Today we'll weigh in on L.A.'s clean-up of skid row and the tuberculosis outbreak that's taking the discussion to the Supreme Court. We'll also consider a bill that would reduce the sentence of serious drug crimes in California. Later, Steve Zimmer and Kate Anderson join Larry for a live debate about their school board candidacy, and we examine Cal Baptist University's decision to expel a transgender student.
City of Los Angeles asks U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on homeless belongings
Skid row in downtown Los Angeles has long been the subject of controversy, but a more recent dispute regarding a possible health threat in the homeless community may be elevated to the U.S. Supreme Court. Today, the city of Los Angeles will ask the high court to overturn a lower court ruling preventing indiscriminate seizure and destruction of belongings that homeless people temporarily leave unattended on public sidewalks. The city is citing an immediate public health threat, an outbreak of tuberculosis, as cause for sterilization of the area. If the Supreme Court takes up the case, the outcome could have wide-ranging implications for cities across the nation struggling with how to handle homeless citizens’ rights.
The legal battle began when eight homeless people accused LA city workers, escorted by police, of confiscating and destroying items the homeless plaintiffs had left unattended while they used the restroom, filled water jugs or appeared in court. Their possessions that were seized included identification, medications, cellular phones and toiletries. In some cases the plaintiffs were prohibited from retrieving their belongings.
Last September, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the belongings that homeless leave on city sidewalks for short periods of time may be taken only if the items pose an immediate threat to public safety or health or serve as evidence of a crime. The court also stipulated that the city cannot bluntly destroy the belongings and must inform owners about how to retrieve the items. Regarding the decision, Andy Bales, the leader of the Union Rescue Mission on skid row, said to the Los Angeles Times, “We never, ever had to battle that before the injunction, which has taken skid row back at least eight years to before all the improvements.” He added, “it has emboldened people to leave their stuff everywhere.”
Does the outbreak of tuberculosis on skid row qualify as an immediate threat to public health? Does seizure of homeless people’s belongings effectively prevent the spread of diseases? Should the U.S. Supreme Court take up this case?
Guests:
Andy Bales, CEO, Union Rescue Mission
Carol Sobel, Board Member, National Lawyers Guild; Attorney representing several homeless individuals in the case
Proposed bill gives prosecutors 'wobble' room for drug possession cases
Last year, State Senator Mark Leno’s proposed bill to make simple possession of drugs such as heroin, cocaine and meth a misdemeanor was shot down by the Senate. Yesterday, Leno (D-San Francisco) came back with a toned-down version that would introduce prosecutorial discretion.
Under SB 649, prosecutors would have the option to charge simple possession as either a misdemeanor or a felony, making the charge a “wobbler.” Leno hopes that lessening the charge in some cases could help steer low-level offenders into rehabilitation, rather than incarceration, saving an estimated $159 million a year on state prisons. He also believes that long sentences without treatment do nothing to end the cycle of drug use and recidivism. The bill is supported by the American Civil Liberties Union of California and the NAACP.
A recent poll found that over 60 percent of Californians feel that simple possession of drugs should be a misdemeanor. The California District Attorneys Association, however, warns that the more lenient policy could send the message that “drugs are not as bad as they used to be.”
Do you favor allowing prosecutors to offer drug offenders a lesser charge? Do you fear it could worsen California’s drug problems? Would you rather see less money spent on prisons, more going towards rehabilitation and treatment programs?
Guests:
Kim Horiuchi , criminal justice and drug policy advocate, American Civil Liberties Union of California
Cory Salzillo, legislative director, California District Attorneys Association
How Max Boot’s book could change the war
Policy advisor and historian Max Boot has written “the” history book to guerilla warfare. His 750-page narrative (including a 66-page bibliography and 41-page index) details guerilla warfare going back to the year 66 A.D. However, it is not until we come to the American Revolution that guerilla warfare and counterinsurgency tactics start to raise parallels with the war we are in today. Max Boot tells of how America was victorious against the British army because of guerilla warfare and changing public opinion. And he illuminates the charismatic leaders who have led armies of civilians to take up arms.
As he faithfully recounts counterinsurgency tactics that succeeded and failed throughout history, one question remains: how will the U.S. war on terrorism end? Does Boot’s book provide an answer, or add to the questions? Will military officials read his book and be influenced by Boot’s accounts? Max Boot joins Larry to talk about “Invisible Armies,” guerilla warfare, and the war we face today.
Guest:
Max Boot, author of Invisible Armies: An Epic History of Guerrilla Warfare from Ancient Times to the Present
School Board Elections 2013: Los Angeles demands an end to school politics
The L.A. Unified School District has been under scrutiny this year as it has faced some major public battles. Parents, teachers and politicians have all demanded reform, but the question is what needs to change and who can change it. That question has garnered attention for this year’s LAUSD school board elections. There are three out of seven seats open, but all eyes are on District 4’s candidates—incumbent Steve Zimmer and lawyer Kate Anderson.
The center of this controversy is whether or not the school board will support Superintendent John Deasy, a decision that the board is already torn about. District 4's candidates may cast the deciding vote. Zimmer believes it is healthy for the school board to not support the superintendent, and Anderson supports Deasy’s initiatives to change the current school system by placing more pressure on teachers. Anderson also argues that Zimmer does not have children in the LAUSD system and is out of touch with its real problems. However, many have questioned whether or not Anderson’s background in law and politics is translatable to education since she doesn’t have experience in it.
Both candidates, Zimmer and Anderson, join Larry for a live debate as they talk about where they stand on Deasy, why Zimmer does not agree with charter school expansion and Anderson is pushing for it, and if teacher evaluations can be tied to student performance. Also, will the candidates address the child abuse and molestation charges of more than 50 children this past year? What other measures need to be reformed in LAUSD?
On March 5, 2013, the public will decide and the District 4 race will end.
Guests:
Steve Zimmer , Los Angeles Unified School Board member, District 4, and candidate for re-election
Kate Anderson, candidate for Los Angeles Unified School Board member, District 4
KPCC's Voter Guide
View your March 5 ballot, research & choose your candidates. Save, print, email, &/or text yourself your choices!
Transgender woman sues Cal Baptist after expulsion
Former Cal Baptist student Domaine Javier is suing the university for damages caused by her expulsion in August 2011. Javier, a transgender woman, says she was expelled because of her gender identity -- Cal Baptist found out she was born male after she appeared on an episode of MTV’s “True Life.”
Javier has identified as female since early childhood, and identified herself as female on her application and administrative information at Cal Baptist. The university claims that she was expelled for “fraud, or concealing identity.” California law prohibits discrimination against an individual because of their sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity, and the suit against Cal Baptist argues that the school violated state law and is in breach of contract. University lawyer Theodore Stream refused to comment on the claim, which seeks $500,000 in damages, because he hasn’t seen it yet.
Should using a gender identity that does not match one’s biological sex be considered fraudulent? Should Cal Baptist have the right to expel students who use their preferred gender identity on official school documents? What kinds of laws should protect gender non-conforming students from discrimination?
Guests:
Mara Keisling, Executive Director of National Center for Transgender Equality
Steve Crampton, Vice President for Legal Affairs and General Counsel for Liberty Counsel