News & Commentary

The tragic shooting of Kate Steinle in San Francisco has focused national attention on why her accused assailant, Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, was released from the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department’s custody in April and not deported. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others have rushed to cast blame on the sheriff’s department for Ms. Steinle’s death. But this horrible and apparently random act of violence shouldn’t be used to push a political agenda.

San Francisco, like many local communities, is considering the use of police body worn cameras, and the Board of Supervisors recently allocated $6.6 million for their purchase pending approval of a use policy. But for body cameras to deliver on their promise of accountability and promote public trust, there must be transparency and public trust in both the process that leads to a decision to adopt them and the policy that may ultimately govern their use. That's why the ACLU of California, joined by the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Color of Change, sent a letter today detailing our concerns with the transparency and effectiveness of the process so far and the provisions of the July 9, 2015 draft policy.

Arizona is a little bit freer today.

By the time Credy Madrid Calderon fled Honduras and sought asylum in the United States, he had been threatened, shot at and severely beaten by local gangs. Arriving in the United States, however, did not mean sanctuary for Credy. Instead of being reunited with his wife and children, all U.S. citizens, Credy found himself in an immigration jail. He waited there for months, uncertain of whether he would even get the chance to explain to a judge why he faced certain death if he was sent back to Honduras.

With the introduction today of the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Woman Act, members of Congress declared not only that every woman who receives care or insurance through the federal government will have coverage for abortion services, but they also prohibited political interference with decisions by private health insurance companies to offer coverage for abortion care.

If there’s one thing the First Amendment stands for, it’s that vigorous debate about the issues of the day—even, and perhaps especially, uncomfortable debate about things like racism or terrorism—should be free from government interference. Tragically, that principle has been betrayed repeatedly over the past decade and a half, as law enforcement agencies continue to single out individuals for scrutiny based on speech or association protected by the First Amendment.

Brutality takes many forms. One kind takes your life away, another leaves your body broken. Perhaps the most insidious kind seeks you out and makes you feel terrified, harassed, unsafe, unprotected, as though people see you as a threat through no fault of your own.

The demise of the death penalty is upon us. While the Supreme Court ruled this week to allow the continued use of a controversial lethal injection drug, Justice Stephen Breyer’s sweeping dissent invited the nation to question capital punishment’s constitutionality. If you have any doubt about the answer, just ask Henry McCollum or Paul House.

Unless you've been hiding under a rock or got lost under a mountain of glitter, you know that on Friday the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that same-sex couples looking to tie the knot may do so in all 50 states. I was proud to stand on the steps of the Supreme Court with our clients as the decision came down, marking the victorious culmination of a 45-year battle towards marriage equality.