Connect with us

Nevada

Voters in California and Nevada consider ban on forced labor aimed at protecting prisoners

Published

on

Voters in California and Nevada consider ban on forced labor aimed at protecting prisoners


SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California and Nevada voters will decide in November whether to ban forced prison labor by removing language from their state constitutions rooted in the legacy of chattel slavery.

The measures aim to protect incarcerated people from being forced to work under the threat of punishment in the states, where it is not uncommon for prisoners to be paid less than $1 an hour to fight fires, clean prison cells, make license plates or do yard work at cemeteries.

Nevada incarcerates about 10,000 people. All prisoners in the state are required to work or be in vocational training for 40 hours each week, unless they have a medical exemption. Some of them make as little as 35 cents hourly.

Voters will weigh the proposals during one of the most historic elections in modern history, said Jamilia Land, an advocate with the Abolish Slavery National Network who has spent years trying to get the California measure passed.

Advertisement

“California, as well as Nevada, has an opportunity to end legalized, constitutional slavery within our states, in its entirety, while at the same time we have the first Black woman running for president,” she said of Vice President Kamala Harris’ historic bid as the first Black and Asian American woman to earn a major party’s nomination for the nation’s highest office.

Several other states such as Colorado, Alabama and Tennessee have in recent years done away with exceptions for slavery and involuntary servitude, though the changes were not immediate. In Colorado — the first state to get rid of an exception for slavery from its constitution in 2018 — incarcerated people alleged in a lawsuit filed in 2022 against the corrections department that they had still been forced to work.

“What it did do — it created a constitutional right for a whole class of people that didn’t previously exist,” said Kamau Allen, a co-founder of the Abolish Slavery National Network who advocated for the Colorado measure.

Nevada’s proposal aims to abolish from the constitution both slavery and involuntary servitude as punishment for crime. California’s constitution was changed in the 1970s to remove an exemption for slavery, but the involuntary servitude exception remains on the books.

Wildland firefighting is among the most sought-after prison work programs in Nevada. Those eligible for the program are paid around $24 per day.

Advertisement

“There are a lot of people who are incarcerated that want to do meaningful work. Now are they treated fairly? No,” said Chris Peterson, legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada, which supports the measure. “They’re getting paid pennies on the hour, where other people get paid dollars, to do incredibly dangerous work.”

Peterson pointed to a state law that created a modified workers’ compensation program for incarcerated people who are injured on the job. Under that program, the amount awarded is based on the person’s average monthly wage when the injury occurred.

In 2016, Darrell White, an injured prison firefighter who filed a claim under the modified program, learned he would receive a monthly disability payment of “$22.30 for a daily rate of $0.50.” By then, White already had been freed from prison, but he was left unable to work for months while he recovered from surgery to repair his fractured finger, which required physical therapy.

White sued the state prison system and Division of Forestry, saying his disability payments should have been calculated based on the state’s minimum wage of $7.25 at the time. The case went all the way up to the Nevada Supreme Court, which rejected his appeal, saying it remained an “open question” whether Nevada prisoners were constitutionally entitled to minimum wage compensation.

What to know about the 2024 Election

Advertisement

“It should be obvious that it is patently unfair to pay Mr. White $0.50 per day,” his lawyer, Travis Barrick, wrote in the appeal, adding that White’s needs while incarcerated were minimal compared to his needs after his release, including housing and utilities, food and transportation. “It is inconceivable that he could meet these needs on $0.50 per day.”

The California state Senate rejected a previous version of the proposal in 2022 after Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration cited concerns about the cost if the state had to start paying all prisoners the minimum wage.

Newsom signed a law earlier this year that would require the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to create a voluntary work program. The agency would set wages for people incarcerated in state prisons under the law. But the law would only take effect if voters approve the forced labor ban.

The law and accompanying measure will give incarcerated people more of an opportunity for rehabilitation through therapy or education instead of being forced to work, said California Assemblymember Lori Wilson, a Democrat representing Solano County who authored this year’s proposal.

Wilson suffered from trauma growing up in a household with dysfunction and abuse, she said. She was able to work through her trauma by going to therapy. But her brother, who did not get the same help, instead ended up in prison, she said.

Advertisement

“It’s just a tale of two stories of what happens when someone who has been traumatized, has anger issues and gets the rehabilitative work that they need to — what they could do with their life,” Wilson said.

Yannick Ortega, a formerly incarcerated woman who now works at an addiction recovery center in Fresno, California, was forced to work various jobs during the first half of her time serving 20 years in prison for a murder conviction, she said.

“When you are sentenced to prison, that is the punishment,” said Ortega, who later became a certified paralegal and substance abuse counselor by pursuing her education while working in prison. “You’re away from having the freedom to do anything on your own accord.”

___

Yamat reported from Las Vegas. Austin is a corps member for the Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues. Follow Austin on Twitter: @ sophieadanna

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Nevada

Lawsuits challenging Nevada’s voter rolls dropped ahead of 2024 election

Published

on

Lawsuits challenging Nevada’s voter rolls dropped ahead of 2024 election


A conservative organization dropped legal challenges it had filed attempting to force four Nevada counties to address its claims that voter rolls in those counties may have included thousands who had moved out of the area.

Citizen Outreach Foundation filed lawsuits last month in Carson City, Clark, Storey and Washoe counties asking the courts to order the counties to process the group’s challenges of suspected ineligible voters.

On Friday, Chuck Muth, president of the Citizen Outreach Foundation dropped the suits after what he called “nitpicking” objections over certain wording and on whether the group’s challenges needed to be notarized.

The lawsuits were among several filed against Nevada in the lead-up to the November 2024 election. The Republican National Committee and other Republican groups have also filed lawsuits challenging the state’s election laws, from its mail ballot processes to its voter roll cleanup procedures. Other lawsuits so far haven’t had success, though none of the cases have officially closed yet. Some are in administrative steps with the court before final dismissal or are waiting appeal.

Advertisement

‘Pigpen Project’

Muth and his group sent multiple citizen-based challenges to counties across the state as part of its “Pigpen Project” that launched in January 2023 with the goal of identifying ineligible voters on Nevada’s voter rolls and working with counties to remove them. The group cross-referenced U.S. Postal Service change of address data and found registrations of people the group thinks has moved away.

Muth said there was no way the issue in his group’s lawsuits could have been resolved before people started sending back their mail ballots, which has already begun. Muth refiled new challenges to the Clark County clerk alleging that ineligible voters remain on the voter rolls, and he said he plans to push for changes to the laws during the next legislative session.

Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar called the voluntary dismissal a “victory for Nevada.” He described the lawsuits as “meritless challenges to our voter rolls” that affected military members and their families who are overseas.

“No eligible voter should be subject to suspicion or confusion about their voter status,” Aguilar said in a statement. “That’s especially true when the challenges do not meet the standards of either Nevada or federal law.”

Advertisement

Muth said the state raised technical issues with the challenges he filed, and he criticized the secretary of state for calling them meritless.

“For him to say they were meritless challenges is pure BS,” he said. “There is merit to them, and if he wanted to work with us, we could have had this cleaned up a long time ago.”

New challenges filed

Under a new section of the law, Muth refiled new challenges that will address the objections the state made. They will also screen out any addresses of potential voters who could be overseas from their list of challenges, which Muth said made up about a dozen of 30,000 challenges.

The state had said the challenges needed to be notarized. Muth does not know if that’s necessary, but he may have the challenges notarized this time.

Advertisement

Aguilar said there are multiple systems in place to ensure every eligible Nevada voter, and only eligible voters, can cast a ballot.

“I want all Nevadans to rest assured that our elections remain accurate and secure, and that every eligible voter’s voice will be heard,” Aguilar said.

Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford said in a statement he is pleased the lawsuits were voluntarily dismissed.

“These frivolous lawsuits are both a waste of time and an assault on Nevadans’ democratic rights,” Ford said. “State and federal law prevent vigilante voter roll maintenance this close to Election Day.”

Contact Jessica Hill at jehill@reviewjournal.com. Follow @jess_hillyeah on X.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Nevada

EXCLUSIVE: Nevada Players Vote To Forfeit Against SJSU, Transgender Player Despite School’s Statement

Published

on

EXCLUSIVE: Nevada Players Vote To Forfeit Against SJSU, Transgender Player Despite School’s Statement


The Nevada women’s volleyball team held a vote among players and voted to forfeit an Oct. 26 match against San Jose State and transgender player Blaire Fleming, OutKick has exclusively learned.

The Nevada athletic department said in an exclusive statement to OutKick on Oct. 3 that the team would play the scheduled match. However, the school did not consult with the players before making that statement. 

“The University of Nevada volleyball team remains focused on its upcoming matches with UNLV and San Diego State and intends to play its remaining Mountain West schedule, including the match with San José State University on October 26,” the statement read. 

Advertisement

“The University will continue to abide by the NCAA, Mountain West Conference and USA Volleyball rules and regulations as well as the laws and Constitution of the State of Nevada.”

But most of the Nevada players did not agree with the decision made by the school and decided to take matters into their own hands. 

“We, the University of Nevada Reno women’s volleyball team, forfeit against San Jose State University and stand united in solidarity with the volleyball teams of Southern Utah University, Boise State University, the University of Wyoming, and Utah State University,”  the team wrote in an exclusive statement to OutKick. 

Advertisement

“We demand that our right to safety and fair competition on the court be upheld. We refuse to participate in any match that advances injustice against female athletes.” 

Riley Gaines, host of the OutKick podcast “Gaines for Girls” and one of the most influential pro-woman voices in the country, lauded the Nevada team for their bravery. 

“When college athletes have to vote on whether to play the sport they received scholarships for, it’s a clear sign that the adults responsible for protecting them have failed,” Gaines said in a statement to OutKick.

“I applaud these athletes for setting boundaries and prioritizing their safety over victory. They’ve shown far more courage and leadership than the president of the university and the President of this country. 

“A movement is forming, where athletes take control of their future, reminding us that what’s being called ‘progressive’ is actually taking us back in time.”  

Advertisement

Sia Liilii, a senior and one of two captains on the team, told OutKick that players were frustrated when they found out that the school had committed them to playing the match without speaking to them.

“The school released that statement without consulting our team at all,” Liilii said. “We were pretty upset that we were not made aware that a statement was going to come out.” 

The senior outside hitter also noted that the timing of the statement couldn’t have been worse. 

“We were actually in Las Vegas preparing for our match against UNLV, our in-state rival,” she said. “It was a really frustrating time, especially because we were about to go and play a big game.”

Advertisement

Nevada lost to UNLV, 3-2, although Liilii acknowledged that the statement release did not affect the team’s performance. 

The senior told OutKick that players and coaches had a meeting the day after the match against UNLV to talk about the statement that the school released. 

She said that players decided they wanted time to think about what they wanted to do. 

This week, the team came together again and made the decision to forfeit their match against San Jose State. 

“We decided that we’re going to stand in solidarity with other teams that have already forfeited and that we wouldn’t participate in a game that advances sex-based discrimination or injustice against female athletes,” Liilii said. 

Advertisement

Nevada is the fifth school to cancel a match this season against San Jose State and the fourth Mountain West team to forfeit rather than face transgender opponent Blaire Fleming. 

Southern Utah became the first school to cancel its match against San Jose State last month when it backed out of a scheduled contest at the Santa Clara Tournament. 

Nevada joined Boise State, Wyoming and Utah State as schools from the Mountain West to accept a loss rather than play their scheduled match. 

While Liilii acknowledged the potential for negative backlash due to the team’s decision, they decided it was worth it to stand up for what they believe in. 

Advertisement

“It’s definitely something that we’ve talked about as a team, but we’ve always come back to the fact that we believe that women deserve fair competition and our rights to opportunity,” she said. 

OutKick reached out to the University of Nevada to request comment on the decision made by the players. We will update if/when the school returns our message. 

The Mountain West Conference has repeatedly told OutKick that the forfeits are “institutional decisions” and the conference has no plans, currently, to adjust their procedures despite the multiple cancelations. 

The conference’s latest statement to OutKick, sent on Oct. 3: 

Advertisement

“Per Mountain West policy, these are institutional decisions, and questions should be directed to the institutions. The forfeits are following the current policy and will be accounted for in the conference standings,” conference spokesperson Javan Hedlund wrote via email. 

OutKick reached out to the Mountain West after the Nevada announcement to ask if a fourth school forfeiting a match had changed the conference’s position. 

They did not immediately respond to our request. 





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Nevada

Trouble For Kamala Harris Ahead? Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Nevada: Democrats Lose Voter Registration Edge

Published

on

Trouble For Kamala Harris Ahead? Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Nevada: Democrats Lose Voter Registration Edge


The Democratic Party’s voter registration advantage has seen a dip in three key battleground states, namely Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Nevada. This shift could potentially pose a challenge for Vice President Kamala Harris in the upcoming elections.

What Happened: The shift is attributed to a lack of enthusiasm for the Biden administration and the Democratic Party in general. In contrast, Republicans have significantly increased their voter registration advantage in Arizona, another key battleground state, reported The Hill.

Analysts attribute the drop in Democratic voter registration in certain areas of Pennsylvania to growing dissatisfaction with the current administration in Washington. However, Democratic strategists in both Pennsylvania and North Carolina remain confident that a significant portion of the new voters identifying as independent will ultimately favor Harris over Trump.

See Also: NBA Legend Shaq Admitted That He ‘Never Voted’ In Presidential Election Until 2020 As He Urged Others To Register: ‘One Thing I Never Like To Do Is Be A Hypocrite’

Advertisement

Why It Matters: The fall in Democratic voter registration comes amidst a decline in Vice President Harris’ popularity among Hispanic voters. This demographic has traditionally been crucial in swing states.

Furthermore, recent polls conducted by the Wall Street Journal and Emerson College suggest a close race between Harris and former President Trump in key swing states. While Harris posted a lead in most 2024 election polls of national voters, swing state polls have been much closer, with Trump having the edge in some states.

Check This Out:

This story was generated using Benzinga Neuro and edited by Shivdeep Dhaliwal

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending