In an election year marked by pandemic, massive unemployment, and widespread protest against entrenched racial inequality that has pervaded nearly every aspect of life in the United States, Human Rights Watch and partners provide insight and analysis to make sense of the human rights developments unfolding across the country.
Despite Alabama's Disturbing Cervical Cancer Death Rate, Students Go Without Comprehensive Sex Ed
Human Rights Watch released a report today documenting Alabama's failure to provide students with sexual health information that could help potentially protect them from cervical cancer. The report also found that the state, which has the highest rate of cervical cancer deaths in the nation, has failed to help adolescents get sufficient access to the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine – an effective tool to prevent several types of cancer, including most cervical cancers.
In April, the New Yorker published a feature story on the disturbing rise in cervical cancer deaths in Alabama, featuring Human Rights Watch research.
“Young people need access to accurate information on their sexual health to build healthy relationships and make informed and safe decisions,” said Annerieke Daniel, women’s rights fellow at Human Rights Watch and author of the new report, in a statement. “Alabama can significantly improve health outcomes and possibly wipe out cervical cancer for future generations by guaranteeing comprehensive sexual health education in schools and increasing HPV vaccination rates.”
Report Exposes Impact of Privatizing US Criminal System
By Komala Ramachandra
A new report by the American Bar Association (ABA) shows how growing privatization in the US criminal legal system and the financial burden created by “user fees” is effectively criminalizing poverty.
The report, “Privatization of Services in the Criminal Justice System,” finds that private companies are now involved in almost every stage of the criminal process. These companies provide pretrial services, like bail, supervision, electronic monitoring, and alcohol and drug testing. Courts may also offer private diversion programs that allow people to avoid a criminal record upon successful completion. After a person is convicted or accepts a plea deal, they can be assigned to private community supervision or probation.
Almost all of these services entail “user fees” often set by and paid directly to the private provider, with little government oversight. Even collection of these charges may carry additional fees or commissions for the collection agencies, again paid by the individual. Human Rights Watch has documented the pernicious impact of cash bail and private probation, particularly on those living in poverty.
People can also rack up charges while incarcerated, including charges for health care, basic supplies in the commissary, telephones or electronic communication, and financial services like money transfers.
The system can be expensive for anyone but is particularly harmful for low-income people. When an individual is unable to pay, they may face a range of consequences, including extended supervision terms, arrest warrants, additional court hearings, and even jail or prison time. That can mean even more fines and fees because it takes longer to pay them off. This effectively creates a two-tiered justice system that privileges those who can afford to pay fines and fees quickly, and traps those who cannot. It also means low-income people may pay more for the same offense.
This report follows on the ABA’s “Ten Guidelines on Court Fines and Fees,” which provided recommendations to court officials to prevent fines and fees being used to penalize people who are unable to pay their court debt.
The ABA’s recommendations include increasing transparency, regulation, and supervision of private companies, and significantly reducing the use of fines and user fees. Crucially, judges should always assess an individual’s ability to pay and waive costs when they cannot afford them.
Latest CDC Data Reveals More About Covid-19’s Racial Disparities
Black and Latino people in the U.S. are 3 times as likely to contract the coronavirus than their white neighbors — and nearly twice as likely to die, according to new data we obtained by suing the CDC https://t.co/s0FnwSrpWq— The New York Times (@nytimes) July 5, 2020
On Sunday, the New York Times reported that new federal data that the newspaper obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit reveals alarming details about the widespread nature of the pandemic’s racial disparities:
“Early numbers had shown that Black and Latino people were being harmed by the virus at higher rates. But the new federal data — made available after The New York Times sued the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — reveals a clearer and more complete picture: Black and Latino people have been disproportionately affected by the coronavirus in a widespread manner that spans the country, throughout hundreds of counties in urban, suburban and rural areas, and across all age groups.
. . . .
“The disparities persist across state lines and regions. They exist in rural towns on the Great Plains, in suburban counties, like Fairfax County, Va., and in many of the country’s biggest cities.”
The New York Times story also reports that the CDC data it obtained was incomplete, and that data related to race and ethnicity “was missing for hundreds of thousands of cases.”
"Even with the missing information, agency scientists said, they can still find important patterns in the data, especially when combining the records about individual cases with aggregated data from local agencies.
"Still, some say the initial lack of transparency and the gaps in information highlight a key weakness in the U.S. disease surveillance system.
"'You need all this information so that public health officials can make adequate decisions,' said Andre M. Perry, a fellow in the Metropolitan Policy Program at The Brookings Institution. 'If they’re not getting this information, then municipalities and neighborhoods and families are essentially operating in the dark.'”
Congress Urged to End Program that Has Increased Militarized Policing
This week, Human Rights Watch joined various rights groups in calling on Congress to end the 1033 Program, which transfers surplus military-grade equipment from the Department of Defense to local law enforcement agencies. The program is under the microscope after police in communities across the US arrived with armored vehicles and assault weapons at largely peaceful protests against police violence and systemic racism.
Recent scenes of police using military gear to violently escalate protests have added renewed urgency to end dangerous programs that arm police w/ weapons of war. @hrw & other rights groups urge #US Congress to end the 1033 Program. #Defund #Demilitarize https://t.co/S0BVgwhGTT. pic.twitter.com/QMZcuVIpYm— Dreisen Heath (@dreisenheath) July 1, 2020
As explained in a letter sent to the House Armed Services Committee, the program hasn’t made commtunities safer and should be brought to an end:
"The military surplus equipment transfer program, known as the 1033 Program, was formally established in the 1997 FY National Defense Authorization Act. Since its inception, more than $7.4 billion in surplus military equipment and goods, including armored vehicles, rifles, and aircraft, have been transferred to more than 8,000 law enforcement agencies. The program came to national attention in the aftermath of the killing of Michael Brown in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri. Since then, Congressional leaders have tried to reform or end this program that has caused an increase in militarized policing particularly in communities of color.
"Research studies indicate that the 1033 Program is not only unsafe but ineffective as it fails to reduce crime or improve police safety. In 2015, President Obama issued Executive Order 13688 that provided necessary oversight of the program. The Executive Order has since been rescinded, which only underscores that legislative action -- not executive orders -- is critical to address the concerns with this program.
"In the aftermath of Ferguson, law enforcement agencies across the country have continued to receive military equipment and weapons of war, including '494 mine-resistant vehicles, at least 800 pieces of body armor, more than 6,500 rifles, and at least 76 aircraft.'
"Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have also received enormous amounts of excess military equipment as part of the militarization of our border. This is particularly concerning at a time when ICE and CBP units are being deployed in response to peaceful protests and for interior law enforcement programs.
In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder in Minneapolis, millions have demonstrated globally against police brutality and systemic racism. In cities across our country, hundreds of thousands of demonstrators called for justice and accountability for George Floyd and the countless unarmed Black people that have been killed by law enforcement.
In response to the national outrage, armored vehicles, assault weapons, and military gear once again filled our streets and communities, turning them into war zones. Weapons of war have absolutely no place in our communities. What’s more, evidence has shown that law enforcement agencies that obtain military equipment are more prone to violence.
Many Black and Asian Americans Report Experiencing Discrimination Amid Covid-19
A significant number of Black and Asian Americans say they have been subjected to racial discrimination during the Covid-19 pandemic, according to a report released today by the Pew Research Center.
The Pew study also found that Black and Asian Americans report heightened anxiety about wearing protective face masks in public, due to fears of being viewed as suspicious:
“The coronavirus outbreak continues to have far-reaching health and economic consequences for the American public. But for many, especially Black and Asian Americans, the effects extend beyond medical and financial concerns. About four-in-ten Black and Asian adults say people have acted as if they were uncomfortable around them because of their race or ethnicity since the beginning of the outbreak, and similar shares say they worry that other people might be suspicious of them if they wear a mask when out in public, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.
"...When asked about other negative situations they may have experienced because of their race or ethnicity since the pandemic, Asian and Black adults are more likely than Hispanic and white adults to say that they have been the subject of slurs or jokes or feared someone might threaten or physically attack them because of their race or ethnicity."
US Supreme Court Rules to Uphold Abortion Rights
Rayshard Brooks Was a Victim of Abusive Probation
This week, Rayshard Brooks was honored in a funeral at the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church in his hometown of Atlanta. Brooks, 27, was fatally shot in the back by Atlanta police on June 12 following a report that he had fallen asleep in the drive-through line at Wendy’s. His death at the hands of police, just three weeks after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, added fuel to the nationwide protests that have been calling for an end to systemic racism in law enforcement and other areas of US life.
Loved ones fondly remembered Brooks as a devoted father of three, son, and husband, and a coworker who would go out of his way to help others. They also recalled the ways that he had been unfairly treated by the criminal legal system, particularly by probation. In a February interview, Brooks had complained about the struggle to move on with his life and provide for his family after incarceration.
“He was running from a system that makes slaves out of people,” Rev. Dr. Raphael G. Warnock, the senior pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church, said at the funeral according to the New York Times. “This is much bigger than the police. This is about a whole system that cries out for renewal and reform.”
“Your past doesn’t define you, it refines and shapes you so that you are better equipped to step into your God-given purpose,” said Ambrea Mikolajczyk, Brooks’ former employer. “The system kept drawing him in, grabbing ahold of him like quicksand.”
Allison Frankel, Aryeh Neier Fellow in the US Program at Human Rights Watch, says that the US should make fundamental changes to its probation and parole systems, which often trap people in a cycle of reincarceration due to its high costs and unreasonable requirements..
As of 2016, 4.5 million people in the US--or 1 in 55--were under probation or parole. In Georgia, where Brooks was under probation, that number was a staggering 1 in every 18. https://t.co/mV9PchkYwS pic.twitter.com/ROb1FVy87r— Allie Frankel (@abfrankel) June 18, 2020
“Brooks' own wishes were simple: to be treated like an individual; to have more time with his family; to be seen not just for his criminal record; to lighten the pressure of his probation; to get mentorship,” Frankel wrote.
A Step Toward Equal Voting Rights for DC Residents
The US House of Representative’s overwhelming vote today in favor of the admission of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth as the 51st US state affirms that Washington, DC residents are entitled to equal voting rights.
The House’s vote on H.R. 51 is the first time either chamber of Congress has meaningfully addressed DC residents’ longstanding deprivation of these rights. The district’s non-voting delegate to the House of Representatives, Eleanor Holmes Norton, has been pushing for passage of such legislation for decades.
The persistent denial of equal voting rights in the city reflects structural racism. Washington, DC has long been majority African American, and is nearly 50 percent Black.
President Donald Trump has indicated he would veto the bill, though it is expected to stall in the Republican-majority Senate.
The question of DC’s admission as the nation’s 51st state aside, US lawmakers on both sides of the aisle should realize its residents’ voting rights.
In Tulsa, the Spirit of Juneteenth Prevailed
Tensions were high in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on Saturday morning, especially in the historic Greenwood district, as residents and community leaders wondered how President Donald Trump’s visit to their city, his first political rally since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, would play out.
One day earlier, Greenwood’s residents had celebrated Juneteenth, marking 155 years since the last enslaved people in the United States were declared free. June also marked 99 years since an estimated 300 people were killed, the vast majority of them Black, in Greenwood, which was then known as Black Wall Street due to its affluence.
Would Trump or Vice President Mike Pence try to tour the district? Would they drive or walk through Greenwood on their way to the Bank of Oklahoma (BOK) Center, where Trump’s rally would be held? Would white supremacist groups who have expressed support for Trump try to come to Greenwood and provoke trouble?
Community leaders held an outdoor press conference in Greenwood around noon on Saturday, making a final plea for Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum to cancel the Trump rally due to safety and health concerns amidst the coronavirus pandemic.
During the press conference, Dr. Tiffany Crutcher, whose twin brother Terence was killed by Tulsa police in 2016, called on those demonstrating to focus their efforts not on protesting the Trump rally but on urging Tulsa leaders to build up the Greenwood community by improving housing, education and economic opportunities.
Reverend Robert Turner, pastor of Greenwood’s historic Vernon AME church, delivered a message to Trump at the press conference: “We are sick and tired of you inciting violence and anger and hatred throughout this city and throughout this nation.” He later added: “If you do love Black people, do something about it. Pass a bill. Give reparations. Change the policies that discriminate against us to this very day.”
For the community leader and mayoral candidate Greg Robinson, Trump’s rally was a “dog whistle,” an “intentional attempt to destruct the growth and unity that cities like Tulsa are trying to create and disrupt it with hateful rhetoric.”
Worried that Trump or Pence might visit the memorial of the massacre, community members covered it up with a tarp and signs saying “This is Sacred Ground—Not a Photo-Op,” and “Reparations Now.” They anxiously guarded the area, concerned that US Secret Service agents might come and remove the coverings.
In the end, Trump and Pence stayed clear of Greenwood.
Meanwhile, about a mile away, a small group of Trump supporters had gathered near the BOK center in downtown Tulsa since Thursday, waiting for the doors to open to get into the rally. More Trump supporters arrived Saturday morning, as well as groups of anti-Trump and Black Lives Matters protesters.
Soon after the gates to get into the BOK Center opened, at around 11:22 a.m., Sheila Buck, a 62-year-old schoolteacher from Tulsa, went through the gates. She had a ticket, she later told Human Rights Watch, but like others, said she was told she didn’t need one and that people were allowed in on a “first come, first serve” basis. Buck said she was wearing an “I Can’t Breathe” shirt – a reference to George Floyd’s last words – and a black hood, channeling the actor Regina King. King starred as a police officer in the Watchmen – a 2019 futuristic HBO television series about a police department in Tulsa that, in the series, fought white supremacists waging a war against it, in part due to its enforcement of reparations granted by law in the series to victims of prior racial injustice.
As Buck stood in line after the first barrier, a group of men in button-down shirts pulled her out of line and said she wasn’t allowed to be there. They called the police over, she said, and then she knelt on the ground and prayed.
Police then approached her and said it was a private event and she did not have the right to be there. “It’s like you’re in someone’s home,” she said they told her. She insisted that she had a ticket, she lived in Tulsa, and had a right to be there. But the police proceeded to arrest her, handcuffing her and taking her to the Tulsa county jail. The Tulsa police department later said on Twitter that “Ms. Buck was in an area that is considered a private event area and the event organizer, in this case the Trump Campaign, can have people removed at their discretion.”
She said that when she arrived at the jail, officials took her blood pressure, and since it was elevated, they brought her to the Oklahoma State University medical center. Once her blood pressure went down, they brought her back to the jail. She was held there until being released at around 5 p.m., after $500 bail was posted on her behalf, and with a summons to appear in court on charges of “obstructing and interfering with a police officer.”
Later that afternoon, at around 5:45 p.m., police arrested three activists who had scaled a flagpole and were attempting to put up flags in defense of Black lives, including one that said “Defund the Police” and another that said “Invest in Black Communities,” on a flagpole outside the BOK Center. The three activists were: Alexandra Scott, a council member from Norman, Oklahoma; Ashley McCray, an Indigenous rights activist from Shawnee, Oklahoma; and Jonathan Engle, a veteran and activist from Taos, New Mexico. They said that police also arrested Alan Pogue, a photojournalist who had media credentials to attend the rally and who was standing nearby.
The police forced the three off the flagpole, the three activists said, by cutting the ropes of their harnesses and yanking them down. They then cuffed the four of them with zip ties and brought them to the police vehicle, where Secret Service agents questioned them, before taking them to the county jail. Scott said the handcuffs were so tight that she started losing circulation. When she complained to a police officer, she said he told her, “I don’t care. You’ll have to pass out before we loosen them.”
At around 11:30 p.m., after their $500 bails had been posted, they were all released. They were told that they had been charged with “obstructing a police officer.” Engle said that he had about two dozen insect bites the next day, and he thought the clothes they made him wear in jail must have been infected with fleas, bedbugs, or something else.
McCray said that as a member of the Absentee Shawnee tribe of Oklahoma, she wanted to put up the flags to show that Indigenous people are standing in solidarity with their Black relatives. “It’s important that we amplify the message that we do not accept hate, we do not accept white supremacy, and we do not accept Trump,” she said. “He’s only coming here to incite hatred and stir up white supremacy which is rampant throughout our state. It’s definitely not lost on us that he chose Tulsa, and we’re approaching the 100-year anniversary of the Greenwood massacre. Coming here just after Juneteenth with his message of hate and division, we wanted it very clear that we do not accept his presence here.”
Scott said that she wanted to put the flags up to send a message to those who feel threatened by Trump’s “vulgar, hateful rhetoric,” his “racism,” and his “sexual assaults on women.” She said she wanted to use her privilege as a white person and her platform as a council member to let people who have been targeted by Trump’s policies and rhetoric know that they are heard and seen, and everyone should feel safe. “I don’t live in Black or brown skin, and I was scared to go out there and do what we did,” she said. “But I’m not scared to leave my house and not come home because of police brutality or a white supremacist. So it was important for me that people know we’re here.”
While Engle, McCray, and Scott were in jail, crowds of anti-Trump and Black Lives Matters protesters marched across downtown Tulsa near the BOK Center, sometimes converging with groups of Trump supporters, leading to some heated confrontations that remained largely peaceful.
At around 9:15 p.m., just after the Trump rally ended, police fired pepper balls at crowds near the BOK Center blocking the streets, leading many of the protesters to disperse.
Meanwhile, in Greenwood, about one mile away from the BOK Center, crowds of people started dancing in the streets at a block party.
It was a continued celebration of Juneteenth, Greenwood, Tulsa, and its vibrant Black community. Over the weekend, much of the world’s attention was focused on Tulsa and the Trump rally, but the story of Tulsa’s 1921 Race Massacre needs to be told. It’s well past time the calls to action from Greenwood leaders like Dr. Tiffany Crutcher, Greg Robinson, and Rev. Robert Turner are heeded. Reparations are due to survivors and descendants of the massacre and changes are needed to address structural racism and racial inequalities. This includes diverting resources spent on using the police to solve many societal problems, like homelessness, poverty, problematic drug use, and mental health issues, into appropriate services to address these issues outside a policing context. It also requires investing in improving access to job, health, education, and economic opportunities for Black people – in Tulsa and across the nation.
US Supreme Court Allows Dreamers ‘To Breathe Again’
The United States Supreme Court ruled on Thursday to reverse the Trump administration’s decision to scrap Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama-era program that protects certain immigrants who came to the US as children from deportation. It lifts some fear and gives new hope for the more than 600,000 DACA recipients in the US and will help keep families together.
It’s hard to overstate the importance of the ruling. When then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the move to terminate DACA in 2017, Human Rights Watch spoke to DACA recipients – known as Dreamers – as they protested in the shadow of Trump Tower in New York City. One devastated protester told us the decision “would essentially mean my life is over.”
Nearly three years later, we spoke again with two of the DACA recipients we met that day. For more read here.
A Tulsa Homecoming: Witnessing the Legacy of the 1921 Race Massacre
Dreisen Heath is an advocate at Human Rights Watch and author of its May 2020 report, “The Case for Reparations in Tulsa, Oklahoma: A Human Rights Argument.” She delivered the following remarks during the “I Too, Am America” Juneteenth Rally for Justice in Tulsa’s Greenwood neighborhood on June 19, 2020.
I stand here today only because of the resolve of my ancestors, the relinquishing strength of my Tulsa family and friends, and the possibilities that we can break from the chains of injustice.
I was born here in Tulsa just down the road at Hillcrest Medical Center. My parents were patrons of Mt. Zion [Baptist Church], which is often pictured in smoldering flames as a result of the targeted and vile racist destruction of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre. They tried to make a life for themselves here for several years and relied heavily on this resilient community to guide and nourish them. While my young parents did their best to provide their first child with the life that they had envisioned, they were forced to leave Tulsa because of homelessness and uncertainty.
I would hear stories about Tulsa growing up. How welcoming the people were, the stark differences between neighborhoods in north Tulsa versus south Tulsa, the disappearance of “Black Wall Street,” and the constant fear that came with walking the same streets as the KKK. Community members shared oral histories with my parents about the aftermath of the Tulsa Race Massacre; many said they never knew where their neighbors went and never heard from them again. The Black community in Greenwood was forcibly separated and displaced from one another, some never able to live to tell the tale of survival.
I’d never imagine that what would eventually bring me back to Tulsa would be the continuation of the massacre. Human Rights Watch brought me back home, and not because Tulsa’s Greenwood District was restored to the prosperous Black economic hub it once was, but because oppressive and unchecked police violence, a legacy of slavery and the massacre, stole the lives of Terence Crutcher, Joshua Harvey, Joshua Barre, and too many others.
The legacy of slavery and the persistence of structural and other forms of racism are like being stuck in quicksand. You will either sink because of no fault of your own, but because our institutions have been designed to pull you down, keep you under, and drown you out. Or you must save yourself from submersion, pulling yourself out a few inches at a time, but still feeling weighed down by the burdens of racial injustice.
While many of our ancestors were taken away from us, many others pulled themselves out of the quicksand of slavery and racial injustice. Let’s be clear: The Emancipation Proclamation, a piece of paper, a declaration, did not set us free. Enslaved people were liberating themselves by the thousands and political interests followed thereafter. But while Juneteenth is a celebration of liberation, of freedom, obstacles to Black freedom in the United States still exist after 155 celebrations.
What is freedom if you can never escape the intergenerational traumas and impacts of slavery? What is freedom when Black families have to relive the killings of their loved ones over and over by police, every time they utilize their power to take another innocent Black life? What is freedom when Black Tulsans live less than their white counterparts? What is freedom when wealth that was once established, was then stripped away deliberately and never paid back?
It is because of people and leaders in our community like Dr. Tiffany Crutcher, Kristi Williams, Chief Amusan, Pastor Robert Turner, Councilor Vanessa Hall-Harper, Attorney Damario Solomon Simmons, Greg Robinson, and Representative Regina Goodwin [several of whom are featured in this article], among others, that we can imagine and systematize what freedom actually looks like. Conditions in Black and brown communities must change, and Human Rights Watch is honored and so humbled to stand in solidarity with and lend our support to our heroes on the front lines of change.
Healing and restoration are only possible if we use today and the rest of our days to address slavery’s legacy head on. The pathway towards equality in Tulsa requires economic justice. It requires reparations for the massacre survivors and descendants and the broader Black community that have not yet seen economic opportunity. It requires targeted investments in the Black community in housing, education, employment, business development, and other forms of economic development. It requires an end to everyday abusive policing and racial profiling, and an end to the economic conditions that cause police to abuse their power.
Tulsa, while unique in the severity of its destruction, shares a similar past and present with many other cities across the United States. If we don’t get it right in Tulsa, we will never be able to get it right.
There may be distractions near and far, but we must never surrender. We must reclaim our freedom.
Calls for ‘Reparations Now’ at Tulsa’s Juneteenth Rally
Several thousand people gathered yesterday in Tulsa, Oklahoma’s historic Greenwood district for the “I, Too, Am America,” Juneteenth Rally for Justice. It was in part a celebration to commemorate the emancipation of the last large population of enslaved Black people in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865 – with live music, food trucks, and plenty of reminders to wear masks and socially distance.
But the anger and frustration were also palpable, as Black Tulsans are all too aware that, after 155 Juneteenth celebrations and nearly 100 years after the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, when a white mob killed several hundred Black people and destroyed a prosperous Black neighborhood, deep-rooted problems remain, and the enduring legacy of structural racism and injustices continue. Many Tulsan community leaders gave powerful speeches, with calls to action and demands for long overdue reparations.
Dr. Robert Turner, pastor of Historic Vernon Chapel A.M.E. Church in Tulsa, described the significance of the field where the rally was held:
The very place where you are standing is sacred ground, where nearly 100 years ago, bombs were dropped right where you’re standing. Children were running, mothers were looking, grandmothers were afraid. And so, we are here today, in this sacred place to celebrate Juneteenth, to celebrate the liberation of African Americans from chattel slavery some 155 years later.
But…we still today, 155 years later, are not yet free. We as a people are not yet free to even walk down the streets of Tulsa without the police coming to harass and assault our young men. We are not free as a people to sit in our car and rest and relax as Terence Crutcher did without getting our lives taken from us.
We as a people are still not free when you have a major of our police department saying that we don’t kill Black people enough. We as a people are not free when you have a mayor that says justice such as reparations is divisive. We demand reparations not tomorrow, not next week, not next month, not next year, but we demand reparations, Mr. Mayor, Mr. Governor and Mr. President, Now. Reparations Now.
In his remarks, Demario Solomon Simmons, a civil rights attorney and an adjunct professor of African and African American studies at the University of Oklahoma, also explained why reparations were needed:
What are reparations? The root word means “to repair.” It’s very simple. We need to repair the damage that was done, not just in 1921, but the continual massacre that has happened ever since that day. We must repair it because we suffer in north Tulsa. We suffer as Black people in this city. And the only way we can have reconciliation that they talk about it, is to have what? Reparations.
A number of other speakers made powerful calls to action and justice, including: Dr. Tiffany Crutcher, who has become a leading advocate for justice afterTulsa police killed her brother Terence in 2016; Greg Robinson, Tulsa community activist and candidate for mayor; Tulsa’s City Council Vice Chair Vanessa Hall-Harper, who is also Membership Committee and Power Group Chair for the Black Wall Street Chamber of Commerce; and the civil rights activist and founder of the National Action Network, Reverend Al Sharpton.
"Our History Was Erased"
Descendants of the Tulsa massacre survivors are using President Trump’s visit to raise awareness about the city’s racist legacy. They share their stories and remind us of Tulsa’s deep history, current conditions, and map a pathway for justice.
Celebrating Juneteenth in Tulsa
Human Rights Watch's Dreisen Heath speaks live at Tulsa's Juneteenth Celebration:
"None of the Survivors or Their Families Ever Received A Penny"
People’s Right to Peaceful Protest
US President Donald Trump should know that the US Constitution and international human rights law guarantee people’s right to peaceful protest. The thousands expected to march in Tulsa, Oklahoma, to say that Black Lives Matter should be allowed to speak out and exercise their human rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression, and their constitutional right “peaceably to assemble.”
In a recent tweet, Trump referred to “Any protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes,” suggesting they’re somehow linked, although the weeks of anti-racism protests across the United States have been overwhelmingly non-violent yet in many cities met by a brutal police response. He added: “you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle, or Minneapolis. It will be a much different scene!”
In Tulsa, site of the 1921 race massacre that killed 300 people, the vast majority Black, and devastated a thriving community, tens of thousands are expected to rally to mark Juneteenth, and in support of justice for George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and all the other Black people who had their lives stolen by police violence over many decades in the US. Thousands of other people are expected to attend a Trump campaign rally in Tulsa tomorrow. Rather than issuing veiled threats, the president should remind the local authorities that everyone has a right to protest safely and without fear of attack.
Anyone looking to learn more about possible solutions should read about the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, look at our recommendations on how to address structural racism in the US and support our campaign for Congress to pass H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act.
Policing, Poverty, and Racial Inequality in Tulsa, Oklahoma
Tulsa, Oklahoma is a case study in abusive, overly aggressive policing in the US.
In September 2019, Human Rights Watch released a report on policing, poverty, and racial inequality in Tulsa as well as an interactive depicting the geographic correlations between these issues and policing practices in Tulsa, based on our analysis of Tulsa Police Department and US Census Bureau data from 2012 – 2017.
"We Won't Rest Until Freedom is Free!"
#ReparationsNow: Tell Congress to Pass Reparations Bill
US Congress should act to repair harms of slavery by passing H.R. 40
The time for the United States to account for its legacy of slavery is long overdue.
Black people in the US continue to feel the impacts of slavery today in the form of structural racism, violence, discrimination and disparities in areas such as health, housing, education, economics, policing and law enforcement.
The mass protests stemming from pervasive racial inequality and unlawful killings of Black people, like George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and Tony McDade, reflect the US government’s failure to provide redress for this long history of abuse.
US House Resolution 40 (H.R. 40) is a federal bill that will establish a commission to examine the impacts of slavery and other racist laws and practices. The commission would help pave the way for a full and truthful reckoning and accounting for past harms.
To build a better, more just future, we must address and repair the continuing legacy of slavery.
Take action now and send a message to your representatives. SIGN HERE >>
Human Rights Watch Celebrates Juneteenth in Tulsa
Human Rights Watch is in Tulsa this weekend in celebration of Juneteenth and as part of a local effort, led by our Tulsa partners, to shine a light on the 1921 Race Massacre, entering a 100 year commemoration, and as a positive and focused counterpoint to President Trump's political rally, misguidedly, taking place during the same weekend.
Address Slavery’s Legacy on Juneteenth
Officials across the United States should commemorate Juneteenth, a day honoring the declaration abolishing slavery, by considering and supporting laws and policies to address structural and other forms of racism in the US, Human Rights Watch said today. If US President Donald Trump is serious about addressing police misconduct and ensuring justice for all people, as his recent executive order on policing states, he should use his June 20 rally in Tulsa to lay out concrete steps to bring about structural changes to policing and address systemic racism in the US.
As mass demonstrations continue across the country, spurred by police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and many other Black people, officials should recognize that many of the racial inequalities and disparities driving the protests stem from the US failure to adequately account for and address the harm caused by slavery and its enduring impact.
“Black people were enslaved and exploited, and continue to be marginalized and disregarded today,” said Nicole Austin-Hillery, US program director at Human Rights Watch. “If the US does not finally address the accumulated effects of historical and present harm for Black people, it risks continuing to carry slavery’s legacy forward, causing new harm indefinitely into the future.”
Juneteenth celebrates the emancipation of the last large population of enslaved Black people in Galveston, Texas, who were informed they were free on June 19, 1865.
Why I Protest
HRW asked protestors across the US why they're out in the streets demonstrating. Here's what we heard.
Trump Executive Order on Policing Ignores Calls for Systemic Change
In response to three weeks of protests against police violence and systemic racism that have continued across the United States and throughout the world, President Trump issued an executive order on Tuesday that he said would encourage better police practices. But the order made no mention of how to address structural changes in policing. Surrounded by members of law enforcement at the signing, Trump condemned the growing call to reduce the footprint of the police in the country. The order focused more on ways to support police than on ways to save Black lives.
“The Safe Policing for Safe Communities EO [Executive Order] issued by #45 only brushes the surface of what is needed to begin reforming policing in the US. Examining alternatives to arrest, removing responsibility for addressing homelessness and mental health issues from police is where it begins,” wrote Nicole Austin-Hillery, executive director of the US Program at Human Rights Watch, on Twitter.
“The thing Donald Trump needed to address most in his EO on policing and communities was the one thing he completely ignored—the issue of race,” she said. “No real reform and healing can take place without an acknowledgement that race is at the core of the nation’s painful and ugly history."
“Trump's new executive order on policing throws a lot of money at the problem when the institution as a whole needs to be fundamentally restructured, reformed and in many ways dismantled,” tweeted Laura Pitter, deputy director of the US Program at Human Rights Watch. She pointed toward Human Right Watch’s June 9 news release calling for government officials to reject efforts such as #8CantWait that propose “only minor and ineffectual changes.”
Read More: Human Rights Watch calls for officials to address the structural racism underlying the protests.
Police Targeting ‘Street Medics’ at US Protests
The two red stripes formed an unmistakable and universally recognizable sign on Omid’s white helmet: a red cross. Yet a New York City police officer attempting to disperse largely peaceful protesters pinned him down with a knee on his back, threatening to drown him in the milk he was carrying to help protesters alleviate the effects of tear gas.
Omid is a street medic. Police arrested him on May 30 in Brooklyn and detained him in a crowded cell with 14 demonstrators for around 2 hours. Omid is not alone: across the United States, police have targeted street medics with the same brutality used against those protesting the institution’s systemic racism.
On June 2 in Asheville, North Carolina, local police in anti-riot gear barged into a line of street medics trying to protect a triage station they had set up in an alley away from the main protest. “We were standing at the opening of the alley, our hands over our heads, chanting that we were medics,” one of the volunteers told me. “Instead of talking to us, [the police] grabbed us by the shoulders, shoved us down the street, and told us to leave if we don’t want to be arrested.” The police then proceeded to destroy US$700 of medical supplies at the station, the volunteer said.
On May 31, in Austin, Texas, police fired a less-lethal impact projectile at a group of protesters, hitting Justin Howell, a 20-year-old Texas State University student, in the head. “He dropped dead weight to the ground and there was a lot of blood. We thought he was dead,” a witness told me. Police later claimed their intended target was someone standing near Howell who had thrown a plastic bottle and a backpack at the police.
After Howell lay on the ground with a fractured skull, the police chief announced, a police officer directed protesters to bring the wounded young man over to the nearby police headquarters so that he could receive medical attention. A video filmed at the time shows that a group of protesters, including street medics, then carried Howell to the station. As they approached, however, police officers guarding the headquarters fired so-called less lethal weapons at least 14 times, hitting one of the street medics with a projectile, injuring his hand.
New York Protester Jailed for a Week Highlights Parole Abuses
Across the United States, authorities have been cracking down on protesters demonstrating against police violence and structural racism in ways that perpetuate the pattern of harm that is spurring outrage. The week-long detention of a New York City essential worker, Devaughnta “China” Williams, whom police arrested at a protest and charged with parole violations, is a case in point.
There are 4.5 million people under probation or parole in the US. Any slip-up, from missing a meeting, to violating a local ordinance, can land them back in jail or prison – with few fair trial protections. Reflecting the racial inequities that are spurring protests, Black and brown people are disproportionately subjected to supervision and incarcerated for violations. In New York City, Black people are jailed for alleged parole violations at a rate 12 times higher than for white people.
According to media reports, after finishing his janitorial shift on June 4, Williams, a 27-year-old Black man on parole, briefly marched with protesters in the Bronx. Police trapped, bludgeoned, and pepper-sprayed the group shortly before the 8 p.m. curfew and arrested more than 250, including Williams. Williams was exempt from curfew as an essential worker, but police listed “breach of curfew” in charging him with parole violations.
Generally, people arrested in New York have the right to challenge their detention at a hearing within 24 hours – though, in a hotly contested decision, a New York judge recently lifted that requirement in the context of Covid-19 and the protests. Regardless, because Williams is on parole, authorities could lodge a “detainer” mandating confinement pending parole violation proceedings, which could take weeks or months.
Washington DC’s Police Reforms Fail to Address Structural Problems
The slate of policing reforms unanimously passed by the Washington DC City Council this week is a notable first step but falls short of the fundamental change that is needed.
The reform package, which DC council members have promised is the first of many, makes the use of neck restraints by officers a felony, forbids hiring officers previously fired for police misconduct, prohibits the purchase of military equipment from the federal government, and restores the right to vote to people incarcerated for felonies in DC. Mayor Muriel Bowser has indicated she will sign the bill. Even if she does, because the reform package was passed as an emergency measure, it will only last for 90 days and will need to be voted on again following public hearings to become permanent law.
DC authorities should get at the root causes of police violence and racial disparities, which have plagued the city’s police department. Reforms should include a drastic reduction in unnecessary arrests, including arrests for conduct that should not be criminalized to begin with, including drug possession for personal use – which Human Rights Watch has documented is the single most arrested offense in the country – and sex work. DC should also move away from using police to address problems related to homelessness and poverty, such as loitering and trespassing. Instead, authorities should invest in programs that actively improve access to health, education, housing, and job opportunities, and focus on addressing longstanding racial disparities in all these systems.
Pompeo Channels US Hypocrisy Over Human Rights
Comments this week by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo show little recognition that United States human rights violations in its own backyard have implications for its foreign policy.
While all US administrations have downplayed US violations of human rights, the Trump administration seems to have raised hypocritical invocation of human rights in US foreign policy to a new level.
At a June 10 press conference, a reporter challenged Pompeo to explain US credibility on human rights at a time when US citizens protesting against racism were being met with excessive force by federal and local law officers.
Pompeo responded that the reporter’s question was fundamentally flawed for “assuming there is a moral equivalency” between authoritarian countries that “repress their people and bludgeon their people” and a country like the US where journalists were able to directly question the Secretary of State about government actions. “Those things don’t happen in those nations,” he said.
But violations of human rights are violations of human rights, whether they occur in an authoritarian regime or in a democracy. The nationwide protests in the wake of the May 25 police killing of George Floyd are not just about local and federal law enforcement using excessive force against Black people and largely peaceful protesters. They reflect an ongoing history of violations of Black people’s fundamental rights, underlying structural racism, and the lack of redress for the harm suffered.
New York State Passes Historic Police Transparency Bill
Police disciplinary records in New York State are one step closer to being made public.
Under intense public pressure, the New York Legislature voted on Tuesday to repeal Civil Rights Law section 50-A, a 1970s law that concealed police disciplinary records from public disclosure in New York. Governor Andrew Cuomo has publicly declared he will sign the bill and Human Rights Watch urges him to do so immediately.
For years, police departments across the state have used the law to evade accountability by making all police disciplinary records confidential, including substantiated findings of misconduct by independent watchdog agencies. Section 50-A prevented the public for years from learning that the New York City police officer who fatally choked Eric Garner in 2014 had a lengthy record of misconduct.
In recent days, as protests precipitated by the police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and many other Black people swept across the United States, #Repeal50A became a rallying cry for demonstrators in New York seeking to turn outrage into meaningful policy.
Covid-19 Disparities Reflect Structural Racism, Abuses
The United States government should address the underlying factors driving racial disparities in Covid-19 illness and death rates. These include the US failure to fully protect the human rights of black and brown people as well as government policies that have directly contributed to racial disparities in health, housing, criminal law, and other areas.
Human Rights Watch wrote to the Ways and Means Committee of the US House of Representatives, pointing to several failures to protect the human rights of black and brown people that compound each other in ways that increase the risks Covid-19 poses for people of color. These include:
- Racially discriminatory policing and incarceration, brought again into the spotlight after the police killing of George Floyd, which exposes black and brown people to higher risk of infection from Covid-19 in detention. Studies have shown that discrimination in policing also correlates with stress, anxiety, depleted economic opportunities, and poor health outcomes, which may increase the risk of serious illness from Covid-19.
- Communities of color in the United States, especially Native Americans living on reservations, are facing Covid-19 without sufficient and affordable access to water, a human right, which is critical to reduce risk of infection.
- The human right to be free from racial segregation has never been adequately protected in the United States. Research indicates a correlation between high rates of racial segregation and poor health outcomes in the United States, including from Covid-19.
- For low-income “essential” workers, the risk they already face from Covid-19 is exacerbated by government failures to protect the rights to a safe and healthy workplace.
- Failures to protect the right to an adequate standard of living for people of color means that they are more likely to live in close quarters, use public transportation, and be exposed to the virus through work. Due to lower incomes and higher levels of debt, poverty is most acute among blacks and Latinos. About 21 percent of black people and 18 percent of Hispanic people live under the poverty line, compared with 8 percent of white people.
- Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, childbirth was already more deadly for black women in the United States. Policies implemented by some hospitals in response to Covid-19, such as limiting childbirth support and encouraging early discharge, compound with structural racism in the medical field to increase the risk of adverse health outcomes for black women during the pandemic.
“All levels of government in the US are failing to protect black and brown people’s basic rights, in ways that exacerbate their vulnerability to Covid-19,” said Alison Parker, managing US program director at Human Rights Watch. “Congress should adopt concrete, bold measures to ensure the human rights of all people and eliminate the structural racism that permeates many institutions and aspects of life in the United States.”
New York Protesters Jailed in Crowded, Filthy Conditions
Police conduct in the United States – including unprovoked beatings, excessive force, and arbitrary arrests – has come under intense scrutiny as protests erupted after the police killing of George Floyd.
Let’s add to this list the police’s actively endangering people’s health during a pandemic.
Across the country, protesters, journalists, and sometimes bystanders have been arrested in large groups – often for breaking curfews, blocking traffic, failure to disperse, or other minor offenses. Many were detained for hours in crowded cells with no masks, no hand sanitizer, and no way to stay apart. Police have reportedly torn the masks off some protesters when they were arrested, and many police officers seen at protests have not been wearing masks themselves.
A journalist in New York, Keith Boykin, described how he was filming protesters marching down the West Side Highway in Manhattan around 3:30 p.m. on May 30 when a line of police approached. They arrested Boykin and handcuffed him with a zip tie. Boykin said that when he told them he was with the press, an officer replied, “It doesn’t matter. You’re going to jail.” An officer pulled down Boykin’s mask, and since he was handcuffed, he couldn’t put it back on. After waiting in a hot van before being transferred onto a police bus, Boykin was eventually taken to 1 Police Plaza, the New York City Police Department’s headquarters, where he was put in a crowded cell with 34 people. Most of the other detainees didn’t have masks, and there was no soap or sanitizer to disinfect their hands. After six hours in police custody, Boykin was released.
“I had no opportunity to make a phone call, no one questioned me, no one read me my rights, and they were exposing me to coronavirus,” he said. “It shouldn’t be this way in America.”
Rights Groups Urge Authorities to Prevent and Account for Attacks Against Journalists
Today, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and 16 other organizations call on governors and mayors in states across the United States that have seen a pattern of abuse against journalists, including Governors Tim Walz of Minnesota, Gavin Newsom of California and Andrew Cuomo of New York, and Mayors Jacob Frey of Minneapolis, Muriel Bowser of Washington DC, Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles and Bill de Blasio of New York City, to immediately halt abusive police actions against journalists during protests in the past week, and to take swift measures toward accountability for violations of the First Amendment during violent crackdowns on peaceful protests.
Police have arrested and assaulted journalists all over the country as they cover the protests against the police killing of George Floyd, a black man, on May 25. There have been at least 300 incidents since May 26, the majority committed by police, including more than 49 arrests, 192 assaults (160 by the police), and 42 incidents of newsroom and equipment damage, according to the US Press Freedom Tracker. These incidents have happened in 33 states throughout the country, with the majority in Minneapolis, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, New York City, Louisville, Detroit, Denver and Philadelphia.
The letter was was signed by 17 press freedom, journalism, and human rights organizations, including:
Reporters Without Borders
Human Rights Watch
Society of Professional Journalists
International Women’s Media Foundation
The National Press Club
NPC Journalism Institute
The National Association of Black Journalists
The James W. Foley Legacy Foundation
The Native American Journalists Association
Radio Television Digital News Association
The National Coalition Against Censorship
The National Press Photographers Association
Military Reporters and Editors
Read the Letter Here >>
US Should Reject #8CantWait Policing Program
Government officials in the United States responsible for police policy and practice should reject a new campaign called #8CantWait that proposes only minor and ineffectual changes. They should instead adopt meaningful reforms that will ensure police are held to account and reduce the police footprint, investing saved resources into services that improve access to housing, education, employment, and health care to address structural racism in the United States.
The hashtag #8CantWait is a list of policy proposals that would regulate some police behavior in certain instances without any enforcement mechanism. They include requiring officers to de-escalate situations; to intervene when other officers use excessive force; to give warnings before shooting when possible; to follow a “use of force continuum;” to exhaust all reasonable options before using deadly force; and to file reports for force incidents. They would ban chokeholds and shooting at moving vehicles. They rely almost entirely on police officers’ discretion and on departments policing themselves.
“The #8CantWait policing program is so superficial as to be meaningless,” said John Raphling, US criminal legal system researcher at Human Rights Watch. “It allows mayors and police chiefs to say they’re doing something without actually making the changes that are needed.”
As mass protests continue across the US following the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, many local government and police officials have embraced the #8CantWait program in responding to popular demands for substantial reform. The campaign’s marketing relies on questionable data analysis while touting endorsements from celebrities and politicians.
The #8CantWait program threatens to undermine the growing momentum in the US to fundamentally change policing and race relations.
Reckless Use of US Helicopters to Intimidate Protesters
Police and other law enforcement officers have responded to largely peaceful protests across the United States with, in many cases, excessive force and other abusive tactics. This week they threatened demonstrators with military helicopters.
On June 1 at around 10 p.m. in Washington, DC, a UH-72A “Lakota” helicopter from the District of Columbia National Guard bearing a Red Cross emblem and at least one other helicopter, a variant of the “Blackhawk,” hovered low above protesters out after a city-wide curfew. The wind beating off the rotors snapped tree branches and sent debris flying.
A “show of force” is a common US military tactic used to intimidate and scare opponents. But hovering low over protesters and using rotor wash to disperse them is reckless and dangerous. Under these circumstances it was excessive use of force prohibited by international human rights law. One former US military combat pilot told Human Rights Watch he used a similar tactic to suppress and detain suspected insurgents in Afghanistan. The windspeeds created by a low-hovering helicopter can lift objects and cause serious damage, potentially leading to injury or death. These risks are amplified in congested urban environments, where the consequences would be exceptionally dangerous if something were to go wrong.
Stop Using Untrained, Abusive Agencies at Protests
The United States federal government should immediately stop deploying federal agents without relevant training or those from abusive agencies to protests across the country.
On June 2, 2020, the US government deployed officers from nearly a dozen federal agencies to control protests in Washington, DC, and other cities. Many of these agencies were unlikely to provide training in crowd control, increasing the risk of abuse. The deployment of US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raised particular concerns due to their histories of human rights violations and lack of accountability.
“Border Patrol agents have a disturbing record of killing people, including US citizens, with impunity, and ICE has a history of violating detainees’ rights,” said Nicole Austin-Hillery, US program director at Human Rights Watch. “As people protest police brutality and encounter new police abuses, these agents risk infusing more danger into volatile situations.”
US: Address Structural Racism Underlying Protests
United States authorities should take bold steps to address the structural racism driving mass protests across the country.
The national, state, and local governments should enact and enforce meaningful police accountability measures, drastically reduce unnecessary arrests, and end the use of police to address societal problems related to poverty and health, which disproportionately target black and brown people. Instead, they should invest in real support for communities in need and programs designed to counter long-term structural racism in multiple areas, such as health and education.
“The anger and frustration driving mass protests across the US is about more than the criminal actions of the police officers who killed George Floyd,” said Nicole Austin-Hillery, US program director at Human Rights Watch. “It is about a law enforcement system that does not value all people equally and sacrifices the lives and well-being of black people as a result.”
A video shows Minneapolis police officer, Derek Chauvin, killing George Floyd by pinning him to the ground and pressing his knee against Floyd’s neck on May 25, 2020 for more than eight minutes. Four days later, prosecutors charged Chauvin with third degree murder and second degree manslaughter and had him arrested, but they have not charged the other officers involved. The district attorney should immediately file charges against the other three officers involved in Floyd’s death.
Floyd’s death is the latest in a long history of killings of black people by police in the US with little or no accountability. In recent years, these include Eric Garner, Philando Castile, Alton Sterling, Delrawn Small, Terence Crutcher, Breonna Taylor, and many others. They also include killings of black men that prosecutors refused to properly investigate, like that of Ahmaud Arbery, a 25-year-old black man killed in February by two white men as Arbery was jogging in Georgia.
While killings captured on video like Floyd’s get extensive media coverage, police across the US use force and engage in abuse that do not cause death but are harmful and pervasive, especially toward black people, Human Rights Watch said. Studies show that police use force on black people at vastly higher rates than on white people, including tasers, dog bites, batons, punches, and kicks. Human Rights Watch investigations of the Tulsa, Oklahoma police department found that officers deployed tasers against black people at a rate almost 3 times as great as against white people and that black people were subjected to police violence 2.7 times as frequently.
Racial disparities in policing mirror entrenched racial disparities in many systems, including housing, education, and health care. Policymakers should address these underlying disparities with programs in all these areas that are specifically designed to counter the long-term effects of structural racism.
“It should not take the killing of a black man by police recorded on video to generate broad concerns about the mistreatment of black and brown people every day,” Austin-Hillery said. “The worst cases are just the tip of the iceberg of a system in which the racism is structural, not just cruel actions by bad cops.”
US Should Provide Reparations for 1921 ‘Tulsa Race Massacre’
State and local authorities in Tulsa, Oklahoma should provide reparations for the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, when a white mob killed several hundred black people and destroyed a prosperous black neighborhood. They should promptly develop and carry out a comprehensive reparations plan, in close consultation with the local community, to address the harm caused by the massacre and its lasting impact.
The 66-page report, “The Case for Reparations in Tulsa, Oklahoma: A Human Rights Argument,” details the destruction that left hundreds of people, most of them black, dead and more than 1,200 black-owned houses burned in Tulsa’s Greenwood neighborhood, then known as “Black Wall Street.” Human Rights Watch also described some of the subsequent policies and structural racism that prevented Greenwood and the broader North Tulsa community from thriving. In this context, the US Congress should also pass H.R. 40, a bill that would begin to address the ongoing harm from slavery.
“It was almost 100 years ago that the Greenwood neighborhood in Tulsa was destroyed, but survivors of the massacre and their descendants are still suffering the consequences,” said Dreisen Heath, US program advocacy officer at Human Rights Watch and author of the report. “Decades of black prosperity and millions of dollars in hard-earned wealth were wiped out in hours but nobody was ever held accountable and no compensation was ever paid.”
The massacre occurred between May 31 and June 1, 1921, after a black man was accused of assaulting a white woman. A white mob, including people deputized and armed by city officials, descended on Greenwood, terrorized black families, and burned their community to the ground. About 35 square blocks – more than 1,200 black-owned houses, scores of businesses, a school, a hospital, a public library, and a dozen black churches – were destroyed and thousands were left homeless. The American Red Cross estimated the death toll at 300, but the exact number remains unknown. Only recently did officials begin limited excavations of unmarked mass graves.
In the immediate aftermath, the state declared martial law and the state and local authorities disarmed and arrested black people in Tulsa, moving them to internment camps where thousands of black Tulsans, then homeless, were forced to live in tents. Government officials committed no public money to help Greenwood rebuild. Rather, they impeded rebuilding, even rejecting offers of medical and reconstruction assistance from within and outside Tulsa.
No one was held responsible for the violent crimes, and city and state officials attempted to cover up the massacre for decades. This fall, for the first time, the Oklahoma Education Department will include the race massacre in its curriculum.
Ongoing de facto segregation, discriminatory policies, and structural racism have left black Tulsans, particularly those in North Tulsa, with a lower standard of living and fewer opportunities than other Tulsans. There are significant racial disparities in the city across multiple indicators, from access to health and nutritious food to education. Greenwood community members have expressed concern that the current economic investment plans are not sufficiently focused on supporting the community or preserving its black heritage, but rather on gentrifying the area.
“Tulsa stands out for the malicious destruction during the massacre, but the racist systems, policies, and practices that have harmed black Tulsans over decades are not unique,” Heath said. “In many ways, Tulsa is a microcosm of the United States.”
COVID-19 Running Rampant in Ohio Prisons
The accounts from people inside Ohio’s Marion Correctional Institute expressed an overwhelming fear. In early April, as COVID-19 rapidly spread, they described living in dormitories with well over a hundred other men, double their capacity, in stacked bunks less than 3 feet apart.
Prison staff were not wearing masks or taking other precautions. They lacked cleaning equipment, fresh clothes, soap and clean masks. They said that staff ignored people who said they were sick or placed them in punitive solitary confinement. Meanwhile, more and more of the people in prison were experiencing extreme symptoms. Like in a horror movie, people would leave and not come back.
As a researcher on the criminal legal system for a human rights organization, I had grave concerns about the spread of COVID-19 in jails and prisons. The accounts from MCI confirm those concerns.
US Should Rescind Guatemala Agreement that Compels Asylum-Seekers to Abandon Claims
Yesterday, Refugees International and Human Rights Watch released a joint report showing that the Asylum Cooperative Agreement between the United States and Guatemala effectively compels Salvadoran and Honduran asylum seekers to abandon their claims, leading many to return to possible harm in their country of origin.
As the result of an illegal deal between the US and Guatemala, asylum seekers from Honduras and El Salvador were held in inhumane conditions in US border jails and ultimately compelled to abandon their asylum claims, @RefugeesIntl and @hrw found: https://t.co/BKhwbKtnQy— Ariana Maia Sawyer (@ArianaMSawyer) May 19, 2020
A Salvadoran man said that a US Department of Homeland Security official told him “there is no asylum” and “there are no Central Americans allowed into the United States.”— Bill Frelick (@BillFrelick) May 19, 2020
“Under the agreement, the United States has rapidly transferred non-Guatemalan asylum seekers to Guatemala without allowing them to lodge asylum claims in the US,” a news release from Refugees International and Human Rights Watch states. “Given Guatemala’s inability to provide effective protection and the risk that some transferees face the threat of serious harm either in Guatemala or after returning to their home countries, the US violates its obligation to examine their asylum claims by implementing the agreement.”
Advocates of immigrants’ rights have responded to the findings of the report across social media.
This is a compelling and extensively-researched report which is, IMHO, the definitive report so-far on the disastrous and illegal "asylum cooperative agreements" that the Trump administration was using to end asylum—before COVID-19 shut the ACAs down and ended asylum another way. https://t.co/l2t3J6Ip2D— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) May 19, 2020
Report by @RefugeesIntl/@hrw confirms the devastating effects of the ACA signed with Guatemala. The agreement puts migrants in danger and makes a mockery of the U.S.' asylum system & laws. Great job documenting this, @YaelSchaer @ArianaMSawyer @r_schmidtke https://t.co/Msh8ka5y30— felipe navarro-lux (@fnlux) May 19, 2020
"The ACA has been implemented in a way that effectively compels transferees to abandon their claims."— Jessica Bolter (@jessicabolter) May 19, 2020
Essential reading with the most detail I've seen to date on the ACA process in the U.S. and Guatemala. https://t.co/93n01dInaf https://t.co/lKSOurhjpV
2020 candidates for office should heed the report authors’ recommendations: “The US and Guatemalan governments should rescind the Guatemalan agreement rather than plan for its resumption. The US should also halt plans to begin transferring non-national asylum seekers to El Salvador and Honduras under similar agreements.”
Gerrymandering Explored in Film ‘Slay the Dragon', Experts to Address US Elections
How do you defeat a system that allows politicians to legally and unapologetically suppress the will of voters?
This question is at the center of Slay the Dragon, an inspiring new documentary from Participant Films about the quest to end gerrymandering ahead of the 2020 US elections. Human Rights Watch Los Angeles Film Club – which is inviting the public to view Slay the Dragon online for free – is hosting a virtual Q&A Sunday at 6pm PST/9pm EDT featuring the documentary’s protagonist, The People Executive Director Katie Fahey, along with leading voices from Human Rights Watch and the NAACP. The discussion on voting rights in the 2020 elections comes as the United States grapples with how to make voting fair and accessible in the era of Covid-19.
Gerrymandering is complex in its history and approach, but Slay the Dragon deftly illuminates increasingly brazen efforts to manipulate US elections. State legislatures engaged in gerrymandering rig the system by redrawing district maps in twisted ways, often with the aid of new mapmaking software. With voters of the rival party now squeezed and consolidated into these new districts, the party behind the redistricting increases its chances of winning elections even if it loses the popular vote.
Extreme partisan gerrymandering has infected our electoral process for far too long. Our democracy should represent the will of the people and must not be reduced to a political charade. Voters should choose their representatives instead of representatives choosing their voters.— NAACP (@NAACP) June 27, 2019
Michigan is known to have one of the most manipulatively drawn electoral maps in the country, which as the film explains, played a role in the deadly Flint water crisis. The documentary follows Katie Fahey, an everyday Millennial who goes on to lead an enormously successful anti-gerrymandering campaign that puts the power back in the hands of voters.
Fahey will be joined at Sunday’s virtual event by Jamal Watkins, vice president of civic engagement at the NAACP, Dreisen Heath, advocacy officer at Human Rights Watch, and Gerry Johnson, editor and senior strategist at Human Rights Watch.
When: Slay the Dragon is available for free viewing through May 17. The virtual Q&A starts at 6pm PST/9pm EDT.
Where: Click here to join the virtual discussion.
Growing Concerns About Racial Bias in Social-Distancing Arrests
On Wednesday, New York State Attorney General Letitia James called on the New York Police Department to enforce social distancing rules without racial bias, following reports that people of color are being disproportinately targeted during the Covid-19 pandemic. Data shows that Black and brown people comprised nearly 68 percent of social distancing arrests in the city between March 16 and May 5, and Latinos another 24 percent. Black and Brown people received more than 80 percent of summonses related to the state of emergency.
“The apparent unequal enforcement of social distancing policies is deeply troubling, and deepens the divide between law enforcement and the people they are tasked to protect,” James said. “It is inherently wrong to aggressively police one group of people, yet ignore another group that commits the same infraction. The NYPD must better ensure that a New Yorker’s race, color, and neighborhood does not determine how they are patrolled.”
Concerns over discriminatory enforcement of social distancing rules extend far beyond New York. ProPublica examined court records in Ohio and released an analysis finding that “black people were at least four times as likely to be charged with violating the stay-at-home order as white people.”
A @propublica analysis found charges of violating Ohio's stay-at-home order seem to have fallen disproportionately on black people.— Sentencing Project (@SentencingProj) May 12, 2020
Black people in the state were at least 4X as likely to be charged with violating the order as white people. https://t.co/2gV60qMSCZ
Mass incarceration in overcrowded, unhygienic conditions exacerbates the threat of Covid-19, and overpolicing plays a significant role in putting people behind bars, often for low-level offenses. Candidates for public office should push to reform the criminal justice system, including policing practices, in ways that substantially reduce unnecessary arrests and incarceration. As Human Rights Watch reported this month, "limitations on arrests and transportation of people to jails will protect those arrested and the police.”
US Children Are Going Hungry at Record Levels
As the Covid-19 outbreak rages on, two new national surveys on hunger in the United States are in -- and the news is not good. There's been an alarming rise in the number of families struggling to put food on the table, according to the COVID Impact Survey and the Brookings Institution's Survey of Mothers with Young Children. Brookings fellow Lauren Bauer crunched the numbers and showed that, due to the pandemic, food insecurity in the country has increased -- and households with children 12 years of age and under are experiencing hunger like at no other time in modern history.
Using @COVIDImpact data from their first week in the field, I found that 1 in 3 households with a child are food insecure.— Lauren Bauer (@laurenlbauer) May 6, 2020
See their topline results & run your own analysis on their data here:https://t.co/qEF0OwE2tX.
Elected officials and 2020 candidates for office should support the expansion of SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps, to address the growing number of families experiencing hunger. With the three previous Covid-19 relief packages passed by Congress falling short of providing necessary aid and protections for families in poverty, future relief packages should focus on meeting the basic needs of those most in distress.
The consequences of failing to curb food insecurity can be dire, particularly for the US children who are experiencing more hunger than ever during the pandemic. Children who go without adequate amounts of food are at greater risk of developing mental and behaviorial health challenges and chronic illnesses, and face obstacles to academic achievement.
In his piece on growing food insecurity among children, @jasondeparle notes, "Inadequate nutrition can leave young children with permanent developmental damage.” More here: https://t.co/tz1Y1Sowot pic.twitter.com/04IFct7ouJ— The Hamilton Project (@hamiltonproj) May 6, 2020
High-Stakes Trial over Voting Rights in Florida Nears Conclusion
By Alison Leal Parker
In November 2018, Floridians struck a major blow against discriminatory voting laws when they went to the ballot box. They approved Amendment 4 in an overwhelming majority, restoring the voting rights of most people in the state with felony convictions. It was an important step toward realizing the American ideal of free and fair elections.
The victory proved to be short-lived. Soon after the vote, the Florida legislature passed a law that once again put people’s ability to vote in jeopardy. SB 7066 requires citizens with felony convictions – whose right to cast a ballot had just been restored – to pay various fines, fees, or restitution, known as legal financial obligations or “LFOs,” before they can vote.
Seventeen plaintiffs, represented by voting rights groups including the ACLU, NAACP LDF, the Brennan Center, and the Campaign Legal Center, are challenging the law in the case Jones v. DeSantis. Last week, I listened to part of the telephone trial, which is now in its final week in the US district court for the Northern District of Florida. The outcome could decide whether hundreds of thousands of formerly incarcerated Floridians are barred from voting this year due to payment requirements.
The testimony I heard included an exchange between plaintiff’s counsel and Doug Bakke, chief operations officer for the clerk of court for Florida’s Hillsborough County. It made clear that many voters in Florida are unable to pay the LFOs at issue.
Bakke explained that the vast majority of fines, fees, and restitution in Florida go unpaid. He told the court that the “more pure or true collection rate is anywhere between 3 and 8 percent of fines and fees assessed.” In a separate line of questioning he agreed that the average LFOs assessed in a first or second degree felony case would be $5,214 – an amount beyond reach for the majority of Americans according to an October 2019 study by JP Morgan Chase, which reported an inability to cope with unexpected bills above $700 for a low-income family and $2000 for a middle-income family. The Chase study was published well before the financial impacts of Covid-19 began to take effect.
But human rights law is clear that individuals’ voting rights cannot hinge on how much money is in their bank account.
Both Florida’s original disenfranchisement of people with felony convictions who had completed their sentences, and SB 7066 requiring payment of LFOs, violate international human rights law. As early as 1998, in a joint report with the Sentencing Project, Human Rights Watch stated that felony disenfranchisement after sentence completion, especially for a broad category of offenses like all felonies, violates article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a human rights treaty to which the United States is a party.
Requiring that people pay fines, fees, and restitution violates that treaty’s requirement that the right to vote not be subject to a “distinction of any kind, such as…race…property, birth or other status.” Whether or not a person can afford these fees, the requirement to pay before voting is unreasonable as it amounts to a de facto restriction on the right to vote based on property requirements. It's also inconsistent with the state's obligation to take effective measures to ensure that all persons entitled to vote can do so.
Putting aside these unreasonable restrictions on the right to vote, even if a Florida citizen was able to pay, it’s often impossible to determine how much a particular voter owes. Testimony in this week’s trial revealed that for many potential voters in Florida with felony criminal records, it will be impossible to determine whether they have any legal financial obligations to the state; and if they do, how much they owe. This may be particularly true for those with convictions from the 1980s or earlier.
In an exchange between plaintiff’s counsel and Bakke regarding Pastor Clifford Tyson, a Florida citizen who had felony convictions dating as far back as 1978, Bakke said, regarding the accuracy of the LFO records, “The older the case, the less confidence I would have.”
As plaintiff’s counsel walked Bakke through the various aspects Pastor Tyson’s records, which included old and more recent convictions from the mid 1990s, she asked, “can you tell me today how much Pastor Tyson still owes?”
The answer: “I believe it is still the $2. I have no records to indicate whether or not the costs of supervision have been paid.” Further exchanges regarding separate records held by the clerk’s office introduced the possibility that Tyson owed $271; or possibly $259. The testimony left unclear whether or not additional restitution payments were required of Tyson. In an interview with the Brennan Center for Justice, Pastor Tyson explained that he lives off of a disability payment of $7,600 per year. If he could ever determine the actual amount he owes the state of Florida, it may be an amount beyond his ability to pay.
This testimony laid bare a basic but irrefutable fact: It’s very difficult or impossible for many people with felony convictions in Florida to pay their LFOs. That’s both because they cannot afford to pay the LFOs and because the state is unable to tell them through any centralized system how much they owe.
Although Covid-19 wasn’t addressed directly, the testimony also made clear that the crisis only makes Florida’s chaos around voting rights worse. The Jones trial is being held telephonically because courts have been closed for non-essential services in light of the public health emergency. For those same reasons, returning citizens will struggle to get help or information from court officials like the clerk who testified yesterday, and other offices are unlikely to be open to take payments.
Even before the coronavirus outbreak, some Florida citizens were too poor to pay restitution, fines, and fees. Now, as the state’s recordkeeping proves unprepared to navigate SB 7066 and hundreds of thousands of people's voting rights hang in the balance, Florida must ensure voting rights in the context of a global pandemic. The court’s ruling will have enormous implications for the constitutional and human right to vote in Florida as the Covid-19 crisis rages on.
Alison Leal Parker is managing director of the US Program at Human Rights Watch.
Exacerbated Maternal Health Challenges Loom for African Americans Amid Covid-19
Going through pregnancy is challenging for many parents. But for Black women in the United States, the dangers are heightened. Black women face a maternal death rate that’s more than double that of their white counterparts. The troubling figures reflect a nation whose health care experiences and outcomes are divided along racial lines.
Annerieke Daniel, a fellow in the Women's Rights Division at Human Rights Watch, knows the racial disparities all too well. During her pregnancy last July, she was diagnosed with preeclampsia, a condition that disproportionately affects and kills African-American women. Daniel, who is Black, wrote about her experience in an essay published on Sunday by the LA Review of Books. The piece sheds light on the systemic challenges that Black rural women face in accessing maternal health care – and how the Covid-19 crisis threatens to make it worse.
“As the pandemic overwhelms our healthcare system and leads to shortages in medical providers and supplies, pregnant women will suffer, and the many Black women living in rural areas who already lack access to an obstetrician or hospital will have an even tougher time,” Daniel writes. “Health disparities that existed long before the pandemic will contribute to the alarming rate at which COVID-19 is infecting, and killing, Black Americans.”
The maternal health crisis is due in part to states’ refusal to expand Medicaid, which has contributed to the closure of rural hospitals in the South. As Daniel reports, there were 45 hospitals serving rural Alabama in 1980. In 2016, there were only 16.
Public policies have a direct impact on the prenatal care and number of hospital beds available to rural Americans and all people in need, making it important for elected officials and those running for office in 2020 to address the crisis head-on. Daniels encourages policy makers to consider expanding Medicaid eligibility to increase coverage rates. Medicaid expansion, she says, “could help stem the high number of rural hospital closures and ensure that women can deliver their babies in safe and respectful circumstances.”
Read Daniel’s entire essay at the LA Review of Books.
Trump Signs Executive Order Keeping Meatpacking Plants Open Amid Rise in Worker Deaths
President Trump issued an executive order on Tuesday night forcing US meatpacking plants to remain open, despite Covid-19 outbreaks at facilities leading to the deaths of plant workers across the country. The order comes after many of the nation’s largest meat processors closed or slowed production due to the rise in infections. As Human Rights Watch reported last week, workers are enduring the pandemic amid fewer safety protections due to rollbacks implemented by the Trump administration before the pandemic.
In issuing his executive order, Trump cited the Defense Production Act in order to deem the plants "critical infruastructure." The president announced no new protections to protect employees.
Experts from Human Rights Watch, which has done extensive research on the dangers facing meatpacking workers, sounded off on the order.
This is a terrible decision that puts the lives of meat and poultry plant workers at even greater risk. At the same time, the Trump admin is rolling back protections, like line speed limits. How does this keep our workers or food supply safe? https://t.co/XB3KHyO6TN https://t.co/NCnF7DCZtg— komala ramachandra (@Komala_chandra) April 28, 2020
“This is a terrible decision that puts the lives of meat and poultry plant workers at even greater risk,” tweeted Komala Ramachandra, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch. “At the same time, the Trump admin is rolling back protections, like line speed limits. How does this keep our workers or food supply safe?”
Even before the pandemic, meat processing jobs were already some of the country’s most dangerous. But the Trump administration aggressively deregulated line speed rules, increasing risk of serious injury. https://t.co/4kLZoGQddh— Grace Meng (@grace_meng) April 29, 2020
"The order requires plants to stay open; it does not require plants to follow CDC/OSHA guidance to keep workers safe,” tweeted Human Rights Watch senior researcher Grace Meng, referring to the US Centers for Disease Control and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Under the Trump administration, OSHA is operating with the fewest safety and health inspectors in its 48-year history.
In her Human Rights Watch article last week, Ramachandra emphasized that the rollbacks of safety rules in meatpacking plants can be undone. "Reinstating protections should be a priority of candidates seeking voters’ trust in the 2020 elections," she writes. "Protecting all workers – especially those at the front lines who are risking their lives to feed the country– should be a priority for all branches of government."
‘Action to Protect Voting Rights Is Urgently Needed,’ Warns Nicole Austin-Hillery in CNN.com Op-Ed
What You Should Know About Trump’s Executive Order on Immigration
By Grace Meng
This week, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order on immigration that doesn't do what he said the order would do when he tweeted about it earlier in the week. Although he declared that he would “temporarily suspend immigration” into the United States, the actual order suspends issuance for 60 days a subset of green cards (officially, a permanent resident card): some employer-based green cards and some family-member green card applications, all from outside the United States. And as multiple media outlets have pointed out, the US Department of State, which issues visas overseas, has already nearly suspended operations due to the global Covid-19 pandemic. It’s not clear how many people this order will actually affect, at least for now.
Unfortunately, this doesn’t mean we can dismiss the latest Trump executive order as harmless.
The order separates families for no rational reason. The children of lawful permanent residents or the elderly parents of US citizens are hardly competing for American jobs. But as long as this order is in effect, green card holders will not be able to bring their children or spouses to the United States and US citizens will not be able to bring their parents, adult children, or siblings.
The order is the latest in a series of executive orders, policies, and statements that paint immigrants as the “enemy.” And xenophobic, anti-immigrant policies and language are dangerous. They undermine the reality that immigrants boost the US economy and are serving in essential roles to keep this country healthy and safe. They also fuel dangerous, racist actions, as seen by the recent rise of hate crimes against Asian Americans.
Nor is the administration likely to keep this suspension “temporary.” The first executive order barring entry of people from seven Muslim-majority countries was initially in effect for 90 days – three years later, the ban lives on. The March 24 order by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention allowing officials to expel unauthorized migrants at land borders without screenings for asylum or other protections was originally in effect for 30 days but was just recently extended for another 30. President Trump sought to limit legal immigration in legislative proposals that Congress rejected. Now he’s trying to implement his agenda through executive action.
The US immigration system has long needed reform – to protect families, to protect workers, to protect asylum seekers, and to protect due process. The Covid-19 pandemic has only made more apparent the crucial role immigrant workers play in the US economy, and how difficult and dangerous work conditions can be for US citizens and immigrants, as made obvious by the outbreak in meatpacking plants across the US. The best way to protect American workers during this crisis and beyond is to acknowledge the contributions of immigrants and ensure all workers in this country are able to work in safety and with dignity.
Grace Meng a senior researcher in the US Program at Human Rights Watch.
US Meatpacking Workers Face Crisis, Slashed Safety Protections During Pandemic
Michigan Father, Son Die from Covid-19 After Family Reportedly Begged Hospitals for Help
A family in Detroit is grieving after experiencing devastating losses to Covid-19. A man and his father died within 6 hours of each other, sending the family reeling and amplifying concerns about racial bias in the US health care system.
Gary Fowler died in his home on April 7, after desperately seeking coronavirus testing and treatment without success. As USA Today reports:
Gary Fowler, 56, went to the emergency rooms of three metro Detroit hospitals in the weeks leading up to his death, begging for a coronavirus test, begging for help because he was having difficulty breathing, but he was repeatedly turned away, Gambrell said.
"My dad passed at home, and no one tried to help him," Gambrell, 33, said through tears. "He asked for help, and they sent him away. They turned him away."
In the hours before his death, breathing was so difficult, Fowler slept sitting up in the bedroom chair, while his wife, Cheryl, dozed in the bed by his side. When she woke, her husband of nearly 24 years was gone.
Before he took his last breaths, Fowler scrawled on a piece of paper, "Heart beat irregular ... oxygen level low."
The day prior, Fowler’s father had died from Covid-19 at the age of 76.
Fowler’s stepson, Keith Gambrell, who has also tested positive for the coronavirus, said in a CBS News interview that he believes that racial bias played a role in Fowler’s death. "I honestly believe it was because my father was black,” he said. “They didn't honestly take his symptoms serious enough to give him a test."
While the latest funding bill provides money for testing, some states are already ramping up their testing programs. But tests have been difficult to get in many places.@Jerickaduncan spoke to one family, now mourning a man they say was turned away from getting tested 3 times. pic.twitter.com/XkYwnC3FJK— CBS This Morning (@CBSThisMorning) April 22, 2020
Gambrell told USA Today that in the hours following Fowler’s funeral, Fowler's wife had to be put on a ventilator due to Covid-19 complications after being turned away from the first hospital they tried. The ordeal has tested the family’s resilience.
"This coronavirus is gonna cause so much PTSD for people. It's sad," Gambrell said. "There's going to be a major fallout after this. It's not right at all.”
About one third of coronavirus cases in Michigan are among African Americans, despite Black people only comprising 14 percent of the state’s population. A recent analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that Michigan isn’t alone – the latest data shows that across the country, people of color, especially African Americans, are being disproportionately slammed by Covid-19.
With experts expecting a second wave of the coronavirus to hit the United States this fall, 2020 candidates must offer solutions to America's racial barriers to adequate health care as Election Day approaches. Continue following us for more coverage and analysis of the racial disparities related to Covid-19 and how US leaders can address them.
As US Debates Reopening, Trump Announces Intention to Suspend Immigration
On Monday night, President Trump took to Twitter to announce that he planned to seal the United States off from immigration for an undisclosed period of time. The executive order, he claimed, would protect the country from the Covid-19 outbreak and safeguard American workers from migrants who seek employment in the U.S.
In light of the attack from the Invisible Enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our GREAT American Citizens, I will be signing an Executive Order to temporarily suspend immigration into the United States!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 21, 2020
The announcement follows the release last week of the Trump administration’s guidelines for states to ease stay-at-home orders and its push to reopen the US economy.
The response from experts on immigrant rights has been swift. Grace Meng, senior immigration researcher at Human Rights Watch, wrote on Twitter: “By suspending legal immigration to the US, American families will be among those who suffer most, people who will remain separated from spouses, children, parents, and other loved ones at a time when we all need our families most.”
President Trump's announcement he will suspend immigration to the US is a classic xenophobic, rights-abuser move - trying to deflect attention from government failures by blaming immigrants.— Grace Meng (@grace_meng) April 21, 2020
Immigrants are among essential front-line workers risking their lives to keep this country going. https://t.co/xZuaFqVDwK. They're doctors & nurses; grocery store workers; farmworkers & meat packing workers who are keeping our country going. https://t.co/HtwV4aL9bL— Grace Meng (@grace_meng) April 21, 2020
By suspending legal immigration to the US, American families will be among those who suffer most, people who will remain separated from spouses, children, parents, and other loved ones at a time when we all need our families most. https://t.co/wxvgw3h2Wv— Grace Meng (@grace_meng) April 21, 2020
Trump has already upended asylum, expelling people at the border, including children, without screening them for eligibility for protection under US and international law. https://t.co/pcyKJPipqO— Grace Meng (@grace_meng) April 21, 2020
Immigration has emerged as one of the most pressing issues in the 2020 US elections, following a pattern of increased deportations and violations of immigrants’ rights under both Republican and Democrat administrations. Human Rights Watch has published a guide to provide an overview of human rights issues at stake in the 2020 elections, including questions to help voters assess candidates’ positions on the rights of immigrants.
Human Rights Watch guide to some of the most pressing human rights issues in the 2020 US elections.
Charlie Martel and Grace Meng of Human Rights Watch on the systematic dismantling of the US asylum system during the pandemic.
In a letter to the Trump administration, over 180 rights groups demand an end to border expulsions and protection for domestic violence survivors.
Amid Pandemic, Elected and Aspiring Leaders Should Look to Rev. Joseph Lowery
Two weeks after Rev. Joseph Lowery was laid to rest, the human rights community is still reflecting on the lessons left behind by the man nicknamed the "Dean" of the Civil Rights Movement in America. Rev. Lowery, who died in March at the age of 98, worked closely with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and made significant contributions to the fight for social justice over the course of several decades. His legendary activism ranged from co-founding the Southern Christian Leadership Conference with Dr. King in the 1950s to protesting injustices in the criminal justice system in the 1970s, and even in his retirement advocating against capital punishment.
Coretta King once said the Rev. Joseph Lowery had “led more marches and been in the trenches more than anyone since Martin.” Now Lowery, too, has led his last march.— AJC (@ajc) March 28, 2020
Remembering Joseph Lowery https://t.co/FDTH3SgqRL pic.twitter.com/uJvyV2S6cR
Notably, Rev. Lowery stood up to powerful elected officials when their policies infringed on the rights of the vulnerable. In a push for voting rights for Black Americans, for example, he bravely delivered demands to George Wallace, Alabama’s segregationist governor, after the famous 1965 “Bloody Sunday” march from Selma to Montgomery. Wallace ordered state troopers to beat the protestors, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed soon after.
Rev. Lowery’s family buried him in a small private funeral, due to Georgia’s restrictions on gatherings during the Covid-19 crisis. Nicole Austin-Hillery, executive director of the US Program at Human Rights Watch, was among the civil rights leaders around the world who wouldn’t let Rev. Lowery’s legacy be a casualty of the pandemic. In an op-ed for The Progressive, she reminds elected officials, 2020 candidates, activists and all of us what we can learn from Rev. Lowery’s example:
Of all the amazing accolades listed in his obituary, I was most struck in reading that he once told an interviewer his theory on why he lived longer than most of the other great civil rights leaders. He said he felt God was keeping him alive so he could address the injustices of the criminal justice system, particularly toward poor black men.
I am too young to have known and worked with Lowery, but I did once hear him deliver one of his fiery oratories on race and justice at Howard University. As a civil and human rights lawyer who heads the U.S. Program at Human Rights Watch, I’ve devoted my career to fighting the same injustices Lowery did throughout his life.
As the nation lives through the COVID-19 pandemic, we are all experiencing what it is like to feel vulnerable. But perhaps the most vulnerable of all are those in our jails and prisons. The virus is affecting the lives of those in detention as well as those who care for them.
Overpopulated U.S. jails and prisons are incubators for the spread of disease — a problem that existed long before the World Health Organization declared the coronavirus a global pandemic.
Our research at Human Rights Watch underscores that a disproportionate number of those in detention are black — the very group of people Lowery felt called to defend and protect.
If swift action is not taken to lessen the prison and jail population, the virus will spread more rapidly, and the prison system will face deadly consequences. While this alarm bell has not been heard by all, some states have been releasing varying numbers of detained individuals.
On March 27, the same day that Lowery died at his home in Atlanta, hundreds of former federal prosecutors, judges, and justice department lawyers sent a letter to President Donald Trump asking the government to release more people from federal custody to help curb the spread of the virus.
Front-line civil and human rights leaders have always been our conscience, as Lowery’s life reminds us.
In 1979, Lowery, in defiance of a threat from the Ku Klux Klan, marched for leniency for a black man with a mental health condition who was accused of raping two white women in Decatur, Alabama. He recalled later that bullets whizzed inches above his head during the march. That’s the kind of courage that is needed to get us through the present moment.
While the pandemic has overshadowed news of Lowery’s death, we would do well to heed his example. Let’s honor his life’s work by taking action to save those in our jails and prisons.
Further Reading and Viewing:
Read Austin-Hillery's full piece on Rev. Lowery in The Progressive.
Learn more about Rev. Lowery's life and thoughts on leadership by checking out the Oral History Archive of the the National Visionary Leadership Project.
Read more on on HRW.org about the United States' urgent need for policies that protect people behind bars from Covid-19.
What Wisconsin’s Elections Say About the Voting Rights Battle Ahead
Last week, images of mask-clad voters standing for hours in long, snaking lines at Wisconsin polling stations shocked many across the United States. As we reported last Tuesday, a series of dramatic eleventh-hour events concluded in a chaotic Election Day in which many Wisconsin voters had to choose between risking their health and voting in the national and local races that were held, with fewer resources than ever, in the midst of a pandemic. Media investigations following Election Day have shed more light on how events played out and what it could portend for November.
Over the weekend, PBS’ Frontline, in partnership with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Columbia Journalism Investigations, published a story that featured the harrowing experiences of people who felt their votes had been suppressed, including the following anecdotes:
Hannah Gleeson, a 34-year-old health care worker, said she knew voting in person was not going to be an option for her after she tested positive for coronavirus in late March.
Gleeson said she and her husband requested absentee ballots ahead of the deadline but never received them. On election day, the couple stayed home as others made their way to the polls.
“I can’t expose hundreds, possibly thousands, of people to something that I’ve been struggling with now for 14 days,” Gleeson said. “I really think it’s voter suppression at its finest. I honestly think that it’s a failing of democracy and everything that America was built on.”
Lee McFadden Jr., 63, a retiree who said he was recently discharged from the hospital after recovering from coronavirus, lugged his oxygen tank to three different poll locations looking for one without a line.
Unable to stand for long, he was confronted with crowds at every location, he said.
“I told my wife, ‘We’re not going to vote this year because my health means more to me than trying to elect some official,’” McFadden said. “So I came home.”
Milwaukee offered only five polling places Tuesday due to lack of poll workers — less than 3% of its normal 180 voting sites.
On Monday, the New York Times reported in further detail how a US Supreme Court decision – one that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented, saying it “boggles the mind” – allowed the Wisconsin legislature’s suppressive tactics to proceed.
Prior to the Supreme Court decision, a federal judge had granted a request to extend the deadline for mail-in ballots to allow people who feared infection to vote safely. The Supreme Court struck down that lower court decision, ruling that – even in the midst of a coronavirus pandemic that was overwhelming Wisconsin elections officials’ capacity to provide absentee ballots on time – voters would not be allotted any extra time to mail in their ballots. The ruling came the same day that the Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected the governor’s order to delay in-person voting until June.
The New York Times chronicles what happened next:
When the state released its final vote tallies on Monday, it was clear that the decision — arrived at remotely, so the justices would not have to brave the Covid-19 conditions — had resulted in the disenfranchisement of thousands of voters, forced several thousand more to endanger their lives at polls and burdened already strained state health officials with a grim new task: tracking the extent to which in-person voting contributed to the virus’s spread in the state, a federal disaster area.
The obstacles to voting that were erected last week in Wisconsin are part of a larger pattern of increasing disenfranchisement in the United States. In the 2013 case Shelby County v. Holder, the US Supreme Court struck down what many considered the “heart” of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which had been signed into law to end the widespread voter suppression that for generations robbed African Americans of full participation in public affairs. The Shelby ruling now meant that states with sordid histories of racial discrimination no longer had to get approval from the US Department of Justice to change voting laws. Following the court’s decision, a slew of states have passed measures – from voter ID laws to the unnecessary purging of voter rolls – that make it harder for people, especially African Americans and other people of color, to cast a ballot.
As Sherrilyn Ifill, president of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, recently said in a podcast episode of The Atlantic’s The Ticket, the erosion and rollback of voting rights over the last few years goes beyond partisanship – and there’s no reason to think it will stop with Wisconsin.
Yeah, I don’t think we’ve seen a period like this, and in fact that would only make it comparable to the early 1900s, when southern states adopted new constitutions that restricted voting for African Americans. I don’t think we’ve seen a period of sustained retrenchment as we have seen over the past seven or eight years. It’s really quite astonishing. And much of it is steeped in racial voter suppression. Some of it is steeped in partisan voter suppression. And there is an overlap between racial and partisan voter suppression, to be sure. And the willingness of the courts to allow it rather than to see it for what it is.
Continue following Human Rights Watch for more news on the erosion of voting rights in the United States and what can be done to fight it.
COVID-19 Is Upending Life and Elections in the US. What’s Next?
By Gerry Johnson
Wisconsin residents awoke to some confusing news on Tuesday morning: It was Election Day after all.
On Monday, the state’s supreme court blocked Governor Tony Evers’ attempt earlier that day to postpone Wisconsin’s primary elections, despite public health concerns amid the coronavirus outbreak. Meanwhile, open polling locations in Milwaukee have dwindled from 180 to just 5 after thousands of poll workers quit over fears of contracting the virus. Today, social media exploded with images of voters braving incredibly long lines to cast their ballots.
The last-minute turmoil comes as uncertainty continues to grip America – from Wisconsin, where Black people are reportedly dying from COVID-19 at an “alarming rate,” to New York City, where I have fearfully watched friend after friend fight to survive the pandemic while quietly immersed in a battle of my own.
It was less than a month after I co-led the February launch of this very site – a compendium of commentary and insight on the 2020 US elections – that I began to feel exhausted. It wasn’t the reasonable fatigue that one might expect to coincide with covering a fast-paced, high-stakes political cycle for a trusted media source. This exhaustion was peculiar; a five-minute walk left my 30-something lungs gasping for air.
After a few days, muscle and joint soreness began compounding the unshakable fatigue. Why, I wondered as I pounded away at my laptop, was it suddenly so hard to turn my neck?
Then came the chills, which no creative arrangement of hoodies and jackets would relieve. Brain fog, heart palpitations, and lightheadedness soon followed suit.
After two weeks of worsening symptoms, I began to panic -- just as the World Health Organization officially declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11.
The novel coronavirus that was first identified in Wuhan, China in 2019 went on to sweep many countries in Asia and batter Western Europe. And now, despite President Donald Trump downplaying the crisis for weeks, it was upending US life and the economy as we knew it. A cascade of statewide and local stay-at-home orders kept millions of voters from leaving their homes – leading at least 16 states to postpone their primaries, raising concerns about voting rights, and posing new questions about the kind of government the country will need in 2020.
Two-thirds of #Wisconsin’s black voters live in Milwaukee. That city has shut down 97% of its polling locations. Meanwhile, 81% of the people who have died from #COVID19 in the city are black, though black people are 26% of its pop.— Chiraag Bains (@chiraagbains) April 7, 2020
This is a racial justice crisis.
As a Black American, I had particular anxieties about the prospect of falling ill in a nation so woefully unprepared for this outbreak. What I knew – from lived experience and from Human Rights Watch research -- about the deeply entrenched racial biases in America’s healthcare system terrified me to my bones. [Editor's Note: COVID-19’s devastating impact on Black communities in areas ranging from the Bronx to Chicago is beginning to come into view.]
I couldn’t shake the fear that my skin color would render me vulnerable to receiving lesser quality care. As breathing became harder, a morbid question haunted me: If I were to go to the inundated emergency room serving my lower-income neighborhood rather than ask the ambulance to make the longer trip to a wealthy facility, would I be more likely to die? After all, data indicates that low-income areas in New York City are the ones most besieged by COVID-19.
These are just some of the worries facing people across the United States, where the number of COVID-19 cases has soared past the totals in China and Italy; the coronavirus-related death toll has surpassed 10,000; and millions have lost their jobs. People are also grappling with job losses and challenges putting food on the table, the prospect of increased surveillance, and other human rights concerns. The situation is especially precarious for people in US jails and prisons, known incubators for infection, and undocumented migrants, who have been left out of the federal coronavirus relief bill despite the labor and taxes they provide to keep America running.
The crisis has heightened unique anxieties about healthcare disparities that existed prior to the pandemic. Black women, for example, had been ringing the alarm about their disproportionately high maternal death rate even before the outbreak began.
Many people across the US are afraid – and not just of the virus. The pandemic has further exposed, and exacerbated, disturbing levels of entrenched poverty and systemic inequality, and laid bare the country’s failure to protect the health of hard-working, everyday Americans. Tragically, it didn’t have to be this way: Many of the human rights issues that policymakers ignored last month—the healthcare disparities, the plight of unauthorized immigrants, the overcrowding and unhygienic conditions in detention facilities, and more—are the issues that make their constituents sitting prey for a contagion today.
As for me, I’m on the mend. And despite the United States’ long road ahead, I have hope for the future. An unprecedented opportunity stands before us to discard the myth that the richest nation in the history of the world can’t afford to treat people with human dignity. This myth is one of the oldest and deadliest in America, and I’m encouraged to see it steadily debunked by bold, previously “unimaginable” interventions to curb the outbreak. But much more action, and more imagination, will be needed.
At Human Rights Watch, our experts and partners will use this space to engage voters, elected leaders, and 2020 candidates on the grave concerns that the COVID-19 crisis poses for Americans – while also informing them on the promising new possibilities at their disposal. We are invested in making sure that whoever wins the 2020 elections will help lead a nation that is more fair, more just, and more humane.
Gerry Johnson is an editor and senior strategist at Human Rights Watch.
US 2020 Candidates Should Set Racial Justice as a Higher Priority
Amnesty International USA to Host Presidential Candidate Forum on Asylum and Immigration Issues
Twenty-four hours after yesterday’s Democratic debate in Las Vegas, Nevada, White House contenders will once again stand in front of cameras and a live audience to address voters’ concerns – this time at an event specifically about immigration.
On Thursday, February 20, Amnesty International USA (AIUSA), alongside several partner organizations, will host a presidential candidate forum in Las Vegas on asylum and immigration to ask candidates tough and necessary questions on issues that warrant thoughtful and humane solutions.
The AIUSA forum follows last week’s release of their policy blueprint for key domestic and foreign issues ahead of the 2020 US presidential election. The blueprint tracks issues and makes recommendations on human rights-related issues, ranging from the Russian government’s abusive policing practices targeting the LGBT community to America’s gun violence epidemic.
Dismayed by the near-total lack of attention immigration & asylum issues have gotten in the presidential debates?— Charanya Krishnaswami (@charanya_k) February 10, 2020
Well, on Feb. 20, that's about to change at a forum hosted by @amnestyusa in Las Vegas, moderated by @BuzzFeedNews immigration reporter extraordinaire @Haleaziz! https://t.co/h5xdvRXI0A
Voters deserve to hear firsthand from candidates how they intend to welcome children brought here by their parents as infants or treat people seeking safety at our borders. Tune in to the @amnestyusa livestream on 2/20 to hear from the candidates: https://t.co/pOANPNQF14 pic.twitter.com/09FhycPG6Y— Amnesty International USA (@amnestyusa) February 19, 2020
Hot off the presses! New @amnestyusa report outlining urgent #humanrights priorities requiring serious attention by all presidential candidates: #endgunviolence #refugeeswelcome #familiesbelongtogether war crimes, religious/ethnic persecution, arms sales. https://t.co/qYIjaPWgGg pic.twitter.com/Kc6OTPEc7v— Joanne Lin (@JoanneLinDC) February 14, 2020
Live from the Field: Safety First for Asylum Seekers
In its latest attempt to destroy asylum, the Trump administration has sent more than 600 Honduran and Salvadoran asylum seekers, including over 250 children, to Guatemala as part of an Asylum Cooperative Agreement after detaining them for up to 12 days in frigid border jails.
While in Customs Border Protection (CBP) custody, asylum seekers are not given meaningful access to attorneys, and they reported several agents cursed and yelled at them, never let them go outside, never turned the lights off, and never gave them a fair chance to have their asylum claims heard. By the time they arrive in Guatemala, asylum seekers are sleep deprived, hungry, sick, and massively traumatized. They are told they have 72 hours to decide between seeking asylum there or going back home to the countries they fled but face many of the same dangers in Guatemala as they did in their home countries. Very few have selected either option, and no one can be sure exactly where the majority of those expelled to Guatemala have gone. Guatemala is not a safe third country, and the United States should immediately stop sending vulnerable asylum seekers there.
HRW US Border Researcher, Ariana Sawyer, speaks from Guatemala where she is investigating the harms and conditions asylum seekers are enduring.
The Trump admin’s Asylum Cooperative Agreement is a terrifying disaster for the vulnerable men, women, and children asylum seekers who have been sent to Guatemala. This isn’t the half of it The program has to end immediately. The ACA is not protecting people, it’s hurting them. pic.twitter.com/E2tLbq68Pr— Ariana Sawyer (@ArianaMSawyer) February 19, 2020
In 2020, a Chance to Commit the US to Human Rights
The coming elections will help determine the extent to which the United States seeks to uphold human rights, equal protection of the law, and the stated values of “liberty and justice for all.”
The United States has a long way to go before it is truly a nation where everyone can live in dignity; speak out and have families as they please; put sufficient food on the table; send their kids to a decent school; see a doctor without fear of financial ruin; and feel safe in their own skin. Too many people across America confront systemic racism, exclusion and discrimination, and too few have a fair and meaningful say in how they are governed. Overseas, US influence is too often squandered – instead of being used as a force for good. Damaging polices at home find parallels in policies abroad.
Human rights are not abstract ideas that apply only to “other people.” Human rights are as real as the humiliation experienced by the veteran arrested for being homeless, or the 10-year-old with Down Syndrome whom US border patrol agents forcibly separated from her mother. Like the bones in our bodies, our human rights can be a source of severe pain when trampled.
Whoever earns the trust of voters has an opportunity – and a responsibility – to help the country move forward by making human rights a priority. A commitment to upholding human rights is a commitment to making tangible policy decisions to ensure that the bodies, zip codes, and circumstances into which we happen to have been born do not dampen our prospects for a better life.
A 2020 candidate who respects human rights will work to build bridges of understanding around issues of race, color and ethnicity rather than sow divisions that permit white nationalism and other expressions of hate to grow. They will see the connections between discrimination at home and injustice abroad.
A candidate who respects human rights will commit to making health care affordable for everyone, and will oppose efforts to curtail access to medical and other services for women, people living in poverty, people with disabilities, and LGBT people.
A rights-respecting candidate will support the rights of workers, including to organize, receive a living wage, and enjoy safe working conditions.
A candidate who respects human rights will oppose a deterrence-only strategy toward migrants that has led to family separations, harsh detention conditions for children, and a dismantling of the US asylum and refugee system.
A rights-respecting candidate will have plans for reducing the number of people behind bars – many of whom are incarcerated because of racist laws and policies that have disproportionately affected black and brown communities for decades. And they will advance strategies for restoring rights to the millions of people who still cannot vote due to a patchwork of felony disfranchisement laws across the country.
They will end indefinite detention without charge or trial for the men held at Guantanamo Bay, commit to fair trials for all, and seek accountability and redress for past use of torture in the name of national security.
A candidate who respects human rights will ensure that US action abroad promotes and protects human rights, rather than diminishes them. Instead of cozying up to dictators and autocrats, a candidate who respects human rights will instead seek international partners who commit to upholding human rights obligations--and will seek to hold to account those who violate them. They will commit to promoting human rights at the United Nations and other international forums, particularly for refugees and other marginalized people of the world.
In any military action, they will protect civilians and abide strictly by the requirements of international humanitarian law.
These are just some of the human rights issues that hang in the balance in this election cycle. Through November and beyond, Human Rights Watch will help voters, journalists, and others navigate the news and examine some of the most pressing human rights issues of the day – from the consequences of poverty and inequality, to the breakneck expansion of digital surveillance, to the mandate for racial justice.
The present moment is an opportunity for voters to consider how human rights can shape a future of peace, prosperity, and dignity for all. It is also an opportunity for candidates to consider what their policy platforms and rhetoric on human rights – as well as their silence –say about the world they want us to live in.
US Representatives Join Calls to End Harmful 'Remain in Mexico' Program
Anyone whose representative did NOT join this letter should be picking up the phone right now and asking WHY? The Remain in Mexico program separates families, put children in harm's way and makes a mockery of the rule of law. https://t.co/0PpKzEfXbZ https://t.co/7CoIpmlT2I— Clara Long (@clarychka) February 13, 2020
Voting for Human Rights: A Guide for 2020
The presidential debates and other public forums happening across the US this month and until election day offer an opportunity to assess where candidates stand on some of the most pressing human rights issues of our time. We put together a voters guide to help you determine whether the platforms and rhetoric of 2020 contenders promote protection from abusive systems, officials, individuals, and corporations, and support equal protection of the law.
Whether you’re watching this week’s televised debate or attending an upcoming candidate event, reference the voters guide as a springboard to ask yourself – and the people vying for your votes – some essential questions about their vision for America.
In every election, human rights matter. From local schoolboard elections to presidential ones, voters have the chance to choose candidates who will fight for all people’s human rights, not work to undermine them. In the upcoming 2020 United States elections, fundamental human rights are at stake – like health care, a decent school for your kids, equal treatment at work regardless of how you look or who you love, a fair trial whether you are rich or poor, and the freedom to worship (or not). As candidates seek your vote, make sure they’re putting basic human rights front and center.
What does it mean to be a human rights voter?
Support candidates who want the government to adopt and enforce laws that promote and protect human rights. This means candidates who defend people from abusive systems, officials, individuals, and corporations, who support equal protection of the law, and who will push for policies that enable everyone to have the same opportunities to pursue their fundamental rights.
Poverty and Inequality
We all have a right to the highest attainable standard of health, to housing, and to an adequate standard of living. About 40 million people in the United States live in poverty, even though many have jobs making at least minimum wage. A human rights voter should back candidates who work to ensure that everyone can get quality medical care, a safe and sturdy roof over their heads, and enough healthy food to eat.
Candidates should urge measures that would prevent companies from preying on the poor. For instance, they should support stronger regulation of predatory lending industries that offer high interest loans, often carrying triple-digit interest rates, that by design lead low-income borrowers into cyclical debt traps and greater poverty.
Questions for candidates:
- Do you support reforms that protect the right of everyone to just and fair work conditions, including a fair wage, that enables them to support their families?
- Will you oppose rollbacks to programs that support individuals’ basic health, nutrition, and housing needs?
- How will you ensure universal access to adequate health care?
- How will you ensure that people are protected from predatory lenders and abusive debt collectors?
Criminal Legal System
We need to vastly reduce the number of people behind bars in the US – many of whom are incarcerated because of racist laws and policies that have disproportionately affected black and brown communities for decades. Candidates should support the decriminalization of drug use and possession, and an end to disproportionate or cruel sentences, including the death penalty; the use of prolonged solitary confinement, especially for children; the use of pretrial detention only in exceptional cases; and discriminatory money bail.
Questions for candidates:
- Do you support decriminalizing drug possession and use?
- Do you support greater access to evidence-based treatment for substance abuse?
- Will you work to end excessive sentencing?
- Do you support restoring the right to vote to millions of formerly incarcerated Americans?
- How will you hold law enforcement agencies accountable for excessive use of force and unlawful police killings?
Racial discrimination is a serious human rights problem in the United States – from thecriminal legal system and health and housing policies that disproportionately harm Black and Latinx people, to the surveillance of specific groups, such as Muslims or political activists from ethnic or religious minorities, to immigration policies that scapegoat non-citizens as criminals or subject asylum seekers and refugees to disparate treatment based on their national origin. Many of the discriminatory policies that disproportionately impact African Americans and the more general racial and economic discrimination that continues today are legacies of slavery. Candidates should support a congressional commission to develop a proposal to provide reparations for slavery, and the acts of murder, torture, rape, and other violence that accompanied it and continued long after its formal abolition.
Questions for candidates:
- How will you address racial barriers to affordable housing, adequate health care, and equal protection of the law?
- Do you support creating a commission to study how to account for and provide reparations for slavery and its enduring impact?
The US government should promote policies, practices, and laws seeking gender equality, because many women and girls have been left out of US successes so far, especially women of color, women with disabilities, Indigenous women, and female immigrants. Voters, no matter their gender, benefit when women in society do well. They should support candidates who back efforts to ensure women get the health care they need and oppose measures to limit treatment and access to contraception and abortion care. Systemic racism, economic and immigration status, and where a woman lives can make accessing even available health care difficult. Candidates should support efforts to target those most marginalized by the current healthcare system. Candidates should work to preserve progress to end violence against women and push for modern workforce policies including paid family leave, including to care for aging loved ones, measures to end the gender wage gap, and improving laws protecting pregnant women and banning sexual harassment.
Questions for candidates:
- What is your position on new regulations that limit women’s access to contraception, allow medical providers to discriminate against them, and block federally funded health providers from giving them information?
- Do you support paid family leave? How would you implement a program?
- Do you support legislative efforts to target and address racial disparities in women’s health outcomes, including the Jeannette Acosta Invest in Women’s Health Act?
- What measures should be taken to protect access to abortion information and services?
People fleeing their homes in search of safety have a right to seek asylum, and the US has a long history of helping refugees. Immigrants provide huge economic and social benefits to communities across the nation. Candidates should oppose a deterrence-only strategy toward migrants that has led to family separations, harsh detention conditions for adults and children, and a dismantling of the US asylum and refugee system. Candidates should seek to limit excessive surveillance and data collection to enforce the border and should support reform of an immigration system that resulted in serious abuses under previous US administrations.
Questions for candidates:
- Will you oppose requests for additional immigration funds without fundamental policy reform?
- What steps would you take to protect refugees and asylum seekers?
- Will you end the “Migrant Protection Protocols,” a program that is exposing tens of thousands of asylum seekers to danger in Mexico and injustice in US immigration courts?
- What will you do to ensure all immigrants facing deportation get a fair hearing before a judge?
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Rights
We should work to end discrimination against people because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Candidates should support the Equality Act, which would ban employers, landlords, schools, and others from discriminating against people because they are LGBT. They should support efforts to promote equality, including improving access to health care and addressing violence against transgender people, particularly trans people of color. They should oppose laws and policies that encourage discrimination, including sweeping “religious exemptions” that allow states and businesses to discriminate against LGBT people.
Questions for candidates:
- Do you support the Equality Act, which would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity?
- How would you address the transgender military ban?
- How would you address violence against transgender people in the US?
- What is your position on religious exemptions that allow employers, landlords, service providers, and business owners to refuse service to LGBT people based on moral or religious convictions?
Privacy, Data Protection, Digital Rights
Digital rights in the US are at a critical juncture: social media and other companies are vacuuming up vast amounts of personal information about us, yet Congress has not adopted comprehensive data protection laws. Barely regulated technologies affect everyone, including immigrants and schoolchildren. The US government wields massive secret surveillance powers, often with little oversight by Congress or the courts. Candidates should oppose surveillance that may disproportionately harm people of color, such as facial recognition, and rhetoric that stokes fear of Muslims.
Questions for candidates:
- What would you do to create stronger data protection rules for companies and the government?
- Do you support an end to warrantless surveillance programs?
- Do you support safeguards to limit the use of facial recognition software and other emerging technologies that could harm rights?
Climate Crisis and Toxic Pollution
Candidates should support policies that protect the human rights of people marginalized or otherwise most affected by climate change and toxic pollution. The global climate crisis means that Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands, and areas along the eastern US seaboard in particular will face increasingly severe extreme weather events.
Deregulation of health and environmental protections from mining pollution poses a serious danger to poor communities. Similarly, preventing bans of toxic pesticides will continue to put people, especially pregnant women and children, at risk. The independence of federally funded scientific research should be respected, and evidence-based regulations that mitigate the risks of climate change and toxic pollution should be enacted.
Questions for candidates:
- What is your plan to address climate change? How would you improve the US response to extreme weather events, particularly for low-income and marginalized communities?
- Will you commit to respect the independence of federally funded scientific research and enact evidence-based regulations that mitigate the risks of climate change, pollution, and toxic exposures?
- What will you do to make sure that companies responsible for coal-related pollution bear the costs of the clean-up?
- Will you create and enforce pesticide policies that are protective of pregnant women, children, and other groups at greater risk of exposure complications?
- Will you ensure compliance with relevant standards under the Food Quality Protection Act by demonstrating that there is a reasonable certainty a pesticide will not cause harm before approving or renewing its use?
The US government has frequently invoked national security as a justification for human rights violations. To date, there has been no real accounting of past practices, including torture. Candidates should commit to real accountability for US government-sanctioned torture and ill-treatment, including support for declassifying the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on the CIA’s torture program.
Candidates should commit to increasing transparency around the use of lethal force abroad, including by intelligence agencies, and ensuring that civilians unlawfully harmed by US forces receive prompt and appropriate redress. Candidates should commit to ensuring that US personnel implicated in war crimes are fully and fairly prosecuted.
Since early 2002, the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay has held people in indefinite detention, most without charge or trial. Those being prosecuted face fatally flawed military commissions. Candidates should commit to shuttering the Guantanamo facility and ensuring that there is due process for the detainees who remain there, whether in a court in the US or by transfer to a third country.
Questions for candidates:
- Will you increase transparency around the use of force by the US with the aim of reducing civilian casualties, abiding by the laws of war, including the impartial investigation and prosecution of personnel implicated in war crimes, and compensating civilians unlawfully harmed by US forces?
- Will you permanently close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay and end indefinite detention without charge or trial?
- Will you commit to declassifying and releasing the 2014 Senate Intelligence Committee report on the use of torture and enhanced interrogation techniques by the CIA following 9/11?
The next president should reassert a leading US role in the promotion and protection of human rights abroad. The US should return to the United Nations Human Rights Council and other international human rights forums and processes. The US should also recommit to upholding its human rights obligations and adopting a principled, human-rights driven approach to engagement with the world. This means seeking international partners who commit to upholding their human rights obligations and seeking to hold to account those who violate them.
The United States should commend countries for supporting human rights and should work with other countries to hold rights-violating governments, allies, and foes alike to account. It is particularly important to seek candidates who commit to promoting and protecting human rights central to US foreign policy. Candidates should agree to adopt a range of public and private measures to pressure repressive governments to uphold the rights to expression, assembly, and privacy, sexual and reproductive health, rights of LGBT people, freedom of religion, rights of refugees and asylum seekers, and justice for grave international crimes.
Questions for candidates:
- Will you commit to making the protection and promotion of human rights central to US foreign policy?
- Will you support a permanent repeal of the “Global Gag rule” and ensure that US aid does not undermine comprehensive health care for anyone, in particular women, girls, and LGBT and gender non-conforming people around the world?
- Will you ensure US policy demonstrates commitment to resettlement and protection for refugees?
- Will you commit to rejoining the United Nations Human Rights Council?
- Do you commit to support and cooperate with the International Criminal Court?