The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hosted a forum this past December, in partnership with the Princeton School of Public and International Affairs, for a conversation about clemency following efforts by President Joe Biden and Oregon Ex-Governor Kate Brown, who both categorically pardoned people with convictions for marijuana possession.
The panel included Ex-Governor Kate Brown of Oregon, Michael Thompson, a formerly incarcerated advocate and founder of the Michael Thompson Clemency Project and New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin. Thompson and Brown received the inaugural 2022 Lewis Conway Jr. Leadership in Clemency Award during the event. Walk 4 Change co-founder Joe Grumbine CEO of The Human Solution Institute, worked with Michael Thompson extensively including raising money to help with his re-entry and medical needs and doing a series of interviews. “When we talk about clemency, we’re talking about giving hope to people who feel there is nothing they can do,” said Michael Thompson during the event. “These sentences that are stacked and trap people need to be seriously re-evaluated. I would still be in prison if it wasn’t for people fighting for me and fighting to fix a system that is broken.” When he announced the pardons last month, White House officials said Biden’s pardons would extend to over 6,500 individuals with prior convictions for simple marijuana possession. Kate Brown estimates her clemency will lead to pardons for some 45,000 people convicted of simply possessing marijuana. “The one-size-fits-all approach that mass incarceration relies on is rooted in racism,” Brown said during the event. “And as a country, we must rethink this approach. Clemency is a powerful tool that can help right the wrongs we know exist in our criminal legal system."
0 Comments
“Only in America can I kill someone, and two people stand up and take the blame for it,” Keith Jesperson, also known as the Happy Face Killer, says matter-of-factly in a phone interview from Oregon State Penitentiary.
On January 21, 1990, Jesperson killed 23-year-old Taunja Bennett after meeting her at the B&I Tavern in Portland, Oregon. Shortly after, he dumped her body off an isolated road in the Columbia River Gorge. Bennett’s murder caught the attention of 58-year-old Laverne Pavlinac after it had made the local news. Pavlinac had a history of calling police to make false accusations against her boyfriend, 39-year-old John Sosnovske, about crimes he did not commit, hoping to put him in prison to subsequently free herself from a relationship she described as abusive. This time was no different. She called Detective John Ingram and blamed Sosnovkse for Bennett’s murder. Pavlinac’s story would change several times over the course of the investigation, until she eventually confessed to helping Sosnovske kill Bennett and later dispose of the body. Detectives had asked Pavlinac to point out where Bennett’s body was disposed of in the Columbia River Gorge, which she somehow did with no problem. “I think Detective John Ingram sold her a bill of goods, saying we’re going to put you in jail for now, and then you’re going to testify, and we’re going to let you go and you go have a happy life forever and ever,” Jesperson surmises. “And, of course, that didn’t happen.” With a recorded confession and her knowledge of a detail only the killer would know, detectives were able to arrest and charge both her and Sosnovske for Bennett’s murder. At this point, Pavlinac attempted to recant her confession, but was nonetheless convicted and sentenced to prison for ten years to life. Sosnovske always maintained his innocence, but out of fear of facing the death penalty, he pleaded no contest and was sentenced to 15 years to life. In March 1995, upon his arrest, Jesperson confessed to killing Bennett and made it his mission to free both Pavlinac and Sosnovske, who were both innocent. Jesperson figured he “[could] use these people as witnesses to the fact that I had compassion enough to get them out of prison, and in sentencing that means a lot.” But it would not be that easy. In the months following his confession, Jesperson would learn the deep flaws that ravaged the criminal justice system in America, as Sosnovske and Pavlinac remained in prison despite their innocence until November 1995. Although it makes sense that prosecutors wanted to make sure Jesperson was telling the truth about murdering Bennett, should Sosnovske and Pavlinac have ever been arrested and convicted in the first place? “It was very shoddy police work, and I think there is also a certain arrogance involved in it too….here, the investigating officers, they just knew it was John [Sosnovske]… every time Laverne would come up with a new one, it seems to me they got a little bit disappointed like ‘oh, we gotta do something to tighten this up’ and let Laverne sort of reel them back in,” Michael E. Rose, Sosnovske’s post-conviction attorney, explained. “It’s a bit of hubris that they see themselves being on the right side of the law that they can do no wrong. When you’re in that kind of position of power and authority, you just don’t change your mind,” Rose said. “You don’t let on that you are vulnerable, weak, or imperfect. I don’t want to say that’s true for all police officers, but there is that tendency.” In 1990, poor police work in New York cost Jeffrey Deskovic sixteen years of his life when he was wrongfully convicted for raping and murdering a fellow classmate, Angela Correra. “The jury in my case convicted me, even though the DNA did not match me. It was just based on the confession,” Deskovic explained in an interview. Often, people cannot understand why someone would confess to something they did not do, especially when the consequences are as dire as a lengthy prison sentence. Many people believe if ever placed in such a position that they would never admit to a heinous crime they did not commit. However, they fail to recognize how stressful, grueling, and unrelenting police interrogations can be, which would cause anyone to crumble under such pressure. Steven Drizin, a Clinical Professor of Law at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, co-founder of the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, and one of the attorneys representing Brendan Dassey, a central figure in Netflix’s docuseries Making a Murderer, said “everybody has a breaking point.” “Some people can hold out longer than others, but I have no doubt that over time, most people, subjected to today’s psychological interrogation tactics, could be made to confess to a crime, even murder,” Drizin said. In Deskovic’s case, he describes that he believed that he was helping the police solve the case when they drove him 40 minutes out of the county where he lived. Since he was supposed to be in school, neither his mother nor anyone else had any idea of his whereabouts, putting him in a vulnerable position. The police then convinced him to take a polygraph test, telling him that if he complied, they would be able to share new information they had about the case. “The polygraph was [administered by] a Putnam County Sheriff’s investigator, Daniel Stephens, who was dressed like a civilian, and he pretended not to be a cop. He never read me my Miranda warnings,” Deskovic recounted. “I didn’t understand all the words in the brochure that explained how the polygraph worked, but I thought I was there to help the police, so what does it matter?” At no point did Deskovic have an attorney present, and the officers did not give him anything to eat throughout the day. Instead, they brought him into a small room and gave him countless cups of coffee to make him nervous. Stephens then wired him to the machine and began an interrogation implementing what Deskovic describes as “third-degree tactics.” “He raised his voice at me, he invaded my personal space, he kept asking me the same questions over and over again. I realized I was a suspect then, but it was too late. Each hour that passed by my fear increased,” Deskovic said. “I was in fear of my life…he kept that up for 6 ½ to 7 hours, and then that was capped off by when he left the room the cop that was pretending to be my friend came in and told me that the other officers were going to harm me, that I had to help myself.” Eventually, the officer convinced Deskovic to tell them what they wanted to hear, promising he would then be able to go home. “Being young, naïve, frightened, overwhelmed emotionally, in fear of my life, I made up a story based on information which he had given me during the course of the interrogation. By the time it was said and done, I had collapsed on the floor in the fetal position crying uncontrollably. So, all those circumstances led to the false confession.” Deskovic fought for his innocence behind bars, losing seven appeals in the process, before he was finally freed and eventually exonerated. During his incarceration, he said he collected articles about other people who were exonerated, many through DNA evidence. Deskovic had requested a review of DNA evidence in his case, but was initially denied. “On one hand I’d be happy for people, and I would envision the scene outside the prison and use that as motivation to continue, but at some point, that feeling would leave me and I would start to get frustrated like, ‘what about me?’” Deskovic said. “It was really just a technical difference. They were excluded by DNA after the conviction, and I was excluded before I was convicted. Their evidence was newly discovered, mine wasn’t.” The cases involving Pavlinac, Sosnovske, and Deskovic are only a few examples of the defective process that still exists today within police interrogations. In the United States, it is estimated that 46,000 to 230,000 currently incarcerated prisoners are innocent, according to The Los Angeles Times. If nothing else, these numbers reveal an ongoing problem and a broken system every American citizen is susceptible to falling victim to. If police interrogations are meant to lead to a clear path to justice, why should a false confession ever occur? Do most detectives and prosecutors simply wish to solve a case, regardless of one’s guilt? Within an interrogation, Drizin says that police officers use deception, promises of leniency, and threats of harm to “break a suspect down to a place of hopelessness.” “The suspect begins to realize that asserting innocence is futile and wants to bring an end to the interrogation by any means possible,” Drizin said, detailing a process he believes is concerned only with reaching a conclusion, no matter if the truth has been discovered. Drizin believes that many investigations rely too heavily on confessions as a way to close cases. He argues that law enforcement should instead “get the suspect’s account, take some time to prove that the suspect is lying and then slowly confront the suspect with the evidence that proves that the suspect isn’t telling the truth.” “It’s a process more like peeling off the layers of the onion to convince the suspect that he is guilty rather than a process that bludgeons a suspect into confessing to a narrative created by the police. It all boils down to better police investigations,” Drizin said. When someone is wrongfully accused of a crime, they tend to believe in the adage, “the truth will set them free.” Often, they do not believe they will end up convicted and stuck in prison for years. They have faith in the system, that it will work for them, making them “overconfident that they will be able to demonstrate that they are innocent once they leave the interrogation room, but they come to find that their confession makes that all-but impossible,” according to Drizin. Over time, faith chisels away, as they fight against a system that poses as a relentless opponent unconcerned with truth. In the meantime, with innocent people behind bars, the world grows more unsafe since the true felons are left free. Just as Jesperson went on to kill seven more women, the perpetrator in Deskovic’s case was able to kill a second victim, a teacher with two children, while he was free and Deskovic was behind bars. “They could have caught him, and she could have still lived,” he said. Since such monumental mistakes cost people their lives and freedom, a growing awareness has been leading to some significant changes within the way interrogations are conducted. Approximately 30 state legislatures have now passed laws that require interrogations to be recorded. However, some of these laws still need improvement. For instance, in 2017, legislators in New York made it mandatory for police to videotape interrogations, but laid out exceptions for homicide, sex offenses and drug cases. “Those are the cases we need that the most,” Deskovic said. “[The requirement] is to reduce wrongful convictions caused by false confessions, so are we saying in making those exceptions that it’s okay to have a false confession in those cases? So, the bill that’s been introduced is going to close those exceptions.” Laws that require interrogations to be documented via audio and/or video allow “judges [to] have a complete and accurate record of what transpired during the interrogation,” Drizin explained: “Without a record, the risks are too high that judges will simply believe the police narrative of what happened, and police officers, like all human beings, misremember things or, in the worst cases, lie about what tactics were used and who provided the details in the confession,” Drizin said. Since Deskovic’s exoneration, he has become an advocate for much-needed reform efforts, some of which also include allowing testimony about false confessions in the courtroom and introducing an additional pre-trial hearing where the accuracy of a confession would be looked at by the judge to assess any red flags. Since Deskovic was only sixteen at the time of his arrest, he and the advocacy group #Right2RemainSilent have been working to pass the Youth Interrogation Act. The proposed legislation would make it so that anyone under the age of seventeen “would have to speak to a lawyer to have their rights explained to them before they can waive their rights and speak to the police, recognizing that kids that age don’t understand their Miranda warnings,” Deskovic said. Both Deskovic and Drizin agree that passing police deception bills would also help decrease false confessions from occurring, prohibiting police from lying to suspects that they have evidence that does not exist. Police interrogations should only be permitted to last for four hours, Drizin suggests, explaining “that interrogations should not be held in the wee hours of the morning (to guard against sleep deprivation being a factor).” In Deskovic’s case, time was a factor that wore him down, leading to his false confession, so setting such limits would create a less adversarial environment in which lies are merely told out of exhaustion. Even the lack of equality between prosecutors and defense attorneys, specifically public defenders, can skew the pursuit of justice. “We need public defenders that have the same budget and the same manpower as the district attorney’s office. We need to have equal pay for both sides,” Deskovic said. “Right now, it’s not equal, and I think that sends the message that the prosecutor’s job is more important when in reality both lawyers are essential.” Yet, whether these changes are made still does not address the problem of accountability. When police and prosecutors build and win a case, resulting in the conviction of an innocent person, there are no penalties or consequences for robbing years from that person’s life. “Any misconduct [prosecutors] do, if they do it after an arrest has been made, then they have absolute immunity,” Deskovic said. “We have a whole class of people that are in effect above the law.” Although a perfect system can never exist, it is imperative that those who investigate crimes strive for justice, rather than solely pursue securing a conviction. Around Veterans Day, many of us reflect on the honor and sacrifice that our country's veterans have made. It is also an excellent time for attorneys to honor that service and sacrifice by getting involved with providing pro bono legal services to military and veteran clients.
Every year, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs identifies the top unmet needs of veterans facing housing insecurity. Nearly every one of those unmet needs is legal in nature, but most veterans who cannot afford legal assistance end up falling into the justice gap. We can help close that gap. You do not need to be in the military or be a veteran to participate in these opportunities, just willing to give of your time and professional skills. Attorney allies who are not affiliated with the military can provide some of the most impactful legal services to military and veteran clients. Below is an overview of military and veteran pro bono opportunities and how to get involved. Pro Bono Opportunities One of the unique components of providing pro bono legal services to military and veteran clients is the broad range of matters where a volunteer attorney can make a big difference: Some involve litigation while others are more transactional. A common misconception is that the majority of military and veteran pro bono opportunities are related to assistance with claims with the VA or other military benefits, and that pro bono assistance is only limited to those topics. While helping veterans access the benefits they have earned is important, there is also tremendous need for assistance in other practice areas. Opportunities can range from state and federal veterans benefits, applications for discharge upgrades, consumer protection, family law, housing and landlord/tenant law, consumer debt, bankruptcies, public housing, estate planning, Social Security and other benefits, elder law, immigration, and other state law-related issues. For example, a pro bono attorney may be able to use their family law expertise to find opportunities to assist veterans who need divorces, some of which involve child custody issues. Pro bono representation in these instances typically involves assisting the veteran with filing for divorce, accompanying the veteran to hearings, helping develop a parenting plan, and ensuring that appropriate spousal and child support is awarded. There are also opportunities to assist veterans with nonhonorable discharges based on conduct attributable to health conditions — such as traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder — from combat-related exposure or military sexual trauma. These volunteer opportunities typically involve helping the veteran draft and submit a discharge upgrade petition to the appropriate board of correction or discharge review board, and can help remove the stigma associated with receiving a nonhonorable discharge, and provide deserving veterans with access to earned benefits. Providing pro bono services does not necessarily require taking a case for full representation. Counseling and advice, brief services or limited assistance representation can also be quite effective in removing legal barriers veterans may face. These limited scope representation matters may be available through a range of events, including the following. Stand-Downs Stand-downs are day-long or multiday events where a variety of services are made available to veterans in a single location, typically on a walk-in basis. In addition to legal services, the services may include health care, dental care, housing, employment, substance abuse treatment or counseling, clothing, shower facilities, barbers and other essential services. Volunteer attorneys providing legal services at stand-downs are typically providing one-time, limited-scope representation on issues that veterans present the day of the stand-down without an expectation of follow-up or full representation, similar to many lawyer-of-the-day type programs often hosted in courthouses. Attorneys can volunteer in their area of expertise or even by screening veterans seeking legal services. Legal Clinics One-time clinics are another great way for attorneys to provide limited-scope pro bono services. They are typically sponsored by local legal aid organizations serving veterans and staffed by volunteer attorneys with mentors and experts in the subject matter present. These clinics typically last one day and services are provided directly to clients on the day of the clinic without an expectation of follow-up or full representation. For example, Pine Tree Legal Services in Maine provides a legal clinic for veterans and their spouses to receive simple wills and powers of attorney through its Wills for Heroes program in locations throughout Maine. Metroplex Veterans Legal Services has also provided virtual expungement and orders of nondisclosure clinics in counties throughout Texas. Mentorship and Training Those interested in providing volunteer legal services may also be able to provide mentorship and training in their area of expertise, so others have the foundation to provide services directly to military and veteran clients. This is a unique way for those who are unable to provide direct representation to continue to provide volunteer legal services. Corporate Assistance A sometimes overlooked opportunity for volunteer attorneys is to provide corporate-related legal services to a nonprofit veteran organization. This can be in the form of assisting with incorporation or entity formation, risk management, operational policies, lease negotiations, assisting with employment-related issues, or other legal matters related to the nonprofit's operation, or otherwise providing corporate assistance. Getting Involved The first step to finding opportunities to get involved is to look for a reputable nonprofit or other legal aid program in your community that already provides legal aid to veterans, service members or their families, if there is one. These organizations devote resources to providing their volunteers with the following key benefits. Screening Veteran legal aid providers will typically screen cases to ensure the client qualifies for pro bono legal services, assess the merits of the matter that the client wishes to have resolved, and provide a screening and placement memo. All of these tools will assist the volunteer attorney in avoiding conflicts and providing pro bono legal services to a military or veteran client. Training and Mentorship Volunteer attorneys will typically be provided with training on military and veterans culture and how to meet the unique legal needs of veterans and their families. These legal aid programs will also typically provide experienced staff attorneys as mentors to volunteer attorneys. Follow-Up Representation Accepting a referral from a veterans legal aid provider is also beneficial if additional or new legal problems arise that are outside the scope of services the volunteer attorney has agreed to provide. The veteran can be directed back to the legal aid organization, which can assist them in securing other resources or assistance. Conclusion Attorneys should consider honoring veterans by providing pro bono legal services to military and veteran clients. There are many great organizations with which attorneys can volunteer.[1] Volunteering your time and legal skills, in any capacity that you are comfortable, will make a lasting positive impact on a well-deserving group of individuals. Nearly 500 years after papal decrees were used to rationalize Europe's colonial conquests, the Vatican repudiated those decrees on Thursday, saying the "Doctrine of Discovery" that was used to justify snuffing out Indigenous people's culture and livelihoods is not part of the Catholic faith.
The doctrine was invoked as a legal and religious standing by Europeans who "discovered" new lands and violently seized it from people who had been living there for generations. It has been cited in different arenas for centuries, including by the U.S. Supreme Court — as early as 1823 and as recently as 2005. "The statement repudiates the very mindsets and worldview that gave rise to the original papal bulls," the Rev. David McCallum, executive director of the Program for Discerning Leadership based in Rome, told NPR. "It renounces the mindset of cultural or racial superiority which allowed for that objectification or subjection of people, and strongly condemns any attitudes or actions that threaten or damage the dignity of the human person." Here's a brief guide to the Discovery Doctrine, and why the Vatican's move is historic: The doctrine came from papal "bulls" in the 15th century. The doctrine was laid out in a series of papal "bulls," or decrees; the first one was issued in 1452. They authorized colonial powers such as Spain and Portugal to seize lands and subjugate people in Africa and the "New World," as long as people on the lands were not Christians. Scholars widely note three bulls: Pope Nicholas V's Dum diversas (1452) and Romanus Pontifex (1455); and Pope Alexander VI's Inter caetera (1493). Later popes revoked the decrees, but the damage was done. The papal bulls "were not considered valid just 30 to 40 years after they were first issued. They were in fact abrogated legally and nullified by the Vatican by the late 1530s," McCallum told NPR. The Vatican's nullification was too late to stop the destructive impact of colonialism, McCallum said, noting that European expansion was fueled by a "sort of missionary sense that the Western monarchies had a right to go to these new lands and to take from them their resources and if necessary to put down people, including enslaving them." The doctrine made its way into the U.S. legal system "Back in the in the 19th century, it was used as a precedent which gave people a sense of title to land that had not been owned with an official title in deed," McCallum said.So what began as a religious decree in the 1400s then became the basis for a legal concept in the U.S., when the Doctrine of Discovery was invoked in an 1823 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that Indigenous people had only rights of "occupancy," not ownership, over lands they had long lived on. The land, then, was open for the taking" As a result of this being written into the American property law, it was actually considered a precedent," McCallum said, including citations as recent as a 2005 case in upstate New York, involving the Oneida Indian Nation. Indigenous groups have long sought the repudiation Indigenous advocates have previously called on the Catholic Church to issue a formal repudiation of the doctrine, saying personal apologies fell short, given the magnitude of the policy's effects. Last year, the pope stunned observers when he personally apologized to Taylor Behn-Tsakoza, a youth delegate with the Assembly of First Nations who lives in British Columbia, for the Catholic Church's role contributing to years of suffering. Behn-Tsakoza welcomed the pope's action. But she also noted the irreparable harm done to her culture by centuries of subjugation and to families like her own by decades of forced assimilation — and she called on Francis to renounce the Doctrine of Discovery. Months later, the pope apologized to Indigenous peoples for the systemic abuse inflicted upon Native children at Catholic-run residential schools. But he stopped short of formally rescinding the doctrine. What did the Vatican say about the doctrine? Invoking the Christian mandate to respect the dignity of every human being, the Vatican said on Thursday, "The Catholic Church therefore repudiates those concepts that fail to recognize the inherent human rights of indigenous peoples, including what has become known as the legal and political 'doctrine of discovery.' " The Church also said it stands with Indigenous peoples now and strongly supports the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which it says can help protect Indigenous rights as well as improving living conditions and development "in a way that respects their identity, language and culture." The Vatican also invoked the pope's words from his visit to Canada last year: "Never again can the Christian community allow itself to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior to others, or that it is legitimate to employ ways of coercing others." Priests welcome the Vatican statement "What was significant today is the way that the statement repudiates the very mindsets and worldview that gave rise to the original papal bulls," McCallum said. "It renounces the mindset of cultural or racial superiority which allowed for that objectification or subjection of people, and strongly condemns any attitudes or actions that threaten or damage the dignity of the human person." Bishop Douglas Lucia of the Diocese of Syracuse, N.Y., said he believes the statement will lead to more dialogue. "The call 'to walk side by side' is especially poignant in this land of the Onondaga and Haudenosaunee where there exists the 'Two Row Wampum," " Lucia told NPR via email. "It is a 1613 agreement of how the Haudenosaunee would treat the new settlers on their land based on friendship, peace, and forever." With the Vatican taking a formal stance, Lucia added, the Christian community can acknowledge its own failings and work with Indigenous peoples to embody that 1613 agreement. One of the biggest food safety sanitation companies in the United States had at least 102 kids working overnight shifts in dangerous conditions at meat processing facilities across the country, the U.S. Department of Labor said Friday. Packers Sanitation Services Inc. Ltd. has agreed to pay $1.5 million in penalties after a DOL investigation discovered it had been employing children ranging in age from 13 to 17 years old to clean razor sharp saws and other equipment using hazardous chemicals, according to a statement from the agency. The Wisconsin-based services provider had kids cleaning things like back saws, brisket saws and head splitters, and at least three of the children were injured while working, the DOL said. Packers Sanitation was fined a little more than $15,100 for each minor-aged employee, the maximum civil penalty allowed by the law, according to the agency. Jessica Looman, principal deputy administrator of the DOL's wage and hour division, said the child labor violations by Packers Sanitation were systemic, stretched across eight states and "clearly indicate a corporate-wide failure by Packers Sanitation Services at all levels." "These children should never have been employed in meat packing plants and this can only happen when employers do not take responsibility to prevent child labor violations from occurring in the first place," Looman said in the statement. The children were employed at meat processing facilities operated by a number of processors including Tyson Food Inc., Cargill Inc., Greater Omaha Packing Co. Inc. and Maple Leaf Farms Inc., according to the DOL. Those facilities are in Arkansas, Colorado, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, Tennessee and Texas, the agency said. According to the DOL, it began looking into Packers Sanitation last August. In November 2022, the solicitor's office filed a complaint in Nebraska federal court accusing the company of employing at least 31 children to clean dangerous powered equipment during overnight shifts at JBS USA plants in Grand Island, Nebraska, and Worthington, Minnesota, and at Turkey Valley Farms in Marshall, Minnesota. Later that month, a Nebraska federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking Packers Sanitation Services from committing child labor violations. Last December, Packers Sanitation agreed to comply with child labor laws nationwide and take "significant steps" to ensure future compliance, according to a consent order and judgment. And on Thursday, the company paid the $1.5 million in penalties, the DOL said. Michael Lazzeri, the DOL's wage and hour regional administrator in Chicago, said the agency's probe found that Packers Sanitation's systems "flagged some young workers as minors, but the company ignored the flags." "When the Wage and Hour Division arrived with warrants, the adults — who had recruited, hired and supervised these children — tried to derail our efforts to investigate their employment practices," Lazzeri said. PSSI said in a statement the company has a "zero-tolerance policy against employing anyone under the age of 18 and fully shares the DOL's objective of ensuring full compliance at all locations." PSSI said that as soon as it became aware of the DOL's allegations, it conducted its own audits and hired a third-party law firm to review its policies and help bolster them. Hiring managers have also been given additional training, according to the statement. "Our audits and DOL's investigation confirmed that none of the individuals DOL cited as under the age of 18 work for the company today, and many had separated from employment with PSSI multiple years ago," PSSI said. "The DOL has also not identified any managers aware of improper conduct that are currently employed by PSSI." The Labor Department is represented in-house by Ambriel Renn-Scanlan, Traci Martin and Laura O'Reilly. Packers Sanitation is represented by J. Randall Coffey and Patrick M. Dalin of Fisher & Phillips, and Gillian G. O'Hara of Kutak Rock LLP. The Nebraska case is Martin J. Walsh v. Packers Sanitation Services Inc. Ltd., case number 4:22-cv-03246, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska. Delaware lawmakers on Tuesday gave final approval to a pair of bills to legalize cannabis and regulate its sale, sending the legislation to the desk of Gov. John Carney, who rejected a similar decriminalization measure last session.
The decriminalization bill, H.B. 1, would remove all penalties for personal use and possession, but also contains provisions aimed at cracking down on "gifting" arrangements, whereby a seller gives a customer cannabis as a freebie alongside another purchase. The bill was approved by the state Senate on a 16-4 vote after clearing the House of Representatives 28-13 earlier this month. The legislature also gave final approval to a more comprehensive companion bill, H.B. 2, aimed at creating a regulated market for adult-use cannabis under the ambit of a new Office of Marijuana Control Commissioner. The legislation was approved 15-5, with three-fifths majority approval needed for passage. The House approved it earlier this month on a 27-13 vote. Delaware lawmakers had also approved in the last session a bill to decriminalize cannabis possession, but it was vetoed in May by Carney, and lawmakers at the time rejected a measure to overturn his veto. In rejecting the bill, Carney said in May, "I do not believe that promoting or expanding the use of recreational marijuana is in the best interests of the state of Delaware, especially our young people." Emily Hershman, a spokesperson for the governor, declined to say whether he would approve or veto the newly approved legislation. "The governor continues to have strong concerns about the unintended consequences of legalizing marijuana for recreational use in our state, especially about the impacts on our young people and highway safety," she told Law360. "He knows others have honest disagreements on this issue. But we don't have anything new to share today about how the governor will act on H.B. 1 and H.B. 2 if they reach his desk." Both H.B. 1 and H.B. 2 passed with majorities large enough to overcome a governor's veto. The bills can also become law without the governor's action. Laura Sharer, executive director of the Delaware chapter of cannabis legalization advocate NORML, said in a statement Tuesday, "With immense public support and the support of the majority of our full General Assembly, the message to Governor Carney is clear: Legalize cannabis and end the criminalization of cannabis." "Ending the criminalization of cannabis is about more than just ending fines and criminal penalties," she continued. "The unjustifiable human cost of cannabis prohibition has created generational damages for Delawareans for decades." How States Are Using Limited Licensed Legal Paraprofessionals to Address the Access to Justice Gap4/3/2023 Several states have opportunities for paralegals to advance their careers while addressing the access to justice gap. In some states, there are opportunities for paralegals to advance their career while addressing the access to justice gap. Currently, there are four states that have implemented programs approving individuals for a limited license that allow non-lawyers to provide viable alternatives to hiring a lawyer for uncomplicated legal needs when the client cannot afford a lawyer while maintaining professional standards required by each state. The states that currently issue some type of a limited license are Arizona, Minnesota, Oregon, and Utah. Although neither California nor Washington is actively licensing non-lawyers, each has been involved in developing limited license programs. In this blog, we will focus on these six states.
Let’s begin by looking at the State of Washington. In June 2012, Washington developed a program to license non-lawyers in specific areas of the law where the state’s population needed legal services the most. Washington’s non-lawyer legal providers are known as Limited Licensed Legal Technicians (“LLLT”). LLLTs are licensed by the Washington Supreme Court and have the authority to use their limited license in the area of family law (including divorce, child custody, and other family law related matters) within the state, but on a limited basis. LLLTs have the authority to consult with and advise clients, complete and file court documents, and assist pro se litigants at some court hearings and settlement conferences. Washington was the first state to license non-lawyer legal providers. Unfortunately, on June 4, 2020, a majority of the Washington Supreme Court voted to sunset the LLLT program due to the cost in sustaining the program and the small number of interested candidates. The Court allowed applicants already working towards their licensure the opportunity to complete the license requirements by July 31, 2022, and permitted current LLLTs in good standing to retain their license and continue to provide services as outlined in Washington State Court Rules: Admission and Practice Rules, Rule 28. There are currently sixteen active LLLTs in Washington State. Until 2015, Washington State was the only state embarking on non-lawyer licensing when Utah formed its workgroup to determine if this licensing (or something similar), would work for them. The Supreme Court Task Force to Examine Limited Legal Licensing in Utah was established to identify areas of law where gaps existed in access to justice. The task force identified family law, debt collection, and eviction as the areas having the most need. A steering committee began meeting in February 2016 to determine the requirements related to education, admissions, and administration, as well as to propose guidelines for professional conduct and discipline. Utah’s non-lawyer legal provider is known as a Licensed Paralegal Practitioner (“LLP”). LLPs are governed by the Rules Governing the Utah State Bar, specifically Rules 14-703 and 14-802(c), which also set forth the education and training requirements necessary to become an LLP. The State Bar began licensing LLPs at the end of 2019. There are presently twenty-three active LLPs licensed in the State of Utah, providing limited legal services to clients. Several states have opportunities for paralegals to advance their careers while addressing the access to justice gap. In April 2016, the Board of Governors established the Oregon State Bar Futures Task Force (“OSBFTF”) to examine how the bar could best serve the public and support professional development of lawyers, given the evolution of legal services being obtained and delivered. In 2017, the OSBFTF recommended that there be a limited-scope license for paralegals as a tool to assist in addressing the access to justice gap in low to moderate-income citizens of the state. In 2019, the Board of Governors followed the recommendation and established the Paraprofessional Licensing Implementation Committee. The committee is responsible for developing a program for licensing paralegals to perform a limited-scope of legal services in the areas of family law and landlord-tenant law. On July 19, 2022, the Oregon Supreme Court approved to the limited-scope license to permit paralegals to provide legal services in the areas of family law and landlord-tenant law. The Court approved the Rules for Admission along with the Rules of Professional Conduct and minimum continuing legal education requirements that are scheduled to go into effect on July 1, 2023. More information can be obtained from the state bar’s website at https://www.osbar.org/lp. In Arizona, a Task Force on the Delivery of Legal Services was created. In January 2021, the Arizona Supreme Court modified Arizona Code of Judicial Administration (“ACJA”) to add §7-210, which outlines the requirements and duties to become a Limited License Legal Practitioner, now known as a Legal Paraprofessional (“LP”). ACJA §7-210 lists the requirements for licensure, the roles and responsibilities of an LP, and the continuing education requirements in order to receive and maintain licensure. Presently, there are four areas of law where a LP can provide services: family law, limited jurisdiction civil, criminal law, and administrative law. ACJA §7-210 requires that each applicant pass the core examination and an examination in the specific area of law they wish to be licensed. The Arizona State Bar began licensing LPs in November 2021 and there are currently twenty-two licensed LPs providing legal services within the state. On September 29, 2020, the Minnesota Supreme Court amended the Court Rules to authorize a pilot project that went into effect on March 1, 2021, and goes through March 31, 2023, unless extended. In November 2020, Minnesota’s Legal Paraprofessional Pilot Project Standing Committee was established to oversee the statewide pilot project which allows approved Minnesota Legal Paraprofessionals to represent and advise clients in certain housing and family law related matters. The LP must also be overseen by a licensed Minnesota attorney. The Standing Committee will evaluate the success of the pilot project and determine if the project is meeting the goal of improving access to justice within the civil legal services arena. LPs are approved to represent and advise clients in the areas of landlord-tenant and family law and can appear before the Minnesota courts if they are approved and acknowledge the requirements of Supervised Practice Rule 12 in addition to understanding that participation is in a pilot project that is scheduled to end in March 2023. Some of the requirements include record keeping and tracking information sought by the Standing Committee for use in the final evaluation of the pilot project. In June 2022, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued an Order amending the Rules Governing the Legal Paraprofessional Pilot Project and extended the pilot program through March 31, 2024. The rules go into effect on October 14, 2022. The Court expressed a concern for nearly ninety-five percent of individuals within the state and involved in a family law or landlord-tenant action, going unrepresented. The Standing Committee has until September 14, 2022, to provide the Supreme Court with the training or experience requirements which have been developed and are required for the LP, before services will be provided under the pilot program. The State of California has also created a working group tasked with developing recommendations and rules relating to a limited licensure for Licensed Paraprofessionals. Similar to other states that developed non-lawyer licensure programs, California began its journey for licensure by researching the access to justice gap within the state. The California proposal for a limited paraprofessional has met significant resistance from lawyers, the California Supreme Court and the California Legislature. It’s back to the drawing board for California’s working group. With more people continuing to face hard economic times, it would not come as a surprise that most states move toward the same, or similar, approval processes for licensed limited paraprofessionals. Milk for your bones, carrots for your eyes—but what about your brain? Here are the foods that experts say are key for growth and development. Everybody’s heard that eating carrots can help improve eyesight, or that calcium-rich milk is good for your teeth and bones. But what about the brain?
“From a neuroscientist’s perspective, food is really fundamentally important for brain health, because our brains literally run on nutrients,” says Lisa Mosconi, director of the Weill Cornell Women’s Brain Initiative and author of Brain Food: The Surprising Science of Eating for Cognitive Power. Brains need different nutrients as they age, and early childhood is a particularly critical time for brain growth, development, and health. “Even just in the first few years of life, the brain is really sprouting neurons at light speed,” says Mosconi, who’s also a neuroscientist. “A baby’s brain has more neurons, more brain cells, than there are stars in the Milky Way.” Overall, scientists have found around 45 nutrients that are key to brain health, including things like protein, zinc, iron, choline, folate, iodine, vitamin A, vitamin D, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, and omega-3 fatty acids. Of course, the words “folate” and “choline” aren’t likely to make anyone’s mouth water—children or otherwise—so the trick is to target the foods that are naturally rich in the good stuff. In addition to the foods listed below, consider adding to the menu oats, nuts, citrus fruits, beans, and vegetables of different colors. “Starting early is key,” says Claire McCarthy, a pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital and assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. “If all a child has ever known is healthy foods, they’re far less likely to fight with their parents about eating them.” By targeting a few food groups and experimenting with new ways of preparing them, fueling your family’s brain growth can be easier than you might think. THE FOOD: Berries WHY IT MATTERS: Even inexpensive and common berries like blackberries and blueberries are bursting with vitamin C, and though most people associate that nutrient with the immune system, the brain needs it too. Vitamin C is an antioxidant, says Mosconi, which means it plays a crucial role in neutralizing naturally occurring free radicals that cause damage to our DNA and cells. “It’s also important for the formation of neurotransmitters, the chemicals used for signaling in the nervous system,” Mosconi says. Without enough vitamin C, the integrity of many body tissues, brain included, start to weaken. Raspberries, dark cherries, mulberries, and goji berries are other superstars in this category. Berries also boast a good mix of natural sugars and fiber, which is important for the digestive system. (Read about the secrets of the brain.) HOW TO GET KIDS EATING: Berries are probably going to be the easiest sell on this list, but if you’re looking to switch things up, Mosconi recommends dipping berries in yogurt or even dark chocolate, which has its own brain benefits thanks to an essential amino acid called tryptophan. You might also freeze berries and blend them into a sorbet with a touch of lemon juice and maple syrup. THE FOOD: Plums WHY IT MATTERS: This fruit, whether fresh or dried (called a prune) is a great source of tryptophan, an essential amino acid linked to a neurotransmitter called serotonin, which can help regulate mood. Keeping your child’s brain supplied with tryptophan will also help them sleep at night, when our brains rest and repair themselves. Chia seeds and raw cacao—the ingredient in dark chocolate—also contain tryptophan. HOW TO GET KIDS EATING: With a lip-smacking combination of sweetness and tang, pureed prunes can be one of your baby’s first solid foods. As kids get older, whole plums are a fun alternative to apples in the lunchbox. Or you can get fancy and slice prunes down the middle and slather them in crunchy peanut butter for a healthy snack full of fiber and protein. THE FOOD: Sweet potatoes WHY IT MATTERS: If there was one food to focus on for children’s brain health, it would be dark leafy greens, says Mosconi, whose latest book is called The XX Brain: The Groundbreaking Science Empowering Women to Maximize Cognitive Health and Prevent Alzheimer's Disease. But she’s still honest: “Kids won’t eat them.” So instead, how about a tuber that’s naturally sweet, incredibly versatile, and packed full of another antioxidant known as vitamin A? This essential vitamin is important for general brain health, but a severe lack of it can actually hamper central nervous system development and function. HOW TO GET KIDS EATING: You can mash ’em. Bake ’em. Fry ’ em. Grill ’ em. Turn ’em into tots, tarts, latkes, or soups. The possibilities are endless. THE FOOD: Fish WHY IT MATTERS: More than half of our brains are composed of fat, which should mean it’s a no-brainer that lipids would play a role in neurological health. But the kind of fats you eat matter. For instance, one type of omega-3 fat known as DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) is extremely important for building nerve cells. These cells are responsible for healthy brain growth and development, as well as learning skills, Mosconi says. To get it, “you need to focus on cold-water fatty fish.” Some of the most DHA-rich fish are salmon, mackerel, anchovies, sardines, and herring, easily remembered with the acronym SMASH. (Get more kid-friendly recipes on Nat Geo Kids.) HOW TO GET KIDS EATING: With a young daughter herself, Mosconi often makes what she calls the “elevated fish stick.” First dip a fish filet in a bowl of egg, then into a bowl of finely crushed pistachios, almonds, breadcrumbs, and salt. Finish by sautéing in coconut or extra virgin olive oil. Of course, if your kiddo won’t touch one of the SMASH fish, it might help to get them used to the taste of fish with the regular old patties and sticks found in the freezer section. Tilapia and cod have healthy fatty acids, too, McCarthy says. She also has a parting piece of advice: Parents need to walk the walk as well. “Kids watch their parents and learn from them,” McCarthy says. “If you want your kids to eat healthy brain foods, you need to eat them too.” |
HISTORY
March 2024
Categories |