Connect with us

Louisiana

Julia Letlow faces more questions about past DEI comments in Louisiana Senate campaign

Published

on

Julia Letlow faces more questions about past DEI comments in Louisiana Senate campaign


How does U.S. Rep. Julia Letlow square endorsing diversity, equity and inclusion policies as a college presidential applicant in 2020 and her subsequent anti-DEI voting record in Congress?

That’s the question that confronted Letlow Friday in the face of continuing attacks from the man she is trying to unseat, U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, for her calls to expand DEI to hire more women and racial minorities on the faculty when she was applying in 2020 to be the next president of the University of Louisiana-Monroe.

In press releases and a video on Thursday and Friday, Cassidy pointed to her comments to challenge her conservative credentials. “Julia is a liberal,” he concluded.

State Treasurer John Fleming, the other major Republican candidate in the race, has piled on with criticisms of Letlow.

Advertisement

“DEI is a Marxist concept that says everybody has to have equal outcomes regardless of their abilities or regardless of how hard they work or study,” Fleming said in an interview. “Socialism or Marxism has never worked in any country.”

So far, Letlow has noted that she has expressed strong opposition to DEI programs since she was elected to the House in 2021. She also noted that Cassidy supported bills passed by Congress that included DEI programs.

On Friday, The Times-Picayune | The Advocate requested an interview with Letlow to ask her to explain how she could call for creating a “division” of DEI at UL Monroe and then oppose those programs after joining the House the following year.

“Early on, DEI was presented in higher education as a way to encourage people to achieve the American dream,” the campaign responded in a statement from Letlow. “But I quickly witnessed firsthand what it really was: another tool the radical left hijacked to divide people, push indoctrination, and build a system that holds people down instead of lifting them up.”

The wrangling over DEI is taking place six weeks before the May 16 Republican primary where Republicans and no-party voters will choose among Fleming, Cassidy, Letlow and Mark Spencer, a political unknown, to be their next senator.

Advertisement

The party’s leadership is crystal clear on DEI.

President Donald Trump, from the day he returned to office, has sought to root out DEI policies at the nation’s universities.

Gov. Jeff Landry wrote the U.S. Department of Education on Feb. 23 that “harmful diversity, equity and inclusion policies have no place in Louisiana.”

This backdrop explains why Cassidy began slamming Letlow on DEI immediately after Fox News on Wednesday aired a report that contained video of her promoting the benefits of DEI when she was one of six semifinalists to be UL Monroe’s next president in August 2020.

“I think it exposes her true colors,” Cassidy said in a video recorded on Thursday.

Advertisement

Letlow, who has a doctorate from the University of South Florida, was the university’s Executive Assistant to the President for External Affairs and Community Outreach at the time. Her comments came three months after a police officer in Minneapolis choked George Floyd to death, spurring a leftward move nationally in favor of DEI and so-called “woke” policies.

“A strong and progressive leader”

During the interview, Letlow called herself “a strong and progressive leader” and said UL Monroe’s next president needed to provide powerful support for DEI because the university didn’t have enough women and women of color on the faculty.

“We have 8 percent African-American faculty women on this campus,” she said. “That is not enough. That does not reflect our student population.”

She added, “We don’t have enough women at the top. We don’t have enough women of color at the top. I would be committed to that. I believe the president needs to have diversity on their senior council, just like you said. You avoid groupthink when you have more diverse voices at the table.”

Pearson Cross, a political science professor at UL Monroe, said central to Cassidy’s efforts is an attempt to neutralize or wrestle away from Letlow her chief campaign calling card: Trump’s endorsement of her on Jan. 17.

Advertisement

“Given the strident anti-DEI efforts by Trump and Landry, being a supporter of DEI makes it seem like you’re terribly out of step,” Cross said. “That’s a point the Cassidy campaign is making. It’s evidence that Letlow is not one of us.”

Ed Chervenak, a UNO political science professor, said Cassidy’s tactics are clear.

“He wants to reassure conservative voters that he’s the conservative candidate in the race, not Letlow,” Chervenak said.

Undermine Cassidy’s narrative

The Letlow campaign is seeking to undermine that narrative by reminding voters that Cassidy voted to convict Trump on impeachment charges after the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol, and by noting that Cassidy, in August 2023, said Trump should drop out of the presidential race because he was facing criminal charges from four indictments. (Trump was convicted by a jury in New York City in May 2024 of paying hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels to hide a sex scandal that threatened to derail his 2016 presidential campaign.)

The Letlow campaign is also zeroing in on several bills where Cassidy joined some Republicans in voting with Democrats to pass bills when President Joe Biden was in office. Tucked into these sprawling bills were measures that promoted DEI.

Advertisement

“Cassidy,” Letlow said in her statement, “voted with Democrats to fund and expand the DEI machine. So the contrast in this race is simple: I fought it, and he helped bankroll it.”

There are three candidates in the May 16 Democratic primary. They are Nick Albares, Jamie Davis and Gary Crockett. None currently hold elected office.



Source link

Louisiana

Supreme court sides with oil and gas firms in Louisiana coastal damage fight

Published

on

Supreme court sides with oil and gas firms in Louisiana coastal damage fight


The supreme court handed a win on Friday to oil and gas companies fighting lawsuits over coastal land loss and environmental degradation in Louisiana.

The 8-0 procedural decision gives the companies a new day in federal court after a state jury ordered Chevron to pay upward of $740m to clean up damage to the state’s coastline, one of multiple similar lawsuits.

Backed by the Trump administration, the companies argued the case belongs in federal court because they began oil production and refining during the second world war as US contractors. They deny responsibility for land loss in Louisiana and say it is wrong to sue them for what they did before state environmental regulations were in place.

Louisiana’s coastal parishes have lost more than 2,000 sq miles (5,180 sq km) of land over the past century, according to the US Geological Survey, which has also identified oil and gas infrastructure as a significant cause. The state could lose an additional 3,000 sq miles (7,770 sq km) in the coming decades, its coastal protection agency has warned.

Advertisement

The Republican governor, Jeff Landry, backed the lawsuits when he was attorney general, despite being a longtime oil and gas industry supporter. Attorneys for local Louisiana leaders say the supreme court appeal was a stalling tactic.

The companies appealed to the high court after jurors in Plaquemines parish – a sliver of land straddling the Mississippi River into the Gulf – found that energy giant Texaco, acquired by Chevron in 2001, had for decades violated Louisiana regulations governing coastal resources by failing to restore wetlands affected by dredging canals, drilling wells and billions of gallons of wastewater dumped into the marsh.

The case is one of dozens of lawsuits filed in 2013 alleging oil giants including Chevron and Exxon violated state environmental laws for decades.

The companies asked the justices to overturn a 2024 decision from the US court of appeals for the fifth circuit that allowed the suit to stay in state court.

Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the case, saying he had financial ties to ConocoPhillips. He had recused himself from other cases due to his stock holdings.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Louisiana

Louisiana GOP races to keep an exonerated Black man from taking office in New Orleans

Published

on

Louisiana GOP races to keep an exonerated Black man from taking office in New Orleans


The Louisiana House Judiciary Committee April 16 passed a bill essentially eliminating New Orleans’ clerk of criminal court just weeks before Calvin Duncan, a Black man who was wrongfully imprisoned for decades before being elected to the position last year, is set to take office.



Source link

Continue Reading

Louisiana

Parole committee for people convicted by nonunanimous juries advances

Published

on

Parole committee for people convicted by nonunanimous juries advances



Incarcerated people with nonunanimous jury convictions would be able to send an application for parole to the committee within its first year.

Advertisement
play

  • A Louisiana bill to review nonunanimous jury convictions advanced in a Senate committee.
  • The bill would create a temporary committee to recommend parole for incarcerated individuals.
  • The law allowing nonunanimous verdicts, rooted in an 1898 law to dilute Black jurors’ votes, was abolished in 2018.
  • Democrats and advocacy groups oppose the bill, arguing it does not go far enough to correct past injustices.

BATON ROUGE — A bill that would allow a committee to recommend parole to incarcerated Louisiana residents who received convictions through nonunanimous jury verdicts advanced 4-3 along party lines in a Senate judiciary committee.

Senate Bill 215 would allow the Department of Public Safety and Corrections to create a committee to review the appeal records of cases with nonunanimous convictions.

Incarcerated people with nonunanimous jury convictions would be able to send an application for parole to the committee within its first year. The committee would end after three years.

Democrats and advocacy groups opposed the bill, saying it did not go far enough to correct the problems.

Advertisement

The bill is meant to address possibly unjust convictions that are no longer legal in Louisiana after a constitutional amendment requiring unanimous verdicts passed in 2018.

The original law, allowing for convictions on as little as a 9-3 vote, was part of the 1898 constitutional convention, and it was designed to dilute Black jurors’ votes.

Louisiana changed the requirement to a 10-2 vote during the 1973 constitutional convention. Oregon, the only other state that allowed nonunanimous juries, had the same requirement.

Under the new bill, clerks of court would provide applicants with their records free of charge, and district attorneys and victims could respond at hearings.

Advertisement

Sen. Patrick McMath, R-Mandeville, who wrote the bill, said the legislation was a compromise between district attorneys who believed in the validity of convictions and criminal justice advocates.

“There’s likely not a way that either of those groups can come to a full consensus, but I think it was important to have the discussions and to continue to have the discussions,” McMath said.

Bradley R. Burget, president of the Louisiana District Attorney’s Association, supported the bill.

“We’re not exactly happy with it,” Burget said. “There’s a lot of the members of the DA’s association that may not be 100% for this, but I think this is something that they can live with.”

Advertisement

Zachary Daniels, the association’s executive director, liked the bill’s provision giving the committee authority to determine which nonunanimous convictions are just since “many of these contain strong evidence and are valid convictions where the prosecutor played by the rules at the time.”

Before the legislative session, the association found at least 1,215 cases a committee could analyze.

Daniels said it would be impossible to retry all of these cases because witnesses, officers and victims may no longer be available, and evidence may no longer exist.

The extensive list of issues the committee could consider includes the length of jury deliberations, the strength of the state’s case, the effectiveness of the defense attorney and evidence of racism.

Advertisement

Former Rep. Randal Gaines, who is now chair of the Democratic Party of Louisiana, filed a similar bill in 2022 that included the same list of issues that could be reviewed.

Herman Evans, who spent 37 years in prison after a nonunanimous jury convicted him in 1989 for a second-degree murder he did not commit, opposed the bill. Even after the perpetrator confessed in 2012, Evans did not get a hearing until 2024.

“That bill ain’t going to do nothing,” Evan said. “They’ve got the parole board. They’ve got the clemency board. It’s about the same board. And it costs about the same if you bring them back and let them get denied.”

Daniels said the expected cost to implement the bill is $1.8 million, based on a study resolution written for the 2025 legislative session by Sen. Charles Owen, R-Rosepine.

Owen also filed House Bill 219 that would allow courts to have resentencing hearings for nonunanimous convictions. The House Committee on Administration has not heard the bill yet.

Advertisement

One issue that arose in the meeting was the governor’s impact on the committee.

The governor would appoint to the committee three retired appellate court judges or Louisiana Supreme Court justices, one retired district attorney or assistant district attorney and one retired public defender.

The district attorney and public defender appointees would come from a list of three nominations from the Louisiana District Attorneys Association and the state public defender.

Advertisement

Although all five members would need to agree that a conviction was unfair, the current bill would allow the governor to make final decisions on releasing applicants.

The current bill does not provide details on the governor’s power. Daniels said the bill would eventually include that language after input from attorneys from the governor’s office.

Daniels also noted that there may be some conflict between the committee’s final decision and Gov. Jeff Landry’s tough-on-crime approach.

Advertisement

Sarah Gozalo of the Promise of Justice Initiative expressed concerns about the governor’s ultimate power.

“If we find that miscarriage of justice, the solution is, we will ask the governor — the one person who, in 2018, opposed getting rid of nonunanimous jurors,” Gozalo said.

Other opponents of the bill suggested keeping the bill in committee until it was amended to address their concerns.

Bruce Reilly, deputy director of Voice of the Experienced, and Erica Navalance, a criminal defense attorney, recommended adding post-conviction evidence to the records the committee sees to prove claims of ineffective defense counsel or prosecutorial misconduct.

McMath declined to defer the bill.

Advertisement

“I think that holding it up in this committee doesn’t necessarily give the chance to continue to move on through the process, where we all know that things sometimes can change and get new input,” McMath said.

Sen. Royce Duplessis, D-New Orleans, who had a similar bill in 2025 that did not pass, objected to the bill’s advancement.

“Just know that this is not an easy objection for me,” Duplessis said. “And if this bill does advance, I want to continue, or at least I want to work with you, to try to find a solution, because it’s been stated repeatedly, we’re not quite there.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending