LOS ANGELES'The American Civil Liberties Union and United Airlines announced today that they have reached a settlement in a lawsuit brought on behalf of Assem Bayaa and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), charging that the airline discriminated against Bayaa by removing him from a flight. While United disputes Bayaa's and ADC's allegations, the parties agree that settlement of this claim is in the best interest of all.

United has previously worked, per a settlement agreement reached with the United States' Department of Transportation on a similar subject, to develop and administer comprehensive training to its employees on the topic of Equal Treatment of Customers. ADC and its affiliated organizations, ADC Research Institute and the ADC Law Enforcement Outreach Program, assisted United in developing the content for the training. The American Civil Liberties Union applauds United for the message it is sending its employees on this important topic through the Training and has recommended to its clients, Bayaa and the ADC, to resolve this case in recognition of United's industry leading efforts in this regard.

United is committed to providing service without discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, race, religion or national origin.

Date

Friday, June 17, 2005 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Criminal Justice and Drug Policy Reform

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

LOS ANGELES - Exactly one year after hundreds of people were arrested near bus stations and supermarkets for alleged immigration violations, the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California has obtained more than a thousand pages of documents that may confirm community suspicions that the border patrol targeted people based on race.

The ACLU of Southern California filed a lawsuit last December seeking Border Patrol records after the agency repeatedly ignored a request for records under the Freedom of Information Act. Last week, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, formerly the Border Patrol, released the last of 1,500 pages detailing raids last summer in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, Kern, and San Diego counties.

"Because these raids were so unusual and intrusive, they sparked tremendous fear in the community. People wanted an explanation, so we filed this case to find out the facts about why the raids happened," said Ramona Ripston, Executive Director of the ACLU of Southern California. "When people know what their government is up to, there is greater trust in the system as well as greater knowledge of how to improve the system."

The released CBP documents show:

'Agents suspected people of not being U.S. citizens simply because they spoke Spanish.

'Agents stopped and questioned at least 45 people who were citizens or legal residents.

'Although the CBP claimed the raids were based on intelligence from local police, at least one police department denied giving any information to the agency.

'Agents approached pedestrians and people waiting at bus stops and day laborer sites for questioning.

'Agents arrested 423 people altogether, some in cities as far as 250 miles away from the U.S. - Mexico border.

"Although the Border Patrol claimed that the raids were based on specific intelligence, there is nothing in the documents released to support their claims," said Ranjana Natarajan, an attorney for the ACLU of Southern California.

Documents show that Department of Homeland Security and border patrol officials in Washington, D.C. knew nothing of the raids because there was no prior approval from the headquarters. After the raids, Homeland Security told CBP to focus on law enforcement at the border and let a different agency, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, handle enforcement inside the country. Nearly a year after the initial request for documents, the ACLU will negotiate with the CBP for the release of additional documents that the agency has continued to withhold.

Date

Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Criminal Justice and Drug Policy Reform

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

LOS ANGELES - What do Yao Ming and Russell Crowe have in common?

They, like Laguna Niguel resident Janice Rooney, can't get a credit card from the Union Bank of California. Despite incredible wealth, or good credit in the case of Rooney, Union Bank won't extend you credit if you are not a U.S. citizen.

In response to its discriminatory policy, Rooney, who is married to a U.S. citizen and was born in the Philippines, filed a lawsuit today in Los Angeles Federal District Court with the ACLU of Southern California and the national ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project. Rooney was told last year by Union Bank that her application for a secured credit card was denied simply because she is not a citizen of the United States.

"Denying a credit card to someone because they are a citizen of a different country is discrimination," said Ahilan T. Arulanantham, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Southern California.

Rooney, who is a registered nutritionist, entered the United States as a lawful permanent resident. After relocating to the Los Angeles area with her husband, she attempted to establish her own credit by applying for a credit card from Union Bank. The bank denied her application in a form letter that gave the reason: "You are not a citizen of the United States." A second letter from bank legal counsel to Rooney, who eventually received credit at another bank, claimed that the discrimination was legal. The lawsuit seeks to end this policy that potentially could affect the more than 10 million immigrants living here legally as permanent residents.

"If a woman is denied a room at a hotel because of the color of her skin, it's discrimination that must be stopped, even if another hotel takes her in," said ACLU of Southern California Executive Director Ramona Ripston.

Union Bank and at least two other banks, including United First Mortgage of Virginia and First National Bank of Omaha, also appear to follow a policy of denying credit to people who are not U.S. citizens. The bank's prominent advertising campaign, which features large portraits and captions emphasizing that the bank caters to everyone, led Rooney to apply for a credit card there first.

"While my husband was teaching me to drive I saw Union Bank's billboards everywhere. I thought it would be a good bank to choose," said Rooney. "I hope this lawsuit ends this discriminatory policy so that in the future new immigrants aren't treated the way I was."

"Union Bank's policy is as perplexing as it is discriminatory," added Lee Gelernt, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project. "Credit is essential in our society. In a country with 11 million legal immigrants, it doesn't make any sense to say that you must be a U.S. citizen to have a credit card."

Date

Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Criminal Justice and Drug Policy Reform

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of Southern California RSS