Category Archives: Civil Rights

Read Civil Rights updates, alerts, news, and legal commentary from leading lawyers and laws. Providing news and information about Civil Rights Law for legal professionals.

Civil rights activist group says the Air Force Academy favors Christianity over other religions

Using new billboard, ad campaign to spread message

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. – A civil rights activist group is taking aim at the Air Force Academy accusing it of favoring Christianity over other religions.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation said the problem has been going on for years and the group has now launched a new campaign to try to get President Barack Obama’s attention.

The private group has put up a billboard on I-25, south near Garden of the Gods, and plans to have a banner flown by a plane that says “Why is Jesus the Commander in Chief at USAFA?”

It also launched a TV advertisement that says, “Welcome Mr. President to our Airforce Academy. The Military Religious Freedom Foundation asks the questions: why is Jesus Commander in Chief here?”

“At the Airforce Academy today it’s a freaking train wreck when it comes to the separation of church and state,” said Mikey Weinstein, Founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.

Weinstein said cadets are often treated differently, if they’re not fundamentalist Christians.

“We’ve had cadets bullied and pressured, members of the staff pressured to attend the national pray events that occur there,” he said.

Weinstein said they hope President Obama will take notice of their campaign, and address the issue when he speaks at the Academy’s graduation on Thursday.

“This destroys unit cohesion, good order, morale and disciple,” he further explained.

Denver7 reached out to the Air Force Academy about the group’s concern, but was told the academy had no comment.

For Weinstein, he said they’re fighting for the rights of cadets of all faiths.

“We would like to see people who are violating the oath to the U.S. Constitution aggressively investigated and visibly punished at the Air Force Academy,” he said.

Sourced From     – http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/colorado-springs-area/civil-rights-activist-group-says-the-air-force-academy-favors-christianity-over-other-religons

The Department of Justice is suing North Carolina over its same-sex bathroom law

The US Justice Department on Monday filed a complaint against North Carolina over its controversial transgender bathroom law, saying the law constituted a pattern and practice of discrimination and violated the Civil Rights Act.

The law, signed by Governor Pat McCrory in March, prevents local governments in North Carolina from passing nondiscrimination ordinances, and bans transgender people from using the bathroom that corresponds with their gender identity.

The state of North Carolina, McCrory, the state’s Department of Public Safety, and the University of North Carolina were named as defendants in the lawsuit.

According to a statement from the Justice Department, the law is in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Title IX of the Education Acts Amendment of 1972, and the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, all of which bar discrimination based on sex.

Speaking at a press conference, Attorney General Loretta Lynch called the law “impermissibly discriminatory,” and compared the struggle transgender Americans are facing to civil-rights battles against women and African-Americans.

“It was not so very long ago that states, including North Carolina, had signs above restrooms, water fountains and on public accommodations keeping people out based upon a distinction without a difference,” she said.

Lynch made it clear that the law puts North Carolina, and particularly the 17-school University of North Carolina system, at risk of losing federal funding. Some have estimated the potential losses in funding as high as $1.4 billion.

Earlier Monday, North Carolina sued the federal government for mandating the state abandon the law.

Trump University case will go to trial

  @CNNMoney April 26, 2016: 5:49 PM ET



The slug-fest between Donald Trump and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman over Trump University continues.

On Tuesday, a New York court ruled that Schneiderman’s $40 million civil suit alleging fraud against Trump University would still have to go to trial, even though Schneiderman had asked the court for a ruling based on the evidence already presented.

No date has been set for a trial. But according to a statement from Schneiderman, the judge “indicated her intention to move as expeditiously as possible.”

A spokesman for Schneiderman’s office said the trial could take place as early as this fall. If so, that timing could prove tricky for Trump should he be chosen as the GOP’s presidential nominee.

The Trump camp was happy with the court’s decision Tuesday.

“We are extremely pleased that the Supreme Court has yet again rejected the Attorney General’s attempt to avoid a trial.” said Alan Garten, an attorney for Trump.

Related: Trump University controversy … in 2 minutes

The denial of Schneiderman’s request for summary judgment came after a New York court rejected the arguments of Donald Trump’s lawyers that Schneiderman’s fraud case should be tossed out.

Trump University, launched in 2005, was a real estate seminar business that promised to teach students the mogul’s investing techniques to get rich on real estate. The business, which has effectively been defunct for several years, is currently facing three lawsuits filed by and on behalf of former students who claim it was a fraud.

Schneiderman’s suit, filed in 2013, accuses Trump University of deceptive business practices, alleging that its advertisements made false claims, including that Trump handpicked the instructors and that consumers who took the seminars would receive access to private sources of financing — i.e., “hard money lenders.”

“It was a classic bait-and-switch scheme,” Schneiderman told CNN.

–CNN’s Drew Griffin contributed to this report.

 CNNMoney (New York)First published April 26, 2016: 5:20 PM ET from http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/26/news/trump-university/

Canada violating international law with Saudi arms sale: expert

OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail

A controversial rationale the Trudeau Liberals are using to justify approving exports of combat vehicles to Saudi Arabia – that these machines could help Riyadh prosecute a war in neighbouring Yemen – is figuring prominently in a Federal Court challenge aimed at stopping the shipments.

Eric David, a renowned human rights legal scholar from Belgium who has acted in major international cases, is lending support to a March 21 lawsuit led by University of Montreal professor Daniel Turp that seeks to block exports of the weaponized armoured vehicles from Canada.

In an affidavit being added to the lawsuit, Prof. David of the Free University in Brussels says he believes Canada is violating international law by shipping arms to a country already accused of massive human-rights violations in Yemen. A United Nations panel investigating the Saudi-led bombing campaign in Yemen found “widespread and systematic” attacks on civilian targets in violation of international humanitarian law.

Allowing the “sale of armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia … would violate the obligation to respect and ensure the respect of human rights and international humanitarian law,” Prof. David wrote in a 196-page filing.

“The sale of armoured vehicles … becomes an “internationally wrongful act.”

As The Globe and Mail first reported, Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion last week quietly approved export permits covering more than 70 per cent of the $15-billion transaction with Saudi Arabia – a decision that represents the most vital step in determining whether a weapons shipment to a foreign country can proceed or whether it’s “illegal,” as Ottawa calls it.

The revelation that Mr. Dion greenlighted the bulk of this deal runs contrary to the Liberal claim that the Trudeau government’s hands were tied on the Saudi deal.

Many observers had assumed the Conservatives had granted export permits when they signed the deal.

The Liberal signature on the export permits means the Trudeau government has taken full ownership of a decision to sell arms to a country notorious for human-rights abuses.

In the memorandum justifying the export permits, the department of Global Affairs reasons that the light armoured vehicles will help Riyadh in its efforts at “countering instability in Yemen,” where the Saudis are fighting Houthi rebels aligned with Iran, as well as combatting Islamic State threats.

“The acquisition of state-of-the-art armoured vehicles will assist Saudi Arabia in these goals,” the memo approved and signed by Mr. Dion said.

When it comes to Yemen, the Canadian government is choosing its words carefully, noting that so far the Saudis have not been found to be using Canadian-made combat vehicles previously sold to Riyadh to commit rights violations there.

Asked about the Saudis’ conduct in Yemen on Thursday, Mr. Dion said they’re not the only ones that need be held to account. “There are serious concerns that should be raised about all of the parties” fighting in Yemen, Mr. Dion told the Commons foreign affairs committee Thursday, widening the matter to include the conduct of Houthi rebels.

“As far as Yemen is concerned, our priority is to have a peaceful solution found.”

Separately, Thursday, Mr. Dion offered only mild support for an NDP proposal by MP Hélène Laverdière to create a Commons committee that would scrutinize arms exports. “I think it’s an interesting proposal. I am not sure it’s the priority right now – but the committee can certainly decide,” the minister told the foreign affairs committee.

Saudi Arabia is regularly ranked among the “worst of the worst” on human rights by Freedom House.

Sourced From – http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-violating-international-law-with-saudi-arms-sale-expert/article29640135/

Wells Fargo admits deception in $1.2 billion U.S. mortgage accord

BY JONATHAN STEMPEL

Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N) admitted to deceiving the U.S. government into insuring thousands of risky mortgages, as it formally reached a record $1.2 billion settlement of a U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit.

The settlement with Wells Fargo, the largest U.S. mortgage lender and third-largest U.S. bank by assets, was filed on Friday in Manhattan federal court. It also resolves claims against Kurt Lofrano, a former Wells Fargo vice president.

According to the settlement, Wells Fargo “admits, acknowledges, and accepts responsibility” for having from 2001 to 2008 falsely certified that many of its home loans qualified for Federal Housing Administration insurance.

The San Francisco-based lender also admitted to having from 2002 to 2010 failed to file timely reports on several thousand loans that had material defects or were badly underwritten, a process that Lofrano was responsible for supervising.

According to the Justice Department, the shortfalls led to substantial losses for taxpayers when the FHA was forced to pay insurance claims as defective loans soured.

Several lenders, including Bank of America Corp (BAC.N), Citigroup Inc (C.N), Deutsche Bank AG (DBKGn.DE) and JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), previously settled similar federal lawsuits.

But Wells Fargo held out, and its payment is the largest in FHA history over loan origination violations.

Friday’s settlement is a reproach for “years of reckless underwriting” at Wells Fargo, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan said in a statement.

“While Wells Fargo enjoyed huge profits from its FHA loan business, the government was left holding the bag when the bad loans went bust,” Bharara added.

The accord also resolved a probe by federal prosecutors in California of alleged false loan certifications by American Mortgage Network LLC, which Wells Fargo bought in 2009.

No one has been criminally charged in the probes, and the Justice Department reserved the right to pursue criminal charges if it wishes, according to the settlement.

Franklin Codel, president of Wells Fargo Home Lending, in a statement said the settlement “allows us to put the legal process behind us, and to focus our resources and energy on what we do best — serving the needs of the nation’s homeowners.”

Lewis Liman, a lawyer for Lofrano, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Wells Fargo on Feb. 3 said the settlement would reduce its previously reported 2015 profit by $134 million, to account for extra legal expenses.

The case is U.S. v. Wells Fargo Bank NA, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-07527.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel and Nate Raymond in New York; Editing by Dan Grebler)