August 2017

  • August 22, 2017

    by Kyle Barry, Policy Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 

    ***This piece was originally posted on Medium 

    In tweets and statements, Senate Republicans have emphatically distanced themselves from President Trump’s morally bankrupt response to the violent white-supremacist rally in Charlottesville. When Trump blamed “both sides” and said that “many fine people” were among the torch-bearing neo Nazis, the bipartisan rebuke was swift. Jeff Flake said that “we cannot accept excuses for white supremacy.” Orrin Hatch said that “we should never hesitate to call out hate whenever and wherever we see it.” And Lindsey Graham criticized Trump for responding in a way that earned “praise from some of the most racist and hate-filled individuals and groups in our country.”

  • August 21, 2017
    Guest Post

    by Ryan Snow, University of Virginia School of Law ‘18

    I wasn’t there. I was still in DC finishing an internship. I woke up on Saturday feeling tense and nervous. As soon as I pulled up the news on my phone and saw the footage of the torch-lit rally and attack at the Rotunda Friday night, I knew I should have been there to help defend my community and values. Instead, I could only watch in frustration and horror as the images and videos streamed in.

  • August 21, 2017
    Guest Post

    by Dr. Caroline Poplin, Counsel & Medical Director, Guttman Buschner & Brooks PLLC

    This Supreme Court apparently believes it should never question a presidential claim of national security, no matter how weak, no matter how broad, even if it involves refugees fleeing war and persecution.

    Lest we forget, the United States was founded by the Pilgrims, a heretical Protestant group fleeing threats of imprisonment and execution in Jacobean England.

    In Trump’s first executive order, popularly called the Muslim travel ban, the president suspended the United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days, halted admission of Syrian refugees indefinitely and reduced the total number of refugees to be admitted for 2017 to 50,000 from the 110,000 authorized by President Obama.

  • August 17, 2017
    Guest Post

    by Franita Tolson, Professor of Law, University of Southern California Gould School of Law

    Under the National Voter Registration Act (“NVRA”), states can remove an individual from the voter rolls if the person confirms, in writing, that he or she has moved, or if he or she has failed to respond to an address verification notice and has failed to vote in two consecutive federal elections.  52 U.S.C. 20507(d).  The NVRA is clear, however, that individuals cannot be removed solely for failing to vote.  52 U.S.C. 20507(b)(2). At issue in A. Philip Randolph Institute v. Husted, which will be argued this fall before the U.S. Supreme Court, is whether a state can use a person’s failure to vote as a trigger to send the address verification notice required by section 20507(d).  Under 20507(c), states are free to contract the post office to obtain the names of those individuals who have filed a change of address form and then send notices to those individuals.  In addition to obtaining names from the post office, Ohio also sends notices to those voters who have not engaged in any “voter activity” for two years, such as filing an address change on a voter registration card or with a state agency, or voting, either provisionally, through an absentee ballot, or in person on election day.

  • August 16, 2017
    Guest Post

    by Mark Rumold

    *This piece was originally posted on EFF.org

    We’ve already written about problems with the government’s investigation into the J20 protests—a series of demonstrations on January 20, the day of President Trump’s inauguration—which resulted in the arrest of hundreds of protesters.

    But prosecutors in DC are still at it. And they’re still using unconstitutional methods to pursue their investigation.