Social Movements & the Law

"Co-edited by two activists with deep experience in organizing prison books programs (PBPs), Books Behind Bars introduces readers to PBPs and their decentralized organization. PBPs are a grassroots-level and nationwide activist movement challenging the largest prison industry in the world by refusing to let incarcerated people remain isolated and forgotten. Operating on shoestring budgets, will all-volunteer workforces and donated libraries, books to prisoner programs are examples of ordinary people acting to undermine the isolation and judgment of incarceration. Although there are currently fifty-three books to prisoners groups serving in all fifty states, these programs remain relatively unknown. The goal of this book is to bring awareness to this diffuse and long-standing social movement and offer readers a way to get involved. In addition to highlighting voices from PBPs throughout the United States, the volume also includes essays, images, and artwork from independent bookstore owners, formerly and currently incarcerated folks, activists, artists, journalists, volunteers, organizers, and scholars"--

"In Judging Insanity, Punishing Difference, Chloe Deambrogio explores how developments in the field of forensic psychiatry shaped American courts' assessments of defendants' mental health and criminal responsibility over the course of the 20th century. During this period, new psychiatric notions of the mind and its readability, legal doctrines of insanity and diminished culpability, and cultural stereotypes about race and gender shaped the ways in which legal professionals, mental health experts, and lay witnesses approached mental disability evidence, especially in cases carrying the death penalty. Using Texas as a case-study, Deambrogio examines how these medical, legal, and cultural trends shaped psycho-legal debates in state criminal courts, while shedding light on the ways in which experts and lay actors' interpretations of 'pathological' mental states influenced trial verdicts in capital cases. She shows that despite mounting pressures from advocates of the 'rehabilitative penology', Texas courts maintained a punitive approach towards defendants allegedly affected by severe mental disabilities, while allowing for moralized views about personalities, habits, and lifestyle to influence psycho-legal assessments, in potentially prejudicial ways"--

By: Matt Nosanchuk, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Strategic Operations and Outreach, Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education All students deserve access to learning environments that are inclusive and free from discrimination and that nurture their intellect, wellbeing, and creativity, preparing them for success in school and beyond. Books have been the gateway toContinue Reading

“I love working on iPretendians/i because it gives me an opportunity to use humor as a vehicle to teach and inform. ” says Angel Ellis, co-host of iPretendians/i, Apple Podcasts' Spotlight show for July 2024. Angel Ellis is a free-press activist and director of Mvskoke Media. Her co-host Robert Jago is a freelance writer, entrepreneur, and Indigenous rights activist from Richmond, British Columbia. Together, they pitched the show to the podcast network, Canadaland, as a new original series. “I broke one of the first big Pretendian stories of this whole moment,” says Jago, “and the way that I did it didn’t provide enough context. This series gives me a chance to try and reshape that.”Ellis and Jago hope listeners understand the serious nature of the problem, while becoming more acquainted to Native joy and humor. “The broadest part of society coming to understand its impact on Indigenous people, has always been a driving motivation for me,” says Ellis. “ If nothing else, I hope listeners learn that there is a way to be supportive of and enjoy Indigenous cultures without wearing it like some passing fad.”What do some of the most prominent and successful Indigenous artists, leaders and professors have in common? They aren’t Indigenous. There are hundreds of cases of Indigenous identity fraud that we know about, and likely thousands that we do not. So why do these so-called “pretendians” do it? How do they pull it off? And what happens when they are exposed? In each episode of this riveting new podcast series, co-hosts Robert Jago (Kwantlen First Nation and Nooksack Indian Tribe) and Angel Ellis (Muscogee (Creek) Nation) reveal unbelievable stories of audacious fraudsters and investigate the complex phenomenon of Indigenous identity theft.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Vice-president says Black woman who was shot in her home by an Illinois sheriff’s deputy ‘deserved to be safe’

Alexis Smith tells audience that her abuser is in crowd and that ‘I, and my community, deserve healthy relationships’

The 17-year-old was having a meal on the floor when she was attacked with a butcher knife Sunday. Officials say they aren't yet ruling out hate crime charges.

The disgraceful lack of care she endured was a direct result of Texas’ deadly new abortion law.

Kamala Harris news and opinion

The billionaire tech mogul "vowed to destroy the woke mind virus" and said people who promote gender-affirming care "should go to prison."

Upsurge in activity from white supremacists and swastika-toting extremists follows rash of anti-LGBTQ+ state laws

For decades, the ideas of equality, justice, and human rights have been the core pillars of Canada’s national identity. However, the reality embedded within our criminal justice system creates a significant obstacle to the actualization of those ideas. Overrepresentation of Indigenous and Black individuals in Canadian jails and prisons, and systemic racism in the criminal […]

US News is a recognized leader in college, grad school, hospital, mutual fund, and car rankings. Track elected officials, research health conditions, and find news you can use in politics, business, health, and education.

Coalition behind push says it turned in more than double the needed signatures to get measure on November ballot

People of various political backgrounds in the US state say they are increasingly feeling like pawns in a political game

"Beyond Complicity is a fascinating cultural diagnosis that identifies our obsession with complicity as a symptom of a deeply divided society. The questions surrounding what it means to be legally complicit are the same ones we may ask ourselves as we evaluate our own and others' responsibility for inherited and ongoing harms, such as racism, sexism, and climate change: What does it mean that someone "knew" they were contributing to wrongdoing? How much involvement must a person have in order to be complicit? At what point are we obligated to intervene? Francine Banner ties together pop culture, politics, law, and social movements to provide a framework for thinking about what we know intuitively: that our society is defined by crisis, risk, and the quest to root out hazards at all costs. Engaging with legal cases, historical examples, and contemporary case studies, Beyond Complicity unfolds the complex role that complicity plays in US law and society today, offering suggestions for how to shift focus away from blame and toward positive, lasting systemic change"--

Representation of the LGBTQ+ lawyers in the legal profession is growing, especially as younger generations move into the workplace.

The University of Arizona is the state’s only land-grant university and has served in that role since it opened its doors to students in 1891.

The dispute pitted Idaho's near-total abortion ban against a federal law that requires Medicare-funded hospitals to offer abortions when needed to stabilize a patient's emergency medical condition.

Worldwide Pride Month events are underway but they are coming at a time when many people who identify as LGBTQ+ say they are facing increasing difficulties at work, ranging from being repeatedly misgendered to physically assaulted.

In commemoration of Pride Month, the Lillian Goldman Law Library invites you to view “Out in Print: Early LGBT Legal Periodical Literature,” a new

Wisconsin is home to 12 tribal nations, each with its own unique history, culture, and government. As sovereign entities, these nations have the inherent right to create, enforce, and adjudicate laws to protect and enhance …

Independent News and Analysis on the U.S. Supreme Court

Gun ownership can be prevented not only for convicted "abusers" but also those found to pose a "credible threat."

This Note attempts to determine how tribal governments such as the Navajo Nation can exercise greater control over and protect their Nation’s data from external entities. Tribal Nations or Indigenous Nations can exercise their political and cultural sovereignty by utilizing both Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDSov) and Indigenous Data Governance (IDGov). This Note will examine the Māori’s application of IDSov within their own culturally-specific IDGov framework. Then, there will be an overview of the existing mechanisms available within the Navajo Nation legal system that govern data and the fundamental principles embedded in the culture of the Diné (Navajo) people. Finally, this Note will discuss recommendations that the Navajo Nation can incorporate into its legal system using the Māori’s example of its own data governance model and tools as a template. Overall, the goal of this Note is to demonstrate the legal mechanisms available to the Navajo Nation to implement its own set of data sovereignty principles aligning with its own traditional values, similar to the Māori in Aotearoa (New Zealand).

Making library websites accessible : a practical guide for librarians-book

"Examining the restitution of cultural property to Indigenous Peoples in human rights law, this book offers a detailed analysis of the opportunities and constraints of international law as a tool of resistance and social transformation for marginalized groups. In accordance with an increasing insistence on respect for diverse cultures, and through their own international mobilization, Indigenous Peoples have participated in the construction of a distinct human rights framework. Significant academic inquiry has focused on the substantive gains made by Indigenous Peoples in this context; along with its impact on a body of law that had previously denied Indigenous Peoples a basis for claims to their own cultural materials and practices. Accordingly, this book acknowledges that Indigenous Peoples, as non-state actors, have generated greater substantive and procedural legitimacy in human rights law making. Offering normative insights into the participation of non-state actors in international law making, it also, however, demonstrates that, despite their significant role in constructing the legal framework of human rights in the 21st century, the participation of Indigenous Peoples continues to be structurally limited. With its interdisciplinary approach to the field, this book will appeal to scholars and students in the fields of law, politics, anthropology and indigenous studies"--

"This book argues that hate speech is not protected. Based on an examination of Supreme Court case law and First Amendment theory, the book finds that hate speech lies outside the Supreme Court's hierarchy of speech protection because it advances no ideas of social value"--;"Hate speech has been a societal problem for many years and has seen a resurgence recently alongside political divisiveness and technologies that ease and accelerate the spread of messages. Methods to protect individuals and groups from hate speech have eluded lawmakers as the call for restrictions or bans on such speech are confronted by claims of First Amendment protection. Problematic speech, the argument goes, should be confronted by more speech rather than by restriction. Debate over the extent of First Amendment protection is based on two bodies of law--the practical, precedent determined by the Supreme Court, and the theoretical framework of First Amendment jurisprudence. In Hate Speech is Not Free: The Case Against Constitutional Protection, W. Wat Hopkins argues that the prevailing thought that hate is protected by both case law and theory is incorrect. Within the Supreme Court's established hierarchy of speech protection, hate speech falls to the lowest level, deserving no protection as it does not advance ideas containing social value. Ultimately, the Supreme Court's cases addressing protected and unprotected speech set forth a clear rationale for excommunicating hate speech from First Amendment protection." --