California Attorney Lawyers

The State shall not discriminate or grant preferential treatment, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, national or ethnic origin in the operation of public employment services, education or public contracting authorities. ”

This tribute to justice and equality is now a part of the State Constitution. It was launched in 1996 by the voters of California, wanted to end the “affirmative action”, quotas, set-aside and other preference programs. The refusal of certain public and officials of local government in honour of this mandate is now blocked the implementation of the California Civil Rights Initiative, commonly known as Proposition 209 Why?

In his affidavit, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer am for the safeguarding and defending the Constitution and laws of California, neither the chief law enforcement authorities of the State refuses to implement Proposition 209 officer Indeed, the prosecutor General himself was against the California Supreme Court, demanding that the amendment of the Constitution, be interpreted as a waterway at the bottom of its protective devices against the granting of preferences in terms of race or sex !

San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, shortly after the proposal’s Passage, explains clearly why ignore it and the city, the new amendment to the Constitution of the State, as his famous “so sue me” speech of their passage. He said, in part because, “We will participate actively in all legal challenges. I think, San Francisco, nearly 70 percent voted No, it is clear where the city. ”

Despite the passage of Prop. 209, vice-city lawyer Buck Delventhal confirmed that San Francisco is not the end preferences for minorities and women-owned contractors. He said, shortly after Proposition 209’s passage: “We have a duty, under the [U.S.] Constitution for the elimination of discrimination and the establishment of a State as Proposition 209 amendment can not remove our authority and obligation under a superior rule of law as the Federation Constitution.”It seems quite difficult. Unfortunately, USA Constitution says nothing about the hotel preferences (of discrimination) of minorities, a fair solution because of allegations of past discrimination.

City attorney Dennis Herrera, the Authority to tell the city and the circle of their agencies preferably practices are against the Constitution of the State. He himself can not be done, possibilities for appeal against the city agency implementation of discriminatory practices still prevalent in San Francisco. So what can be done to the implementation Herrera Proposition 209?

In a recent press release, he boasted about San Francisco in winning several legal battles and the city to overcome several challenges on procedural grounds. However, the Court decided, never on the benefits of the town of action in light of the proposal 209 Herrera says that it was OK to discriminate in favour of minorities because, according to its press release September 26, based concerning acts of discrimination in the city of Contracting, San Francisco’s program requires two federal Constitution and federal laws financed by the budget. ”

Let’s do a reality. On at least the last 40 years, we have one of the most liberal and most cities hosting minorities. The city is now argue that we have a history of blatant racial discrimination, which requires us to ignore Proposition 209, which is itself prohibits racial discrimination. The proper remedy for this odious history of discrimination is the first street on the right, wrong on persons discriminated against. The city officials have perpetrated these crimes alleged rights of citizens must be identified by the city prosecutor, then criminally prosecuted and convicted by the district public prosecutor.

Why not commandments small minority of companies that contracts for the city before Proposition 209 - or, for that matter, after the California Civil Rights Initiative? If our city has evidence that he was complicit in these crimes of citizens’ rights, we will criminally responsible. Federal-cities, funding rules mandates that the main partners provide opportunities for subcontracting offers minority businesses. Fair enough. This is not the same as ensuring that minority businesses bidders for success low.

In addition, the city is now the government says in its press release, it is compelled to consider the Confederation of mandates for its racing policy for recruitment and procurement, it is estimated asset of the Constitution of the ‘State. First, when did San Francisco, where federal law seriously? We are not the Feds “prohibition of marijuana seriously - we are to develop the country. We are not federal laws on the territory of illegal immigrants seriously - we are a sanctuary for them. So what’s new? Lever and we commend the federal Racial Discrimination encourages minorities? Which federal laws are they? I must have missed.