Latino Participation in the 2010 CENSUS
A recent study from America’s Voice Education Fund finds that Latino population growth will dramatically impact congressional apportionment after the 2010 Census.
The study, entitled “The New Constituents… How Latinos Will Shape Congressional Apportionment After the 2010 Census,” projects that, as a result of Latino population growth, nineteen states will see changes in their Congressional representation. The study finds the following:
“Latinos are not just settling in major cities, but diverse regions of the country. After the 2010 Census, new Members of Congress in states like Georgia and South Carolina as well as Arizona and Texas will owe their positions, in part, to the expanding Latino population.
Not only is the overall Latino population growing, but the number of Latino voters is also increasing dramatically. Nationwide, Latino voter registration grew 54% and Latino voter turnout grew 64% between 2000 and 2008. In sixteen of the nineteen states projected to gain or lose seats after the 2010 Census, the Latino share of the overall electorate increased between 2000 and 2008. In five of the eight states projected to gain seats, and in all of the eleven states projected to lose seats, Latinos made up a greater share of the overall electorate in 2008 than they did in 2000.
As the Latino demographic continues to grow, politicians who ignore or demonize the Latino population in their states will find the road to re-election much more difficult. This is evidenced by Proposition 187 in California, which created a backlash among Latino voters that the state Republican Party is still trying to overcome, marked the beginning of a trend that has been repeated in national, state, and local elections over the last several years. This trend will only continue as the Latino electorate grows, if politicians continue to demonize Latinos and immigrants through harsh rhetoric and policies. For example, according to polling by Bendixen & Associates, 87% of Latino voters refuse to even consider voting for a candidate who advocates mass deportation of undocumented workers.”
http://www.americasvoiceonline.org/blog/entry/the_new_constituents_how_latinos_will_shape_the_next_congress/
As the study indicates, Latino participation in the 2010 Census is critical, as it will impact communities throughout the country. It is the first Census where Latinos make up the second-largest population group, and participation will affect almost $400 billion in federal funding for local communities and representation in Congress.
The U.S. Census Bureau has had a poor track record when it comes to counting Latino residents (in 2000, the undercount was an estimated 3%). Immigrants have traditionally been scared to fill out the census. Despite a push by the Census Bureau to encourage participation, a nation-wide resistance to the census pervades. A recent Washington Times article describes as national push for a Hispanic boycott of the 2010 Census as a sign of displeasure with current immigration policy, a push that could undoubtedly harm Latino communities throughout the country. http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/12/hispanics-mull-boycotting-census/
Ensuring that Latinos are represented in the 2010 Census requires a comprehensive, community-based effort. Census forms will be mailed to homes in March, then May through July census takers will make house calls to those who didn’t fill out their forms. By December, the bureau will deliver population counts and by March 2011 redistricting data will be delivered to the states.
¡HAGASE CONTAR! (It’s Time, Make Yourself Count!) Campaign: http://hagasecontar.yaeshora.info/english
There are many ways to get involved:
• Join or start a Complete Count Committee:
Complete Count Committees (CCC) are forming across the country to spread the word about the importance of the 2010 Census and to motivate residents to complete and return the questionnaire. CCCs plan and implement census awareness campaigns that specifically address individual communities. http://2010.census.gov/partners/national-complete-count-committee/
• Teach Classes:
If your law school offers opportunities to teach in the community (children and adults alike), please refer to http://www.census.gov/schools/ in order to obtain teaching materials regarding the census.
• Spread the Word: http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/5873/t/5178/tellafriend.jsp?tell_a_friend_KEY=1897
• Volunteer to help fill out Census forms or answer questions in your community
Obviously. Assuming the health care debate gets resolved by 2077, the immigration debate is likely to get more attention and coalition building will matter big time. Here’s a recent AP article on it: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ilNl3pdT0IwX1JZiZnVFHpbzdc0wD9C7B7IO3
Unquestionably, the immigration issue is a temperature’s-rising matter; opinions are strong, in some cases ranging to demands to close the borders. And no small part of the renewed impetus for revamping the system are the increasing immigrant crackdowns.
Against this backdrop, the collection of voices clamoring for overhaul is expanding — Caribbean-Americans, evangelical churches, labor unions and law enforcement, besides the NAACP. And businesses, too, are becoming increasingly active.
I really hope that immigration doesn’t turn out to be the polarizing monster of an issue that everyone expects it to be, but it is important for the advocates of immigration reform to get as many groups involved in this as possible. I am particularly interested in the business communities involvement; I have long believed that immigration reform makes great economic sense — something that doesn’t get as much attention as it should. I hope to write more extensively around this last point in an upcoming post.
As a bonus, here’s a little Thanksgiving themed cartoon that’s relevant to the conversation:
Click here to view our latest newsletter. We worked hard to bring you the latest updates from all of our regions.
We are happy to announce that The Florida Bar Foundation’s 2010 Legal Aid Summer Fellowship applicationis now available on-line. Please note that the application deadline date is January 21, 2010. Applications submitted after January 21, 2010 will not be considered.
As you know, the Florida Bar Foundation’s Legal Aid Summer Fellowship Program is a great opportunity for law students to work at a Florida legal aid program for eleven weeks during the summer to get hands-on experience while solidifying their commitment to practicing public interest law upon graduation.
Important Application Information:
We will only be accepting applications via the on-line application form located on the Foundation’s website (http://www.flabarfndn.org/). Because we generally receive more than 400 student applications for the 40 available Summer Fellowship positions, we are not able to conduct interviews with students before selecting the top 40 student applicants. When making selection determinations, we rely on the information provided by the students in their application and in their accompanying attachments such as resumes and writing samples. We encourage students to have their application reviewed by Career Services staff or Career Development staff prior to submission.
Selection Criteria:
Among the several factors to be considered in the selection of successful applicants are:
Ø The depth and breadth of the applicant’s commitment and experience in working with the low-income community;
Ø The applicant’s passion, insight, and personal commitment to public service and pro bono work;
Ø The applicant’s background and personal story, including their minority status, cultural diversity, and poverty experience;
Ø The applicant’s future career goals and employment objectives;
Ø The thoughtfulness, care, and clarity the applicant puts into completing the application; and
Ø The applicant’s writing skills and academic achievements.
Where Can the Application be Found:
The on-line application and other materials can be found in several places on the Foundation’s website (http://www.flabarfndn.org/), by looking in the News from the Foundation section and the Grant Programssection of the homepage (see attachments).
The on-line application can also be found on the Foundation’s website by following these steps:
1) click on the Grant Programs tab at the top of the homepage,
2) scroll down to Law Student Assistance,
3) click on the Law Student Assistance button, and then
4) click on the Legal Services Summer Fellowship Program button.
Applicants will need to review and print out the 2010 Program Placement List (found at the Legal Services Summer Fellowship Program webpage) before submitting their application. Students may list up to 4 program placement preferences on their application.
Who To Contact:
Please let us know if we can provide additional information or brochures or respond to any questions during the student application period. The contacts at the Florida Bar Foundation are Clara Bevington (cbevington@flabarfndn.org) or Jennifer Wimberly (jwimberly@flabarfndn.org). We can be reached by phone at: 407-843-0045.
Thanks for your assistance. We look forward to another successful fellowship program.
With kind regards,
Jennifer Wimberly
*************************
Jennifer Wimberly, Esq.
Program Associate
LAP/LSA Grant Programs
The Florida Bar Foundation
Leadership and Funding for Justice in Florida
250 S. Orange Avenue
Suite 600P
Orlando, FL 32801
Phone: 407.843.0045 (FL 800.541.2195)
Fax: 407.839.0287
E-mail: jwimberly@flabarfndn.org
About a year ago, California passed “Proposition 8,” restricting marriage to only opposite-sex couples subsequently overturning the California Supreme Court’s ruling of In re Marriage cases. The Proposition 8 battle over gay marriage was one of the most hotly contested initiatives in state history, accumulating over $80 million between the two campaigns. In the middle of that fight was the struggle to obtain the Latino vote.
Latinas/os were considered a crucial swing vote, as they backed a progressive Presidential candidate in Barack Obama, but also supported strongly conservative religious views of the Catholic Church. Yet, despite supporting a progressive president (carrying it by more than 2 to 1 over John McCain), 53% of Latinas/os voted for Proposition 8—a significant percentage in such a close race, 52% to 48%. Many called the Latina/o vote an irony, especially to those that consider gay marriage a civil rights issue. It was reasoned that Latina/o people should understand the struggle for civil rights, and thus be supportive of other marginalized groups. While we cannot generalize the Latino voice in the context of the gay marriage debate (and, no matter what your position is), there is no doubt that Latino culture is perceived as machista and homophobic .
Recent politics in Latin America, however, may start changing this perception of Latinas/os. Latin America, Catholic continent of the world, is slowly progressing towards a pattern of recognizing same-sex civil unions and gay marriage. The country and the world came to a shock when an Argentinean judge recently ruled that a ban on same-sex marriage violated Argentina’s constitutional rights of equality.
While the judge ruling only affects Buenos Aires, gay marriage proponents hope this ruling will have the same impact that same-sex civil unions has had across Latin America. Argentina became the first Latin American city to legalize same-sex civil unions, setting an example for several states in Mexico and Brazil. Uruguay legalized civil unions nationwide. Thus, demonstrating the adaptability of Latin American culture despite its long held tie to the Catholic Church.
While the leap between civil unions and gay marriage is significant, there is no doubt that times are changing and the question left is how this Latin American trend will affect Latinas/os in the United States. Gay marriage proponents are determined to succeed in California, only time will tell whether Latin American politics will help lead the fight for these activists here at home.
Con mucho, mucho…amor
Brenda
There are just over 100 people in the world serving sentences of life without the possibility of parole for crimes they committed as juveniles in which no one was killed. All are in the United States.
On Monday, November 9, the Supreme Court heard appeals from two such juvenile offenders: Sullivan, who raped a woman when he was 13, and Graham, who committed armed burglary at 16.
Sullivan was sentenced to life without parole in 1989, when he was just 13, after a questionable sexual battery conviction. His two older accomplices testified against the younger, mentally impaired boy. They received short sentences, one of them as a juvenile.
The case of Graham has similar contours. Graham, a learning disabled child, born to crack-addicted parents, was on probation in connection with a burglary committed when he was 16 when he participated in a home invasion. He, too, had older accomplices. He was never convicted of the actual crime but was given life without parole for violating the conditions of his probation.
These were two very troubled children in need of adult supervision and perhaps even time behind bars. But it is insupportable to conclude, as the courts did, that children who committed crimes when they were so young were beyond rehabilitation. The laws under which they were convicted violate current human rights standards and the Constitution.
The Supreme Court must keep the international standard in mind when it hears arguments in these matters. The petitioners in both argue that sentencing children to life without the possibility of parole for a nonhomicide violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
The court came down on the right side of this issue in 2005 when it barred the execution of juvenile offenders by a vote of 5 to 4, reasoning that people under 18 are immature, irresponsible, susceptible to peer pressure and often capable of change. The Court also stated that executing 16- and 17-year-olds violated the Eighth Amendment, conflicted with “evolving standards of decendy” and isolated the United States from the rest of the world.
Judges and legislators agree that execution of juvenile offenders is a harsh punishment but they are deeply divided about when sentences of life without the possibility of release are warranted.
“Sometimes a 15-year-old has a tremendous appreciation for right and wrong,” said State Representative William D. Snyder. “I think it would be wrong for the Supreme Court to say that it was patently illegal or improper to send a youthful offender to life without parole. At a certain point, juveniles cross the line, and they have to be treated as adults and punished as adults.”
A retired appeals court judge, John R. Blue, did not see it that way. “To lock them up forever seems a little barbaric to me,” Judge Blue said. “You ought to leave them some hope.”
However, this practice is practically troubling because it is arbitrary. Children who commit nonviolent crimes like theft and burglary are just as likely to be shipped off to adult court as children who commit serious violent crimes. Even worse, the process is racially freighted, with black and Latino children more likely to be sent to adult courts than white children who commit comparable crimes.
A more humane approach is needed to allow these children the chance to become productive citizens. Imprisoning a child for life seems barbarous. In reality, all it does is sweep the problem under the rug – out of sight, out of mind. It is a disturbing policy seeking a “tough on crime” stance without regard to what it does to the children and their families. There are other ways to deter crime. Juveniles deserve the right to rehabilitate. There is a reason why juvenile courts were established. While it is no secret that resources are scarce, pushing these children into adult courts because of a lack of money and availability of services is not the answer. These juveniles deserve an opportunity to rehabilitate.
Cocoa Puff in A Bowl of Milk
“I didn’t know you were that smart!” This was a comment that was said to my fellow co-president as she told another student that she had received a clerkship in the Supreme Court of Colorado. We find ourselves feeling like a cocoa puff in a bowl of milk in our classes. Unfortunately as Latinos, our ability to succeed academically and competitively with other law students is always in question. Whether they think we were admitted through affirmative action, or remedial programs, our intelligence and abilities are sometimes not taken very seriously and can sometimes be compromised.
Latinos encompass 15% of the population in the United States. Only 2.2% are lawyers. From this 2.2% only 1.3% are Latinas. As Latinos in law school, I feel that our experiences tend to be different than some of our other class mates and colleagues. I don’t want to say that flat out racism exists but we work within a system that covertly and sometimes subconsciously works against our interests. At times we find ourselves struggling to understand why a professor stated certain comments to us, or why the Career Development Centers think that we are all Public Interest attorneys.
Recently, I was in an internship class and I had previously approached my professor at a workshop and stated my desire to clerk with a certain Federal Judge in Colorado. At the time I had stated my interests she was speaking to a Federal Latino prosecutor. At this initial meeting, she was very excited that I had shown interest and promised to follow up with me in our next class. So, as promised, I approached the professor after class and again affirmed my interest in being a clerk for this Federal Judge. At that moment, she cringed and looked uncomfortable. She then stated, “You know… there are some things that you need to know about this judge. Did you know he was raised in Southern Colorado?” To which I responded that I did. And then she continued, “Well, I don’t know how to say this, but I’m just going to say it. He has admitted to me that he racially profiles.” I looked at her puzzled at what that could mean, and then said, “Ok?” She then continued, “Well, he looks around our law school and he definitely believes that Latinos are underrepresented and that our system and classes should reflect the population. He grew up around Latinos, and I know he would love a Latino in his court room… but I worry because he’s a demanding judge.” I kept looking at her still confused as to what she was trying to say, and even more confused because when I had initially showed interests she seemed more excited than I was! Again, I nodded my head and said, “Ok…” She continued, “well I know that he demands a lot from his clerks, and again he would love a Latino in his court room, but I just don’t know how he would react to someone who might slip up and not be a good fit and be a Latino.” At this point in the conversation, I really wasn’t sure what was just said to me, if she had considered me unprofessional, or if she was trying to protect me from a judge that would judge me because I was Latina, and not based on my abilities. I was confused by her honesty and by her approach to the conversation. She then asked me if I had applied for the “diversity” clerkships and what my plan was for the following semester. I quickly responded that I hadn’t applied but that I was going to and that I had also applied to our Community Clinic. The clinic focuses on representing indigent clients in three areas: domestic violence restraining orders; housing issues (both eviction defense and housing discrimination); and wage and hour litigation on behalf of immigrant workers. They also focus on community projects designed to address larger systemic problems. She quickly responded, “Now that would be a better fit for you!” I then explained to her that although I love public interest work, I wanted to focus on other areas of law so that I could be as competitive as possible after graduation. Then she continued to explain why the clinic was still a better fit. I again reminded her of why I wanted a clerkship and that I was still interested in clerking for the Federal Judge. She looked surprised and promised to follow up last week. It is now the second week and I have yet to hear from her.
Scenarios like these happen daily to some of us, and sometimes it’s so overt that we glaze over it due to our hectic schedules and continue on until we can analyze it later. In my situation, I didn’t know how to respond because at some point, this professor might write me a letter of recommendation, and I didn’t want to upset her. It leads to my inability to address an issue within a larger power structure. I am at the mercy of this professor because she makes personal recommendations to many of the Federal Judges in the state.
It also left me wondering why I had to apply through our “diversity” applications, and wondered why some feel we wouldn’t be able to obtain our position through the regular pool of candidates. I know that these programs are meant to help us, but sometimes they can be more challenging and damaging because it allows us to question our intelligence, talents and abilities.
In the end, we all came to law school for a reason, and regardless of where we are we are intelligent enough on our merits to be here and shouldn’t question it. We move forward because we have faced these obstacles before, and these experiences make us stronger and more adept to handle these situations when they arise. But the obstacles we face make some days a bit more frustrating and a bit more difficult. We will continue to face these obstacles in our legal careers through entry, retention and advancement, and we will continue to surpass them and exceed the expectations laid upon us. I love cocoa puffs, and I know that eventually if the cocoa puffs sit there long enough the milk starts to turn brown. Stay positive, hold your head up high, and keep moving forward.
En Solidaridad-
Jazmin
>
While the Obama Administration is mulling over Gen. McCrystal’s request for additional troops for the war in Afghanistan, Mexico is dealing with a surge of its own. In December 2006, President Felipe Calderon began an all-out assault on drug cartels in Mexico. Since then, over 13,000 people have died, and over 50,000 suspects have been arrested. That’s more than America’s fatalities in both Afghanistan and Iraq combined.
But Calderon’s War is different from America’s overseas conflicts. For instance, while a rational debate can be had about whether we should or should not scale back our presence in Afghanistan, Mexico’s leader has no such choice. Calderon cannot retreat within his own borders, he cannot cede Mexican territory to armed militants, and he cannot end the conflict by signing a peace treaty.
In some ways, a better comparison with Mexico is Pakistan and its war against radical terrorist elements within its borders. If Pakistan does not reign in the militants that have taken refuge and now functionally control large swaths of land, they will continue to launch attacks into Afghanistan and beyond. Similarly, if Mexico cannot stop the drug violence and retake its streets, the violence and crime will cross its border as well. The similarities don’t end there, though. In Pakistan, public officials have been assassinated in retaliation for the government’s offensive in South Waziristan. For Mexico, this is a daily occurrence. See here, here, and here.
The insurgencies also share a penchant for brutality. Terrorists in Af/Pak and Iraq regularly used images of violence to convey their message, videotaping beheadings, and leaving piles of mangled bodies on streets. In order to get their message of fear and intimidation across, the drug cartels in Mexico commit similarly heinous acts, such as rolling 5 heads onto a dance floor, and leaving dismembered bodies, with obvious signs of torture, in public places.
In terms of brazenness and brutality, there is very little difference between the insurgents in Af/Pak and the drug cartels in Mexico. One major difference, however, is that just across Mexico’s border there are 300 million American civilians. But given these similarities, and how much closer we are to Mexico than Afghanistan or Pakistan, why aren’t we paying more attention to Mexico?
Media coverage of the violence in Mexico is eerily similar to the airtime and attention give to Afghanistan between 2004 and 2008. While Washington was focused on Iraq, the fact that Afghanistan was descending into chaos was not particularly newsworthy. Yet nowadays we can’t stop talking about Afghanistan.
A similar shift may soon happen with Mexico, especially since some pretty horrific drug-cartel violence has already spread into the U.S. To be sure, some media outlets are doing their part, like the L.A. Times’ Mexico Under Siege site, and the Washington Post’s Mexico at War site.
It may reach the point where we have no choice but to pay attention.
No cheating!
A call has been made for all Latino/a law students to help in achieving more diversity in our schools.
Professor Deirdre Bowen, Professor of Legal Writing at Seattle University School of Law, has asked for NLLSA’s help in contesting anti-affirmative action. NLLSA can do so by filling out a short survey which will help in her research. Her research strives to contest anti-affirmative action, arguing that there is still a need for affirmative action, that the benefits of affirmative action are plentiful, and that school’s should still be striving for diversity.
Please see below for comments from Professor Bowen which describes the purpose of the study, and what we can do to help in trying to once again promote affirmative action and diversity in the classroom.
If you are interested in your Latino Law Student Organization participating in the survey, please contact emgonz11@gmail.com and your organization will be sent hard copies of the survey. The survey will also be posted to the blog, but preferred in hard copy form.
Here is a message from Professor Bowen to NLLSA.
Here is what I am proposing to study:
Affirmative action was designed to redress institutional racism that created barriers for people of color in education and job opportunities. Almost since its inception, affirmative action has been met with resistance. In the most recent cases, the Michigan cases, the affirmative action camp found success in relying on a concept called “Critical mass.” The idea is that affirmative action is worthwhile if it is used to create diversity. Indeed, the majority in Grutter embraced critical mass as an analogy for some meaningful number of students in the classroom, without specifically defining it. However, because there is so much resistance to giving critical mass a specific definition within the legal context for fear of the concept being unmasked as just another way of saying “quota”, there is little research on how exactly students of color, the very students who should benefit from it, define it and view it. My study seeks to answer these questions. Are students of color able to give a concrete definition to critical mass? If so, what are the perceived benefits or disadvantages of relying on this concept? Finally, have students of color ever been in a situation in which critical mass was achieved? If so, did it transform the students educational experience. If so, how?
If students would like to read my paper that this study builds on, they can find it by clicking on the link below. My previous work challenges the myths of the anti-affirmative action camp regarding stigma and hostility and finds that more stigma and hostility exists on college campuses located in states that ban affirmative action. The name of the article is Brilliant Disguise: An empirical assessment of a social experiment banning affirmative action.
Thank you,
Professor Deirdre Bowen
Lawyers write too much. Look at the following photography features:
Showcase: Social Worker With a Camera via NYTimes
The photographer is Joseph Rodriguez, an old Brooklyn cat whose pictures have his borough written all over them — even when he’s photographing a nuclear plant in Romania. Here’s some more of his work with his descriptions via josephrodriguezphotography.com:
-
- Peshawar, Pakistan 2001. A boy stands surrounded among one the violently themed movie murals that are ubiquitous in Peshawar.
-
- New Orleans 2006. One year after Hurricane Katrina swept through the Lower 9th Ward, family drove in from Dallas, Texas to try and fix up their property for their 78 yr old mother.
-
- Platra Neamt, Moldova, Romania 1990. One of the poorest regions in Romania, a worker walks home from a chemical plant
-
- Kamfinsa Prison, Kitwe, Zambia 2003. In 1999, a Human Rights Watch report complained about crowding in Zambia prisons and jails that led to the spread of respiratory illnesses and other diseases.
-
- A baby in Boyle Heights. 1993.
-
- Young bread runner holds bread over his head in Diyarbakir, Kurdistan. 1991.
-
- Ron Brown Scholars 2006: Marquise J. McGraw, Bronx, NY 2006. Marquise is studying economics at Cornell University. He plans to earn a doctoral degree in economics and perhaps teach.
-
- Levi’s Ad
-
- Mauritius: A family of Harvesters. Large estates account for about half the nation’s farmland; the rest is owned by small planters, most of them Indians working plots of less than five acres.
-
- Kabul, Afghanistan 2001. A man convalesces as his wife looks on. He is bedridden and states that his injuries were a result of a beating inflicted by the Taliban
- Sohail
