Yesterday in front of a room full of supporters at the Marian Anderson Studio in Danbury, Jason Bartlett formally announced his intention to run for State Senate in the 24th District.
A person who is no stranger to politics, Bartlett served as State Representative for the second district (Bethel, Danbury, and Redding) from 2007-2011. During his time in office, Bartlett was best known for his activism in maters of education (e.g., raising the high school drop out rate to 17) and public health concerns (e.g., Lyme disease awareness).
The State Senate Democratic convention for the 24th District is next Monday and all signs point to Bartlett running unopposed and challenging one of the most divisive, out of touch state lawmaker in the state, the infamous birther extremist Mike McLachlan.
From yesterday, here’s video of Bartlett’s State Senate announcement.
LIVE BLOG: 5th Congressional District Democratic Convention
Monday, May 14, 2012 Time: 2:58 PM
Today, Democratic delegates in the 5th district will cast their ballots and endorse either Chris Donovan, Elizabeth Esty, or Dan Roberti as their choice for Congress.
I'll be on hand at the Rotella Magnet School (380 Pierpont Rd, Waterbury CT) to cover tonight's convention. Depending on the set-up, I'll be able to provide a live video stream of the proceedings.
If you wish to comment on the convention via Twitter, use the hashtag #ct5convention.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
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.