference, South Carolina Governor Nikki Hayley spoke about the controversial issue of removing the Confederate flag from the state’s capital.

She stated:

Fifteen years ago after much contentious debate, South Carolina came together in a bipartisan way to move the flag from atop the capitol dome. Today, we are here in a moment of unity in our state, without ill will, to say it’s time to move the flag from the capital grounds.

The murderer now locked up in Charleston said he hoped his actions would to start a race war. We have an opportunity to show not only was he wrong, but that just the opposite is happening.

The General Assembly wraps up their year this week, and, as governor, I have the authority to call them back into session under extraordinary circumstances. I have indicated to the House and the Senate that, if they do not take measures to ensure this debate takes place this summer, I will use that authority for the purpose of the legislature removing the flag from the Statehouse grounds. That will take place in the coming weeks, after the regular session and the veto session have been completed

I also ask that the focus still remains on the 9 victims of this horrible tragedy. […] We all deserve time to grieve, and to remember, and to heal. We will take it, and I ask that you respect it.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Take Down the Flag: Protestors Rally Against Confederate Flag in South Carolina appeared first on Law Street.

Hundreds of thousands of Haitian immigrants and Dominicans of Haitian descent currently face the risk of deportation from the Dominican Republic. Even though this process is meant to weed out only illegal immigrants, the practice has come under particular scrutiny. The Dominican Republic government has generated a lot of controversy in regards to this sudden deportation effort because many feel it is unjust.

For example, on Monday, Yayine Mesilus was snatched off the streets of her small village in the Dominican Republic and taken back to Haiti. She had migrated there eight years ago with her little brother, Clever, to look for work. She stated:

I was thrown back here because I was not carrying my document to prove I was already trying to register. They didn’t even give me the chance to explain what was happening,

Migrant workers were supposed to be given until the night of Wednesday, June 17, to register with Dominican authorities before being deported. If they had not completed the process, but began registration, they were supposed to be given a 45-day grace period. The government promised to open a path to naturalization for those who registered, after claiming to want to get a grip on its migrant work force.

The forthcoming deportation stems from a law passed last year that requires all foreign-born workers to register with the government within a year or face deportation. But this law followed a 2013 court ruling to strip the citizenship of children born in the Dominican Republic to foreign parents. For human rights advocates, this court ruling was viewed as discrimination against Dominicans with darker skin and Haitian migrant workers.

An international outcry resulted in the government later softening its stance. It promised citizenship to children whose births were in the nation’s civil registry, and a chance to nationalize those not formally registered. But with anything less then full citizenship, these people are left stateless, belonging to neither their birthplace nor their family’s homeland.

Nearly 240,000 migrant workers born outside of the Dominican Republic have started the registration process. But there are an estimated 524,000 foreign-born migrant workers in the country, about ninety percent of whom are Haitian. This leaves a huge population of migrant workers at risk for deportation.

Dominican Republic officials claim that providing illegal immigrants a path to naturalization is more generous than the policies of other countries, including the United States. But their mass deportations involve purging a racial group with which there has been a long history of tension.

Haitian workers have been crossing the border for generations to cut sugar cane, clean homes, and care for children. However, there has been racial tension since the massacre of tens of thousands of Haitian laborers ordered by Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo in 1937. More recently, the Dominican Republic claims to be tired of bearing the brunt of Haiti’s economic troubles, both before and after the 2010 earthquake that sent Haitians fleeing across the border. The 2013 court ruling on citizenship further solidified the tense situation.

The Dominican Republic economy will most likely experience a large change when the migrants are deported. For generations, Haitians have assumed the jobs that many Dominicans do not want, filling a vital part of the labor market often below market rates. If a large portion of their labor force is removed, production costs could rise.

Moreover, this deportation policy illustrates the lack of empathy the Dominican Republic has for its Haitian born people and migrant workers. The government claims to be doing them a favor by providing them with options that have guidelines, but these options are not necessarily adequate. If the Dominican Republic wants to provide Haitians with a clear path to naturalization, it should do so–the current deportation situation illustrates that this simply isn’t the case.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Dominican Republic’s Deportation Policy: Is it Broken? appeared first on Law Street.

The Treasury Department made history Wednesday when it announced its decision to have a woman on a new version of the $10 bill. This move marks an important step forward for the equality of men and women in American history.

In a press release on the topic, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew stated:

America’s currency is a way for our nation to make a statement about who we are and what we stand for. Our paper bills–and the images of great American leaders and symbols they depict—have long been a way for us to honor our past and express our values. 

We have only made changes to the faces on our currency a few times since bills were first put into circulation, and I’m proud that the new 10 will be the first bill in more than a century to feature the portrait of a woman.

The new bill will be released in 2020, exactly one century after the 19th Amendment guaranteed women the right to vote.

There have already been several advocates for a female face on U.S. paper currency. Earlier this year the Women on 20s campaign was launched, with the goal of getting a woman on the $20 bill by 2020. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) introduced a bill directing Lew to “convene a panel of citizens” to recommend an appropriate person. The campaign conducted a ten week poll in May to find out which woman Americans wanted to see represented, with Harriet Tubman finishing in first place.

It doesn’t appear that the Treasury Department will take the Women on 20s campaign’s advice on who the new bill should feature. Instead, officials plan to hold town hall meetings and roundtable discussions to discuss “what qualities best represent democracy to help guide the design process.”

The Treasury Department is also accepting social media submissions using the hashtag #TheNew10, and through comments posted to a dedicated part of the Treasury website, with the decision announced later this year.

The decision made by the Treasury Department has certainly been a win for those who advocate for women’s rights. Placing a woman’s face on the $10 bill will celebrate a female leader in a very public way, which is a long time coming. Over the past century, a few women have been featured on currency, including Susan B. Anthony and Sacagawea. But they have been limited to dollar coins, a currency that does not really receive prominent circulation.

Secretary Lew’s press release referred to how currency reflect the country’s values. The point is well taken, because while women have made notable progress in the United States, there is still more work to be done. The gender imbalance among the country’s leaders can be found in the lack of CEOs on the Fortune 500 list and, the absence of women leading tech companies, or even their lack of presence within our government. There also still exists a persistent wage gap between the sexes. The presence of high profile female leaders and role models can have a significant impact on increasing the leadership skills and educational attainments of young girls and women. Even though the United States is taking in step toward elevating the lesser told stories of important female leaders, this step is long overdue.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post It’s About Time: A Woman Will Be on New $10 Bill appeared first on Law Street.

Matthew Durham’s trial just began last week; he has been accused of sexual misconduct with children while volunteering at an orphanage in Kenya. The 20-year-old Oklahoma native has pleaded not guilty to 17 charges, including aggravated sexual abuse and engaging in illicit sexual conduct in foreign places. He faces life in prison if convicted. But these disturbing allegations against Durham raise many questions about the ethics of American volunteerism.

Durham has been accused of engaging in sexual acts with children between April and June of 2014 while working as a volunteer at the Upendo Children’s Home in Nairobi, Kenya, which specializes in assisting neglected children. Durham began volunteering for the orphanage in 2012. According to court records, officials claim Durham raped boys and girls between the ages of six and nine.

The jury was selected last Tuesday, and opening statements began on Wednesday. The prosecutor, Robert D. Gifford II, began his attack in a particularly disturbing manner, reading Durham’s hand-written confessions which included, “I would take her to the bathroom at night and would hold her down and rape her.” Quoting another that pertained to a boy at the Upendo Children’s Home in the Kenyan capital of Nairobi, Gifford read: “at night I took him to the bathroom and had him perform oral sex on me.”

A court affidavit lists samples of Durham’s hand written and signed confessions of the alleged acts. They go into some detail of what sexual acts occurred. But when faced with these confessions, Durham now claims that he only confessed to the crimes because he was under duress. 

In fact, defense attorney Stephen Jones is arguing that the offenses never happened. During his opening statement he stated, “there is no demon, there are no multiple personalities, there are no crimes. That is the defense, it didn’t happen.” Jones claims that Durham was was coerced into confessing by orphanage officials who kept Durham in isolation and confiscated his passport.

“He’s in fear for his life,” Jones said. He described Durham as “an emotionally vulnerable teenager” who was struggling with his “sexual identity and development” as a devout Christian. Jones claims that when the orphanage learned of the allegations, they didn’t initially notify police, medical officials, or the U.S. Embassy. Others who lived in the Upendo home claimed to have never witnessed any wrongdoing.

But the manager and children’s care taker of the orphanage, Josphine Wambugu, made a number of allegations including that she witnessed Durham sleeping in one of the girls’ dormitory on June 12, 2014. Wambugu also claims to have questioned some of the girls about whether misconduct occurred, and several claimed to have had “bad manners” with Durham, a Kenyan phrase for sexual relations. Wambugu testified that when she confronted Durham, “He say: ‘Yes, I did it! Yes, I did it!'” She also claims that Durham told a group of Upendo officials that he had struggled with child pornography and homosexuality.

Whether or not Jones’ strategy of denying the incidents ever occurred will be successful will be up to the jury. But either way, this case creates some questions about the practice of sending young American students to volunteer abroad. It’s an incredibly common practice–there are so many alternative spring breaks, international volunteer abroad programs, and international service learning projects that provide options for students to volunteer. Both the programs that send students abroad and the organizations that accept them need to implement measures to make sure that the volunteers are properly supervised and vetted. Hopefully answers to some of those questions will arise out of this heartbreaking and disturbing trial. 

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Matthew Durham Trial: American Volunteerism at its Worst appeared first on Law Street.

There has been a lot of speculation with regard to the Rachel Dolezal case. Some say that she lied about her race; lied about who her father was; and maybe even took her adoptive brother and claimed him as her own Black son. She may have also disowned her White parents, and she verbally identifies as African American. She has been pulling the wool over people’s eyes for years about her race, and now that they know the truth, they are mad.

When her parents revealed the truth about her ethnicity, they said that what she was doing was very “puzzling and sad”. Understandable. They went on to say the following:

Her passion for civil rights is influenced by her years in Mississippi, where she advocated for equal rights and participated in community development…She has over the past 20 years assimilated herself into the African American community through her various advocacy and social justice work, and so that may be part of the answer.

Based on the memes, jokes, and rants on Twitter and other social media sites, it seems as if the Black community more or less is not responding well to the NAACP Spokane Branch President lying about her ethnicity. One tweet goes as far as to say:

Just a friendly reminder that a black person passing as white was once a criminal offense. Enjoy ur day. #RachelDolezal

— Amanda Seales (@amandaseales) June 12, 2015

She lied and lied and lied…and continued to lie. Then when she got caught, she lied some more. That definitely isn’t okay, but does it really make Dolezal a bad person? Some people say “lying is lying;” that it’s wrong and because she did it she’s in the wrong. I am not necessarily sure if that is true. Lying is not okay, and it was clearly not the best way for her to accomplish what she was trying to do. But my thing is, didn’t just last week Bruce–I mean Caitlyn–Jenner come out and reintroduce herself as a woman? Yes, she received a lot of negative backlash, but at the same time there was so much support and positivity surrounding her. Revered as a hero to some who struggle with gender identification, others hold her up as a brave soul who has a lot of courage to reveal who she really felt she was inside. It seems to me that if Dolezal personally identifies as Black, she has every right to pursue that, same as Caitlyn Jenner.

Some Black people have been quick to respond, saying things like “they want to be us so bad,” upset with White America for ignoring Black culture, and instead reestablishing it as their own. Without getting too off subject, here’s an example of what that means exactly.

It’s been a little over a year since Marc Jacobs revealed models for his 2015 Spring line featuring “mini buns,” also known as Bantu Knots. Giving this hairstyle a new title, Jacobs completely discredited its African roots. 

I wonder how many Bantu Knots it took for #RachelDolezal to achieve this look… pic.twitter.com/XlkhMKqFK7

— banjila davis (@TiatheDiva) June 12, 2015

@TiatheDiva didnt you know thye called mini buns now inspired by marc jacobs

— Lovely Murrell (@NatRemedieCoach) June 12, 2015

But this is not that. She is not “stealing” Black identity, but instead is accepting and fully embracing this ethnicity because this is the race she identifies with the most. Although it was misleading, Dolezal appears to be transracial. Social media has been quick to address the topic and reactions varied.

Black Twitter bemoaned that switching race does not work like switching gender, noting that Black people can’t pretend to avoid discrimination.

My prob w/ #Transracial: Black folk cant decide to be white when the cops raid their pool party. But a white woman can be NAACP president.

— |L I Z Z O| (@lizzo) June 12, 2015

If #RachelDolezal can do it, so can I. I am now a white American. Give me: good credit, the ability to swim, and police NOT beating me.

— PrestonMitchum (@PrestonMitchum) June 12, 2015

Some in social media have accused Dolezal’s actions of being despicable and offensive, because Black rights can still be supported while being White. But aren’t there Black people who bleach their skin so they’re lighter? Michael Jackson? Those people don’t actively give back to the race they claim to identify with; those people are not civil rights activist. The lines of being transgender are not as black and white as the lines of being transracial, but that doesn’t mean that this identification does not exist.

After taking a look at her LinkedIn profile, her entire life’s work appears to be socially reconstructing and advocating for the Black community. She has a Master’s Degree from Howard University and has spent over 20 years as an instructor and expert on African American culture. She represents the black community publicly and vocally, including as a spokeswoman on race-influenced police violence.

Look at all of the hard work she has put in. She may not have gone about it in the best way, but that does not mean that Rachel Dolezal’s intentions or what she did was wrong.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rachel Dolezal is Transracial and it Doesn’t Negate Her Justice Work appeared first on Law Street.

The Supreme Court of Canada has just ruled that the users of marijuana for medical purposes now have the right to bake the drugs in cookies, take it in lozenge form or as tropical oils in addition to smoking it. The unanimous ruling against the federal government expands the definition of medical marijuana beyond the “dried” form, and speaks volumes about the changes happening in the marijuana industry.

The Court found that the current restriction to dried marijuana violates the right to liberty and security “in a manner that is arbitrary and hence is not in accord with the principles of fundamental justice.” Restricting medical access  in Canada to marijuana in a dried form has now been declared “null and void.” That renders sections four and five of the Controlled Drug and Substances Act, which prohibits possession and trafficking of non-dried forms of cannabis, unenforceable.

This decision supports earlier rulings by lower Courts in British Columbia that said they went against a person’s right to consume medical marijuana in the form they choose.

Medical marijuana patients don’t always want to expose themselves to the effects of smoking the drugs. Inhaling marijuana could present health risks, and is said to be less effective for some conditions that administer cannabis derivatives. With inhalation being a large issue, the smoking process is said to irritate the lungs, which is why smokers are more likely to have an ongoing cough or other health problems like chest colds and lung infections.

A 2011 systematic review of the research concluded that long-term marijuana smoking is associated with an increased risk of some respiratory problems, including an increase in cough, sputum production, airway inflammation, and wheezing–similar to that of tobacco smoking. 

Some medical marijuana users wanted to avoid those side effects. But other methods like brewing marijuana leaves in tea or baking weed into brownies left patients vulnerable to be charged with possession and trafficking under the law.

“This is monumental,” said David Posner, CEO of Nutritional High, a Canadian company that has been testing marijuana-infused candy and drinks for sale in the United States later this year. “Another market the size of California just opened up for our products.”

So what does this mean for the U.S. exactly? Four states–Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and Alaska, as well as Washington D.C.–have legalized marijuana, while a total of 14 states have decriminalized certain amounts of possession. Legal marijuana is said to be the fastest-growing industry in the U.S. According to ArcView, over the next five years, the marijuana industry is expected to continue to grow. They are predicting that 14 more states will legalize recreational marijuana and two more will legalize medical marijuana. At least ten states are already considering legalizing recreational marijuana in just the next two years through ballot measures or state legislatures.

In that context, Canada extending its medical marijuana market, and the U.S.’s current growing market promise continued growth. Non-traditional ways to consume marijuana will continue to rise–this week’s decision was just the beginning.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Weed Trend Grows: Canada Legalizes Medical Edibles appeared first on Law Street.

A New York man named Kalief Browder, who spent three years behind bars without a trial after being accused of a robbery in 2010, committed suicide this past Saturday in his Bronx home. His story is now raising questions for many about the prevalent injustices inherent in our prison system.

In 2010 Browder, then 16, was arrested on suspicion of stealing a backpack. He was eventually sent to Rikers Island where he would spend three years awaiting a trial that he hoped would prove his innocence. Browder spent roughly two of his three years in solitary confinement suffering intense physical and emotional abuse and was severely beaten by officers and other inmates. He also attempted suicide at least six times.

In a 2013 New Yorker interview with Jennifer Gonnerman, Browder recalled punishments he would receive from the guards for attempting to commit suicide. Browder recalled one incident where he ripped off the sheets of his bed in his jail cell and fashioned them into a noose. When he was about to hang himself, guards stormed into his cell, tackled him into his bed, and punched him repeatedly. As a punishment for this suicide attempt, the guards starved Browder for up to four meals at a time.

In 2013, he was allowed to go home after the charges against him were dropped. He never had a trial. 

His attorney, Paul Prestia, described the difficulties that he faced after leaving prison, saying, “every day was a struggle. He lived with a degree of sadness every day since his release.” Prestia said:

When he came out [of jail] and I first met him, he was completely broken — I had to show him how to use a computer; he had to get a job. These were issues he was going to have for his whole life. It’s not his fault. He didn’t deserve that.

After his release, Browder experienced deep bouts of depression and became increasingly paranoid. Six months after his release, Browder attempted suicide, and was hospitalized. During his time in the hospital, Browder was said to be gaunt, restless, and deeply paranoid. While he was eventually released from the hospital, and succeeded for some time–at one point earning a 3.5 GPA at Bronx Community College and tutoring GED students, these issues appear to have persisted. Browder committed suicide on June 6; he had just turned 22 years old.

Browder’s story is deeply tragic and problematic. Someone stuck in a prison for three years waiting for a trial should not be subjected to severe beatings, starvation and other mistreatments. Of the 10,000 inmates at Rikers Island, about 1,500 have been there for the last year without being convicted of a crime. It’s hard to determine how long the wait for a trial usually is; some statistics say a few months, while others wait several years. In Browder’s case, a real trial was never had, and he was released without the necessary resources.

The horrible facts of Browder’s incarceration echo multiple concerns about the way we treat our nation’s prisoners, particularly the racial inequalities in the justice system. The U.S. is said to currently imprison a larger percentage of its Black population than South Africa did at the height of apartheid. African Americans are incredibly overrepresented in prisons. Despite making up only 13 percent of the population, they made up 38 percent of state prisoners in 2011. This highly problematic reality is highlighted by cases like Browder’s: how many lives must end before citizens, particularly African-American men, are treated fairly in our justice system?

There are also concerns specifically about Rikers Island that are now coming to light. A report from the U.S. Department of Justice described “rampant use of unnecessary and excessive force” by guards against teenage inmates on Rikers Island. Surveillance footage obtained by Gonnerman shows Browder being beaten by a guard and assaulted by a large group of inmates. Prestia points out that the fact that this kind of treatment happened in the U.S. is shocking, stating:

When you go over the three years that [Browder] spent [in jail] and all the horrific details he endured, it’s unbelievable that this could happen to a teen-ager in New York City. He didn’t get tortured in some prison camp in another country. It was right here!

In April in a statement provided by the New Yorker, New York City Mayor Bill de Blaiso said that Browder’s “tragic story put a human face on Rikers Island’s culture of delay — a culture with profound human and fiscal costs for defendants and our city.” Since Browder’s release some progress has been made and de Blaiso’s administration has issued a series of major reforms at Rikers. For example, it was able to end the practice of putting 16 and 17-year-olds into solitary confinement. While that’s certainly progress, the tragic end to Browder’s story still brings up many seriously problematic issues that are far from being solved.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What Kalief Browder’s Tragic Story Tells Us About the Prison System appeared first on Law Street.

It’s always upsetting when celebrities do not really give back to communities in need. Luckily, Senegalese-American singer and producer Akon fully agrees with my sentiment for the need to give back. This summer, his charitable organization, Akon Lighting Africa, will be opening a solar academy that will help bring electricity to over 600 million Africans.

The organization was originally launched in 2004 with his other co-founders, Thione Niang and Samba Baithily. All three men have been known to heavily involve themselves in organizations that promote economic growth and social progress in Africa. Since that time, the organization has also provided solar street lamps and domestic solar panels in over one million households in approximately 14 African countries.

The organization intends to open its solar academy in Bamako, Mali’s capital. Given that the continent sees an average of 320 days of sunshine a year, it’s a more than welcoming environment for solar power. Akon Lighting Africa intends to effectively utilize this sunlight–harnessing solar energy is an ideal way to bring electricity to those without it.

Akon and the other co-founders discuss how necessary sustainable jobs are in Africa. Approximately seventy percent of the population is under 35, making Africa the continent with the youngest average population. To them, investing in solar power for the future can help in more ways than one. Thione Niang stated:

The academy will aim to teach people how to install and maintain solar-powered electricity systems as well as micro grids which are really taking off in rural Africa.

It’s the organization’s expectation that Africans who graduate from this center will be able to devise new, innovative, technological solutions. “With this Academy, we can capitalize on Akon Lighting Africa and go further,” said Niang.

In addition to Akon Lighting Africa, Akon has other charitable initiatives operating in Africa. The Konfidence Foundation, which has been around since 2006, works to raise public awareness for issues regarding certain conditions in Africa, as well as providing underprivileged youth with educational materials, recreational resources, and health and wellness services. Akon told African Vibes:

As a regular person, there’s not much you can do, but as a celebrity you can influence millions of people, which makes it a lot easier. Things can happen a lot faster, and I like to take advantage of that and find more ways to bring opportunities to Africa.

He has spoken out in other media outlets about his drive to give back in Africa, stating in a 2014 Politico interview:

I think the United States probably may take the value of Africa just a little bit for granted. I think with the right partners, the right neighboring allies and the right support, Africa could be dominating. Because it has all the natural resources you can imagine, and if all the other countries actually got together and created unity, the dollar would be humongous.

There are obviously many other celebrities in addition to Akon that make an effort to give back to those in need internationally. For example, in 2007, Oprah Winfrey opened The Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls in South Africa located in Henley on Klip in Gauteng province. Beginning with 7th and 8th grade classes, the school grew one grade year each year until it reached capacity in 2012. While Akon and Oprah are just a few select examples of international outreach, they really epitomize a strong sense of charity and generosity.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post This Star Aims to Bring More Solar Power to Africa appeared first on Law Street.

The Texas legislature recently passed a bill that will allow licensed residents to carry concealed hand guns on public colleges and universities. With the bill currently on its way to Governor Greg Abbott, who is expected to sign it, it will soon permit the presence of concealed weapons on college campuses. But this raises some serious questions about the levels of danger the schools could potentially face as a result of the new law.

The final version of this bill allows private institutions to opt out, while public universities would be able to create gun-free zones in areas of campus. This new bill allows licensed gun owners to carry their handguns in classrooms, libraries, and other campus buildings. The law would be in effect in September for four year colleges and universities and by fall 2017 for community colleges.

Some key components of the law include a requirement for university presidents to adopt rules and policies regarding carrying a concealed handgun on campus. The university may also create rules on policies regarding carrying guns into dorms and the storage of guns. The bill does not change who can obtain a concealed handgun license. Any locations that have their own rules off campus, such as bars and hospitals, can keep those rules. Open carry on campuses remains prohibited.

As a student, and someone looking at law schools in Texas, I am not sure how I would personally respond to a bill like this being passed on my college campus. In addition to attending classes, campus is a place where students eat, sleep, and live. It doesn’t really seem fair to invade one’s home with a weapon without really asking. That sentiment is consistent with some of the reactions coming out of Texas and the country right now in response to this legislation.

Julie Gavran, the western director of the Campaign to Keep Guns off Campus, said she worries accidents involving guns, gun thefts, and suicides will increase. She also fears that if the bill is passed, colleges will have to invest more money into hiring security officers and buying metal detectors, which will be taken away from education spending. Gavran stated:

The legislators were more concerned with (concealed handgun license) rights rather than the quality of research and education that the state provides. This total disregard of the voice and concerns of the campus community is an insult to the State of Texas.

Despite these fears, Bill McRaven, chancellor of the University of Texas System does not seem to agree, stating:

It is helpful that the bill was amended to allow our campus presidents to consult with students, faculty and staff to develop rules and regulations that will govern the carrying of concealed handguns on campuses. I pledge to our students, faculty, staff, patients and their families and to all those who may visit a UT institution that, as UT System leaders, we will do everything in our power to maintain safe and secure campuses.

The bill’s House sponsor, State Representative Allen Fletcher explained his motivation for filing it, stating:

Currently, a student, faculty member, or other adult with a concealed handgun license may carry their concealed handgun throughout a campus as long as they remain outside, but the moment they step foot into a building on campus they become criminals.

Despite that point, the safety factor is still a large issue. Fletcher believes that the media, parents, students, and higher education officials exaggerate the bill’s consequences. He argues that the measure will just broaden current laws that already allows concealed handguns on campus outside of buildings. Those in favor of passing the bill also believe permitting gun owners to carry weapons on college campuses can help students and faculty members defend themselves.

The arguments in favor of this bill are extremely valid, but I feel like there could be a different solution that accommodates the needs of all people. An increased presence of weapons on campus still makes me and many others very wary.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Texas Bill Will Allow These Weapons on College Campuses appeared first on Law Street.

Custody battles are often an issue among spouses who are not able to work out their personal differences for the sake of their children. Magazines today often depict celebrities as stars who are “just like us,” showing photos of them pumping their own gas, tanning in the park, or buying groceries at Whole Foods. So, just like us, celebrities also deal with intense and drawn out custody battles. Kelly Rutherford, better known as Lily van der Woodson on “Gossip Girl,” has been dealing with a custody battle regarding her two children, Hermés Giersch and Helena Giersch, with ex-husband Daniel Giersch since their divorce in 2008. This drawn out battle sheds a light on the issues that celebrities’ children face when their parents are in the news.

On May 22, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mark Juhas ruled that Rutherford’s son and daughter be brought back to the United States from Monaco for a June 15 custody hearing, where she was to be temporarily granted sole custody. Her ex-husband’s lawyer argues that because the children are residents of Monaco, California does not have jurisdiction over the children. There has been widespread speculation that Rutherford made fraudulent statements and lied to receive custody of the children. It has now been ruled that the children will not return until just  before June 15, when the Los Angeles and Monaco judges will discuss the situation at a custody hearing. Rutherford’s lawyer says that there is still hope for Rutherford, since this decision does not grant Monaco jurisdiction.

Fighting for what she claims are the basic human rights of her children, Rutherford has started a Children’s Justice Campaign, including Youtube videos with updates on the status of her children, stating,
“American children should not be forced to leave their own country. My children were born here, they have a right to live here, just like the millions of children who were born in this county.”

https://t.co/jRv3MsQlH6 https://t.co/zqzncYk0Er

— Kelly Rutherford (@KellyRutherford) March 15, 2015

Rutherford hopes the court is able to come to a decision soon, claiming that she has spent everything she’s ever worked for on legal fees to get her children back. In December of 2008, Rutherford filed for divorce from her husband, Daniel Giersch, while pregnant with their second child. By August of 2009, the two were able to reach a temporary settlement of joint legal and physical custody, which lasted until April 2010. In April 2012, Giersch’s American visa was revoked after substantial evidence, including terrorist acts, fraud, and his involvement in drug and weapon dealings in South America, were discovered to deport him. The removal of his visa forced Giersch to be permanently removed from the United States, and because of this, he took up residence in Monaco. This resulted in the order by a California judge for the children to live in France with their father since he is unable to enter the U.S. Rutherford, however, claims that there is no official evidence to support Giersch’s claims of being denied access into the U.S. Giersch filed court papers in Monaco, causing the children to be declared habitual residents, subject solely to Monaco law. Both parties are still waiting for the June 15 court hearing.

But one thing to keep in mind is that given that Kelly Rutherford is a well-known celebrity who starred in television hits like “Melrose Place” and “Gossip Girl,” once the court makes a decision, the battle itself will have long residual effects. Years from now when her children are a little bit older and are able to understand the years of back and forth between their parents, they’ll be able to simply Google information on their custody battle.

Rutherford has not been the only celebrity to have her children deal with the issues that come with being in the lime light, and some are fighting back. In 2014, Kristen Bell and her husband Dax Shepard began a “no kids” policy to get news outlets to stop sharing, buying, or posting photos of celebrities’ children without consent. The movement nicknamed the photographers “pedorazzi,” and this action is changing the paparazzi culture. Bell has stated.

No parent should feel like their child is being taken advantage of because of the choices they made on their career paths.

In agreement with Bell, I fully believe celebrities have the right to a private lifestyle, but there is contradictory behavior that comes from other stars that makes it difficult for celebrities to request privacy. Take Kim Kardashian for example–her daughter is regularly talked about on social media for her extravagant outfits, has been taken to fashion shows, and has even been on the family’s reality television show, all before the age of three years old. To celebrities, privacy has become more of a request then a right. When Kardashian’s child gets older, she will be able to find countless photos of herself at six months old hiding under a blanket. News outlets exploit celebrities and their children to such an extent that their entire lives can be accessed at the tap of a mouse pad. This American obsession with celebrities is exactly how I was able to gain such detailed information on the history of Rutherford’s and Giersch’s custody battle.

Kelly Rutherford has been dealing with the consequences of her decision to part ways with Giersch since before the birth of her now five year old daughter. They’ve had years of constant custody battles under a very public microscope–eventually this nightmare has to end.

Angel Idowu

Angel Idowu is a member of the Beloit College Class of 2016 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Angel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Should Celebrity Custody Battles Put Children in the Limelight? appeared first on Law Street.