Categories
News News Blog

Monitor in Police Spying Case Holds Second Public Forum

Brandon Dill

Protesters and police officers face off during the 2016 Hernando de Soto bridge protest

The court-appointed team tasked with monitoring the Memphis Police Department’s (MPD) adherence to a 1978 consent decree prohibiting police surveillance is holding its second public meeting Thursday (today).

Last year, U.S. District Judge Jon McCalla appointed the team after ruling that the police department had violated the Kendrick consent decree of 1978 by participating in political surveillance on activists here.

The team’s first public forum in July left many activists feeling unheard and wanting more of a voice in the monitoring team’s process.

Now, the team wants to hear new concerns from the public tonight at 6 p.m. at Mississippi Boulevard Christian Church.

Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland promoted the meeting last week in his weekly email to constituents.

“The purpose of this meeting is for you to give your thoughts about the decree and its impact on our community,” Strickland wrote. “If you are concerned about your neighborhood receiving a Sky Cop or your child’s school having a traffic camera and license plate readers, please don’t miss this meeting.”

But, Strickland also noted in the newsletter that the consent decree was signed “long before the internet, social media, and other modern technology became a routine part of our lives.”

[pullquote-1]

Strickland said the decree limits MPD’s use of technology in fighting crime, and potentially restricts MPD’s ability to coordinate with other agencies, like the Multiagency Gang Unit.

“To put it in more everyday terms — it may restrict the use of Sky Cops, traffic cameras, interstate cameras, and publicly available social media post which may provide a warning of a public safety threat,” the mayor wrote.

Earlier this year, Ed Stanton III, who is heading the monitoring team, told the Flyer that finding the balance at the intersection of a 1978 consent decree and 21st century police techniques is a challenge.

“In 1978, you didn’t have the internet, social media, SkyCop, body cams, etc,” Stanton said. “We have to ensure that public safety remains a priority, but at the same time, ensuring compliance with the consent decree. There’s a balance there.”

See the agenda for tonight’s meeting below.


Categories
News News Blog

Monitor in Police Spying Case to Seek Feedback at Community Forum

Brandon Dill

Protesters and police officers face off during the 2016 Hernando de Soto bridge protest


The team appointed to monitor the Memphis Police Department’s (MPD) compliance to a federal judge’s ruling on police surveillance wants to hear from the community at a public forum this Thursday.

After the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Tennessee won a lawsuit against the city on behalf of Memphis activists last year, U.S. District Judge Jon McCalla appointed former U.S. Attorney Ed Stanton of the Butler Snow Law Firm to lead the independent group tasked with monitoring MPD’s progress and adherence to the court’s orders.

The question at hand during the August trial: Did MPD violate the 1978 Kendrick Consent Decree which prohibits political surveillance and interference of an individual’s First Amendment rights? McCalla ruled that MPD did violate that decree by actively pursuing covert surveillance of four local activists.

The city violated several areas of the consent agreement, McCalla ruled, including: intercepting phone calls and electronic communications, using a fake Facebook profile of “Bob Smith” to learn of activists’ activities, and failing to properly inform officers of the parameters of the 1978 ruling.

Thursday’s meeting will take place at Mississippi Boulevard Christian Church in Midtown from 6-7:30 p.m. click to tweet

Now, in an effort to “encourage transparent dialogue,” the monitoring team will hold a series of community meetings to share updates on the group’s work and to allow the community to give feedback on the city’s efforts to comply with the 1978 consent decree.

Thursday’s meeting will take place at Mississippi Boulevard Christian Church in Midtown from 6 p.m.-7:30 p.m. Attendees will have the opportunity to ask the team questions and learn more about MPD’s progress with compliance. Representatives of the ACLU will also be at the meeting to answer questions.

A second public forum is tentatively slated for the fall. The monitoring team also launched a website this month to keep the public informed on the group’s efforts. 


Apart from appointing the monitoring team, McCalla also ordered MPD to revise its policy on political surveillance, train officers on the decree, establish a process for criminal investigations that may result in political intelligence, establish written guidelines for using social media searches, maintain a list of those searches, and submit that list to the court four times a year.

On August 27th, the monitoring team will return to McCalla’s courtroom to give a 90-day progress report. At an April hearing, McCalla said he would like to have a draft of MPD’s revised information-gathering policy by the August court date.


Categories
Politics Politics Feature

Shelby County Politics Wrap Up

At press time on Tuesday, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) was scheduled to make one more effort, via a unanimous-consent request on the floor of the Senate, to get a vote on the confirmation of Ed Stanton III of Memphis as U.S. District Judge. 

Stanton, now serving as U.S. Attorney for Tennessee’s Western District, was nominated by President Obama in May 2015 to succeed Judge Samuel H. “Hardy” Mays.

Sponsored by 9th District Congressman Steve Cohen of Memphis, a Democrat, and heartily endorsed by Tennessee’s two Republican Senators, Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander, Stanton was expected to be a shoo-in for Senate confirmation long ago, but the same partisan gridlock that has prevented Senate action on Obama’s Supreme Court nomination of Merrick Garland has held up action on Stanton and other judicial nominees.

• The two major political parties have both now established local headquarters for the stretch drive of the presidential race. 

The Republicans went first, opening up a combination HQ for 8th District congressional nominee David Kustoff and the coordinated GOP campaign at 1755 Kirby Parkway on August 31st. The Democrats will open theirs, at 2600 Poplar, with an open house this Saturday. 

At the GOP headquarters opening, Kustoff spoke first, then Shelby County Commissioner Terry Roland, as West Tennessee chairman for Donald Trump. Next up was Lee Mills, interim Shelby GOP chair (he replaced Mary Wagner, who had been nominated for a judgeship). He began recognizing Republican gentry in the room.

When Mills got to David Lenoir, the Shelby trustee who’s certain to oppose Roland for county mayor in 2018, he fumbled with Lenoir’s job title, then somewhat apologetically said, “David, I always want to call you tax collector.” Roland then shouted out delightedly, “I do, too!”

• Given the overwhelmingly Republican nature of voting in the 8th District in recent years, Kustoff’s chances of prevailing are better than good, but for the record, Rickey Hopson of Somerville is the Democratic nominee. Hopson is making the rounds, having spoken at last month’s meeting of the Germantown Democratic Club, one of several local Democratic clubs taking up the slack for the Shelby County Democratic Party, decertified by state Democratic chair Mary Mancini several weeks ago.

Another Democratic underdog challenging the odds is Dwayne Thompson, the party’s candidate for the state House District 96 seat (Cordova, Germantown) now held by the GOP’s Steve McManus. A fund-raiser is scheduled for Thompson next Wednesday, September 28th, at Coletta’s Restaurant on Highway 64.

Memphis lawyer John Ryder, who currently serves as RNC general counsel and who supervised both parties’ rules changes and the RNC’s redistricting strategy after the census of 2010, has been named Republican Lawyer of the Year by the Republican National Lawyers Association and will be honored at a Washington banquet of the RNLA at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington on Tuesday, September 27th. “Special guests” will include Senator Corker and RNC chairman Reince Priebus.

Categories
Opinion

Why School Desegregation Cases Seem to Last Forever

header_bench.jpg

One of our readers asked a good question about a story earlier this week about the settlement of a 1965 school desegregation lawsuit in Fayette County, Shelby County’s sparsely populated eastern neighbor.

“Why did it take 47 years?”

I wish I knew. I tried unsuccessfully to reach U.S. Attorney Edward L. Stanton, III in Memphis and Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez at the Justice Department in Washington and Mitchell Rivard in the communications office of the Justice Department. Stanton and Perez were quoted in the press release calling the Fayette County case “a significant landmark” in desegregation and enforcement of the 1964 Civil Rights Act in school districts “a top priority” of the feds.

So important that it was announced in a handout that nobody was available to discuss. But that is another story for another day.

The Fayette County settlement is interesting for a couple of reasons. Its proximity makes it a potential flight option for unhappy residents of Memphis and Shelby County. And the settlement (consent order, in legal language) requires the district to implement a “controlled choice program” to racially rebalance schools. Carrots and sticks, but no busing.

And the timing? Mere coincidence?

The rebalancing standard is a racial ratio within 15 percent of the ratio of black and white students in the county school system as a whole. Readers may remember seeing this before in 2007 when then-U.S. District Judge Bernice Donald ordered it (with some allowances) for the Shelby County School System which she refused to release from the grip of the federal court. She was overturned by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2009 in a 2-1 decision, and in 2011 she was elevated to the appeals court herself.

Depending on what happens the rest of this year with the Shelby County Commission suit on municipal schools, maybe she will get a Shelby County do-over.

It’s not like judges are not human, not subject to political pressure, don’t get it wrong sometimes, and don’t change their minds. There is plenty of evidence of all of those things in the court records of school desegregation in Memphis and Shelby County.

Court-ordered busing in the Memphis case in 1972 was upheld 2-1 by the appeals court, but history would show that it was dissenter Paul Weick who got it right: “The burden of eliminating all the ills of society should not be placed on public school systems and innocent school children.”

Donald was openly critical of herself and “the court” in her 2007 ruling. She wrote: “The court’s failure to adopt clear and unequivocal guidelines for achievement of the court’s goals is in large part responsible for the fact that the county is seeking unitary status some 44 years after this suit was first filed, at a time when the county system is in some respects more racially polarized than in the distant past.”

But her order for a “special master” to oversee school-by-school rebalancing, scary as it sounded to some people, never came to be. She was overturned on appeal: “Racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake. It is to be pursued when racial imbalance has been caused by a constitutional violation. Once the racial imbalance due to the de jure violation has been remedied, the school district is under no duty to remedy imbalance that is caused by demographic factors.”

As in Memphis in 1972, there was a powerful dissent to the Shelby County case (Robinson v. Shelby County Board of Education) in 2009. In light of the pending federal lawsuit on the constitutionality of municipal schools, it is worth quoting at some length: “Nothing — not the agreement of the parties jointly to seek dissolution of the desegregation decree, not the number of years that this case has been pending and the general progress in race relations nationwide that has occurred in that time, and not the eagerness of the courts or school boards to restore local control over community schools — can substitute for evidence showing the Board’s compliance with the desegregation decree. The evidence in fact reveals that among the forty-four schools for which the Board has data, two thirds of them are not in compliance with the flexible benchmark set forth by the district court for measuring racial balance . . .  Because the parties have not carried their burden of showing that the racial disparities that continue to plague the County’s schools are not the vestiges of past unlawful discrimination, I would affirm the district court’s judgment.”

The Fayette County settlement (the Justice Department in Washington has domain over all cases involving enforcement of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in schools) suggests that the plus-or-minus 15% standard could be back in play, along with “controlled choice programs.”

Attorneys for the Shelby County Commission argue that muncipal schools would amount to segregation, or resegregation.

You don’t have to read through a pile of legal briefs and judicial rulings to get some perspective on this. You just have to look at the brief history of Southwind High School.

It was built in 2006 and opened in 2007 after Shelby County built and opened Arlington High School in northeastern Shelby County. Arlington is majority white. Southwind was nearly all-black the day it opened. It is in a Memphis annexation area. A planning official once stated in an affidavit that if Memphis completed the annexation (which it has not), the black enrollment in Shelby County schools would be 7.6 percent, not 35 percent as it was in 2007.

Southwind was located on an expensive piece of land at Hacks Cross and Shelby Drive. A less expensive site was rejected. That site was farther east and would have changed the demographics of the new high school.

Southwind High was a joint project of the city and county school boards. The understanding was that it would become a city school, meaning it would not be “racially identifiable” — a key legalism — in a system that was 90 percent minority. The Memphis superintendent at the time, Carol Johnson, signed off on it, then left a year later. The annexation was delayed, giving residents of Southwind and Windyke subdivisions another six years of no Memphis property taxes. Mayor Herenton disavowed annexation, saying “mayors don’t annex.” The City Council disavowed it too, after agreeing on annexation boundaries that excluded certain subdivisions under development next door to Southwind High School. The Office of Planning and Development was left holding the bag. It was politics at its finest.

Bernice Donald mentioned it in her order, and the appeals court mentioned it in their reversal: “The annexations by the City of Memphis, along with voluntary housing choices made by the public, have drastically altered the racial composition of the school district. In addition, school construction and student boundaries (including the new Southwind High School) approved by the district court over the past few decades have affected the present racial unevenness. Although the district court now faults itself for “rubber-stamp[ing]” school construction and zoning requests, its role in managing and shaping the school district cannot be ignored.”

Judge Donald never explained her curious ruling, self criticism, or change of direction. And to this day, no city or county mayor or school superintendent has explained the hows and whys of Southwind High.

Everybody’s baby is now nobody’s baby.

Long answer to a short question, but that’s why school desegregation cases hang around for 45 or 47 years. And we are not done yet.