<xmp> <body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\07514627901\46blogName\75Hat+City+Blog\46publishMode\75PUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\46navbarType\75BLUE\46layoutType\75CLASSIC\46searchRoot\75http://hatcityblog.blogspot.com/search\46blogLocale\75en\46v\0752\46homepageUrl\75http://hatcityblog.blogspot.com/\46vt\75-2753012581089479703', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script> </xmp>

FLASHBACK: Dissent or disloyalty

Saturday, March 27, 2010
Time: 10:54 PM

In honor of the recent threat made towards me by the the member(s) of Elise Marciano's hate-group, I think this mini documentary of the state's teabagging movement from my friend Connecticut Bob is in order.



(full disclaimer: I contributed video and photo footage to this documentary)

LOCAL ACCESS VIDEO: Bethel Watch 03.22.10 broadcast


Time: 12:23 PM


LOCAL ACCESS VIDEO: Danbury Live 03.20.10 broadcast

Friday, March 26, 2010
Time: 11:56 PM


LOCAL ACCESS VIDEO: Spotlight On 03.23.10 broadcast


Time: 11:45 PM


City takes another setback in Danbury 11 case

Thursday, March 25, 2010
Time: 11:23 PM

Rally20.jpg

The News-Times has the details:
A federal judge has ruled that the men known as the Danbury 11 not be required to divulge their immigration status as part of their civil rights lawsuit against the city.

While attorneys for the city claimed the status was "at the heart of the case," the judge cited previous case law when she ruled that handing over the information would have a "chilling" effect on other immigrants seeking to enforce their civil rights.

"We are gratified, but not surprised, because this order follows a long line of cases saying the courts should be open to everyone," said Rebecca Heller, a law student with the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services organization at Yale Law School, which is representing the immigrants.

"People should not have to face harassment and deportation in order to vindicate their civil rights in federal court," Heller said.

The Danbury 11 is a group of day laborers who were arrested in Danbury and turned over to immigration agents in September 2006 during a sting operation involving local police officers.

The lawsuit filed by the day laborers claims that local police don't have the authority to enforce federal immigration law and that the officers used racial profiling when a local undercover officer picked them up at Kennedy Park.

[...]

"The judge has said they (the city) can't throw up a smokescreen and try to divert the jury from that reality," he said. "The judge saw through the frivolous nature of this defense and will make the defendants act like adults instead of politicians."

[...]

Local immigration attorney Michael Boyle said the city's attempts to gain access to the day laborers' immigration status amounts to a fishing expedition and a scare tactic that is often used in hope the plaintiffs will drop their case.

He added that, in general, most federal judges don't like to encourage such fishing expeditions.

"It's a very positive decision," Boyle said. "But I think for the city of Danbury it astounds me that this case continues to go on forever."

As for the gubernatorial candidate who called the Yale Law Students a bunch of "kids who have nothing better to do with their time."
Mayor Mark Boughton, a five-term Republican seeking his party's nomination in the gubernatorial race, has made national headlines in the past concerning immigration issues. He declined to comment specifically on this case because the matter remains pending.

Hark! Danbury's last honest man has no comment on the case? Sounds like he's singing a different tune compared to his dismissive comments four years ago.

Hartford Courant 12.14.06
A group of students at Yale Law School is expected to file suit today in federal court in a bid to find out how Homeland Security put together its sting on Sept. 19. The students want to know what role Danbury played in the operation and if the policies guiding the department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm may be unconstitutional. Their inquiry began with a request under the federal Freedom of Information Act. "We asked nicely," said Simon Moshenberg, a second-year student from Washington, D.C. "They didn't answer. We sued."

[...]

In an interview Wednesday, Boughton insisted that immigration police acted alone. They notified Danbury police this summer that they'd be making some arrests this fall but offered no other details, he said.


WVIT and WTNH 12.06:
WTNH: Boughton said the city played no part in the September 19th action...

WVIT: He [Boughton] said the city was not involved in the planing of the raid...



The residents of Danbury deserve to know once and for all whether the mayor LIED about his knowledge in this ICE raid. When pressed by state reporters, based on what I witnessed Boughton has during his press conference when the suit was filed, lets hope the city doesn't attempt to settle this case before Boughton is required to give his deposition and testify under oath.

State Rep. Bob Godfrey questions the timing of Gov Rell judicial nominees


Time: 5:48 PM

Last night at the Danbury Democratic Town Committee meeting, Deputy Speaker and State Rep. Bob Godfrey voiced his frustration with the timing of Gov. Rell's judicial nominee announcement.

For those not in the loop, a little background is in order.
Late Wednesday afternoon, Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell nominated one Superior Court Judge to the Supreme Court to fill a vacancy and 10 lawyers to the Superior Court. However, according to lawmakers in charge of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, the path to confirmation for the 10 Superior Court judges is “murky” at best.

Lawmakers said they will look at confirming Superior Court Judge Dennis Eveleigh to fill the vacancy left by Supreme Court Justice Christine S. Vertefeuille, but the other nominations are questionable.

Rep. Michael Lawlor, co-chairman of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, which is responsible for vetting potential judges, said he won’t support any of the nominations until the budget crisis in the Judicial Branch is resolved.

“They have no money,” Lawlor said. “They’re closing courthouses and law libraries.”

The salary for each of the judges could cost the branch as much $150,000 per year, when its already had to scale back its operations after Rell vetoed a bill that would have exempted the Judicial Branch from cutting $7.8 million over the next two years. That decision has forced the branch to start closing courthouses, law libraries, and other programs and because of the early retirement plan there are 400 fewer court interpreters, clerical staff, as well as judicial marshals to provide security.

“Many of these people are very qualified,” but “it’s unlikely they will get confirmed,” Lawlor said Wednesday in a phone interview.

[...]

Ironically, Rell’s Budget Director Robert Genuario, who has maintained that the cuts to the Judicial Branch were necessary, was one of the 10 nominees to the Superior Court bench Wednesday.



"Learn the past, watch the present, and create the future"

Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Time: 1:13 PM

CF_DDTC

When I think of the current state of the Danbury Democratic Town Committee, I'm reminded of an old saying that goes "learn the past, watch the present, and create the future."

Back in 2006, residents who were upset with the direction of the DTC under the leadership of then chairman Bernie Gallo held a primary Because of that primary, Gallo lost re-election to the committee, which in turn effectively ended his run as chairman.

Back in early 2006, in an interview of the local access show Community Forum, then former Common Council President Warren Levy and former State Rep Joe Walkowich expressed their concerns about the state of the DTC at the time.



Why is this important? Well, if you fast forward to 2010, you'll see that the concerns among Democrats regarding the leadership of Joe DaSilva (the person who took over the DTC after Gallo's departure) and who forced a DTC primary this year mirror the concerns expressed in 2006.

As the DTC moves forward, hopefully the committee can address these concerns and hopefully, those who expressed their concerns can work with the new leadership of the committee for the common good of the party.

THE CASE AGAINST JOHN McGOWAN DAY EIGHT: The seven trillion dollar man


Time: 11:57 AM

When it comes to strange things, just when you think you've seen it all, John McGowan (a.k.a. Mr. Pseudolaw) takes irrational behavior to a whole new level.

Litchfield Register Citizen Ronald DeRosa has the hilarious details regarding the latest chain of events in this bizarre case.
A Bethel man slated to defend himself in his own sexual assault trial is seeking in excess of $7 trillion from Litchfield Superior Court alleging libel.

John J. McGowan, also written John-Joseph:McGowan III, claims the court system has been libelous against him for carrying on his criminal case in public. He claimed he is owed over $7.4 trillion from the court system, which must be paid “in admiralty,” which is the law of the sea, through a “commercial process.”

Facing 20-years if found guilty, McGowan is slated to go to trial beginning Aug. 13 at the Litchfield court where he will have to personally convince a jury of his peers that he did not turn a 2008 consensual sex encounter into rape.

McGowan has not sought an attorney and has maintained he wants to go pro se on his case.

Assistant State’s Attorney Dawn Gallo argued there was no legal basis for his $7 trillion libel claim. Judge James P. Ginocchio agreed, saying Gallo is a prosecutor for the state whose job is to deal with criminal cases like McGowan’s.

Gallo noted that McGowan attempted to file the claim in a criminal procedure on civil court paperwork.

“There is no basis in which he can address that claim,” she said.


Wait, it gets better...
On Tuesday he filed another motion against Gallo, claiming the prosecutor did not give him a witness list within adequate time of his request for one in November.

Gallo, who then handed over the list, reminded McGowan it is procedural that the witness list must not be submitted until the day of jury selection.

McGowan, however, maintained the list is invalid because the motion he made was not answered in time.

“Therefore, the witnesses on their list should not be called,” McGowan said.

Gallo argued the state has provided “voluminous discovery,” meaning evidence and reports related to his case, in the past few months.

McGowan’s motion to exclude the witness list was a matter of him not understanding the practices of the court, Gallo said.

“If Mr. McGowan had a lawyer, his lawyer would be able to explain that,” the prosecutor said.

Gallo also argued further on the witness list, stating McGowan did obtain a copy already.

How did she know that? Because when she got a request to deny the witness list from McGowan, it listed each of the witnesses she previously wrote on the list, Gallo said.

“There’s no form in which he can address that claim,” Gallo said. “It’s improbable on its face.”

McGowan has previously tried to maintain his own personal sovereignty in court.

He reiterated this on Tuesday, when he initially refused to cross the bar that blocks off the audience section from the court itself.

“I enter strictly under threat, duress and coercion and at no way do I leave my inalienable rights I expressly reserve them,” McGowan said.

Judge Ginocchio eventually convinced him that he had to come forward because being behind the bar — and 20 feet from the microphone — does not affect his rights.

In anyone wants a ring side seat to this show, McGowan's next court date is on June 11th.

UPDATE: Just got word that McGowan's next scheduled court appearance has been changed to Jul 7 at 9:30 A.M.




RELATED POSTS:


Boughton decides not to attend immigraiton forum...

Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Time: 8:23 PM

...while throwing his trademark temper tantrum we've all come to love, and taking a swipe at those who were offended by his presence on the panel.
After a group of Latino law school students vehemently objected to Danbury Mayor and Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Boughton's being invited to participate on a university panel discussion about immigration, Boughton said he will abide by their wishes.

"I haven't changed my opinion one bit," Boughton said Tuesday, but "I really wasn't interested in getting engaged in some kind of controversy where people are interested in suppressing my First Amendment right to freedom of speech."

[...]

"I would believe (these statements) are libelous, and I would expect better of law students," he said. "Their letter is so over the top there is no room for intelligent discourse. I strictly believe in the opinion that the laws of the United States of America ought to be enforced and no one is going to take that away from me."

Can someone hand Mayor Mark a tissue please...

Seriously, when it comes to why Boughton has NO business at this forum, I'll quote from Peter Gosilin.
Mayor Boughton is well known for his opinions about undocumented immigrants and law enforcement. But there is no evidence that Boughton is qualified to say anything about undocumented immigrants in the workplace from the point of view of sociological inquiry, legal analysis, or policy prescription. Boughton does not provide "balance" to discussion of rights and redress for the undocumented worker. What he provides is a distraction and a false sense that unless nativists and racists are invited to participate in every discussion that touches on immigration, somehow the discussion is one-sided. Moreover, I have to point out that since Boughton is also a Republican Party candidate for Governor of Connecticut, the Public Interest Law Journal has violated any accepted norm of "balance" by inviting him without inviting his opponents.

[...]

On the other hand, perhaps both Boughton and Attorney Vincent could contribute to a discussion of 287g programs: ICE-initiated programs in collaboration with local officials to effectively "deputize" local law enforcement to act as immigration agents in their communities. In such a discussion, perhaps some qualified speakers could ask them about the role that 287g agreements play in polarizing communities, in making victims of crime fear reporting to the police, and in giving local police further excuses to stop, harass, arrest and detain people for the crime of "breathing while brown." And while we are at it, a "balanced" panel could include officials from the cities of New Haven and Hartford, who have repudiated 287g in favor of local policies that forbid police officers from acting as immigration enforcers. And it could include people from the community: community leaders and individuals who have experienced the impact that these competing policies have effected on immigrants in Connecticut.

This isn't about free speech but rather students speaking out about the presence of a person who has historically used the topic of illegal immigration to further his political agenda and someone who offers ZERO input to the topic of the symposium entitled “Undocumented Immigrants in the Workplace."

As we move forward in this gubernatorial campaign, and as more people learn about Boughton's anti-immigrant policy, expect the level of outraged directed at Danbury's last honest man to continue.




RELATED POSTS:

Objection to Boughton's participation at immigration forum continues


UConn Latino law students to Boughton: You're not welcomed on campus


Mayor Boughton ignores the rise of anti-immigrant xenophobia in Danbury

Boughton misleads the public regarding city's role in Danbury 11 case

Court documents expose Danbury Police involvement in day laborer raid

HatCityBLOG FLASHBACK: The MISleader and the Danbury 11 case


Time: 2:59 PM

In light of recent developments regarding Boughton's scheduled participation at an immigration forum at the University of Connecticut, I've received numerous requests for information on Boughton's anti-immigrant policies.

I think Boughton's dishonest role in the Danbury 11 case is a good start. For those who don't remember, back in Sept of 2006, ICE agents, disguised as contractors, went to Kennedy Park and picked up several day laborers who were looking for work. After being picked up, the workers were driven to Danbury Police Headquarters where they were subsequently arrested and detained.

REMEMBER What's important IS NOT the case. In fact, people get somewhat confused when talking about this matter as there are TWO cases...the deportation case (which is on appeal) and the MORE important CIVIL case.

In short, what is at issue is Mayor Boughton's long history and well documented history of misleading the public and overstepping his grounds as an elected official. The statements Mayor Boughton made to the media and public during the arrest and after the Yale Law Students attempted to obtain documents from City Hall are at issue here.

Boughton claimed in numerous interviews to the media back in December of 2006 that DANBURY HAD NO ROLE IN THE OPERATION THAT RESULTED IN THE ARREST OF THE DAY LABORERS ON KENNEDY PARK. It wasn't until the lawyers representing the day laborers won their FOI lawsuit against the city of Danbury was it shown that an UNDERCOVER DANBURY POLICE OFFICER drove the van that picked up the day laborers. This is a direct contradiction from the previous statements from the mayor and as of today, Boughton refuses to talk about the what he said back in December of '06.

If the civil case goes the way it should, Boughton will be forced to testify under oath about what he knew in regards to the case as well as explain his contradicting statements to the public regarding the city's role in the raid.

Originally posted in 10/07




This is serious.

This is no joke.

This is not about one's view on immigration.

This is about an over-zealous mayor who has, once again, used the topic of immigration for political purposes.

This is about the local media KNOWING that the mayor mislead the public YET won't challenge the mayor on his previous statements.

This is about residents having to read news accounts from other mainstream media outlets to get the real story.

This is about honesty.

This is about integrity.

This is about trust.

This is about competence.


FACT:
In December, Mayor Boughton (who had no problem talking about the incident) was repeatedly quoted in the media as stating that Danbury was not involved in the raid that occurred last September.

Documents finally released in April by a FOIA request shows that a booking report lists the arresting officer as a Danbury Police official.

A court brief by the Department of Homeland Security states that a undercover Danbury Police officer was the individual who drove the vehicle used to pick up the day-laborers.

Also included in the FOIA release to the Yale Law students were a series of over overtime slips from Danbury Police officers.

Until two weeks ago, the public was under the impression that Danbury played no part in the raids. NOW, one year after the raids and ten months after Mayor Boughton made his initial statement about Danbury's non-involvement in the raids, The Fairfield Weekly quotes a News-Times article that states Chief Al Baker "explaining that the arrests were initially made because of complaints about the day laborers' effects on traffic and that Danbury police did drive the van."

Once having no problem talking about the incident (and hurling insults at the Yale Law Students), NOW Mayor Boughton refuses to comment on the details of the raid.

Mayor Boughton's action has placed the city in a MAJOR constitutional lawsuit, which will cost the city more money than I care to think about.

The story is Boughton misleading the public about Danbury's role in the raids.

If Boughton mislead the public about the September raid, what else did he misleading us about?

For instance, here are some quotes from the last honest man in Danbury regarding the use of local police to enforce immigration laws:

Hartford Courant, April 26 2006.
Most local police departments say they have no interest in arresting illegal immigrants who have not committed crimes. Even in Danbury, when Mayor Mark Boughton last year tried unsuccessfully to have state police enforce immigration law, he said he didn't want his police doing it because it could discourage immigrants from cooperating in criminal investigations.

New York Times 05.25.05
It will begin at Kennedy Park, where the crowds of Hispanic men who gather before dawn to find work as day laborers helped prompt Mayor Mark D. Boughton to ask that the state police be deputized to enforce federal immigration laws.

[...]

Now, while members of Danbury's Common Council continue to draft a ''repetitive outdoor activity'' ordinance to restrict volleyball by cracking down on parking and noise, among other things, the mayor says deputizing the state police may not be necessary, that the police may have enough remedies without becoming immigration agents.

Hartford Courant 05.07.05
Lost in the hubbub is the political reality that having state police enforce immigration law in Connecticut is unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever. And even Boughton acknowledges that his plan would have little effect on the number of undocumented immigrants in town.

[...]

Blumenthal responded to Boughton's request by saying it would need the approval of Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle and the state legislature.

Blumenthal said there is no chance of that happening this year and he has "serious reservations" about the proposal.

"Deputizing local or state police is not a long term or fundamental solution to the problem,"
he said.

Although Boughton wants state police to enforce immigration law, he is not interested in Danbury police having the same authority, for fear it would cripple their ability to investigate other crimes.

"The same is true, to an even greater extent, for the state police," Blumenthal said.

Something to think about when Boughton, and the shameless Republican leadership, take the first steps towards local police enforcing immigration enforcement tomorrow.

Now onto more serious matters that goes to the heart of Boughton's character...the mayor's misleading statements to the public in regards to the city's role in Danbury 11 case:

Hartford Courant 12.14.06
A group of students at Yale Law School is expected to file suit today in federal court in a bid to find out how Homeland Security put together its sting on Sept. 19. The students want to know what role Danbury played in the operation and if the policies guiding the department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm may be unconstitutional. Their inquiry began with a request under the federal Freedom of Information Act. "We asked nicely," said Simon Moshenberg, a second-year student from Washington, D.C. "They didn't answer. We sued."

[...]

In an interview Wednesday, Boughton insisted that immigration police acted alone. They notified Danbury police this summer that they'd be making some arrests this fall but offered no other details, he said.

Television reports on Danbury 11 case: 12.06
Channel 8: Boughton said the city played no part in the September 19th action...

Channel 30: He [Boughton] said the city was not involved in the planing of the raid...


Fairfield Weekly last week (before Boughton was slapped with a lawsuit):
A year ago, eleven Ecuadorian day laborers were sneakily apprehended in Danbury's Kennedy Park by Immigration and Customs Enforcement with help from some men pretending to be contractors. They had some hard hats, a van and, according to recently uncovered information, a few Danbury police badges.

Why were the local cops assisting in a federal sting? Well, according to remarks from Danbury mayor Mark Boughton last December, they weren't. He repeatedly said the city played no role in the ICE raid.

[...]

Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court case that began Monday, received the booking report for the arrests after placing a FOIA request. Under "arresting officer," was the name "Lolli," which turns out to be the name of a Danbury police officer. The Danbury News-Times quotes Chief Al Baker explaining that the arrests were initially made because of complaints about the day laborers' effects on traffic and that Danbury police did drive the van. The department chose not to further comment on their involvement when approached by the Weekly.

Boughton elaborated in an e-mail that "the city provided logistical support to ICE," which is "common" and "does not mean that the Danbury PD planned, organized or carried out the raid." He stands by his comments from December.

Interview with Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court.
1.: Information obtained from the FOI request shows Danbury police officer as the arresting officer on booking report.



2. According to defense attorney Simon Moshenberg, in brief to the court, the Department of Homeland Security states that DANBURY POLICE OFFICERS were the ones disguised as contractors and driving the van used to pick up the day laborers. This is contrary to statements Boughton made to the press in December and the city of Danbury has not issued an official response in any legal proceedings regarding DHS's statement.



Video highlights of what we knew then about Danbury's role in the raid versus what we know now.

When you think of leadership, you think of an individual with certain characteristics such as honesty, integrity, trust, and competence. As more details of this case emerge and more people are informed about the Boughoton's conflicting comments, it's going to be increasingly difficult to apply these characteristics to the mayor.

THE CASE AGAINST JOHN MCGOWAN: UPDATE TO COME


Time: 12:49 PM

The next court hearing case against former John McGowan is scheduled for today at Litchfield Court House.

The 2007 mayoral candidate, former Vice President of Elise Marciano's racist hate group, anti-immigrant activist, and local access television personality was arrested and charged with first degree sexual assault, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in jail.

The police affidavit details the horrific details of McGowan's alleged crime against the victim.
…he [McGowan] pushed his penis into her anus. When he did this, Victim stated that she asked "What are you doing" and "Stop." Victim states that she arched her back as she initially struggled to to get him out of her. When she did this, McGowan put his right arm around her neck and put her in a headlock.

I'll provide details on what happened in court later today.




RELATED POSTS:

McGowan advocates residents kill day laborers at Kennedy Park

McGowan yells at immigrant right supporters, desecrates Mexican flag at immigration rally

Fairfield Weekly mocks McGowan's campaign for mayor.

Elise Marciano's anti-immigrant hate group members applaud while speaker advocates placing immigrants in WW-II style concentration camps.

Objection to Boughton's participation at immigration forum continues


Time: 12:27 PM

The controversy surrounding Mark Boughton's participation in a forum on immigration on the campus of the University of Connecticut continues.

In a rebuttal to CT Public Interest Law journal Editor-in-Chief Patrick Linsey's response to the Latino Law Student Association's objection to Boughton's participation in the forum, Attorney Peter Goselin of the Connecticut Chapter of National Lawyers Guild wrote the following:

Dear Patrick,

I was forwarded a copy of the Public Interest Law Journal's response to the Latino Law Student Association regarding the upcoming seminar on undocumented immigrants in the workplace. As an employment attorney who spends a lot of time working on wage theft and the super-exploitation of undocumented immigrants in the workplace, I feel compelled to respond.

With all respect due to you and the other students who have worked on convening this event, I share the disappointment and the disapproval of the students of UConn LLSA with the composition of the seminar. Nor am I persuaded by your response to LLSA's concerns, though I have no doubt that your response is offered in good faith to address those concerns.

What concerns me most - first, about the presence of Mayor Boughton and the keynote speech by Attorney Vincent, and second, about your defense of the decision to invite them - is that it so totally misses the mark in terms of what this symposium is allegedly about. Mayor Boughton is well known for his opinions about undocumented immigrants and law enforcement. But there is no evidence that Boughton is qualified to say anything about undocumented immigrants in the workplace from the point of view of sociological inquiry, legal analysis, or policy prescription. Boughton does not provide "balance" to discussion of rights and redress for the undocumented worker. What he provides is a distraction and a false sense that unless nativists and racists are invited to participate in every discussion that touches on immigration, somehow the discussion is one-sided. Moreover, I have to point out that since Boughton is also a Republican Party candidate for Governor of Connecticut, the Public Interest Law Journal has violated any accepted norm of "balance" by inviting him without inviting his opponents.

Described as the principal legal advisor to ICE, Peter Vincent may have a lot to say about the administration's view of immigration and immigration reform. But if the goal were to invite a speaker from the administration who is qualified to discuss undocumented immigrants in the American workforce, why an ICE attorney instead of someone from the Department of Labor? Under the leadership of Hilda Solis, the USDOL has been very active in collaborating with local community groups and elected officials to fight wage theft and unsafe working conditions, problems that plague undocumented workers. What can Attorney Vincent contribute to that discussion? What expertise in labor policy does he possess that merits making him the keynote speaker for a symposium with the workplace rights of undocumented immigrants as its central theme?

On the other hand, perhaps both Boughton and Attorney Vincent could contribute to a discussion of 287g programs: ICE-initiated programs in collaboration with local officials to effectively "deputize" local law enforcement to act as immigration agents in their communities. In such a discussion, perhaps some qualified speakers could ask them about the role that 287g agreements play in polarizing communities, in making victims of crime fear reporting to the police, and in giving local police further excuses to stop, harass, arrest and detain people for the crime of "breathing while brown." And while we are at it, a "balanced" panel could include officials from the cities of New Haven and Hartford, who have repudiated 287g in favor of local policies that forbid police officers from acting as immigration enforcers. And it could include people from the community: community leaders and individuals who have experienced the impact that these competing policies have effected on immigrants in Connecticut.

What we have here is not balance but a terrible mismatch. Two speakers have been invited (and one a keynote at that) who have no expertise in the area that the symposium is supposed to take up. And though their views and their actions should be exposed to criticism and challenge . . . those views and actions touch most closely on matters that are not on the agenda of this symposium at all.

It is my understanding that the students of LLSA have asked you to revoke the invitations you have extended to Mayor Boughton and to Attorney Vincent. I join in and endorse that view.

Peter Goselin
National Lawyers Guild - Connecticut Chapter





RELATED POSTS:


UConn Latino law students to Boughton: You're not welcomed on campus


Mayor Boughton ignores the rise of anti-immigrant xenophobia in Danbury

Boughton misleads the public regarding city's role in Danbury 11 case

Court documents expose Danbury Police involvement in day laborer raid

UConn Latino law students to Boughton: You're not welcomed on campus

Monday, March 22, 2010
Time: 2:39 PM

This Friday, UConn School of Law fill be holding a forum on illegal immigration and lets just say that students are pretty upset with one of the members of the panel

Ken Krayeske did a write-up regarding the strong opposition towards Mark Boughton's participation on the panel for My Left Nutmeg.




On March 26, 2010, from 1030 am to 400 pm, the UConn Public Interest Law Journal will host a forum on illegal immigration.

The kicker: Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton and a representative from ICE will be among the keynote speakers.

The Latino Law Students Association at UConn Law today sent out an e-mail detailing its opposition to the inclusion of these individuals as speakers (and since this has not been published but from a UConn law email, I'll blockquote the text fully):

Statement against Mayor Mark Boughton and the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Custom’s enforcement Policy


The Latino Law Student Association wishes to express its concerns with respect to Mayor Mark Boughton, scheduled to speak at the upcoming CPILJ Symposium, “Undocumented Immigrants in the Workplace.” Mayor Boughton, of Danbury, has been an outspoken anti-immigrant crusader in the State of Connecticut for the past decade. His policies have served to intimidate Danbury’s immigrant and Latino populations (whether documented or not.) He has asked that Danbury’s police officers participate in ICE’s 287 (g) program, which allows them to enforce federal immigration laws. He has also passed ordinances that permit selective enforcement of the housing code in Latino neighborhoods and that prohibit residents from playing volleyball. 1 Most recently, the Yale Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic filed a lawsuit against the city of Danbury for carrying out an illegal undercover sting operation in which 11 day laborers were arrested. This case involves a joint operation between local law enforcement and federal immigration agents where undercover police officers posed as contractors looking for workers, arrested them, and then turned them over to Immigration officials. [2] Mayor Boughton’s hate speech and discriminatory policies targeting immigrants should not be tolerated and he certainly should not be given a platform to espouse his views at UConn CPILJ’s symposium.

Danbury’s city ordinance, as endorsed by Mayor Boughton stands in stark contrast, to that of the city of Hartford, another Connecticut city with a large Latino immigrant population. In August 2009, the city of Hartford passed an immigration ordinance which prohibits the city of Hartford from using local law enforcement to carry out federal immigration laws. First, the ordinance affirms that all city services are available to residents, regardless of immigration status. Next, it prohibits city employees from asking about and disclosing a person’s immigration status when seeking city services. Finally, it prohibits police from asking crime victims and/or witnesses about their immigration status and prevents them from arresting and detaining anyone based solely on immigration status.

On a national level, the use of law enforcement to carry out civil immigration violations is highly controversial. The current immigration policy as it is carried out by The Department of Homeland Security and its agency, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, "ICE" (formerly INS), discriminates against Latino workers and harasses Latino and immigrant communities.

The current policy seeks to arrest and deport as many immigrant workers as possible without thought to their human rights and without a fair alternative. ICE is conducting raids on homes and businesses in virtually every state in the nation and has only recently, under the Obama administration, started to go after employers that knowingly employ undocumented workers. The current policy is fundamentally flawed because it disproportionately relies on law enforcement tactics to solve administrative immigration violations. The policy has been particularly harsh on Latino communities and has criminalized Latino workers. The raids used by ICE agents have been condemned nationwide because they indiscriminately arrest and deport persons who may appear to be Latino whether or not there are warrants against them.

The Latino Law Student association is also concerned about CPILJ’s keynote speaker, Peter S. Vincent, who is a representative of the ICE agency. Having a keynote which represents the views of ICE- a notoriously anti-immigrant agency, along with Mayor Boughton on one of the panels, sends a skewed message about how we should think critically about these issues to those in the law school community and the greater Hartford community. We hope that in the future CPILJ and its members consider the impact of bringing such speakers to their symposium.

This past Sunday, March 21, 2010 thousands of immigrants, advocates, and supporters marched on the Washington Mall to raise their voices for a just immigration reform. Immigration raids and deportations continue to affect immigrant communities around the nation. We stand in solidarity and believe that it is important to speak out against individuals, like Mayor Boughton, federal agencies like department of Homeland Security and Immigrations Customs, and Enforcement, who espouse policies that are harmful to Latino communities.

For the foregoing reasons the Latino Student Association expresses its objection to allowing Mayor Boughton and Peter Vincent speak at the upcoming CPILJ Symposium.

- The Latino Law Student Association


UPDATE: In response to the letter from the Latino Law Students Association, CT Public Interest Law journal Editor-in-Chief Patrick Linsey issued the following statement:
To the Law School Community,
The Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal has read with concern LLSA's objections to several of the speakers at Friday's symposium. First, the journal in no way endorses the views of any panelists at our symposium.

That said, we certainly understand the concerns of many students, including members of LLSA, over Mayor Boughton. Many on campus and throughout Connecticut have raised sound arguments against immigration enforcement in Danbury. I look forward to these arguments being made at the symposium on Friday.

But we also feel it is worth noting: While not in line with the views of LLSA or many of the students on this campus, Mayor Boughton's ideas are shared by a large number of people in this country. As such, any discussion of so complex an issue that does not address those views would be incomplete. Indeed, in 2008 the World Affairs Council of Connecticut hosted a debate between Mayor Boughton and New Haven Mayor John DeStefano, and the result was a reasoned dialogue (please see: http://articles.courant.com/2008-03-13/news/0803130243_1_illegal-immigration-immigration-reform-immigrant-labor).

Mayor Boughton has agreed to serve on a panel with three people holding much different views on immigration -- views much more likely to be shared by many of those on campus. These panelists include Sandra Trevino, executive director of La Junta (please see: http://www.juntainc.org/en/about/) and Amy Sugimori, executive director of La Fuente (please see: http://www.nycpp.org/en/staff.html). The journal has made every effort to sponsor a balanced symposium.

We on the symposium committee feel it is important to listen to those with whom we disagree as well as those with whom we agree -- even on issues so fraught with emotion and human suffering as this one. We could live in a world where Mayor Boughtons speak only at Tea Party rallies and Sandra Trevinos speak only at symposia sponsored by public interest law journals. In that world, the symposium we organized would not exist.

Finally, as for Mr. Vincent: We also understand the concerns some have had with immigration policy under the Obama Administration – concerns from those on both sides of the debate (please see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/19/AR2010031904676.html). But Mr. Vincent has been appointed under a president who has expressed support for comprehensive immigration reform (please see: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/us/politics/09immig.html), including a path to legal citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

Mr. Vincent oversees more than 900 federal immigration lawyers across the country, and we hope his talk will add to our understanding of how the government is currently handling this issue and how it may be approached in the future. To the extent LLSA and others on campus disagree with current Immigration and Customs Enforcement policies, we respect those disagreements. But I would again ask you to consider the
above thoughts on considering alternative perspectives.

It is our great hope that members of LLSA -- and students, faculty and staff from across the law school community -- will attend Friday's symposium. We hope that all of our panelists and that our keynote speaker will face questions that challenge their viewpoints. If any people or groups on campus have further concerns, I or any member of the symposium committee would be happy to speak with them.

Sincerely Yours,

Patrick Linsey

Patrick Linsey, Editor-in-Chief
Tony Lu, Symposium Editor
Rachel Sauer, Symposium Editor
Meghan Sweeney, Symposium Editor
Symposium Committee, Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal





RELATED POSTS:

Boughton misleads the public regarding city's role in Danbury 11 case

Court documents expose Danbury Police involvement in day laborer raid

Danbury residents join 200,000 in Washington for immigration reform

Sunday, March 21, 2010
Time: 8:36 PM



A busload of immigrant rights supporters from the Greater Danbury area joined like-minded individuals who gathered in Washington to rally for immigration reform.

If FoxNews can claim that 30,000 teabaggers in Washington opposing the health care bill was a success for their cause, I guess 200,000 immigration reform supporters is a success for their cause.
More than 200,000 people gathered on the National Mall today to participate in March for America, a rally advocating comprehensive immigration reform.

Organized by Reform Immigration for America, the rally brought together groups from around the country — including Service Employees International Union, Midwest Organic and Sustainable Education Service, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Democracia Ahora and the Coalition for Human Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles — to send a message to lawmakers: “The time for immigration reform is now.”

President Obama delivered a message from the big screens in the crowd in which he assured the demonstrators of his commitment to passing comprehensive immigration reform.

Several lawmakers also spoke at the event, including Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.), and several marchers had signs that read, “Luis Gutierrez for President.” Gutierrez, a leading advocate of immigration reform in the House, said, “If America has a problem it can’t solve, it blames immigrants. We’ve been patient long enough. … I know how you can get heard in the Capitol. You raise your voice. Our day is coming.”


With health care reform basically in the rear view mirror, hopefully Congress will tackle the issue of immigration reform. It's time is LONG overdue.

© 2013 Hat City Blog | READ, WATCH, AND LEARN.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.
PEOPLE-POWERED MEDIA.

trans_button



100 percent of your donaiton will be used towards updating this site.
Thanks in advance!


trans_button

Lowest Gas Prices in Danbury
Danbury Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com



Yellow Pages for Danbury, CT
Blog Flux Directory
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License
Bloggers' Rights at EFF

make money online blogger templates

trans_button
trans_button
Danbury City Charter
Danbury Code of Ordinances
Robert's Rules of Order

trans_button
Danbury 2005 election results
Danbury 2007 election results
Danbury 2009 election results
Danbury 2011 election results
Danbury 2013 election results
City of Danbury calendar

trans_button
The Mercurial
Danbury News Times
Danbury Patch
Tribuna Newspaper
Danbury El Canillita
(Spanish edition)

Danbury El Canillita
(English translation)

Comunidade News
(Portuguese edition)

Comunidade News
(English translation)


trans_button
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.

The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.

Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.

Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.

CLICK HERE TO READ/DOWNLOAD MAYOR BOUGHTON'S DEPOSITION

CLICK HERE TO READ/DOWNLOAD MIKE McLACHLAN (then MAYOR CHIEF OF STAFF) DEPOSITION

Danbury Area Coalition for the Rights of Immigrants v.
U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security
3:06-cv-01992-RNC ( D. Conn. )

(02.25.08) Court docket

(10.24.07) Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Emergency Motion for Protective Order

(09.26.07) Press Release

(12.14.06) Complaint


Barrera v. Boughton, No. 07-01436
(D. Conn. filed Sept. 26, 2007)

(02.25.08) Court Docket

Amended complaint

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss State Law Claims

Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

Order on Motion to Dismiss

Defendants' Answer to Amended Complaint

NEW HAVEN REGISTER: Immigrant's 2006 arrest was flawed Danbury mayor testifies

(10.05.07 (VIDEO) Boughton mislead the public about Danbury's involvement in raid

(09.18.07) Yale Law Students expose Danbury involvement in raid

(12.14.06) VIDEO: Interview with Yale Law Students at FOI presser

(12.14.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 FOI complaint media roundup

City Clerk Jean Natale standing next to skinhead sparks outrage

(10.03.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 rally

(09.29.06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 case deepens

Word of raid spread across the country

(09/29/06) VIDEO: Danbury 11 protest news conference

(09/29/06) Immigrant newspaper "El Canillita" gives best account of ICE day labor raid at Kennedy Park


Politics_Over_People
View Boughton's campaign finance statements from 2001-present (COMING SOON)

When questioned, Boughton fails to address the issue of anti-immigrant racism in Danbury

City admits mistakes in firefighter lawsuit, taxpayers forced to pay 450K settlement, and Boughton offers no comment, no details of accountability

READ allegations of wrongdoing by Boughton filed by the plaintiffs

Boughton misleads public about World Cup games "spontaneous" celebrations for FOUR years

trans_buttonBoughton_Galante

MARK BOUGHTON'S TICKING TIME BOMB

DOWNLOAD AND ANALYZE MARK BOUGHTON'S ELECTION AND PAC FINANCE REPORTS

Why won't Boughton give back Galante money?

Boughton contributor goes to jail

Fairfield Weekly questions Boughton's honesty

Hatrford Courant's Stan Smith not believing Boughton

Connecting the dots

Boughton-Galante connection established


APPEAL HEARING: 10/21/14 @ 09:30 AM

Directions to Litchfield Court House

Decision Day: GUILTY!

Day Ten: Moving forward

Day Nine: DNA

Day Eight: The seven trillion dollar man

Day Seven: Jury Trial

Day Six: Motions denied

Day Five: Endless subpoenas and bizarre motions to dismiss

Day Three/Four: He's competent!

Day Two: Excuses, excuses

Day One: Strange behavior, disturbing arrest warrant affidavit

McGowan arrested, charged with first-degree sexual assault


Read the full report on
the gross incompetence of
City Clerk Jean Natale

Watch Jean Natale's misleading, questionable, and outrageous testimony in front of the charter revision commission

Natale moonlighting during City Hall business hours

Republcian Common Council member claim City Clerk of being "racially motivated" in the Hispanic Center ad-hoc committee case

Danbury News-Times editorial criticizes City Clerk "racially motivated" involvement in Hispanic Center ad-hoc committee case

Photo of City Clerk standing next to skinhead holding anti-immigrant death threat sign

Public complains that the City Clerk is never available in her office / spends most of her time in the Registrar of Voters office

City Clerk confronts and yells at her critics at City Hall

Transcript of Minority Leader Tom Saadi criticizing Jean Natale's performance.

Freedom of Informaiton ruling on a complaint filed against Jean Natale.


Elise_Deer Highlighting the disturbing mind of a hate group leader and her xenophobic followers...

Exposing lies from Marciano regarding death threat made against yours truly

VIDEO: Marcaino shows her anti-Muslim side

I'm an AMERICAN!!!!!

MORE TO COME!!!

TOM "Big(o)T BENNETT HAS ONLY HIMSELF
TO BLAME



trans_button
trans_button


trans_button

Dunkin Donuts logo


Screen shot 2009-11-30 at 5.12.04 PM 2010 CTTF: Common Council debate

2010 CTFF: Funding ad hoc committee #2

2010 CTFF: Funding ad hoc committee meeting #1

2009 CTFF: Common Council funding debate

2009 CTFF: Funding ad hoc committee meeting

OPENING NIGHT 2008

LOCAL ACCESS: Roundtable discussion on '08 CTFF