
The New Orleans-based lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) youth advocacy group BreakOUT! is demanding that the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) release to the group a long-awaited policy addressing LGBT discrimination by police in a petition on Change.org. BreakOUT! is also asking NOPD representatives, including Superintendent Ronal Serpas, meet with members of the group before releasing a final policy.
From the petition site:
"Over a year ago, the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) first made a promise to BreakOUT! to meet with them before finalizing an LGBTQ policy in the NOPD. In an October 2012 City Council meeting, NOPD representatives again promised to meet with BreakOUT! before finalizing a policy. BreakOUT! also submitted their own model LGBTQ policy for the NOPD's consideration on this date."
"They were notified on December 3, 2012 that an LGBTQ policy was in its final stages in the NOPD and that once it was finalized, a meeting would be scheduled with them for review. They still have not heard back from your Department."
BreakOUT! "Chief Ronal Serpas: Keep Your Promise & Release Your Draft LGBTQ Policy to BreakOUT!"
Reached by phone this morning, NOPD spokeswoman Remi Braden could not comment immediately as she was unaware of the petition.

A legacy that extends far beyond food runs through the dining rooms of Dooky Chase Restaurant, a landmark of the civil rights struggle, a trove of African American art and a daily example of the power of community.
As the Chase family prepares to celebrate the 90th birthday of their matriarch, the legendary chef Leah Chase, they are planning a pair of public events to honor her and raise funds for a new foundation to ensure that legacy endures.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office (OPSO) today unveiled a 53-page proposed consent decree addressing longstanding safety issues at Orleans Parish Prison (OPP). The decree was filed in U.S. District Court by DOJ, the Sheriff's Office and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which represented the plaintiff class in the class-action lawsuit filed against the jail and Sheriff Marlin Gusman last spring. Court records indicate that The city of New Orleans, which would ultimately be responsible for funding the provisions of the agreement, did not sign off on the filing, court records show.
The filers have requested a Feb. 19 fairness hearing on the consent decree before Judge Lance Africk, who would then have to sign off to give it the force of law. Africk would then have to determine how much funding would be required to enforce the consent decree.
Like the proposed New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) consent decree, today's settlement requires a federal monitor to follow OPSO's progress toward compliance. Unlike that one, though, which has a four-to-five year recommended expiration date, the OPP consent decree would expire "when Defendant has achieved substantial compliance with each provision of the Agreement and have maintained Substantial Compliance with the Agreement for a period of two years," the document reads.
(More after the jump)

The proposal, which will be submitted as part of an ongoing class-action lawsuit against the jail, will be due to the court by October 15. As we reported last spring, the Southern Poverty Law Center filed suit on behalf of all Orleans Parish Prison inmates in April:
The alleged details of daily life in OPP — including charges of dangerously overfilled cells, inadequate medical care and a culture of indifference to the inmates' welfare on the part of guards, supervisors, wardens, all the way up to Gusman himself — have inundated SPLC's office. On an average day, OPP is home to more than 3,200 inmates, or the equivalent of nearly 1 percent of New Orleans' total population.
In an interview for that story, SPLC attorney Katie Schwartzmann said the evidence against the Sheriff's Office was "overwhelming."
Attached to the 38-page lawsuit are 19 affidavits signed by current or former inmates, including 10 named plaintiffs. The witnesses paint a picture of an institution where brutal violence is the norm, with little intervention from guards, and where medical attention arrives late if at all.
The federal government has been negotiating an agreement with the Sheriff's Office for more than a year, following several years of federal scrutiny. Last month, Justice intervened in the lawsuit. Africk has also granted a request from Gusman that the city of New Orleans — which controls the the sheriff's budget — be named as a third-party defendant.
After two hours of oral arguments — interrupted briefly by the evacuation of U.S. District Court for what turned out to be a false fire alarm — Judge Susie Morgan today did not make a decision on four motions to intervene in the federal consent decree between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD). Morgan said she would rule on the motions before a hearing on the whole agreement, set for August 29.
Attorney Bill Quigley, representing intervening citizens group Community United for Change, said that one of the criteria for determining whether a group should have a right to intervene is "demonstrated interest," which the group had established.
The problems addressed in the consent decree "didn't start with Hurricane Katrina, did not start on the Danziger Bridge," Quigley said. He said that members of the group had been active in police reform for at least 30 years, since the Algiers 7 case. Quigley said that many of the reforms addressed in the decree had been promised, each time without giving citizens any real authority.
The lack of real citizen oversight has meant those past attempts didn't pan out. Quigley brought up a large number of NOPD civil rights abuses in the past several decades.
"All of this has continued," he said.
The proposed NOPD consent decree calls for community advisory boards. Quigley emphasized "advisory" and said the idea was essentially meaningless. He noted that two other similar agreements, in Cincinnati and Los Angeles, community groups were allowed to intervene.
"To us this is literally life and death, to us as the victim community ... the people who are the statistics the Department of Justice is talking about," Quigley said.
"We want the system to work. We want a civilian control position inside of this. We want a term longer than four years," he said. "This is a systemic issue."
(More after the jump)
The Delhi school targeted this week by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was ordered by the Louisiana Department of Education to change a policy that forced pregnant students and students suspected of being pregnant from school.
Delhi Charter School president Albert Christman — who previously had said he was unaware of the policy's discrimination — said it was "intended to protect students from ridicule and harassment," according to the ACLU of Louisiana. Louisiana Department of Education policy director Michael Higgins wrote a letter to the school, demanding it rescind the policy by Aug. 16. The letter demanded a policy that "does not discriminate against pregnant students or students perceived to be pregnant” and that “under no circumstances shall the school require any student to take a pregnancy test.”
"They ordered them," said ACLU of Louisiana president Marjorie Esman, "so they have no choice." The school policy was to subject students to a school-selected physician for a pregnancy test, and if they didn't comply or are found pregnant, the students would be asked to leave:
If an administrator or teacher suspects a student is pregnant, a parent conference will be held. The school reserves the right to require any female student to take a pregnancy test to confirm whether or not the suspected student is in fact pregnant. The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice. If the test indicates that the student is pregnant, the student will not be permitted to attend classes on the campus of the Delhi Charter School.
The ACLU of Louisiana also submitted a letter to the school on Monday, demanding the school remove its policy, which violates Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibiting sex discrimination in schools and programs receiving federal funds. An online petition asking the same collected more than 100,000 signatures.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana has challenged a Louisiana public school that requires female students to take a pregnancy test if they're suspected of being pregnant. At Delhi Charter School, students are subject to a school-selected physician and risk expulsion if they don't comply. In a statement, Louisiana ACLU director Marjorie Esman said, “The pregnancy policy violates the rights of every girl at Delhi Charter School. ... Every girl is at risk of being subject to intrusive medical testing, and possibly forced out of school, for reasons that have nothing to do with her education.”
According to its student handbook:
If an administrator or teacher suspects a student is pregnant, a parent conference will be held. The school reserves the right to require any female student to take a pregnancy test to confirm whether or not the suspected student is in fact pregnant. The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice. If the test indicates that the student is pregnant, the student will not be permitted to attend classes on the campus of the Delhi Charter School.
It continues, saying "any student who is suspected of being pregnant and who refuses to submit to a pregnancy test shall be treated as a a pregnant student and will be offered home study opportunities." If "home study opportunities are not acceptable," the school will offer counseling for other education opportunities.
The ACLU says the policy violates Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, a federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in schools and programs receiving federal funds. It states that students can't be excluded from any activities “including any class or extracurricular activity, on the basis of such student’s pregnancy, childbirth, false pregnancy, termination of pregnancy or recovery therefrom.”
The ACLU demanded in a letter that the school suspend the policy, or it will consider filing a lawsuit against it. No word whether the school still uses this handbook, which is dated 2006.
Attorneys for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) are accusing the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office (OPSO) of failing to respond to requests for documents pertinent to the group's federal prisoners' rights lawsuit against the office and Sheriff Marlin Gusman. SPLC, which is seeking class action status for the suit, has asked federal Magistrate Judge Sally Shushan to compel OPSO to produce the documents.
On June 19, Shushan ordered OPSO to produce the discovery documents on a "rolling basis," meaning as they become available, with all responses to be finished by July 13. But SPLC attorneys claim that OPSO hasn't complied.
"Despite this Court’s Order for rolling discovery production, Defendants have yet to produce a single document to Plaintiffs," writes SPLC's lead attorney, Katie Schwartzmann, in a July 2 motion to compel discovery.
(More after the jump)
The campaign against a Louisiana seafood company accused of subjecting foreign guest workers to "forced labor" conditions continues to gain momentum. As of this writing, a change.org petition calling on Walmart to stop doing business with C.J.'s seafood, a Breaux Bridge-based seafood company that sells 85 percent of its inventory to the retail chain, has received more than 135,000 signatures as of this writing.
The following is taken from a statement, attributed to Ana Rosa Diaz, identified as a 40-year-old Mexican employee of CJ's in the United States under the H-2B temporary visa program:
Our boss forces us to work up to 24 hours at a time with no overtime pay. No matter how fast we work, they scream and curse at us to make us work faster. Our supervisor threatens to beat us with a shovel to stop us from taking breaks.We live in trailers across from the boss's house, and we’re under surveillance all the time. The supervisors come into our trailers without warning, and they threaten to fire us if we leave after 9 p.m.
The supervisor also locked us in the plant so we couldn’t take breaks. One worker called 911. After that the boss rounded us up at 2:30 a.m., closed the door to keep the American employees out, and threatened our families.
(Continued after the jump)