News & Commentary

Luis L. is a lawful permanent resident from the Dominican Republic. As a young child, he moved with his family to Florida, where I interviewed him for a report by the ACLU and Human Rights Watch. Luis developed schizophrenia as a teenager, prompting trouble with the law. But fortunately, the judge presiding over Luis's criminal case recognized that Luis' behavior was connected to his disability and sent him to get mental health treatment. After a few years at an assisted living home, Luis was doing well — he was taking medication that alleviated the frightening symptoms of schizophrenia and was taking control of his life. But when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) decided to detain him based on his old conviction, Luis was packed off to a facility hours away and denied the medication he had been taking, prompting a terrifying downward cycle that lasted months. He told us that the only thing more petrifying than deportation was the experience of being without his medication. "I was scared for my life," he said. Thousands of immigrant detainees like Luis are housed in remote detention facilities around the country, far from professional medical services and the contact and care of their families. For detainees with mental disabilities, this isolation has two further sinister consequences: first, detention can be particularly traumatic for individuals with mental health conditions, such as schizophrenia or post-traumatic stress disorder. In some cases, the agonizing experience of being trapped in detention provokes psychological breakdowns. And second, detainees with disabilities are sometimes lost and forgotten — for years — in detention. Detention is a rights-stripping environment; and for many detainees with disabilities the problems they experience in detention affect their immigration hearings. When detainees' health deteriorates in the absence of appropriate medical care, detainees are often unable to participate in their immigration proceedings. Like Luis, they may be unable to provide even basic information about themselves in court. And because there is no clear limit for how long a person can be detained during their proceedings, detainees can be trapped in detention for years when immigration judges delay or reschedule hearings, waiting or hoping for something to happen that will help the detainee to take part in the hearing. For Guillermo Gomez-Sanchez and Jose Franco-Gonzales, a judge's decision to administratively close each of their proceedings—effectively putting the hearings "on hold"—rather than safeguarding their rights, triggered a nightmarish journey that included years of detention. Mr. Franco-Gonzales was in fact lost and forgotten by ICE during his four and a half years in detention while Mr. Gomez-Sanchez (detained for five years) was transferred far from his family in California to a hospital in South Carolina. Both were released in March 2010 after the ACLU of Southern California filed lawsuits on their behalf. In November 2010, the ACLU and a coalition of public interest organizations filed a class action lawsuit to ensure that detainees with mental disabilities are given bond hearings and the opportunity to ask for release. The lawsuit also argues for legal representation at bond hearings and throughout immigration proceedings so that detainees with mental disabilities have a fair and real opportunity to show they pose no flight risk or threat to the community and can be released from detention. Without these safeguards, detainees with disabilities—who include U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents—are stuck in detention with no end in sight, unable to move forward in their cases. But as one immigration judge observed, fixing the insufficient and unfair procedural rules isn't going to be enough: "Trying to fix the regulations misses the point; these people should not be in removal proceedings in the first place." This article was originally published on the ACLU Blog of Rights.

With Grand Rapids' ArtPrize in full swing, the ACLU of Michigan Western Branch has enjoyed an overwhelmingly positive response to our first ArtPrize exhibit. The quality of the art and the power of the messages the works carry have amazed all the visitors who have come to Fountain Street Church. Our exhibit Art and Civil Liberties focuses on the myriad of ways that art has been linked to the defense of civil liberties, from illustrating controversial social issues to encouraging revolutionary change. Judges Deb Mankoff and ACLU of Michigan Legislative Director Shelli Weisberg chose two particularly gripping pieces to receive $1,000 Best-in-Show awards. Chicago-area artist Dominic Sansone's piece Brand New God took the top ACLU of Michigan prize, and its power routinely garners gasps from visitors. The installation fills the church's chapel with rows of small human figures of all colors worshipping a central idol: a gilded AK-47 rifle. The Fountain Street Chuch's Social Action Committee's top prize was awarded to Michigan artist Brad VanderMoere's We's Goin' To Washington! The oil painting decrys the disconnect between citizens and their representatives. Both pieces are among the 25 highest vote-getters in the Hillside Neighborhood in the ArtPrize area. One of the largest pieces in the show is a triptych by Sandra Hansen. Modeled after a Medieval alter-piece, the eight-foot tall painting memorializes one of the most famous victims of racism, the young Emmett Till. Other featured artworks deal with homophobia, violence against women, mental illness, and several pay tribute to civil liberties heroes, including Nelson Mandela of South Africa and artist Ai Weh Weh of China. To celebrate the opening of the exhibit, we held a panel discussion focused on the role of artists in drawing attention to social issues. Some audience members felt that video and electronic media are superior at spreading social issue commentary widely. Others felt that the immediacy and strength of direct contact with an artist's work can be much more influential for individuals, even if that experience is limited to a few people. The discussion was a great introduction to the experience of viewing ArtPrize works both at the church and elsewhere in the city. ArtPrize is already half over: I urge everyone to see as much of the art as possible, but give priority to the show put on by the ACLU and Fountain Street Church, at 24 Fountain NE, just east of Division Avenue.

The Michigan Legislature is once again putting political gamesmanship ahead of women’s health. Today, the House and Senate will vote on bills prohibiting a rarely used, yet medically necessary abortion method. As if that's not bad enough, the bills are useless since the procedure is already banned by federal law. Take Action: Tell your elected officials that this ban is a waste of time. HB 4109 and SB 160 are the legislature’s fifth attempt to ban an abortion method already prohibited under federal law. Not only are these bills unnecessary and redundant, they don't provide an exception to protect a woman’s health. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an identical federal abortion ban in 2007 that did not include a health exception—overturning thirty plus years of precedent that required abortion restrictions to include health exceptions. This attempt to play politics with women's health is out of step with mainstream values and runs counter to the strong message from voters to focus on jobs and the economy. Instead of focusing on divisive political issues, the legislature should work together to promote common-sense polices that support a woman's ability to make informed and responsible health care decisions. Make your voice heard: Tell your legislator to protect women's health. By Shelli Weisberg, Legislative Director

High school has not been all fun and games for 19-year-old Renee.Yet even though she struggled in school, she worked extra hard in her classes since she was determined to graduate. However, just before she was supposed to receive her diploma she was met with one final, humiliating challenge.The new principal pulled a group of students aside, including Renee, to tell them that they had all had "irregular" test results. Every one of them would be required to take new tests or miss the opportunity to graduate.The irregularities? Renee's scores were too excellent. The principal added that Renee and other students may have somehow used a teacher’s password and obtained the test answer key.Renee immediately recognized that she was being called a cheater. Not only that, but as a person of African descent, she noticed her scores were doubted while the school was celebrating a white student whose test performance was the same.That's when I heard about Renee's story. As the staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan’s Racial Justice Project, I called the principal to hear what he had to say.The principal was the newest in a series of administrators at the school. As he stepped into the principal’s role, he didn't know anything about Renee’s particular academic history or the fact that her performance on a test was deemed to be too excellent once before. In this earlier incident, she was required to submit to another closely-monitored exam – which she passed.When I spoke to the principal, I was able to tell him about Renee's particular academic history: she'd scored highly partly because she'd taken the class before, not because she was a cheater.Since I had his ear, I also explained the importance of giving students an opportunity to be heard as individuals before being punished.This is basic due process every student deserves. If provided in schools, many black students would be able to keep learning and succeeding instead of being pushed into the school-to-prison pipeline.After I spoke to the principal, he not only agreed to meet with Renee and allow her an opportunity to speak for herself but also agreed to consider the individual circumstances of other students as well.Two days later, a very proud and exuberant Renee clutched a high school diploma in her hand. A little bit of due process can go a very long way.

I’ve started noticing a troubling trend in the news lately:June 9, 2011 – Police are looking for a white male who has taken liquor and baby formula from Kroger stores in Birmingham and Troy.

Our justice system should be a place where freedom has no price and equality prevails. Sometimes reality falls short of these lofty goals, and it's often the most vulnerable who pay the price. This week we've been working hard to guarantee justice for all, representing five people thrown in jail simply for being poor. And they're not the only ones...

In the past few weeks, I've seen people in tears, calling family members and begging them to come to the court with cash. I've seen defendants end up in jail over minor violations - violations that other defendants simply had to write a check to get out of. For the last five weeks my fellow interns and I have been observing courtrooms all over southeastern Michigan. We saw many defendants who are forced to choose between paying a hefty fine or spending time in jail. This type of sentence, called pay or stay, is constitutionally questionable and ethically dubious. Unfortunately, it is also very common.

Everyone likes to get out in public this time of the year, and that includes protesters, picketers and petitioners on the street and in city parks. Read this week's Rights Review to hear more about how you can participate in our work defending the First Amendment.

Coming back from summer vacation a little red? The oppressive weather hasn't slowed us down.