JUDICIARY: The Federal Judiciary in the 21st Century - Why SCOTUS Has No Code Of Conduct - Revisiting The Doctrines Of Stare Decisis & Partus Sequitur Ventrum - Happy Residuals Of The Peculiar Institution Month!

Clarence & Ginni, who no one knows about her political
fundraising activities or what SCOTUS resources
were used for personal inurement or
 to influence, or just write out, opinions.

There has always been cyberchatter which questions Clarence Thomas' legal acumen, which is why I believe he is popping up to lead the charge of challenging the doctrine of Stare Decisis.

Perhaps, that is why he was never very vocal in oral arguments.

But, hey, what do I know?

I know there is a very long history on very questionable rulings when it comes to foreign influence in elections and trafficking tiny humans, like the doctrine of Partus Sequitur Ventrem.

I also know he is open to revisit stare decisis which is a good thing, considering lots of those precedent decisions were made during the "Pre-Emancipation Proclamation Era".

Notice how this video intentionally fails to address the Partus Doctrine.

Heck, there is court precedence going back to Three-Fifths Clause Days, right back to that Partus Doctrine that no one seems to want to talk about.

DeShaney v. Winnebago made it perfectly clear that children have absolutely no civil rights, where this doctrine is even more solidified if that child hails from the population of "The Poors", the socioeconomic status of the mother.

Homer Plessey
 Partus Doctrine ruled he had
no right of association under the
First Amendment because of the
"One-drop rule".

Plessey v. Ferguson is not even recognized as a First Amendment argument of right of association, which means the entire Brown v. Board of Education needs to be revisited, in full, to correct the basis of the decision, because it never addresses the residuals of the peculiar institution of chattel law, like the Partus Doctine.

How can SCOTUS make rulings on race when it is using the "One Drop Rule" of the Partus Doctrine, which was made before CRISPR?

See, how can the supreme court of the land, and not the sea, because that would be maritime, private law, sit up there, in the heavens, pushing their compromised rulings, without even mentioning the the Partus Doctrine?

I am not alleging any of SCOTUS rulings were compromised for the simple fact that there is no grievance procedure, or rather due process of the petitioners, as that part of U.S. history was intentionally omitted when there exists no federal grievance procedure.

How can SCOTUS continue to promulgate the Stare Decisis Doctrine made under the Partus Doctrine?

Because the SCOTUS and federal justices can do what they want, when they want, including the perpetuating the residuals of the peculiar institution.

Just ask John Roberts.

I wonder what his role shall be as we proceed to our Constitutional Crisis?

As you watch, or may not watch, this hearing, the discussions, using their hand picked American University groomed spokestokens, focus on how they are going to hole the Justices accountable.

I say have a public forum, like they used to do, where the public can put out their dirt.

Many of the witnesses were against the personal lives of the Justices made public and had no clue of how to told them accountable.

I say we just use that Justinian Code, the internet, and proceed with the reconstruction of justice in blockchain technologies, to preserve the annals of history, no matter what is uncloaked in the trafficking of tiny humans.

#maytheheavensfall

Justice Thomas urges U.S. Supreme Court to feel free to reverse precedents

(Reuters) - Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday urged the U.S. Supreme Court to feel less bound to upholding precedent, advancing a view that if adopted by enough of his fellow justices could result in more past decisions being overruled, perhaps including the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

Writing in a gun possession case over whether the federal government and states can prosecute someone separately for the same crime, Thomas said the court should reconsider its standard for reviewing precedents.

Thomas said the nine justices should not uphold precedents that are “demonstrably erroneous,” regardless of whether other factors supported letting them stand.

“When faced with a demonstrably erroneous precedent, my rule is simple: We should not follow it,” wrote Thomas, who has long expressed a greater willingness than his colleagues to overrule precedents.

In a concurring opinion, which no other justice joined, Thomas referred to the court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed Roe and said states cannot place an undue burden on the constitutional right to an abortion recognized in the Roe decision. Thomas, a member of the court at the time, dissented from the Casey ruling.

Thomas, 70, joined the court in 1991 as an appointee of Republican President George H.W. Bush. Thomas is its longest-serving current justice.

The court now has a 5-4 conservative majority, and Thomas is among its most conservative justices.

He demonstrated his willingness to abandon precedent in February when he wrote that the court should reconsider its landmark 1964 New York Times v. Sullivan ruling that made it harder for public officials to win libel lawsuits.

“Thomas says legal questions have objectively correct answers, and judges should find them regardless of whether their colleagues or predecessors found different answers,” said Jonathan Entin, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. “Everyone is concerned about this because they’re thinking about Roe v. Wade.”

COURT DIVISIONS
The Thomas opinion focused on “stare decisis,” a Latin term referring to the legal principle that U.S. courts should not overturn precedents without a special reason.

While stare decisis (pronounced STAR-ay deh-SY-sis) has no formal parameters, justices deciding whether to uphold precedents often look at such factors as whether they work, enhance stability in the law, are part of the national fabric or promote reliance interests, such as in contract cases.

In 2000, conservative then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist left intact the landmark 1966 Miranda v. Arizona ruling, which required police to advise people in custody of their rights, including the rights to remain silent and have a lawyer.

Writing for a 7-2 majority, Rehnquist wrote that regardless of concerns about Miranda’s reasoning, “the principles of stare decisis weigh heavily against overruling it now.” Thomas joined Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent from that decision. But even Scalia, a conservative who died in 2016, had a different view of stare decisis.

In a widely quoted comment, Scalia once told a Thomas biographer, Ken Foskett, that Thomas “doesn’t believe in stare decisis, period,” and that “if a constitutional line of authority is wrong, he would say let’s get it right. I wouldn’t do that.”

Stare decisis has also split the current court, including last month when in a 5-4 decision written by Thomas the justices overruled a 1979 precedent that had allowed states to be sued by private parties in courts of other states.

Justice Stephen Breyer, a member of the court’s liberal wing, dissented, faulting the majority for overruling “a well-reasoned decision that has caused no serious practical problems.” Citing the 1992 Casey ruling, Breyer said the May decision “can only cause one to wonder which cases the Court will overrule next.”

Thomas said the court should “restore” its jurisprudence relating to precedents to ensure it exercises “mere judgment” and focuses on the “correct, original meaning” of laws it interprets.

“In our constitutional structure, our rule of upholding the law’s original meaning is reason enough to correct course,” Thomas wrote.

Thomas also said demonstrably erroneous decisions should not be “elevated” over federal statutes, as well as the Constitution, merely because they are precedents.

“That’s very different from what the Court does today,” said John McGinnis, a law professor at Northwestern University in Chicago.

McGinnis said the thrust of Thomas’s opinion “makes clear that in a narrow area he will give some weight to precedent. But at the same time, he thinks cases have one right answer, and might find more cases ‘demonstrably erroneous.’”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Another lesson from Equifax - We must end the predatory consumer practice of forced arbitration

By John Conyres, Jr., Hank Johnson, David Cicilline, & Don Beyer

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

The recent Equifax data breach jeopardized the economic security of nearly half of all Americans because of the credit rating company’s failure to safeguard our most sensitive information, which could now be in the hands of criminals. To make matters worse, many of those affected by this massive security breach are unsure whether they even have legal recourse because of the company’s use of forced arbitration clauses.

Americans are right to be outraged and frustrated and should be especially concerned about the use of forced arbitration by credit rating agencies like Equifax. Forced arbitration clauses are a predatory consumer practice written into the fine print of contracts. Signers unknowingly waive their right to sue and are forced into arbitration if a dispute arises. Americans should have a right to choose whether to sue or to seek arbitration. Preemptively eliminating our access to the justice system is a violation of every American’s right as a consumer. The justice system is one of the few tools that average citizens have to fight deceitful and harmful business practices, vindicate their rights, and pursue justice.

Equifax partially revised its forced arbitration policy in response to public outcry, but a limited change is not sufficient given the systemic nature of this problem and the scope of the lives affected. In recognition of the importance of Americans’ access to justice, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) finalized a rule to eliminate forced arbitration from consumer financial product contracts.

This protection restores the rights of Americans to seek their day in court, and the transparency that comes with it, if their rights are violated by unscrupulous financial services and products. This protection is vital for the economic security of the American people and our country’s commitment to the rule of law. But rather than support this commonsense protection, credit rating agencies, like Equifax, reportedly campaigned against it and spent millions in political contributions to undermine both the CFPB rule and the CFPB itself.

The Equifax data breach shook public confidence in the entire credit rating industry. Companies such as Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian should take this moment to demonstrate their respect for the rights of customers, not undermine them. This is why we wrote to ask the three credit rating agencies to revise their terms of service and eliminate their use of forced arbitration and class action waivers on all the products they offer. Furthermore, we asked that they end their opposition to the CFPB arbitration rule to restore consumers’ day in court.

Forced arbitration clauses are a bald and predatory attempt to shield corporations from liability for their misconduct through the fine print of contracts. The credit rating agencies who we trust with our most sensitive data should not be actively working to undermine consumer rights. They should support the CFPB and the rule against forced arbitration.

Congress must also step forward to protect consumer’s rights. We have led the push in the House to pass the Arbitration Fairness Act, which would eliminate forced arbitration. It deserves a vote. Unfortunately House and Senate Republicans sought a different path. A Republican measure to repeal the CFPB rule, supported by all three credit rating agencies, passed the House of Representatives in July on a nearly-straight party-line vote. It is currently pending in the Senate. We cannot afford to let it pass. The right of your and every other American’s access to the justice system is at stake.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: House Democrats to Trump Administration: Florida Nursing Home Tragedy Is a Wake-Up Call to Protect the Fundamental Rights of Residents Against Abuse

WASHINGTON – In the wake of disturbing reports of the neglect of nursing home residents in the wake of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, 46 members of Congress called on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Seema Verma to maintain current protections for elder Americans against abuse in nursing homes.

In Florida, 12 residents died and more than 100 were hospitalized after a long-term care facility failed to evacuate residents after losing air conditioning in the aftermath of Hurricane Irma. In Texas, similar abuse occurred at a facility that refused to evacuate despite severe flooding. The letter is led by Representatives David N. Cicilline (RI-01), John Conyers, Jr. (MI-13), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (GA-04), Jerrold Nadler (NY-10), Linda Sánchez (CA-38), and Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01).

They wrote: “The horrific reports of abuse at facilities in Florida and Texas in the wake of Hurricanes Irma and Harvey underscore the need for your agency to reconsider upending the legal protections of those who have worked and saved for their entire lives to retire with dignity. This is a time when we should be protecting our nation’s seniors, not rolling back their fundamental right to hold wrongdoers accountable for neglect and abuse.”

Last year under the Obama Administration, CMS finalized a strong rule that prohibited the use of pre-dispute, mandatory (“forced”) arbitration clauses in nursing home admission agreements.

Nursing-home residents stand to lose virtually every cause of action against unscrupulous caregivers unless these current protections against forced arbitration in nursing-home admission contracts are preserved.

As the letter notes, following an extensive notice-and-comment rulemaking process, CMS determined that forced arbitration undermines the ability of health investigators to prevent and remedy abuse in nursing homes.

But under the Trump Administration, CMS has already begun the process to end this protection.

The letter follows a letter from House Democrats—including Representatives Johnson, Cicilline, Conyers, Nadler, and Sanchez—in 2015 that called on CMS to adopt these protections.

The group of House Democrats denounced plans by CMS Administrator Verma to roll back existing protections, writing “Americans in nursing homes deserve better. It is vital that residents and their families are able to enforce their rights and hold nursing home operators accountable for dangerous facility conditions and the inhumane treatment of residents. We strongly urge CMS to protect the health and safety of nursing home residents, particularly in light of recent events, by maintaining the current prohibition of forced arbitration clauses in nursing home admission contracts.”

Congressional Letter To CMS On Nursing Home Protections 10032017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: Top Democrats Ask Equifax, TransUnion, & Experian: Will Restore Consumers Rights In The Wake Of The Equifax Data Breach?

September 21, 2017 (Washington, DC) – Following the Equifax data breach of 143 million Americans’ personal information, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Rep. David N. Cicilline (D-RI), and Representatives Don Beyer (D-VA) and Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), wrote to the three main credit rating agencies—Equifax,TransUnion, and Experian—to hear whether these companies will continue to include forced arbitration clauses in their terms of service or end their campaign against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s rule to restore consumers’ day in court.

They wrote:

“The economic security of nearly half of all Americans has been jeopardized because Equifax’s failure to safeguard our most sensitive information, which is now in the hands of criminals. Making matters worse, many of those affected by this massive security breach are unsure whether they even have legal recourse because of your company’s use of forced arbitration clauses. Although Equifax has revised its policy in response to public outcry, this limited change is simply not enough given the systemic nature of this problem and the scope of the lives affected. We therefore request information concerning your plans to revise your terms of service and stance on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) arbitration rule to restore consumers’ day in court.”

The CFPB arbitration rule includes important safeguards for consumers against forced arbitration, a practice that routinely allows corporate entities to avoid class-action lawsuits by burying legal language in the fine print of contracts that require consumers to waive their right to court.

A Republican measure to repeal that rule, supported by all three credit rating agencies, passed in the House of Representatives in July on a nearly-straight party-line vote. It is currently pending in the Senate.

The House Democrats denounced the three credit agencies for their opposition to the forced arbitration rule, writing, “Rather than support this commonsense protection, your company and others like it have reportedly campaigned against it, spending millions in campaign contributions and other efforts to undermine both the rule and the CFPB. Now is the time to demonstrate your respect for the rights of your customers, not undermine them.”

U.S. House Judiciary Democrats Letter To Equifax Regarding Consumer Protection In Wake of Data Breach by Beverly Tran on Scribd

U.S. House Judiciary Democrats Letter To TransUnion On Consumer Protection In Wake of Equifax Data Breach by Beverly Tran on Scribd

U,S, House Judiciary Democrats letter To Equifax on Consumer Protection In Wake of Experian Data Breach by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & JOHNSON RELEASE STATEMENTS & JUDICIARY DEM FACT SHEET ON GOP ANTI-REGULATORY AGENDA & WISH LIST FOR BIG BUSINESS

Washington, DC – During the first weeks of the 115^th Congress, Republicans are choosing to prioritize a series of anti-regulation bills that would empower Republicans to strip critical protections away from Americans. H.R. 5, the so-called Regulatory Accountability Act, would grind the rulemaking system to a halt while inviting regulatory capture through increased input from corporate interests, waste agency resources and taxpayer dollars, and do nothing to directly help small businesses. In doing so, H.R. 5 would seriously undermine critical protections across every regulated industry, including consumers’ health and product safety, environmental protections, workplace safety, and consumer financial protections.

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Ranking Member Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA) today released the following statements:

Dean of the U.S, House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Instead of wasting time on bad solutions for non-existent problems, we should be working tirelessly across party lines to find solutions to crushing student loan debt, gun violence, unemployment and stagnant wages,” said Conyers. “Unfortunately, House Republicans refuse to work on a bipartisan basis to reduce barriers to employment, even in the context of their anti-regulatory legislation. These same Republicans also refuse to work with Democrats on commonsense amendments to their legislation that would ensure that protections that create jobs and ensure the safety of our food, water and air are not undermined.”

Conyers continued, “Instead of working to support corporate interests through the GOP anti-regulatory agenda, Congress must focus on finding real solutions to real problems facing the nation, such as middle-class economic opportunity, gun violence prevention, the erosion of voting rights, and growing economic inequality.” 

“Once again, House Republicans' only ideas for growing the economy and creating jobs is to endanger countless regulatory protections under the guise of a so-called ‘jobs bill.’ They choose to ignore the fact that 15.6 million private sector jobs were created under the robust regulatory environment under the Obama administration,” said Johnson. “According to a recent Bloomberg report, only 0.3 percent of jobs eliminated last year were due to government regulation, far less than those lost due to other factors such as outsourcing and automation.”

On the House Judiciary Committee alone, House Republicans have held 33 anti-regulation hearings since the start of the 112th Congress, but not a single hearing in the 114^th or 115^thCongress on:

• Gun violence;
• Voting rights;
• The impact of overwhelming student loan debt on families and the economy;
• The mortgage foreclosure crisis, which still is hampering the economic recovery of millions of American families; or
• How we can better help struggling American families regain their financial stability.

A full fact sheet on H.R. 5 and the GOP Big Business Agenda is below.

FACT SHEET: GOP’S ANTI-REGULATORY AGENDA IS ONLY A “BETTER WAY” FOR BIG BUSINESS, NOT WORKING AMERICANS by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

BIPARTISAN HOUSE COALITION PRESSES CLAPPER FOR INFORMATION ON PHONE & EMAIL SURVEILLANCE

Washington, DC – Today, a bipartisan group of ten members of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee—including Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), and former Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), wrote to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to memorialize the Director’s commitment to provide a detailed look at how the government’s phone and email surveillance affects United States citizens.  The intelligence community has promised to provide a public estimate of that impact “early enough to inform the debate” on surveillance reform in the next Congress, with a target date of January 2017.

The letter was signed by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), F. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Darrell E. Issa (R-CA), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Ted Poe (R-TX), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Suzan K. DelBene (D-WA) and David N. Cicilline (D-RI).

U.S. House Bipartisan Coalition Letter To National Intelligence Director James Clapper for Phone & Email Su... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

AFTER TRUMP TWEETS, HOUSE JUDICIARY DEMOCRATS PRESS FOR HEARING ON TRUMP CONFLICTS

House Judiciary Democrats Release CRS Memo Outlining Ethics Provisions Applicable to the President

Washington, DC – After President-elect Donald Trump’s vague announcement this morning to leave his “…great business in total...,” all sixteen Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee wrote today to Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) to request that the Committee hold hearings to examine the federal conflicts-of-interest and ethics provisions that may apply to the President of the United States.

great business in total in order to fully focus on running the country in order to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! While I am not mandated to ....

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 30, 2016

In their letter, the Members wrote, “Although we do not yet know the details of his proposal, this announcement raises a number of questions, including whether Mr. Trump intends to legally transfer ownership of his assets to his children, or simply allow them to manage his assets; the extent his children will continue to be involved in his Administration and whether they will be subject to an “ethics firewall;” whether businesses, foreign governments, and others will continue to able to take actions that benefit Mr. Trump and his family; and what level if any of transparency in these matters Mr. Trump will provide.”

Previously, Mr. Trump claimed that “the president can’t have a conflict of interest.”  However, at the request of Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr., the Congressional Research Service (CRS), a non-partisan legislative agency operating out of the Library of Congress, has prepared a list of federal ethics and conflict-of-interest rules that may and should apply to Mr. Trump when he assumes office. This list includes four criminal statutes and the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  In their letter, the Members cite these rules as a cause for concern.

The letter was signed by every Democratic member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, including: Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Hank Johnson (D-GA), Pedro Pierluisi (D-Res.Comm.- PR), Judy Chu (D-CA), Ted Deutch (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Karen Bass (D-CA), Cedric Richmond (D-LA), Suzan DelBene (D-WA), Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), David Cicilline (D-RI), and Scott Peters (D-CA).

U.S. House Judiciary Letter Requesting immediate Conflict of Interest Hearings on President-elect Trump Con... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Conflict of Interest and “Ethics” Provisions That May Apply to the President by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Policing Strategies Working Group Visits Atlanta

Washington, D.C. – Members of the bipartisan Policing Strategies Working Group traveled to Atlanta, Georgia on November 17-18, 2016 to meet with local community leaders and law enforcement to discuss police accountability, aggression towards law enforcement, and public safety concerns related to these issues. Members who traveled to Atlanta are House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), Representative Doug Collins (R-Ga.), Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas), Representative David Reichert (R-Wa.), and Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.).

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Ranking Member Conyers and Chairman Goodlatte made the following statement on the trip to Atlanta: “Members of the Policing Strategies Working Group had a productive trip to Atlanta. We heard from local law enforcement and community leaders on how they’ve addressed the challenges of the use of excessive force by police and attacks on police, as well as what issues remain. Tragically during our time in Atlanta, Deputy Commander Pat Carothers of the U.S. Marshals Service was killed in the line of duty while serving a warrant to a fugitive in Georgia. We are saddened by this loss of life in the law enforcement community and stand shoulder to shoulder with them. We are reminded that law enforcement officers face danger every day while on duty and remain committed to finding solutions to these and other issues.”

Congressman Doug Collins, who helped coordinate the visit, said the following: “As a lifelong Georgian, I was proud to have the Policing Strategies Working Group visit Atlanta to learn some of the best practices our city and state have in place. Over the course of the trip, we had the privilege of hearing from law enforcement and community leaders and gathered information that will drive forward the conversation on policing and communities.”

Below are five pictures from the trip.

On Thursday, November 17, Emory University School of Law hosted a reception for Members of Congress, local law enforcement, and community leaders.

Congressional delegation with reception guests.

On Friday, November 18, the Members of Congress toured the United States Penitentiary (USP), Atlanta – a medium security federal prison housing over 2,200 inmates. During the tour, Warden Darlene Drew explained USP Atlanta’s reentry services for federal inmates, including those with serious mental illness.

Congressional delegation with Bureau of Prisons staff outside of USP Atlanta.

Following the prison tour, the Members participated in a law enforcement simulator at Georgia State University College of Law. During the simulator, members faced tense situations and had to determine whether or not to use force. 

Afterwards, the Members held a private roundtable with Atlanta Police Chief George Turner, Deputy Chief of Police Joseph Spillane, U.S. Attorney John Horn, Apostle Roderick Hughey of The Community Church of Gainesville, Georgia State University College of Law Associate Professor Nirej Sekhon, and Morehouse College Student Body President Johnathan Hill. Members discussed the challenges law enforcement faces and mistrust among the law enforcement and African-American community.

Group photo before the start of the roundtable.

Johnathan Hill addresses the roundtable.

Following the roundtable, the members held a press conference. Watch the press conference on the Majority’s Facebook page.

Rep. Collins gives remarks to the press.

Background on the Working Group: In July 2016, Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Ranking Member John Conyers announced the establishment of a working group to examine police accountability, aggression towards law enforcement, and public safety concerns related to these issues. The bipartisan working group is in the process of holding a series of roundtables to candidly discuss the issues fueling excessive force used by law enforcement and attacks against police officers. Read Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers’ op-ed on the working group in The Hill here.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Members of the bipartisan Policing Strategies Working Group held a meeting with local community leaders and law enforcement in Atlanta, GA

Looks like they ignored child welfare again...

Police accountability, aggression towards law enforcement, and public safety concerns. Members of the bipartisan Policing Strategies Working Group held a meeting with local community leaders and law enforcement in Atlanta, GA to discuss this and more.

Members of Congress

·         House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)

·         Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.)

·         Representative Doug Collins (R-Ga.)

·         Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas)

·         Representative David Reichert (R-Wa.)

·         Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.)

Roundtable Participants

·         George Turner, Chief of Police, Atlanta Police Department

·         John Horn, United States Attorney, Northern District of Georgia

·         Joseph P. Spillane, Chief of Police, Georgia State University

·         Roderick Hughey, Sr., Pastor, Voices of Faith North

·         Nirej Sekhon, Associate Professor of Law, Georgia State University – College of Law

·         Johnathan Hill, Student Body President, Morehouse University

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: Media Advisory: Policing Strategies Working Group to Visit Atlanta & Hold Press Conference http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2016/11/media-advisory-policing-strategies.html#ixzz4QUbRcfxo
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Media Advisory: Policing Strategies Working Group to Visit Atlanta & Hold Press Conference

Washington, D.C. – Several members of the bipartisan Policing Strategies Working Group will be traveling to Atlanta, Georgia to meet with local community leaders and law enforcement to discuss police accountability, aggression towards law enforcement, and public safety concerns related to these issues. Members of the working group plan to hold a press conference following their private roundtable with community leaders on Friday, November 18 at 2:00 p.m. ET. Details can be found below.

WHO:
Members of Congress

·         House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)

·         Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.)

·         Representative Doug Collins (R-Ga.)

·         Representative Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas)

·         Representative David Reichert (R-Wa.)

·         Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.)

Roundtable Participants

·         George Turner, Chief of Police, Atlanta Police Department

·         John Horn, United States Attorney, Northern District of Georgia

·         Joseph P. Spillane, Chief of Police, Georgia State University

·         Roderick Hughey, Sr., Pastor, Voices of Faith North

·         Nirej Sekhon, Associate Professor of Law, Georgia State University – College of Law

·         Johnathan Hill, Student Body President, Morehouse University

WHAT:  Press conference following the conclusion of the bipartisan Policing Strategies Working Group roundtable with community leaders. 

WHEN:  Friday, November 18, 2016 at 2:00 p.m. Media with video equipment can begin setup at 1:30 p.m. The press conference will also be streamed live on the House Judiciary CommitteeMajority’s Facebook page.

WHERE:       Georgia State University – College of Law

                        85 Park Place NE

Room 242

                        Atlanta, GA 30303

RSVP:  Members of the media who wish to attend must RSVP with Jessica Collins atJessica.Collins@mail.house.gov and Shadawn Reddick-Smith at Shadawn.Reddick-Smith@mail.house.gov by Thursday, November 17.

Background on the Working Group: In July 2016, Chairman Bob Goodlatte and Ranking Member John Conyers announced the establishment of a working group to examine police accountability, aggression towards law enforcement, and public safety concerns related to these issues. The bipartisan working group is in the process of holding a series of roundtables to candidly discuss the issues fueling excessive force used by law enforcement and attacks against police officers. Read Chairman Goodlatte and Ranking Member Conyers’ op-ed on the working group, below:

Examining police-community issues with bipartisan working group

By John Conyers, Jr. and Bob Goodlatte

One does not need a public opinion poll to know that fear and frustration is rampant in many communities across our Nation. Our newsfeeds and TV screens are filled with reports of deadly attacks on police officers and excessive use of force by law enforcement officers. These tragic events have strained race relations and heightened tensions as well as further added to feelings of mistrust between communities and law enforcement. When African-American men and women are pulled over for routine traffic stops, many fear that officers will cause undue harm. And as the men and women in blue head out on their daily patrols, many worry that it may be their last.

It seems as though there are two factions forming: one pro-police and one pro-racial justice. As Members of Congress, we strongly reject this notion of division. The senseless deaths that have occurred over the last several weeks are unconscionable. These incidents must not become the new normal for our communities.

Just days before his murder, Montrell Jackson, an African-American  police officer, summed up these issues  in a Facebook post: “In uniform I get nasty hateful looks and out of uniform some consider me a threat…These are trying times.” He further called on his fellow citizens: “Please don’t let hate infect your heart.”

As a Nation, we must heed Officer Jackson’s call and come together to address these tensions so that we can overcome all unjustified acts of violence. Every layer of civil society – neighbors, community leaders, churches, and state and local governments – must confront this matter of vital national importance.

As Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, we recently established a bipartisan working group to examine the use of force by law enforcement, aggression towards law enforcement, and public safety concerns related to these issues. We are not naïve enough to believe that we can fix this problem by ourselves. However, we can and must devote urgent Congressional attention to these serious problems that must be addressed, and determine what can be done at the federal level to set an appropriate tone. In addition, we need to work with state and local communities to help find the tools they need to do the hard work of improving the relationships between their law enforcement agencies and residents.

Before Congress adjourned, we and the 10 other members of the working group met for the first time to candidly discuss the issues fueling the current state of distrust between some of the public and law enforcement. Each of us comes from different walks of life and different parts of the country and can learn from one another and our constituents. We plan to hold more meetings when we return to Washington, D.C. in September, but in the meantime, we intend to take action to learn more about the problem and potential solutions from the individuals, law enforcement agencies, and community leaders in our state and local communities.

We plan to listen and talk with a variety of people in our districts who are impacted by this problem: law enforcement, religious and other community leaders, area youth, and mothers and fathers who have lost children to violent crime. We want to hear about people’s own experiences so that we can understand the fears and frustrations of those impacted most by the ongoing tension.

The issues driving the wedge between law enforcement and the public will not be solved overnight and they won’t be solved by the federal government alone. Much of the hard work needs to happen in local communities, but we in Congress acknowledge the gravity of this problem and are committed to finding solutions. There is room for compassion for all the victims of violence on our streets.  We must work together as fellow Americans on this issue so that we live up to our nation’s values of liberty and justice for all. 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & JOHNSON: H.R. 5063 WILL UNDERMINE AGENCY ABILITY TO HOLD WRONG DOERS ACCOUNTABLE

Washington, DC – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Ranking Member Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA) today released the following statements after H.R. 5063, the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2016 passed the U.S. House of Representatives.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“H.R. 5063 is a deeply flawed bill that imposes an abysmal solution to a non-existent problem,” said Congressman Conyers. “Many settlement agreements like those under attack by this legislation have facilitated effective responses to harms caused by reckless corporate actors. The majority’s accusations against the Justice Department’s use of settlement funds have been proven to be completely false. It is my hope that my colleagues in the Senate reject this legislation, should it come to the floor for a vote.”

“This so-called “Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2016” is a deeply flawed proposal that would establish sweeping changes to the enforcement of the law by civil enforcement agencies,” said Congressman Johnson. “This misguided bill lets Wall Street off the hook at the expense of homeowners who were misled and severely harmed by the depraved misconduct that gave rise to the mortgage crisis.”

H.R. 5063, the Stop Settlement Slush Funds Act of 2016, would prohibit settlement agreements that authorize payments to parties not “directly and proximately” harmed by the unlawful conduct of the settling defendant. This undermines the ability of agencies to adequately address unlawful conduct, provide complete restitution for violations of the law, and tailor remedies to address systemic or diffuse harms to unidentifiable victims, the public health, or the environment. By forcing agencies into needless litigation, the bill would waste agency time and resources as well as taxpayer dollars and delay the timely enforcement of the law and the provision of full relief for victims.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, WATERS, JOHNSON Lead Over 60 House Democrats in Letter Supporting CFPB Arbitration Proposal

Members Urge Swift Action to Finalize Rule to Restore Consumers’ Rights 

WASHINGTON – 65 House Democrats, led by Reps. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Ranking Member of the Committee on the Judiciary; Maxine Waters (D-CA), Ranking Member of the Committee on Financial Services; and Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law, sent a letter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau expressing strong support for its proposal to limit forced arbitration in consumer contracts.

The rule would ban class-action waivers in forced arbitration agreements for financial products and services, restoring consumers’ right of action when harmed by financial institutions. In the letter to Director Richard Cordray, the Members wrote that the proposed rule “is a critical step to protect the public interest by ensuring that consumers receive redress for systemic unlawful conduct.”

Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Congress directed the CFPB to research the impact of forced arbitration clauses and promulgate a rule that would be in the public interest and for the protection of consumers. The CFPB proposed the rule in May after conducting a three-year, in-depth study on the landscape of consumer arbitrations.

“By restricting class actions and class-wide arbitration in consumer contracts, these clauses enable corporations to avoid public scrutiny by precluding access to the courts,” the letter states. “This is particularly problematic for small, diffuse misconduct that harms innumerous consumers.” The Members encouraged Director Cordray to proceed quickly on the rule “to ensure that consumers have equal protection under the law.”

Conyers, Johnson, Waters Lead Over 60 House Democrats in Letter Supporting CFPB Arbitration Proposal by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS, RANGEL, JOHNSON Introduce Resolution To Recover POW/MIA Remains From North Korea

Washington D.C. – Marking the 66^th anniversary of the start of the Korean War on June 25, 1950, the three remaining Korean War veterans in Congress, Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY), joined by Reps. John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), and Sam Johnson (R-TX), introduced House Resolution 799 that calls on the U.S. government to resume talks with North Korea to account for thousands of American men and women from the Korean War (1950-1953). Between 1954 and 2005, joint U.S.-North Korea teams successfully conducted recovery missions that identified and returned thousands of Americans. Yet these efforts were suspended in 2005, despite the fact that the remains of 5,300 out of 8,000 total number of unaccounted Korean War veterans are estimated to be in North Korea.

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“More than five thousand brave American soldiers who fought in the Korean Conflict for our country remain unaccounted for.  That is simply unacceptable.  As a veteran of the Korean Conflict, I feel honor bound to ensure we do everything we can to bring their remains home.  After all our fighting men in Korea sacrificed, it is our duty to make sure we do everything to provide them and their families some measure of peace.  I am proud to join with my fellow veterans of the Korean Conflict in ensuring the United States reengages the North Korean government on this issue,” said Conyers, who served in the National Guard and the United States Army Corps of Engineers during the Korean War.

“I am grateful to my colleagues and fellow Korean War veterans for working together to ensure that we bring these veterans home. This resolution would ensure that the heroic service members of the Korean War are identified and brought back to their loved ones in the United States, where they belong. We have a responsibility to our veterans to make sure we do not forget their sacrifices made to defend the freedoms we enjoy. Their families deserve peace,”said Rangel, a decorated veteran, who has been awarded both a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star. 

  

“With the 66th Anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War around the corner, it is important we remember those American forces who remain unaccounted for from this war. As a Korean War veteran and former Prisoner of War, I believe we owe our fallen brothers in arms every last effort to provide a proper and dignified return to home. I'm proud to join my fellow Korean War veterans, Congressman Rangel and Congressman Conyers, in this noble cause,” said Rep. Johnson, a decorated war hero, who spent his 29-year career in the U.S. Air Force, during which he flew combat missions in both the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Johnson endured nearly seven years as a Prisoner of War in Hanoi, including 42 months in solitary confinement.

“The lifetime hope for thousands of Americans is to bring home their loved one still missing in North Korea. It is a wound that never healed. The path to finding that closure will open only when North Korean and U.S. leaders decide to pursue this humanitarian mission other than their political differences. It can be done. It has been done. It is time to do so again. Thank you to Representatives Rangel, Conyers and Johnson, who are keeping the mission alive to help fulfill the promise that no one's father, husband, brother, uncle, cousin or comrade in arms is left behind in war," said Rick Downes, President of the Coalition of Families of Korean & Cold War POW/MIAs, and son of Hal Downes, who went missing in action in North Korea in 1952.

As recently as this year, North Korea has reported uncovering the remains of American veterans- but the fate of these remains is unknown due to construction and development. H.Res 799 calls on the U.S. Government to resume talks with North Korea regarding the research, investigation, recovery, and identification of missing and unaccounted Korean War veterans.

“While we will never be able to fully end the lingering pain of the families, we must try to bring closure,” said Rangel,“We will keep fighting to bring home our comrades in arms.”

Rangel, Johnson, and Conyers have previously worked together to introduce and pass legislation that supports veterans of the Korean War, including H.Res.384 - Calling for a formal end of the Korean War; H.Con.Res 91, Encouraging reunions of divided Korean American families; H.Con.Res.41 - Encouraging peace and reunification on the Korean Peninsula (Passed in 2013); H.Res. 618 - Expressing support for designation of 2012-2013 as the "Year of the Korean War Veteran" (Passed in 2012); H. Res 376 - Calling for Repatriation of POW/MIAs and Abductees in North Korea (Passed in 2011); H.J.Res.86 - Recognizing the 60th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War and Reaffirming U.S.-Korea Alliance (Passed in 2010); and the Korean War Veterans Recognition Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-41).

Below is the full text of H.Res 799 calling for U.S. Government to resume talks with North Korea on Korean War POW/MIAs:

Calling on the United States Government to resume talks with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea regarding the research, investigation, recovery, and identification of missing and unaccounted members of the United States Armed Forces from the Korean War.

Whereas more than 36,000 members of the United States Armed Forces died and nearly 103,000 were wounded during the Korean War, which began on June 25, 1950;

Whereas of the approximately 8,000 members of the United States Armed Forces who remain unaccounted for from the Korean War, the remains of at least 5,300 Americans are believed to be in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (in this resolution referred to as “North Korea”);

Whereas the United States and North Korea have a precedent of working together on issues related to American prisoners of war/missing in action (POW/MIAs) from the Korean War;

Whereas North Korea has intermittently returned the remains of deceased members of the United States Armed Forces found in North Korea, including several thousand sets of remains in 1954, and varying numbers of remains in 1990, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2003;

Whereas United States operations in North Korea to recover the remains of deceased members of the United States Armed Forces were suspended in 2005;

Whereas the remains of deceased members of the United States Armed Forces in North Korea are being lost due to construction and development, the passing of North Korean observers of United States plane crashes, and inclement weather conditions;

Whereas North Korea has reported uncovering the remains of deceased members of the United States Armed Forces in North Korea through agriculture and construction projects as recently as 2016;

Whereas not all of the remains of Korean War veterans located at the National Memorial Cemetery in Hawaii (The Punch Bowl) have been identified;

Whereas members of the Coalition of Families of Korean & Cold War POW/MIAs, the National League of POW/MIA Families, the National Alliance of Families, Rolling Thunder, the Korean War Veterans Association, the American Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and thousands of families and veterans are yearning and advocating for the accounting of their loved ones and comrades in arms of the Korean War; and

Whereas the mission of the United States Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) is to provide the fullest possible accounting of missing United States personnel;

Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives calls upon the United States Government to resume talks with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to make substantial progress in the research, investigation, recovery and identification of missing and unaccounted members of the United States Armed Forces from the Korean War.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©