NFL 'Players Coalition' pushes for criminal justice reform

The NFL season came to a close on Super Bowl Sunday, with the New England Patriots beating the Los Angeles Rams 13-3.

For the league itself, 2018 was a success. Television ratings were up five percent, with a per game average of 15.8 million viewers.

Several players did continue to protest police brutality and racial inequality during the National Anthem, but on-field activism didn’t define the season. At the same time, activism did continue on in the NFL, reported The Takeaway.

A group known as the Players Coalition, founded by Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm Jenkins and former Arizona Cardinals wide receiver Anquan Boldin, has pushed the league to donate money towards issues including criminal justice reform and education equity. In 2017, the NFL made a deal with the coalition to donate $89 million to social justice causes over the course of seven years.

To read more CLICK HERE

'Trump Slump' continues, gun sales fall again in 2018

Gun sales tumbled for the second year in a row in 2018, according to an analysis of background check totals by Jurgen Brauer, an economist at Augusta University whose consulting firm, Small Arms Analytics, monitors gun transfers, reported The Trace. 

That’s despite one of the highest-profile mass shootings in American history at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, as well as sustained gun control activism, and electoral victories by Democrats who almost uniformly promised to pursue stronger gun laws.In past years, similar factors have bumped firearm sales to record highs. But last year, shootings and demands for gun control failed to arrest what has been called the gun industry’s “Trump slump.”

Americans bought an estimated 13.8 million firearms in 2018, according to Brauer. That’s still historically strong: in only five of the last 20 years have American bought more guns than they did the previous year. But the 2018 total is down from an all-time high of 16.6 million guns sold in 2016 and 14.7 million in 2017. Few observers were surprised when sales fell during the first year of the Trump administration: With pro-gun Republicans at the height of their power at both the federal and state level, the gun-buying public had reason to believe the president and Congress would block new firearm laws, even after the Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs massacres.

To read more CLICK HERE

Prosecutors seek Trump inaugural documents

Prosecutors in New York have reportedly ordered President Donald Trump’s inauguration committee to hand over documents related to donors and finances, reported the Huffington Post.

According to ABC, which first reported the news, a lawyer working with the committee received a subpoena from federal prosecutors seeking documents related to the organization’s donors, event attendees, perks, contracts and vendors, among other things.

Prosecutors also are looking for any illegal foreign contributions and whether committee staff members were aware of such illegality, The New York Times reported. Federal law prohibits foreign donations to federal campaigns, political action committees and inaugural funds.

The Trump inaugural fund raised $107 million. The committee was chaired by Trump’s longtime friend Thomas Barrack, who the Times said is not mentioned in the subpoena.

A committee spokesman told the Times the organization is still reviewing the subpoena but plans to cooperate with the investigation, which prosecutors opened last year amid scrutiny over the committee.

A spokesperson for the Southern District of New York didn’t immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.

The investigation into the committee was sparked by the investigation into Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer who is expected to begin his prison sentence in March after pleading guilty to campaign finance-related crimes in which he implicated the president.

To read more CLICK HERE

ICE officers stalking Pennsylvania courthouses

The Philadelphia the United States, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement  (ICE) office is the most aggressive in the country, seizing more undocumented immigrants with no criminal convictions than any other. Courthouse arrests are a key part of its strategy, reported Slate. ICE agents stake out Pennsylvania courts and persuade personnel to reveal the immigration status of plaintiffs, defendants, parolees—anyone with business before a judge. Then they arrest these immigrants, either in the courthouse or just outside it, placing them in detention and thwarting their access to justice.

The Pennsylvania judiciary does not have to be complicit in ICE’s assault on the integrity of its justice system. On Wednesday, the Sheller Center for Social Justice at Temple University Beasley School of Law released a new report detailing the devastating impact of ICE’s tactics on Pennsylvania’s immigrants—and urged the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to halt state courts’ collusion with the agency. Its findings bolsters proposals put forth by the ICE Out of Courts Coalition, a collection of public defenders and immigrant advocates led by Community Legal Services. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court can’t stop ICE from snatching immigrants in their homes, schools, and offices. But it can keep ICE agents out of the courthouses where immigrants have a constitutional right to be.

Unsurprisingly, the Temple report notes that ICE activity in Pennsylvania surged after Trump’s election, partly because the president encouraged officers to target individuals without criminal records. ICE conducted courthouse arrests in at least 13 Pennsylvania counties, most of which have large immigrant populations. Probation officials, meanwhile, regularly collaborate with the agency, telling ICE agents which probationers are undocumented. Some probation officers inform ICE when probationers are scheduled for a check-in—allowing ICE to wait at the courthouse and arrest them when they arrive. Others share probationers’ personal information with ICE so agents can seize them at their homes.

Judges, too, help ICE identify undocumented individuals whose immigration status has nothing to do with their claims before the court. A Cumberland County judge called ICE on a couple seeking to get married because she suspected the groom, who is Hispanic, was undocumented. (He wasn’t, but ICE came to the courtroom and fingerprinted him just to make sure.) A Lancaster County judge pressed a defendant about his immigration status during a traffic hearing; when he acknowledged that he was undocumented, the judge had him jailed and asked a police officer to notify ICE. Chester County judges have asked individuals with “Spanish surnames” about their immigration status in an effort to identify undocumented immigrants to report.

The Temple study’s authors implore the Pennsylvania Supreme Court—which promulgates rules for the state judiciary—to convene a task force to craft a response to ICE’s assault on courthouses. Luckily, the ICE Out of Courts Coalition has already proposed a number of sensible policies for the courts to adopt. Among other things, the coalition has called on the courts to prohibit immigration arrests at courthouses, including their “outlying premises”; to prohibit collusion between ICE and court personnel; and to compel ICE officers to identify themselves upon entering a state courthouse.

In 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court proved it was not afraid to take bold action to safeguard individuals’ rights under the state constitution, striking down a GOP gerrymanderdespite a relentless assault by Republican lawmakers. Its progressive majority should not back down from a fight with Trump’s deportation machine. The justices do not have to stand idly by as the Pennsylvania judiciary becomes a stalking ground for ICE agents. They have the power to stop ICE’s immigrations arrests at state courthouses. And Pennsylvania’s victimized, vilified immigrants have nowhere else to turn. 

To read more CLICK HERE

Alabama judge denies condemned man Muslim iman

A federal judge ruled that a Muslim inmate’s scheduled lethal injection can proceed next week without an imam present but said Alabama must keep a Christian prison chaplain out of the execution chamber, reported The Associated Press.

U.S. District Judge Keith Watkins denied a stay requested by Dominique Ray, 42. Ray is scheduled to be executed Feb. 7 for the 1995 fatal stabbing of 15-year-old Tiffany Harville.

Ray says his religious rights are being violated because Alabama has a Christian prison chaplain present at lethal injections, but will not let him have an imam in the room with him as the lethal drugs are administered.

Ray’s lawyers argued that he has the same right to religious comfort in his final moments as a Christian inmate.

Watkins said for security reasons the state can limit death chamber access to prison employees.

The judge ordered the state to keep the prison chaplain out of the death chamber during Ray’s execution. The state already said it was willing to do so.

Condemned inmates in Alabama can visit with their spiritual adviser before their execution and have the person witness the procedure through the glass window of an adjoining room. However, only the prison chaplain and a correctional officer are in the room with the inmate during the lethal injection procedure.

The chaplain will sometimes kneel and pray with an inmate who is strapped to a gurney.

Court records indicate that Ray is appealing.

To read more CLICK HERE

GateHouse: Pittsburgh mayor fights for gun restrictions

Matthew T. Mangino

GateHouse Media

February 1, 2019

After 11 worshipers were brutally gunned down at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh last fall, that city’s mayor, Bill Peduto, took on President Donald Trump’s call for more armed guards at places of worship, or in schools, as a means of thwarting mass shooters.

Peduto told NBC’s “Meet the Press” at the time, that he believed gun restrictions would go further to help stop shootings. “I don’t think that the answer to this problem is solved by having our synagogues, mosques and churches filled with armed guards or schools filled with armed guards.”

At a news conference in December, Peduto took action. Joined by Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf, he unveiled some of the most significant gun legislation proposed by a Pennsylvania city in decades.

The proposed city ordinance includes three specific components. The first would make it unlawful to manufacture, sell or possess an assault weapon within the city limits. A second component bans bump stocks, armor-piercing bullets and other weapon accessories, and the third gives local courts expanded rights to seize the firearms of citizens deemed a threat by their immediate family members or law enforcement.

From the outset, the proposal has been mired in controversy. Within weeks of introducing the city ordinance, hundreds of armed protesters showed up at city hall in opposition.

Then the district attorney wrote a letter to city council saying the council and mayor have no authority to do what they have proposed. “I understand the desire of local governments to be proactive in reducing gun violence” wrote Stephen Zappala, Allegheny County district attorney. “I believe, however, that the legislative effort needs to come from the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and that the legislation currently before Council, if passed, will be found unconstitutional.”

Peduto’s response to Zappala, “Arrest me.”

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette apparently agrees with Zappala. The editorial board recently attacked Peduto’s proposal writing, “Instead of passing toothless laws and miring the city in litigation, city officials should harness the outrage over the Tree of Life tragedy and lobby the Legislature to address gun laws comprehensively.”

Things haven’t improved for Peduto. A handful of city residents incensed over the proposal have accused Peduto of “malfeasance in office,” and are seeking to have him impeached. Just this week, Peduto confirmed to WPXI-TV that he has received threats over proposed gun reform legislation.

The controversy is intensified by a Pennsylvania law that provides no city, county or municipality can “in any manner regulate the lawful ownership, possession, transfer or transportation of firearms, ammunition or ammunition components.”

Last week, more than 100 people spoke at a day-long public hearing on the proposed gun restrictions. Pittsburgh Councilman Corey O’Connor said council would explore amending the ordinance so people understand the city is targeting only certain types of guns.

Regardless, the ordinance is expected to pass and Peduto said he will sign it.

Gun advocates have vowed to challenge the ban in court and promised to file private criminal complaints against council members and Peduto alleging a violation of state law.

Peduto has vowed to mount a stiff defense. He also said he would welcome criminal charges. He has taken a principled position that he believes is important to the health and safety of his constituents. Someone has to try to move the ball forward in this important debate and Peduto and the city council have taken on that role.

Peduto told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, “I’m confident that we have a decent case to make that will not only ultimately be able to uphold what we’re trying to do but also change the discussions in Harrisburg and Washington.”

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book The Executioner’s Toll, 2010 was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter @MatthewTMangino.

To visit the column CLICK HERE

Roger Stone apparently made witness "An offer he couldn't refuse"

Roger Stone, recently indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, is not accepting the indictment passively, reported Just Security. He is, not surprisingly, loudly and publicly attacking the charges — decrying the “inquisition,” the “Gestapo” tactics, and the “war” on his “free speech.” In so doing, Stone is exercising his free speech rights. But in so doing, he also exemplifies a deep misunderstanding of the nation’s First Amendment.

Let’s take a quick look at the indictment.

Start with the witness intimidation charges. According to the indictment, Stone repeatedly demanded Person 2 – widely known to be radio host Randy Credico — to refuse Congressional efforts to have him testify and lie about what he knew.

Not just once, but on “multiple occasions,” Stone told Credico to do a “Frank Pentangeli” before the House Intelligence Committee. Pentangeli is, of course, the character in Godfather II who lies before a congressional committee, claiming not to know information in order to protect his mafia boss.

But Credico is not Pentangali, and Stone was not happy about that. When Stone learned that Credico continued to talk to investigators, he took it a step further.

“Prepare to die,” Stone tells Credico, according to the indictment. Stone allegedly warns Credico that his lawyers were “dying [sic] RIP you to shreds” and that they would take Credico’s therapy dog as well.

Note to Stone #1: Threats to a witness with intent to influence or prevent testimony is not protected speech.

Of course, these are just allegations at this point. Prosecutors may not convincingly establish that these statements were made — although presumably they have them in print or on tape since they include specific quotations. And Stone might convince the jury that they were just made in jest.

But if the facts are as they are appear, Stone threated Credico in attempt to convince Credico not to testify or talk.  This is witness tampering, a crime that carries a maximum 20 years prison term. It is not protected speech.

Other parts of the indictment are rife with damning details about lies made to Congress in testimony before the House and Senate intelligence committees. Stone states that he had no relevant “documents, records, or electronically stored information,” when it fact it later turned out that he possessed a range of responsive texts and emails. He said he hadn’t sent or received any texts or emails about Wikileaks, when in fact he sent and received many. He reportedly lied about just about every aspect of the communications, including the timing, mode, and content of his contact with both Wikileaks and the Trump campaign.

Note to Stone #2: Lying in testimony to and concealing documentary evidence from congressional committees is not protected speech.

Rather, it constitutes the crime of making making false statements to Congress — a crime that carries a maximum of five years for each of the five counts charged. Collectively, the lying to, concealment of documents, and alleged intimidation of Credico provide strong support for an obstruction of justice charge, also carrying a maximum of five years.

Stone is free to exercise his free speech rights in as much as he wants to decry attacks on his free speech. But he would benefit from a lesson on the First Amendment before he does so.

To read more CLICK HERE