Connect with us

Uncategorized

Op-Ed: Stand with Apple, Stand Up for Civil Rights

Published

on

The Apple case is a matter of deep personal concern to me—given the surveillance of civil rights organizations.

The terrorists win when we allow fear to chip away at the U.S. Constitution, our national soul, our freedom, our way of life.

<p><p>

That is why the government, courts, private companies and individual citizens must defend and uphold—however unpopular—our First Amendment rights, our right to privacy and basic freedoms. That is why I stand with Apple in its encryption battle with the FBI.

I mourn the loss of 14 lives snatched away by terrorists in San Bernardino last December. Like every American, I am steadfast in supporting legitimate law enforcement measures to root out terrorism and protect our national security.

But if the government prevails against Apple, it is my belief that it will accelerate—and make easier—government efforts to “hack” into the legitimate activities of human rights organizations and activists, as happened time and time again during the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

 

The recent revelation of the government’s use of drones to conduct domestic spying shows how vulnerable everyday Americans are to invasive surveillance.

That is why the Rainbow PUSH Coalition opposes the FBI’s demand that Apple create new software to enable the government to access information from its iPhones.

 

It represents an unprecedented government overreach that threatens the civil liberties and privacy rights of all Americans. Although the government argues that its demand of Apple is for one time only, one device only, it has been reported that the authorities have already requested that Apple unlock its iPhones in nine other cases.

At great risk, CEO Tim Cook and Apple are standing up not just for their company, but for everyday civilians who cringe at the thought of the government compromising their privacy rights.

Rainbow PUSH supports the formation of a digital security commission. Hopefully, such a commission will create policy that protects personal freedoms and privacy, and respects both civil liberties and the needs of law enforcement and national security.

The Apple case is a matter of deep personal concern to me—given the past and present illegal and unwarranted spying and surveillance of civil rights organizations, much conducted under the guise of national security. The FBI infiltrated the Southern Christian Leadership conference and used wire-tapping and personal threats against Dr. Martin Luther King—with the support of other US government agencies—to discredit him and the civil rights movement.

The FBI’s COINTELPRO campaign spied on, infiltrated and disrupted domestic civil rights and political groups. Rainbow PUSH Coalition and I, personally, have been subject to spying and surveillance, and more recently, there have been accounts of surveillance of the Black Lives Matter movement and activists.

What is also fresh in many people’s minds is how major tech and telecom companies—as disclosed by Edward Snowden—collaborated with the National Security Agency in a global surveillance operation to obtain private information from millions of American people about their phone calls and Internet activity.

There is a toxic wind blowing across the country. Fear and fistfights erupt at political rallies. Children in Flint, Mich., drink poisoned water. Poverty and joblessness threaten to turn our inner cities into wastelands. Violent acts of terrorism, both domestic and global, are on the rise—from racist extremists in the Midwest to suicide bombers in the Middle East.

More than ever we need to have faith and trust in the government to serve and protect our rights and freedoms. But if the government fails to do so, we must.

As Dr. King often said, before he was gunned down in an act of domestic terrorism right before my eyes, “Where we stand in times of controversy is a measure of our character. Some leaders only follow opinion polls.

 

Others stand up for their principles, refuse to compromise and mold opinion.”

On this issue, I stand with Apple, and stand up for civil rights.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Uncategorized

Not Just a Southern Issue: Advocates Say SCOTUS Voting Rights Decision Has Already Started to Reshape Black Political Power

OAKLAND POST — Following the Civil War and Reconstruction, constitutional amendments expanded Black citizenship and voting rights across the South, leading to dramatic increases in Black political representation. But those gains were quickly met with violent backlash and the rise of Jim Crow laws designed to suppress Black voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, and other “race-neutral” restrictions.

Published

on

Shutterstock

By Edward Henderson, California Black Media

U.S. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-CA-37), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) whose district spans parts of Los Angeles County, joined fellow CBC member U.S. Rep. Troy Carter (D-LA-2) for a May 21 briefing with Black media outlets in California. 

The lawmakers highlighted what they describe as a mounting threat to Black political representation resulting from an April 29 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that weakened key protections under the federal Voting Rights Act.  

Kamlager-Dove and Carter warned that the decision, which narrowed the role of race in redistricting, is already reshaping congressional districts across the South and undermining Black voters’ ability to elect candidates of their choice.

“While we are a super blue state, we have far to go when it comes to Black representation; we tend to take that for granted,” Kamlager-Dove said of California, noting that the Golden State has the fifth largest Black population in the country and only has three Black members of Congress.   

“While I support building coalitions, we have to make sure that as a Black community we are not yielding our power,” she added.

Calling the fight “not unique to the South,” Carter urged Black communities nationwide to recognize the broader implications of the legal and political battles unfolding in Southern legislatures and courtrooms. 

The Supreme Court ruling centers on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the portion of the law that prohibits voting systems or district maps that dilute the voting strength of racial minorities. For decades, Section 2 allowed civil rights groups to challenge district maps that weakened Black political representation even when lawmakers did not openly state discriminatory intent.

Now, advocates fear that standard has fundamentally changed. 

“You have to have smoking gun evidence,” said Mitchell Brown, senior voting rights counsel at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, during a recent media briefing hosted by American Community Media on May 15. “Legislators are not going to say the quiet part out loud.” 

The implications could stretch far beyond congressional elections, Brown said.  

Section 2 protections have historically applied not only to U.S. House districts, but also to state legislatures, school boards, county commissions, judgeships, and local governing bodies. Voting rights advocates warn that weakening those protections could reshape political representation throughout the South, particularly in states with large Black populations. 

“This is not just a Southern issue,” said Amir Badat, manager of Black Voters on the Rise and voting special counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Badat described the current moment as part of a much longer historical pattern. 

Following the Civil War and Reconstruction, constitutional amendments expanded Black citizenship and voting rights across the South, leading to dramatic increases in Black political representation. But those gains were quickly met with violent backlash and the rise of Jim Crow laws designed to suppress Black voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, and other “race-neutral” restrictions. 

“This is the same move,” Badat said.

Advocates also emphasized that the consequences of weakened voting protections extend into everyday life. 

Local elected offices such as school boards, city councils, county commissions, and judgeships often determine funding priorities, public safety policy, education standards, and infrastructure investments.

“These are not abstract numbers,” Badat said. “These have real political consequences and policy consequences on people’s day-to-day lives.” 

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Rest in Peace: A.M.E. Pastor and L.A Civil Rights Icon Cecil “Chip” Murray Passes

The Rev. Dr. Cecil L. “Chip” Murray, former pastor of First African Methodist Episcopal Church (FAME) in Los Angeles, died of natural causes April 6 at his Windsor Hills Home. He was 94. “Today, we lost a giant. Reverend Dr. Cecil Murray dedicated his life to service, community, and putting God first in all things. I had the absolute honor of working with him, worshiping with him, and seeking his counsel,” said Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass of the dynamic religious leader whose ministry inspired and attracted millionaires as well as former gang bangers and people dealing with substance use disorder (SUD).

Published

on

The Rev. Dr. Cecil L. “Chip” Murray, former pastor of First African Methodist Episcopal Church (FAME) in Los Angeles, died of natural causes April 6 at his Windsor Hills Home. He was 94.

“Today, we lost a giant. Reverend Dr. Cecil Murray dedicated his life to service, community, and putting God first in all things. I had the absolute honor of working with him, worshiping with him, and seeking his counsel,” said Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass of the dynamic religious leader whose ministry inspired and attracted millionaires as well as former gang bangers and people dealing with substance use disorder (SUD).

Murray oversaw the growth of FAME’s congregation from 250 members to 18,000.

“My heart is with the First AME congregation and community today as we reflect on a legacy that changed this city forever,” Bass continued.

Murray served as Senior Minister at FAME, the oldest Black congregation in the city, for 27 years. During that time, various dignitaries visited and he built strong relationships with political and civic leaders in the city and across the state, as well as a number of Hollywood figures. Several national political leaders also visited with Murray and his congregation at FAME, including Presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

Murray, a Florida native and U.S. Air Force vet, attended Florida A&M University, where he majored in history, worked on the school newspaper and pledged Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity.  He later attended Claremont School of Theology in Los Angeles County, where he earned his doctorate in Divinity.

Murray is survived by his son Drew. His wife Bernadine, who was a committed member of the A.M.E. church and the daughter of his childhood pastor, died in 2013.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Court Throws Out Law That Allowed Californians to Build Duplexes, Triplexes and RDUs on Their Properties

Charter cities in California won a lawsuit last week against the state that declared Senate Bill (SB) 9, a pro-housing bill, unconstitutional. Passed in 2021, SB 9 is also known as the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency Act (HOME). That law permits up to four residential units — counting individual units of duplexes, triplexes and residential dwelling units (RDUs) – to be built on properties in neighborhoods that were previously zoned for only single-family homes.

Published

on

Charter cities in California won a lawsuit last week against the state that declared Senate Bill (SB) 9, a pro-housing bill, unconstitutional.

Passed in 2021, SB 9 is also known as the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency Act (HOME). That law permits up to four residential units — counting individual units of duplexes, triplexes and residential dwelling units (RDUs) – to be built on properties in neighborhoods that were previously zoned for only single-family homes.

A Los Angeles Superior Court Judge ruled in favor of the cities, pointing out that SB 9 discredited charter cities that were granted jurisdiction to create new governance systems and enact policy reforms. The court ruling affects 121 charter cities that have local constitutions.

Attorney Pam Lee represented five Southern California cities in the lawsuit against the state and Attorney General Rob Bonta.

“This is a monumental victory for all charter cities in California,” Lee said.

However, general law cities are excluded from the court ruling as state housing laws still apply in residential areas.

Attorney General Bonta and his team are working to review the decision and consider all options that will protect SB 9 as a state law. Bonta said the law has helped provide affordable housing for residents in California.

“Our statewide housing shortage and affordability crisis requires collaboration, innovation, and a good faith effort by local governments to increase the housing supply,” Bonta said.

“SB9 is an important tool in this effort, and we’re going to make sure homeowners have the opportunity to utilize it,” he said.

Charter cities remain adamant that the state should refrain from making land-use decisions on their behalf. In the lawsuit, city representatives argued that SB 9 eliminates local authority to create single-family zoning districts and approve housing developments.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.