Lotsa fun exciting things happening this weekend, to try to squeeze in between your canvassing and phone banking!
Saturday afternoon one of my favorite groups, Chicanos Unidos, is doing this:
So what, you ask, does Chicanos Unidos do, besides scholarships, internships, political activism, and free legal clinics for the community (something I help with)? SO GLAD YOU ASK:
*** BREAKING NEWS ***
CU has just filed suit against DA Todd Spitzer over the Racial Justice Act! I’ll let the ACLU take it from here…
Plaintiffs Seek Data on Spitzer’s Implementation of Racial Justice Act
SANTA ANA – The landmark California Racial Justice Act, passed in 2020, prohibits the state from pursuing convictions or sentences based upon race, ethnicity, or national origin and allows people to challenge proceedings that may have been tainted by racial bias. But for the law to be effective, the public must be able to access policies and data from prosecutors.
Today, Chicanxs Unidxs de Orange County, the ACLU Foundations of Southern California and Northern California, and the Peace and Justice Law Center filed suit against OC District Attorney Todd Spitzer for violating the state’s Public Records Act (PRA) by refusing to release documents concerning the county’s implementation of the Racial Justice Act.
“Spitzer campaigned on the promise to usher in a new era of prosecutorial ethics and transparency in Orange County,” said Robert Ponce, legal fellow with the ACLU SoCal. “But since taking office, the OCDA has systematically flouted state law by sitting on public records for over a year.”
As part of its effort to monitor compliance with the Racial Justice Act by all 58 district attorneys in the state, the ACLU of NorCal submitted separate requests to the OCDA for prosecutorial data in February 2021 and again in February 2022, and for related policies, practices, and training materials in July 2021; while the ACLU SoCal submitted a request for prosecutorial data related to sex work in September 2021 and the volunteer community group Chicanxs Unidxs submitted a request for prosecutorial data related to the Racial Justice Act this past July.
In all five instances, the OCDA refused to produce any data and asserted overbroad and unsupported exemptions. In response to all four requests for prosecutorial data, the OCDA denied disclosure of records due to formatting, claiming that the county does not maintain records in the format requested.
“The OCDA’s stonewalling of legal requests denies our right to know who is getting charged for what crimes, and whether people of color are locked up more often or for longer sentences,” said Sean Garcia-Leys, co-executive director of the Peace and Justice Law Center and attorney for Chicanxs Unidxs. “The Racial Justice Act is a powerful tool, but it only works if we have basic information about how prosecutors wield their extraordinary power. Transparency matters to accountability.”
As the U.S. Department of Justice investigation reiterated last week, the OCDA has an egregious history of abuse of power. But instead of opening his office up to public scrutiny, Spitzer has sought to shield prosecutorial decision making from accountability.
“Californians have a constitutional right to know what prosecutors are doing in our name,” said Emi MacLean, senior staff attorney with the ACLU of NorCal. “Yet the OCDA is refusing to produce the exact same data that he disclosed from the time of his predecessor three years ago. What is Spitzer hiding?”
An ACLU report based on that 2017/18 data showed persistent racial disparities in prosecutions under former D.A. Tony Rackauckas. The report also revealed a continued pattern by Spitzer’s office of criminalizing people for low-level offenses stemming from substance dependence or poverty, based on 2019/20 case data obtained and published by the media outlet Voice of OC.
Last June, Spitzer gained notoriety as the first district attorney to have been found to have violated the Racial Justice Act. This underscores the need for consistent prosecutorial transparency.
The ACLU’s suit asks that the court compel the OCDA to comply with the PRA and fulfill the five requests by plaintiffs. The lawsuit also asks the court to order the OCDA to take affirmative steps in publishing certain public data regularly online.
Read the complaint HERE.
Okay, that was an ACLU press release. We return you to your regularly scheduled “Things to do this Weekend.”
AOC at UCI, Sunday morning!
Hell yeah we will be there…
And the brilliant Alexandria won’t be the only one speaking – there’s an all-star line-up of local progressive politicians: Costa Mesa Councilwoman Arlis Reynolds, Young Democrat Iris “Nini” Wu, and our endorsed Irvine Council candidate, Dr. Kathleen Treseder. No Farrah Khan to be found!
And SPEAKING of Treseder and Farrah…
*** SEGUE ALERT ***
Dr. Treseder just made news Wednesday night with her statement below at an Irvine council forum – most of what she said I’d already reported here in June, but it was a big deal for her to say it in public, and it was a REAL big deal (and should be very worrisome to Farrah, Melahat, and Brian Probolsky) for her to announce that there is an FBI investigation into the corruption at the OC Power Authority!
Funny, when the FBI first called Treseder to interview her, they mentioned being first tipped off by … THE ORANGE JUICE BLOG! Funny, that reminds me of the times we helped the FBI catch January 6 insurrectionists last year, and all the use they made of our blog in Anaheim earlier this year. Well… that makes us feel good!
I’m finishing up a piece on Farrah to hopefully be published on Monday. “OCPA, Armenians, Porter Leaks, Agran Attacks: Farrah Poisons Everything She Touches.” Then I’ll be pretty busy for a while with my new job, organizing fast food workers in Santa Ana for the SEIU. We’ll see how that goes…
I am (quite seriously) happy that we have the mostly moribund “OC Political” — published by Republican operative Chris Nguyen written (it at all) mostly by Craig Alexander — because what Republican party insiders think really should be available to our readers.
This year’s picks are, so far as I can tell, unfailingly Republicans — where as we like to offer the occasional surprise when it’s warranted. But Craig said one thing about Proposition 1 — the reproductive rights measure — that really does demand rebuttal.
He wrote in opposing it: “Again this would allow taxpayer funded abortions right up to the point of birth (and likely beyond).”
No. It would not. On either point. And people should stop peddling that distortion.
The only time one would see the death of a baby about to be born “at the point of birth” would be in the extremely rare circumstance (if it exists at all these days) to save the life of the mother — and you don’t need a constitutional amendment for that, because it’s based on a pure principle of self-defense. Advances in the methodology of Caesarian births make this essentially impossible within a hospital or birthing center — and it is not something that would be premeditated, which I think the word “abortion” entails. It’s the extremely rare mother who doesn’t want her own healthy child to live. Abortion at this stage of pregnancy is simply not done lightly, and once the neonate is born then the normal civil rights attach to it if they haven’t already. (This is in Roe, by the way.)
As for after birth, I know of nothing in Amendment 1 that would allow a mother to decide to kill a live-born child in advance — let alone have the government pay for it. The one thing that might sound a little like that would involve serious life-foreclosing fetal abnormality in which the neonatal baby would be living for a short time in pain most of us could hardly imagine. Imagine, for example, being born without lungs. In those cases, the same sort of palliative care that could apply to anyone — a high enough dose of an opioid to stop the pain, which is also likely to be enough to end life — might be the appropriate medical procedure — except for ghouls and monsters who want to see a newborn suffer pain beyond any superlative.
And frankly, if we know from diagnostics that a child will be born that way, but people want it to be baptized before it dies, then work something out. Maybe churches in such cases of God’s will could recognize its baptism in amniotic fluid.
I recognize that opponents of Amendment 1 pretty much have nothing to go on in a liberal state like ours — but that doesn’t excuse outright lies. Craig Anderson should be better than that — and maybe take that vile assertion off of his home blog.
Dr. Kathleen Treseder, a well respected professor at UCI and leading scientist on Algae and Climate Science, endorsed by Katie and political allies (and coordinating campaigns together).
For Dr. Treseder to make this public announcement regarding an active investigation, YOU KNOW Dr. Treseder speaks the truth with a high degree of credibility. Dr. Treseder would NOT have made this public declaration regarding an active FBI investigation, towards Farrah CON, if she did not feel strongly about the topic.
Melahat admitted to Dr. Treseder that OCPA and Farrah and Brian Probolsky was all about currying political favors in Orange County. Melahat admitted to Dr. Treseder that appointment of Brian Probolsky to OCPA CEO would assure her client, Farrah, a seat on the Coastal Commission (https://www.coastal.ca.gov/whoweare.html).
Farrah CON’s campaign manager AND political mentor, Melahat, was caught by the FBI to be currying political favors and making deals, leading to ANAHEIM MAYOR’s DOWNFALL!
I suspect the next ones to fall will be Farrah CON and MIKE “the Snake” Carroll.
(Farrah CON released a statement on her PRIVATE Instagram page, disputing Dr Treseder’s claims of FBI investigation, and throwing shade on Dr Treseder’s lack of “accomplishments.”)
Hilarious LMAO to ME, because those of us who watch OCPA Board Meetings and City Council meetings, (and regular subscribers to Irvine Watchdog and ICNV), are exactly AGAINST CON-JOB FARRAH for her “Accomplishments” and dealings with OCPA, with handling of Great Parks’ Veterans’ cemetery, for siding with FivePoint Holdings LLC, and NEVER siding with Irvine families.
Farrah CON-JOB HAS TO GO!
-Luis Huang
Irvine City Council Candidate 2024
luis@luishuang4irvine.com
*The Election will come down to the basics: (1) Are you a 2020 Election Denier? (2) Do you believe in a Woman’s Right to Choose?
Whoever answers correctly will win the Senate and the House. Anyone that votes for Deniers and/or Anti-Women’s Rights…….are not Americans (at least the one’s we went to war for!)
Winships – Absolutely – YES, YES, YES! I love what you wrote here!
I just had to tell you. Thank you.
Mayor Farrah Kahn Has My Vote For Re-Election. [✓]
I know you were impressed with her when you met her years ago, as was I. If you lived in Irvine, you would rate her with Gloria and the Natalies. Worse actually. She is the Melahat candidate, more than anyone else since Jordan.
It’s Branda Lin, Kathleen Treseder, and Agran.
Vern, as a ten-year Irvine resident, I agree. I supported Farrah in her three previous campaigns, but I’ve been more than disappointed in her performance as mayor. I have repeatedly felt betrayed by her reversals of position and her malicious efforts to marginalize and silence Agran. She has shown herself to be a reliable vote for special interests, especially developers, and has been embroiled in one scandal after another. Branda Lin will be a far, far better mayor, and I enthusiastically support her.
I also have to say that it’s not very persuasive for a guy who lives in Anaheim and doesn’t even have a vote to say that Farrah has his vote–and not give any explanation.
I should note that we haven’t seen this IP particular address from the author, though he’s had similar ones.