Tuesday, 31 May 2022

ACLU: From Japanese American Incarceration to the China Initiative, Discrimination Against AAPI Communities Must End

From Japanese American Incarceration to the China Initiative, Discrimination Against AAPI Communities Must End

More than 75 years after the systematic incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II, the U.S. Justice Department launched the “China Initiative,” inciting widespread fear of racial profiling for Asian Americans across the country. This year, as Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC commemorates Asian Pacific American Heritage Month (APAHM), we reflect on the exclusion, traumatization, and scapegoating of our communities under the pretext of national security.

We fight for visibility in our country’s history to stop a cyclical pattern of discrimination and profiling. We recognize the resilience of our communities and the courage of many Asian American and immigrant advocates and civil rights leaders. We question why these sacrifices needed to be made and challenge the paradigm and national security apparatus that treats our identities as Asian Americans as threats. For far too long, our communities have struggled for inclusion and have been viewed as inherently suspect. We are not treated as American, but as “perpetual foreigners,” in a country that we call home.

Now more than ever, it is important to remember our history, and to shed light on the ways that the Asian American community has been targeted and scapegoated as a national security threat based on our race, ethnicity, religion, or ancestry. Many of us know that during World War II, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing the removal of people of Japanese ancestry from their homes and communities. Over 120,000 U.S. residents of Japanese ancestry were rounded up, forced to leave their homes, and incarcerated in remote detention camps in the name of “national security” in what was one of the darkest stains in our nation’s history.

What is often not highlighted in our history is that the racist rationale behind this measure was concern that any people of Japanese descent were more prone to acts of espionage or sabotage. People were reduced to numbers on tags and treated as the enemy based on their background. It did not matter that around a third of those incarcerated were children or that around two-thirds were U.S. citizens. Many died in incarceration from causes including infectious diseases, bad sanitation, or even shooting by guards. Congress eventually acknowledged that “these actions were carried out without adequate security reasons and without any acts of espionage or sabotage documented by the Commission [on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians], and were motivated largely by racial prejudice, wartime hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” It was not until 1988 that the government issued this formal admission of failure.

Decades after the incarceration of Japanese Americans, Fred Korematsu, who was incarcerated and challenged the executive order, warned: “No one should ever be locked away simply because they share the same race, ethnicity, or religion as a spy or terrorist. If that principle was not learned from the internment of Japanese Americans, then these are very dangerous times for our democracy.”

A U.S. flag waves in front of a piece of public artwork about Asian American Pacific Islanders at the Garvey Park in Rosemead.

Credit: Ringo Chiu via AP Images

Unfortunately, history continues to repeat itself. Following 9/11, we saw Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian (AMEMSA) communities subjected to mass surveillance, unwarranted investigations, and unjust prosecutions by the federal government under counterterrorism programs. As with the incarceration of Japanese Americans, racist rationales were used to justify the government’s actions — for example, the discriminatory theory of “radicalization,” which falsely claims that people with certain religious beliefs and practices are more prone to actions threatening national security.

In the past decade, we have continued to see federal agencies use race, ethnicity, national origin, and/or religious beliefs to profile and target Asian Americans, particularly Chinese American scientists and academics. Racial bias against persons of Asian descent permeated federal agencies and influenced the investigations and prosecutions of Asian Americans and immigrants across the country, including Professor Xiaoxing Xi and Sherry Chen. This discrimination intensified under the Justice Department’s now-defunct “China Initiative,” allegedly intended to combat economic espionage and trade secret theft. While there are legitimate concerns about the activities of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) government, the increasing pressure on the FBI and Justice Department to bring cases, along with rising xenophobic and anti-China rhetoric from U.S. government officials, have further fueled anti-Asian sentiments at home and instigated a new wave of racial profiling and violent targeting of our communities.

Under this initiative, officials have relied on a broad theory of “non-traditional collectors” — a euphemism for “spies” — to broadly scrutinize individuals of Chinese descent. Academics with connections to China have been painted as national security threats regardless of any wrongdoing. Reports have found the majority of cases under the initiative do not involve charges of economic espionage or trade secret theft. The initiative incited fear that many individuals are being targeted based on their ethnicity rather than evidence of criminal activity, leaving lives and careers ruined, and driving widespread distrust of our government.

In response to community concerns, Advancing Justice – AAJC launched the Anti-Racial Profiling Project to help directly impacted persons such as Professor Anming Hu, and work towards substantive government reforms. We spearheaded a diverse coalition of Asian American organizations, civil rights groups (including the ACLU), and academic groups to put an end to this harmful initiative. As a result of this coalition’s work, the Justice Department announced its decision to terminate the “China Initiative” on February 23, 2022.

While we commend the Justice Department for listening to the concerns of the Asian American community and celebrate this moment as a critical step forward to address the cyclical and historic racial profiling of Asian Americans, much work remains to be done.

The unjust targeting and profiling of Asian Americans and Asian immigrants have inflicted lasting harms and instilled fear in our communities across the country, especially during a time when hate and violence against Asian Americans continues to rise, further inflaming distress and anxiety. For many of those who have had their “loyalty” questioned like Professor Gang Chen and been subjected to misguided scrutiny under the pretext of national security by their own government, the pain and trauma are long lasting. We call for accountability from the government and remedies for those who have been arrested, lost their jobs, and had their lives destroyed because of unjust investigations and prosecutions.

Moving forward, Advancing Justice – AAJC will continue to advocate for transparency from the government in implementing structural changes to address concerns of racial bias and unjust targeting of our communities. We will continue to push for changes across government agencies, including anti-bias training for investigators, prosecutors, and other government staff to protect not only Asian Americans and immigrants, but all communities of color.

It is long past time to end this injustice. We must remain vigilant of the ways in which Asian American communities are targeted and scapegoated as economic and national security threats. Our institutions and our country must live up to our American ideals and values, and stop this cycle of profiling and discrimination against our communities.

Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC has a mission to advance the civil and human rights of Asian Americans and to build and promote a fair and equitable society for all. Advancing Justice – AAJC launched the Anti-Racial Profiling Project in October 2020 to offer resources and legal referrals for those impacted by the U.S. government’s increased efforts to target and profile Asian American and Asian immigrant scientists and researchers, particularly of Chinese descent. Visit our website at advancingjustice-aajc.org.

We need you with us to keep fighting
Donate today

Published May 31, 2022 at 10:31PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/YeIoqZu

ACLU: From Japanese American Incarceration to the China Initiative, Discrimination Against AAPI Communities Must End

From Japanese American Incarceration to the China Initiative, Discrimination Against AAPI Communities Must End

More than 75 years after the systematic incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II, the U.S. Justice Department launched the “China Initiative,” inciting widespread fear of racial profiling for Asian Americans across the country. This year, as Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC commemorates Asian Pacific American Heritage Month (APAHM), we reflect on the exclusion, traumatization, and scapegoating of our communities under the pretext of national security.

We fight for visibility in our country’s history to stop a cyclical pattern of discrimination and profiling. We recognize the resilience of our communities and the courage of many Asian American and immigrant advocates and civil rights leaders. We question why these sacrifices needed to be made and challenge the paradigm and national security apparatus that treats our identities as Asian Americans as threats. For far too long, our communities have struggled for inclusion and have been viewed as inherently suspect. We are not treated as American, but as “perpetual foreigners,” in a country that we call home.

Now more than ever, it is important to remember our history, and to shed light on the ways that the Asian American community has been targeted and scapegoated as a national security threat based on our race, ethnicity, religion, or ancestry. Many of us know that during World War II, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing the removal of people of Japanese ancestry from their homes and communities. Over 120,000 U.S. residents of Japanese ancestry were rounded up, forced to leave their homes, and incarcerated in remote detention camps in the name of “national security” in what was one of the darkest stains in our nation’s history.

What is often not highlighted in our history is that the racist rationale behind this measure was concern that any people of Japanese descent were more prone to acts of espionage or sabotage. People were reduced to numbers on tags and treated as the enemy based on their background. It did not matter that around a third of those incarcerated were children or that around two-thirds were U.S. citizens. Many died in incarceration from causes including infectious diseases, bad sanitation, or even shooting by guards. Congress eventually acknowledged that “these actions were carried out without adequate security reasons and without any acts of espionage or sabotage documented by the Commission [on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians], and were motivated largely by racial prejudice, wartime hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” It was not until 1988 that the government issued this formal admission of failure.

Decades after the incarceration of Japanese Americans, Fred Korematsu, who was incarcerated and challenged the executive order, warned: “No one should ever be locked away simply because they share the same race, ethnicity, or religion as a spy or terrorist. If that principle was not learned from the internment of Japanese Americans, then these are very dangerous times for our democracy.”

A U.S. flag waves in front of a piece of public artwork about Asian American Pacific Islanders at the Garvey Park in Rosemead.

Credit: Ringo Chiu via AP Images

Unfortunately, history continues to repeat itself. Following 9/11, we saw Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian (AMEMSA) communities subjected to mass surveillance, unwarranted investigations, and unjust prosecutions by the federal government under counterterrorism programs. As with the incarceration of Japanese Americans, racist rationales were used to justify the government’s actions — for example, the discriminatory theory of “radicalization,” which falsely claims that people with certain religious beliefs and practices are more prone to actions threatening national security.

In the past decade, we have continued to see federal agencies use race, ethnicity, national origin, and/or religious beliefs to profile and target Asian Americans, particularly Chinese American scientists and academics. Racial bias against persons of Asian descent permeated federal agencies and influenced the investigations and prosecutions of Asian Americans and immigrants across the country, including Professor Xiaoxing Xi and Sherry Chen. This discrimination intensified under the Justice Department’s now-defunct “China Initiative,” allegedly intended to combat economic espionage and trade secret theft. While there are legitimate concerns about the activities of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) government, the increasing pressure on the FBI and Justice Department to bring cases, along with rising xenophobic and anti-China rhetoric from U.S. government officials, have further fueled anti-Asian sentiments at home and instigated a new wave of racial profiling and violent targeting of our communities.

Under this initiative, officials have relied on a broad theory of “non-traditional collectors” — a euphemism for “spies” — to broadly scrutinize individuals of Chinese descent. Academics with connections to China have been painted as national security threats regardless of any wrongdoing. Reports have found the majority of cases under the initiative do not involve charges of economic espionage or trade secret theft. The initiative incited fear that many individuals are being targeted based on their ethnicity rather than evidence of criminal activity, leaving lives and careers ruined, and driving widespread distrust of our government.

In response to community concerns, Advancing Justice – AAJC launched the Anti-Racial Profiling Project to help directly impacted persons such as Professor Anming Hu, and work towards substantive government reforms. We spearheaded a diverse coalition of Asian American organizations, civil rights groups (including the ACLU), and academic groups to put an end to this harmful initiative. As a result of this coalition’s work, the Justice Department announced its decision to terminate the “China Initiative” on February 23, 2022.

While we commend the Justice Department for listening to the concerns of the Asian American community and celebrate this moment as a critical step forward to address the cyclical and historic racial profiling of Asian Americans, much work remains to be done.

The unjust targeting and profiling of Asian Americans and Asian immigrants have inflicted lasting harms and instilled fear in our communities across the country, especially during a time when hate and violence against Asian Americans continues to rise, further inflaming distress and anxiety. For many of those who have had their “loyalty” questioned like Professor Gang Chen and been subjected to misguided scrutiny under the pretext of national security by their own government, the pain and trauma are long lasting. We call for accountability from the government and remedies for those who have been arrested, lost their jobs, and had their lives destroyed because of unjust investigations and prosecutions.

Moving forward, Advancing Justice – AAJC will continue to advocate for transparency from the government in implementing structural changes to address concerns of racial bias and unjust targeting of our communities. We will continue to push for changes across government agencies, including anti-bias training for investigators, prosecutors, and other government staff to protect not only Asian Americans and immigrants, but all communities of color.

It is long past time to end this injustice. We must remain vigilant of the ways in which Asian American communities are targeted and scapegoated as economic and national security threats. Our institutions and our country must live up to our American ideals and values, and stop this cycle of profiling and discrimination against our communities.

Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC has a mission to advance the civil and human rights of Asian Americans and to build and promote a fair and equitable society for all. Advancing Justice – AAJC launched the Anti-Racial Profiling Project in October 2020 to offer resources and legal referrals for those impacted by the U.S. government’s increased efforts to target and profile Asian American and Asian immigrant scientists and researchers, particularly of Chinese descent. Visit our website at advancingjustice-aajc.org.

We need you with us to keep fighting
Donate today

Published May 31, 2022 at 06:01PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/YeIoqZu

Friday, 27 May 2022

Thursday, 26 May 2022

Tuesday, 24 May 2022

Friday, 20 May 2022

Thursday, 19 May 2022

Albania: Technical Assistance Report-Medium-Term Revenue Strategy: Revenue Administration Reform Options

Albania: Technical Assistance Report-Medium-Term Revenue Strategy: Revenue Administration Reform Options
Published May 19, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

ACLU: On the Frontlines of the Fight Against Mass Deportation

On the Frontlines of the Fight Against Mass Deportation

In states and counties across the country, sheriffs and other local law enforcement are partnering with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain and deport immigrants from their own communities. 287(g) agreements turn police and sheriffs’ deputies into ICE agents, with the result that even minor infractions like traffic stops can result in life-altering consequences for immigrants.

In a new report, the ACLU documented how dozens of sheriffs participating in ICE’s 287(g) program have records of racism, abuse, and violence. As a result of the racial profiling that’s endemic to the program, immigrants and non-immigrants alike live in fear of being stopped, deported and detained, and torn from loved ones as they go about their day-to-day lives.

While the program significantly expanded in size as part of Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda, it has not been curtailed under the new administration despite President Biden’s stated commitment to end contracts initiated by Trump. You can help us fight back by sending a message to the Department of Homeland Security demanding an end to the 287(g) program.

We spoke with three organizers leading the fight against these law enforcement partnerships about what it’s like to live in a community operating under 287(g), how to mobilize communities and empower people to act, and their vision for a future free of this harmful program.

A photo of Stefanía ⁠Arteaga.

Credit: Ashley Mungo


STEFANÍA

Regional Immigrants’ Rights Strategist, ACLU of North Carolina
Charlotte, North Carolina

How does the 287(g) program affect people’s daily lives in your community?

It can be really scary for folks to even drive down the street. In my neighborhood, if you wanted to go to Walmart you had to go through a one-lane road that was being used to stop people. I lived nearby so I would see people getting arrested in front of their children. It was really traumatic to see.

Was there a specific turning point that made you realize you needed to fight back?
We used to have a sheriff’s department checkpoints in an area of town with a lot of country roads and soccer fields. It was common to see the sheriff’s department use those roads as checkpoints, knowing that there were people coming out of soccer games who did not have documentation. And so that’s kind of what led me to take action.

Who are your allies in the movement?

We work closely with Black community members on issues like solitary confinement, juvenile detention — issues that impact both of our communities. So we really did a good job of sharing our experience with the Black community and vice versa. We also worked with our local Women’s March chapter. They were very often white women who were not personally impacted by 287(g) but were interested in supporting us after we reached out and educated them about what was going on in immigrant communities.

A photo of Stefanía ⁠Arteaga.

Credit: Ashley Mungo

What message do you want to impart with your story?

Perseverance. I really encourage folks who are reading this to ask questions, organize, and mobilize, because there’s a serious power within communities to bring about change in local law enforcement. During the Trump administration, a lot of the focus was on federal policies. But in local elections, we have a lot of power to hold the government accountable. Your neighbors, family, friends — we can all make change happen in our own communities.



Margarita Molina

Community Volunteer, RISE / Levántate
Frederick, Maryland

How did you learn that local police were working with ICE in your community?

I live in a diverse area with a large immigrant population and people of all colors and races. There are Hispanic restaurants and stores, so I feel very at home here. But the police think it’s a dangerous area, so they are always around. They seem to think, “Where there are immigrants, there is crime.”

I didn’t know the police were working with ICE until I met a young lady in the supermarket whose husband had been arrested. I wanted to help and get more information, so I went to a meeting in the community, and that is where I learned all about 287(g).

“One of the biggest challenges is getting families to trust us when we tell them they do have rights. Many believe that because we are immigrants, we should just put our heads down and say nothing…”

How has the 287(g) program shaped your community’s relationship with the police?

People are scared of the police and do not trust them to help in times of need. Even if a person is in danger, many wouldn’t dare call the police for protection, for fear it may lead to their arrest for not having papers. Interactions with police are usually negative, even for those of us with papers, who may still be stopped or arrested because of racial profiling.

For example, three community members were stopped on their way to work one day. They were going to their construction jobs, and had left their IDs at home rather than bring them to work. They did nothing wrong — no traffic violations — but the police stopped them anyway, and refused to let them go get their IDs. They were arrested and taken to jail. One of the men’s wife was pregnant and almost lost her baby because the whole ordeal was so stressful. They had to pay for a lawyer, even for their own ankle monitors, and ended up with so much debt because of that one traffic stop.

What are some of the biggest challenges you face as an organizer?
One of the biggest challenges is getting families to trust us when we tell them they do have rights. Many believe that because we are immigrants, we should just put our heads down and say nothing, that we don’t have any rights and can’t do anything about the abuse and fear we experience every day under 287(g). That’s why it’s so important to educate people about the rights we have as immigrants, so they feel empowered to make a difference in their community.

What kind of change do you hope your work will help bring about?
My goal is to get the whole community to unite and work together to eliminate 287(g) from the city. That’s why we are working to provide people with information to navigate situations with law enforcement. Often, they don’t have access to any information or guidance for dealing with law enforcement, especially if they cannot speak English. Now people are feeling more empowered to defend themselves in situations where they used to feel powerless. The police are aware of that, so we are not being persecuted as we were in the past.


A photo of Sindy Mata.

Credit: Lynda González


Sindy Mata

Community Organizer
Fort Worth, Texas

How did you start organizing against the 287(g) program?

I grew up in Fort Worth and specifically on the south side, which is a predominantly immigrant community, and my parents are also immigrants. So I was always surrounded by people who were directly impacted by policies like 287(g). When I first learned about how ICE was partnering with local police to detain and deport people, I knew I had to do whatever I could to fight back. I started organizing in my community after college and it just continued from there.

What does organizing look like in your community?

One of the initial ways we would organize was through neighborhood house gatherings. People would open up their homes and let us use that space to provide members of the community with resources and information to help navigate common interactions with law enforcement, like what to do when you’re stopped by the police.

Some members of the community keep a low profile for fear of repercussions from immigration [officials] and law enforcement. Often, home gatherings can provide a safe space to start getting involved in the comfort of their own communities. We use the opportunity to provide information and guidance for navigating common situations with law enforcement, like what to do if you get stopped by the police. Many come away learning they have more power than they thought.

Home gatherings also give us the opportunity to share our own stories and demonstrate our personal connections to the cause, but most importantly it allows us to invite people in our community to take action and organize to fight the systems causing us harm. We are not just activists — we come from the same neighborhoods impacted by law enforcement. Establishing these connections helps build trust within impacted communities.

A photo of Sindy Mata.

Credit: Lynda González

Do you face any barriers in your advocacy and organizing efforts?
The lack of transparency from sheriffs’ offices has been a major obstacle. When we started advocating for people and raising awareness about what the sheriff’s deputies were doing to our communities, our county jail responded by removing public information so that we couldn’t understand what was happening, why someone was being detained, or the charges against them. Sheriffs would refuse to provide information, even to the families of people detained or deported. So sometimes people don’t know why their loved one was arrested or where they are detained, or even whether they’re dead or alive. There is no transparency or accountability.

What is the ultimate goal you want to achieve as an activist?

It is extremely important for us to continue to remind folks that there are people who are in detention due to 287(g), right now, and that we will continue to fight for their freedom.


Read the ACLU’s report License to Abuse: How ICE’s 287(g) Program Empowers Racist Sheriffs and Civil Rights Violations, below:

https://www.aclu.org/report/license-abuse-how-ices-287g-program-empowers-racist-sheriffs

What you can do:
End ICE's Racist 287(g) Program
Send your message


Published May 19, 2022 at 11:57PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/ju7bzyI

ACLU: On the Frontlines of the Fight Against Mass Deportation

On the Frontlines of the Fight Against Mass Deportation

In states and counties across the country, sheriffs and other local law enforcement are partnering with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain and deport immigrants from their own communities. 287(g) agreements turn police and sheriffs’ deputies into ICE agents, with the result that even minor infractions like traffic stops can result in life-altering consequences for immigrants.

In a new report, the ACLU documented how dozens of sheriffs participating in ICE’s 287(g) program have records of racism, abuse, and violence. As a result of the racial profiling that’s endemic to the program, immigrants and non-immigrants alike live in fear of being stopped, deported and detained, and torn from loved ones as they go about their day-to-day lives.

While the program significantly expanded in size as part of Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda, it has not been curtailed under the new administration despite President Biden’s stated commitment to end contracts initiated by Trump. You can help us fight back by sending a message to the Department of Homeland Security demanding an end to the 287(g) program.

We spoke with three organizers leading the fight against these law enforcement partnerships about what it’s like to live in a community operating under 287(g), how to mobilize communities and empower people to act, and their vision for a future free of this harmful program.

A photo of Stefanía ⁠Arteaga.

Credit: Ashley Mungo


STEFANÍA

Regional Immigrants’ Rights Strategist, ACLU of North Carolina
Charlotte, North Carolina

How does the 287(g) program affect people’s daily lives in your community?

It can be really scary for folks to even drive down the street. In my neighborhood, if you wanted to go to Walmart you had to go through a one-lane road that was being used to stop people. I lived nearby so I would see people getting arrested in front of their children. It was really traumatic to see.

Was there a specific turning point that made you realize you needed to fight back?
We used to have a sheriff’s department checkpoints in an area of town with a lot of country roads and soccer fields. It was common to see the sheriff’s department use those roads as checkpoints, knowing that there were people coming out of soccer games who did not have documentation. And so that’s kind of what led me to take action.

Who are your allies in the movement?

We work closely with Black community members on issues like solitary confinement, juvenile detention — issues that impact both of our communities. So we really did a good job of sharing our experience with the Black community and vice versa. We also worked with our local Women’s March chapter. They were very often white women who were not personally impacted by 287(g) but were interested in supporting us after we reached out and educated them about what was going on in immigrant communities.

A photo of Stefanía ⁠Arteaga.

Credit: Ashley Mungo

What message do you want to impart with your story?

Perseverance. I really encourage folks who are reading this to ask questions, organize, and mobilize, because there’s a serious power within communities to bring about change in local law enforcement. During the Trump administration, a lot of the focus was on federal policies. But in local elections, we have a lot of power to hold the government accountable. Your neighbors, family, friends — we can all make change happen in our own communities.



Margarita Molina

Community Volunteer, RISE / Levántate
Frederick, Maryland

How did you learn that local police were working with ICE in your community?

I live in a diverse area with a large immigrant population and people of all colors and races. There are Hispanic restaurants and stores, so I feel very at home here. But the police think it’s a dangerous area, so they are always around. They seem to think, “Where there are immigrants, there is crime.”

I didn’t know the police were working with ICE until I met a young lady in the supermarket whose husband had been arrested. I wanted to help and get more information, so I went to a meeting in the community, and that is where I learned all about 287(g).

“One of the biggest challenges is getting families to trust us when we tell them they do have rights. Many believe that because we are immigrants, we should just put our heads down and say nothing…”

How has the 287(g) program shaped your community’s relationship with the police?

People are scared of the police and do not trust them to help in times of need. Even if a person is in danger, many wouldn’t dare call the police for protection, for fear it may lead to their arrest for not having papers. Interactions with police are usually negative, even for those of us with papers, who may still be stopped or arrested because of racial profiling.

For example, three community members were stopped on their way to work one day. They were going to their construction jobs, and had left their IDs at home rather than bring them to work. They did nothing wrong — no traffic violations — but the police stopped them anyway, and refused to let them go get their IDs. They were arrested and taken to jail. One of the men’s wife was pregnant and almost lost her baby because the whole ordeal was so stressful. They had to pay for a lawyer, even for their own ankle monitors, and ended up with so much debt because of that one traffic stop.

What are some of the biggest challenges you face as an organizer?
One of the biggest challenges is getting families to trust us when we tell them they do have rights. Many believe that because we are immigrants, we should just put our heads down and say nothing, that we don’t have any rights and can’t do anything about the abuse and fear we experience every day under 287(g). That’s why it’s so important to educate people about the rights we have as immigrants, so they feel empowered to make a difference in their community.

What kind of change do you hope your work will help bring about?
My goal is to get the whole community to unite and work together to eliminate 287(g) from the city. That’s why we are working to provide people with information to navigate situations with law enforcement. Often, they don’t have access to any information or guidance for dealing with law enforcement, especially if they cannot speak English. Now people are feeling more empowered to defend themselves in situations where they used to feel powerless. The police are aware of that, so we are not being persecuted as we were in the past.


A photo of Sindy Mata.

Credit: Lynda González


Sindy Mata

Community Organizer
Fort Worth, Texas

How did you start organizing against the 287(g) program?

I grew up in Fort Worth and specifically on the south side, which is a predominantly immigrant community, and my parents are also immigrants. So I was always surrounded by people who were directly impacted by policies like 287(g). When I first learned about how ICE was partnering with local police to detain and deport people, I knew I had to do whatever I could to fight back. I started organizing in my community after college and it just continued from there.

What does organizing look like in your community?

One of the initial ways we would organize was through neighborhood house gatherings. People would open up their homes and let us use that space to provide members of the community with resources and information to help navigate common interactions with law enforcement, like what to do when you’re stopped by the police.

Some members of the community keep a low profile for fear of repercussions from immigration [officials] and law enforcement. Often, home gatherings can provide a safe space to start getting involved in the comfort of their own communities. We use the opportunity to provide information and guidance for navigating common situations with law enforcement, like what to do if you get stopped by the police. Many come away learning they have more power than they thought.

Home gatherings also give us the opportunity to share our own stories and demonstrate our personal connections to the cause, but most importantly it allows us to invite people in our community to take action and organize to fight the systems causing us harm. We are not just activists — we come from the same neighborhoods impacted by law enforcement. Establishing these connections helps build trust within impacted communities.

A photo of Sindy Mata.

Credit: Lynda González

Do you face any barriers in your advocacy and organizing efforts?
The lack of transparency from sheriffs’ offices has been a major obstacle. When we started advocating for people and raising awareness about what the sheriff’s deputies were doing to our communities, our county jail responded by removing public information so that we couldn’t understand what was happening, why someone was being detained, or the charges against them. Sheriffs would refuse to provide information, even to the families of people detained or deported. So sometimes people don’t know why their loved one was arrested or where they are detained, or even whether they’re dead or alive. There is no transparency or accountability.

What is the ultimate goal you want to achieve as an activist?

It is extremely important for us to continue to remind folks that there are people who are in detention due to 287(g), right now, and that we will continue to fight for their freedom.


Read the ACLU’s report License to Abuse: How ICE’s 287(g) Program Empowers Racist Sheriffs and Civil Rights Violations, below:

https://www.aclu.org/report/license-abuse-how-ices-287g-program-empowers-racist-sheriffs

What you can do:
End ICE's Racist 287(g) Program
Send your message


Published May 19, 2022 at 07:27PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/ju7bzyI

Wednesday, 18 May 2022

ACLU: What You Need to Know About ACLU Artist Ambassadors, Including Amber Heard

What You Need to Know About ACLU Artist Ambassadors, Including Amber Heard

For over 100 years, the ACLU has fought to protect the constitutional rights and freedoms of all people. We do this through litigation, advocacy, and public education, which is what the ACLU Artist Ambassador Program is all about — working with artists of all disciplines who want to use their platforms for good to put a spotlight on pressing civil liberties and civil rights issues.

During the current defamation lawsuit between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, some have claimed that the ACLU made Ms. Heard an ambassador for gender justice and wrote an op-ed on her behalf in exchange for her pledge to donate money to the ACLU. This is wrong. We do not write op-eds or offer ambassadorships in exchange for donations. Period. Becoming an ACLU Artist Ambassador is entirely voluntary; it is a favor to the ACLU, not vice versa.

In 2016, Ms. Heard pledged to donate $3.5 million over 10 years to the ACLU. Two years later, in 2018, the ACLU invited Ms. Heard to become an ambassador and to work with us on an op-ed to bring attention to the issue of sexual assault and domestic violence issues; she agreed. Through her ambassadorship, Ms. Heard supported our advocacy for gender justice issues, a cause that has long been central to our mission at least since Ruth Bader Ginsburg headed the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project.

Whether it’s fighting for women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, immigrants’ rights, racial justice, or criminal legal reform, the ACLU’s Ambassador Project pairs artists, influencers, entertainers, and content creators with the ACLU issues they’re most passionate about. ACLU Artist Ambassadors volunteer their talents to elevate our work by advocating for civil rights and civil liberties in a variety of forums, including sharing information on social media; appearing in videos; and working with us on written pieces that highlight our issues in the media.

Over the years, the public education work through our Ambassador Project included an op-ed from Jesse Tyler Ferguson urging voters to vote like LGBTQ rights depend on it; visiting the border with Padma Lakshmi to draw attention to the state of the broken asylum system; elevating our Systemic Equality agenda with a video narrated by W. Kamau Bell; educating people about the importance of the Census with Ike Barinholtz; drawing attention to the issue of forced pregnancy and abortion bans through a video with Sasheer Zamata; responding to misinformation about transgender people with Peppermint; deploying Tom Morrello to push for the passage of legislation to end solitary confinement; and drafting an op-ed with Amber Heard on gender-based violence to bring attention to the need to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

In 2018, the issues Ms. Heard’s op-ed addressed — sexual assault and domestic violence — were especially salient in light of the confirmation hearing of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the accusations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, as well as the fight to extend VAWA, which ultimately lapsed in February of the following year. The op-ed also pushed for legislative and regulatory reforms that the ACLU has long supported as part of our women’s rights and gender justice work. For 50 years, our Women’s Rights Project has been fighting for gender equity so that everyone has the freedom to live, work, and learn free from gender stereotypes and sexual harassment and assault. Sexual assault and domestic violence occur at alarming rates but are rarely reported. Though reasons for not reporting vary, fear of retaliation, including defamation suits, discourages many from coming forward. As the nation’s oldest free speech organization, we fight for the freedom to speak out about barriers to gender justice.

Our fight to realize the promise of the Constitution for all continues, as does our push to ensure our work gets in front of as many people as possible. We are proud to work with a wide cross section of individuals, including artists, lawmakers, and grassroots partners to protect and defend civil rights and civil liberties for all.

We need you with us to keep fighting
Donate today

Published May 18, 2022 at 09:13PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/fVJZb8c

ACLU: What You Need to Know About ACLU Artist Ambassadors, Including Amber Heard

What You Need to Know About ACLU Artist Ambassadors, Including Amber Heard

For over 100 years, the ACLU has fought to protect the constitutional rights and freedoms of all people. We do this through litigation, advocacy, and public education, which is what the ACLU Artist Ambassador Program is all about — working with artists of all disciplines who want to use their platforms for good to put a spotlight on pressing civil liberties and civil rights issues.

During the current defamation lawsuit between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, some have claimed that the ACLU made Ms. Heard an ambassador for gender justice and wrote an op-ed on her behalf in exchange for her pledge to donate money to the ACLU. This is wrong. We do not write op-eds or offer ambassadorships in exchange for donations. Period. Becoming an ACLU Artist Ambassador is entirely voluntary; it is a favor to the ACLU, not vice versa.

In 2016, Ms. Heard pledged to donate $3.5 million over 10 years to the ACLU. Two years later, in 2018, the ACLU invited Ms. Heard to become an ambassador and to work with us on an op-ed to bring attention to the issue of sexual assault and domestic violence issues; she agreed. Through her ambassadorship, Ms. Heard supported our advocacy for gender justice issues, a cause that has long been central to our mission at least since Ruth Bader Ginsburg headed the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project.

Whether it’s fighting for women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, immigrants’ rights, racial justice, or criminal legal reform, the ACLU’s Ambassador Project pairs artists, influencers, entertainers, and content creators with the ACLU issues they’re most passionate about. ACLU Artist Ambassadors volunteer their talents to elevate our work by advocating for civil rights and civil liberties in a variety of forums, including sharing information on social media; appearing in videos; and working with us on written pieces that highlight our issues in the media.

Over the years, the public education work through our Ambassador Project included an op-ed from Jesse Tyler Ferguson urging voters to vote like LGBTQ rights depend on it; visiting the border with Padma Lakshmi to draw attention to the state of the broken asylum system; elevating our Systemic Equality agenda with a video narrated by W. Kamau Bell; educating people about the importance of the Census with Ike Barinholtz; drawing attention to the issue of forced pregnancy and abortion bans through a video with Sasheer Zamata; responding to misinformation about transgender people with Peppermint; deploying Tom Morrello to push for the passage of legislation to end solitary confinement; and drafting an op-ed with Amber Heard on gender-based violence to bring attention to the need to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

In 2018, the issues Ms. Heard’s op-ed addressed — sexual assault and domestic violence — were especially salient in light of the confirmation hearing of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the accusations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, as well as the fight to extend VAWA, which ultimately lapsed in February of the following year. The op-ed also pushed for legislative and regulatory reforms that the ACLU has long supported as part of our women’s rights and gender justice work. For 50 years, our Women’s Rights Project has been fighting for gender equity so that everyone has the freedom to live, work, and learn free from gender stereotypes and sexual harassment and assault. Sexual assault and domestic violence occur at alarming rates but are rarely reported. Though reasons for not reporting vary, fear of retaliation, including defamation suits, discourages many from coming forward. As the nation’s oldest free speech organization, we fight for the freedom to speak out about barriers to gender justice.

Our fight to realize the promise of the Constitution for all continues, as does our push to ensure our work gets in front of as many people as possible. We are proud to work with a wide cross section of individuals, including artists, lawmakers, and grassroots partners to protect and defend civil rights and civil liberties for all.

We need you with us to keep fighting
Donate today

Published May 18, 2022 at 04:43PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/fVJZb8c

Mongolia: Technical Assistance Report-High Frequency Indicators Mission

Mongolia: Technical Assistance Report-High Frequency Indicators Mission
Published May 18, 2022 at 05:04PM
Read more at imf.org

Monday, 16 May 2022

Republic of Moldova: Ad Hoc Review Under the Extended Credit Facility; Request for Augmentation and Rephasing of Access, Modification of Performance Criteria, and Completion of the Inflation Consultation Under the Extended Credit Facility and Extended Fund Facility Arrangements-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for the Republic of Moldova

Republic of Moldova: Ad Hoc Review Under the Extended Credit Facility; Request for Augmentation and Rephasing of Access, Modification of Performance Criteria, and Completion of the Inflation Consultation Under the Extended Credit Facility and Extended Fund Facility Arrangements-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for the Republic of Moldova
Published May 13, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

ACLU: Politicians Have No Place Making Parole Decisions for Young People

Politicians Have No Place Making Parole Decisions for Young People

For nearly two decades, courts and legislatures have been rolling back the damage wrought by the “superpredator” myth of the 1990s — the racist notion that young people who commit crimes, especially young people of color, will be a menace to society for their entire lives. This devastating ideology sent too many children to prison for too long, but in a series of modern decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court turned the tide. Recognizing that young people are immature, impulsive, and vulnerable to peer pressure — and that they outgrow these traits with time — that young people deserve a second chance at freedom, even if they’ve done terrible things. In the language of the court, young people have the right to a “meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.”

States across the country have taken heed, bolstering opportunities for young people sentenced to lengthy prison terms to receive earlier, and better, chances for release on parole. But California imposes a daunting obstacle to such second chances: the governor’s power to single-handedly reverse a decision of the parole board in homicide cases. California is a shameful outlier in this respect. It is one of just two states (Oklahoma being the other) that allows the governor to veto parole grants. Maryland recently abolished the practice, because, as one former governor put it, “How can it not be political for a governor to hold all the power” in parole decisions?

Indeed, politics is baked into the reversal power in California. Following widespread outcry over a controversial parole grant in the 1980s, California’s then-governor pushed a ballot initiative authorizing him to block the parole board’s release decisions. Unsurprisingly, governors regularly exercise this power in high-profile, politically toxic cases, like those of the Manson family members or 77-year-old Sirhan Sirhan, convicted of killing Robert Kennedy, despite the fact that these people are now elderly and have near-spotless records over decades in prison. But governors also frequently reverse in less infamous cases for fear of political retribution.

Consider the cases of our clients. For example, Joseph Pagaduan was abused by his parents throughout his childhood and, at the age of 18, killed them in a spontaneous and emotionally charged incident. Now in his 40s, Joey has built an exceptional record of his rehabilitation, including by pursuing collegiate education, working as a substance abuse counselor, editing the prison newspaper, participating in a therapeutic acting workshop, learning a variety of trades, and excelling in his work assignments and programming. The parole board rightly awarded Joey a second chance at freedom, finding that he posed no present danger, but the governor reversed the board’s decision absent any evidence to the contrary.

David Adkins’ case presents the same issue. Abandoned, abused, and neglected as a young child, David found solace in drugs, alcohol, and an older peer group. At the age of 16, while heavily intoxicated, he and a peer tragically shot and killed three friends in a heated altercation. That was 32 years ago, and since then, David has turned his life around. He has been sober and misconduct-free for 20 years. And he has pursued virtually every program, class, or work assignment available to him. Yet when the parole board granted him release, the governor reversed, requiring him to remain in prison despite his obvious rehabilitation.

Last week, the ACLU and ACLU of Northern California filed a lawsuit on behalf of Joey, David, and others alleging that the California governor’s power to veto parole grants violates the rights of young people to a “meaningful opportunity for release.” There is simply an unacceptably high risk that parole reversals are grounded in a governor’s political calculations, rather than public safety. That’s why we have asked the courts to abolish the governor’s veto power over the parole board in the cases of young people.

As our clients prove, children are so much more than the worst thing they’ve ever done. Their redemption must be recognized and not reduced to a matter of politics. Anything less would deprive them of their right to return home as mature, responsible community members.

 

Stay informed about our work
Sign up

Published May 16, 2022 at 03:51PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/5hQswLn

ACLU: Politicians Have No Place Making Parole Decisions for Young People

Politicians Have No Place Making Parole Decisions for Young People

For nearly two decades, courts and legislatures have been rolling back the damage wrought by the “superpredator” myth of the 1990s — the racist notion that young people who commit crimes, especially young people of color, will be a menace to society for their entire lives. This devastating ideology sent too many children to prison for too long, but in a series of modern decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court turned the tide. Recognizing that young people are immature, impulsive, and vulnerable to peer pressure — and that they outgrow these traits with time — that young people deserve a second chance at freedom, even if they’ve done terrible things. In the language of the court, young people have the right to a “meaningful opportunity to obtain release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.”

States across the country have taken heed, bolstering opportunities for young people sentenced to lengthy prison terms to receive earlier, and better, chances for release on parole. But California imposes a daunting obstacle to such second chances: the governor’s power to single-handedly reverse a decision of the parole board in homicide cases. California is a shameful outlier in this respect. It is one of just two states (Oklahoma being the other) that allows the governor to veto parole grants. Maryland recently abolished the practice, because, as one former governor put it, “How can it not be political for a governor to hold all the power” in parole decisions?

Indeed, politics is baked into the reversal power in California. Following widespread outcry over a controversial parole grant in the 1980s, California’s then-governor pushed a ballot initiative authorizing him to block the parole board’s release decisions. Unsurprisingly, governors regularly exercise this power in high-profile, politically toxic cases, like those of the Manson family members or 77-year-old Sirhan Sirhan, convicted of killing Robert Kennedy, despite the fact that these people are now elderly and have near-spotless records over decades in prison. But governors also frequently reverse in less infamous cases for fear of political retribution.

Consider the cases of our clients. For example, Joseph Pagaduan was abused by his parents throughout his childhood and, at the age of 18, killed them in a spontaneous and emotionally charged incident. Now in his 40s, Joey has built an exceptional record of his rehabilitation, including by pursuing collegiate education, working as a substance abuse counselor, editing the prison newspaper, participating in a therapeutic acting workshop, learning a variety of trades, and excelling in his work assignments and programming. The parole board rightly awarded Joey a second chance at freedom, finding that he posed no present danger, but the governor reversed the board’s decision absent any evidence to the contrary.

David Adkins’ case presents the same issue. Abandoned, abused, and neglected as a young child, David found solace in drugs, alcohol, and an older peer group. At the age of 16, while heavily intoxicated, he and a peer tragically shot and killed three friends in a heated altercation. That was 32 years ago, and since then, David has turned his life around. He has been sober and misconduct-free for 20 years. And he has pursued virtually every program, class, or work assignment available to him. Yet when the parole board granted him release, the governor reversed, requiring him to remain in prison despite his obvious rehabilitation.

Last week, the ACLU and ACLU of Northern California filed a lawsuit on behalf of Joey, David, and others alleging that the California governor’s power to veto parole grants violates the rights of young people to a “meaningful opportunity for release.” There is simply an unacceptably high risk that parole reversals are grounded in a governor’s political calculations, rather than public safety. That’s why we have asked the courts to abolish the governor’s veto power over the parole board in the cases of young people.

As our clients prove, children are so much more than the worst thing they’ve ever done. Their redemption must be recognized and not reduced to a matter of politics. Anything less would deprive them of their right to return home as mature, responsible community members.

 

Stay informed about our work
Sign up

Published May 16, 2022 at 08:21PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/5hQswLn

Friday, 13 May 2022

Colombia: Financial Sector Assessment Program–Detailed Assessment of Observance of the Basel Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision

Colombia: Financial Sector Assessment Program–Detailed Assessment of Observance of the Basel Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision
Published May 11, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

West African Economic and Monetary Union: Financial Sector Assessment Program–Financial System Stability Assessment

West African Economic and Monetary Union: Financial Sector Assessment Program–Financial System Stability Assessment
Published May 11, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

Grenada: 2022 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for Grenada

Grenada: 2022 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for Grenada
Published May 10, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

Belize: 2022 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; and Staff Report

Belize: 2022 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; and Staff Report
Published May 10, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

The Bahamas: 2022 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for The Bahamas

The Bahamas: 2022 Article IV Consultation-Press Release; Staff Report; and Statement by the Executive Director for The Bahamas
Published May 09, 2022 at 05:00PM
Read more at imf.org

The Bahamas: Selected Issues

The Bahamas: Selected Issues
Published May 09, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

Thursday, 12 May 2022

West African Economic and Monetary Union: Financial Sector Assessment Program–Financial System Stability Assessment

West African Economic and Monetary Union: Financial Sector Assessment Program–Financial System Stability Assessment
Published May 11, 2022 at 07:00AM
Read more at imf.org

ACLU: Six Ways You Can Join the Fight for Abortion Rights

Six Ways You Can Join the Fight for Abortion Rights

With the increasing likelihood that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade, the rights and lives of millions are on the line. But this fight isn’t just taking place at the Supreme Court. Here’s how you can take action.


Pledge

No matter where you live, you can join the fight and support our partners fighting for abortion rights. A good place to start? Take the pledge to show your support.


Mobilize

The ACLU is joining partners in a nationwide mobilization on Saturday, May 14. RSVP now to join a Bans Off rally near you.

https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/rightfully-ours/bans-off-our-bodies#events


Text

Can’t attend a rally or would prefer a more remote option? Text FIGHTBACK to 826-23 to join ACLU alerts for more actions and updates on the crucial work ahead – delivered right to your phone.*


Talk

Check out our guide to discussing abortion rights at the dinner table.

https://www.aclu.org/news/reproductive-freedom/your-mini-guide-to-discussing-abortion-rights-at-the-dinner-table

 

Vote

sign reads" Take your rage to the voting booth"

Credit: Gwen Schroeder

As we head into the midterm elections and prepare for the 2024 national election, we must center abortion in the public debate for all elected officials, and support candidates who unequivocally support abortion rights. You can ask your elected officials and local candidates where they stand on reproductive rights, and demand commitments to protecting abortion access. To fight back, research your candidates and spread the word.

 

Donate

Across the country, abortion funds are helping people access care by providing financial assistance to patients in need. You can help expand the impact by donating to an abortion fund today.

For more information on how to get support when seeking an abortion, check out the National Network of Abortion Funds.

You can also donate to help the ACLU continue our fight for reproductive freedom. Together, we will work toward a better future — one in which everyone is free to make decisions about their own lives and futures.

A pro-abortion sign at a rally in New York.

Credit: Gwen Schroeder

In courthouses and state legislatures across the country, the ACLU is challenging abortion restrictions and promoting abortion access in close collaboration with local providers and our partners. We’ve already shown we can win, and our strategies continue to evolve as the fight for bodily autonomy does. Our advocacy efforts have helped pass legislation protecting or expanding abortion access in Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. And after years of advocacy, we won a federal lawsuit challenging a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rule that required patients seeking mifepristone, a safe drug used for abortion, to pick up the pill in- person at a medical facility. The FDA has permanently repealed the in-person dispensing requirement since that victory, expanding essential access to abortion in states across the country.

Whatever the Supreme Court decides about Roe, the ACLU will never stop defending people’s right to decide when and whether to have a child, and to ensure that everyone who has decided to have an abortion has access to the care and support they need. The ACLU has been fighting for abortion access since before Roe v. Wade was decided, and the work continues. We are committed to using the full force of the organization to do this. We will continue to fight in the courts, in statehouses, and in Congress, at the ballot box through ballot measures and other races, and in the streets — not just today — for as long as it takes.

*By texting FIGHTBACK to 826-23 you are agreeing to receive phone calls and texts (including automated recurring text messages) from the ACLU and its state affiliates at the contacts provided. Message & Data Rates May Apply. Text STOP to opt out of automated texts. Privacy statement.

What you can do:
Be a Defender of Abortion Rights
Join People Power


Published May 13, 2022 at 02:46AM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/9sfLkYB

ACLU: Six Ways You Can Join the Fight for Abortion Rights

Six Ways You Can Join the Fight for Abortion Rights

With the increasing likelihood that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade, the rights and lives of millions are on the line. But this fight isn’t just taking place at the Supreme Court. Here’s how you can take action.


Pledge

No matter where you live, you can join the fight and support our partners fighting for abortion rights. A good place to start? Take the pledge to show your support.


Mobilize

The ACLU is joining partners in a nationwide mobilization on Saturday, May 14. RSVP now to join a Bans Off rally near you.

https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/rightfully-ours/bans-off-our-bodies#events


Text

Can’t attend a rally or would prefer a more remote option? Text FIGHTBACK to 826-23 to join ACLU alerts for more actions and updates on the crucial work ahead – delivered right to your phone.*


Talk

Check out our guide to discussing abortion rights at the dinner table.

https://www.aclu.org/news/reproductive-freedom/your-mini-guide-to-discussing-abortion-rights-at-the-dinner-table

 

Vote

sign reads" Take your rage to the voting booth"

Credit: Gwen Schroeder

As we head into the midterm elections and prepare for the 2024 national election, we must center abortion in the public debate for all elected officials, and support candidates who unequivocally support abortion rights. You can ask your elected officials and local candidates where they stand on reproductive rights, and demand commitments to protecting abortion access. To fight back, research your candidates and spread the word.

 

Donate

Across the country, abortion funds are helping people access care by providing financial assistance to patients in need. You can help expand the impact by donating to an abortion fund today.

For more information on how to get support when seeking an abortion, check out the National Network of Abortion Funds.

You can also donate to help the ACLU continue our fight for reproductive freedom. Together, we will work toward a better future — one in which everyone is free to make decisions about their own lives and futures.

A pro-abortion sign at a rally in New York.

Credit: Gwen Schroeder

In courthouses and state legislatures across the country, the ACLU is challenging abortion restrictions and promoting abortion access in close collaboration with local providers and our partners. We’ve already shown we can win, and our strategies continue to evolve as the fight for bodily autonomy does. Our advocacy efforts have helped pass legislation protecting or expanding abortion access in Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. And after years of advocacy, we won a federal lawsuit challenging a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rule that required patients seeking mifepristone, a safe drug used for abortion, to pick up the pill in- person at a medical facility. The FDA has permanently repealed the in-person dispensing requirement since that victory, expanding essential access to abortion in states across the country.

Whatever the Supreme Court decides about Roe, the ACLU will never stop defending people’s right to decide when and whether to have a child, and to ensure that everyone who has decided to have an abortion has access to the care and support they need. The ACLU has been fighting for abortion access since before Roe v. Wade was decided, and the work continues. We are committed to using the full force of the organization to do this. We will continue to fight in the courts, in statehouses, and in Congress, at the ballot box through ballot measures and other races, and in the streets — not just today — for as long as it takes.

*By texting FIGHTBACK to 826-23 you are agreeing to receive phone calls and texts (including automated recurring text messages) from the ACLU and its state affiliates at the contacts provided. Message & Data Rates May Apply. Text STOP to opt out of automated texts. Privacy statement.

What you can do:
Be a Defender of Abortion Rights
Join People Power


Published May 12, 2022 at 10:16PM
via ACLU https://ift.tt/9sfLkYB