Posts

Posted on

STATEMENT OF THE ASIAN AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK REGARDING THE SUPREME COURT’S RECENT VOTING RIGHTS ACT DECISION

The Asian American Bar Association of New York (AABANY) urges the United States Congress to reinstate the enforcement provisions of the Voting Rights Act, Section 4, that were invalidated this past Tuesday, June 25, 2013 by the United States Supreme Court in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder.

Shelby eliminates the preclearance requirement for certain states or areas in which discrimination had historically been found to exist.  Preclearance required covered states and jurisdictions to submit all changes affecting voting and elections for preapproval by the U.S. Department of Justice.  The decision in Shelby will likely lead to legal sanctioning of efforts to undermine voting rights.

This ruling hits home. Certain New York counties including New York, Kings and the Bronx were areas for which preclearance had been required, based on a prior history of voter discrimination. The Shelby ruling clears the way for the reinstatement of discriminatory practices, such as efforts to restrict access to voting sites or attempts to gerrymander voting districts to dilute the voting power of Asian Americans in New York’s Chinatown or African Americans in Harlem. The profound impact of such practices on the voting rights and electoral aspirations of the affected minority voters in those areas cannot be overstated.

The record the Supreme Court considered contains ample evidence that voting rights discrimination is alive and well in 2013 as it was in 1964.  Justice Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion chronicles that evidence. 

The unfettered right to vote is a precondition of representative democracy.  Retrenchment on that right undermines many other rights such as the right to free speech.  Until Shelby, the necessity of a strong Voting Rights Act was universally recognized. 

Congress must act and exercise its power to provide the checks and balances that our Constitution established when the Founders formed our union to ensure a balanced government.  Voting rights are under attack and we urge Congress and the Administration to take prompt action to defend this most fundamental civil right.

###

AABANY was formed in 1989 as a not-for-profit corporation to represent the interests of New York Asian American attorneys, judges, law professors, legal professionals, paralegals and law students.  The mission of AABANY is to improve the study and practice of law, and the fair administration of justice for all by ensuring the meaningful participation of Asian Americans in the legal profession.

Posted on

NAPABA Applauds Marriage Equality Decisions

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 26, 2013

Contact: Emily Chatterjee
(202) 775-9555

WASHINGTON – In two watershed marriage equality decisions announced today, the U.S. Supreme Court held in United States v. Windsor that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, and found that proponents of Proposition 8 in Perry v. Hollingsworth lack standing to appeal the federal district court decision, which struck down the amendment. The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) has long supported marriage equality, and joined amicus briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court as well as in lower court proceedings in both cases.

“Today is a historic day for our nation as we move one step closer to equality for all Americans,” said Wendy C. Shiba, president of NAPABA. “As a Californian, I am especially proud that NAPABA has supported marriage equality in Windsor and Perry, and in many other cases, and we look forward to the implementation of both decisions.”

Windsor challenged DOMA, a federal law that denies legally married same-sex couples the same federal benefits provided to heterosexual spouses. Justice Kennedy delivered the 5-4 decision and held that “though Congress has great authority to design laws to fit its own conception of sound national policy, it cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

In Perry, Chief Justice Roberts led the 5-4 Court in dismissing an appeal to reinstate California’s Proposition 8, a voter-passed measure outlawing marriage between same-sex couples because of lack of standing. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion “[w]e have never before upheld the standing of a private party to defend the constitutionality of a state statute when state officials have chosen not to. We decline to do so for the first time here.”

###

The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) is the national association of Asian Pacific American attorneys, judges, law professors, and law students. NAPABA represents the interests of over 40,000 attorneys and 66 state and local Asian Pacific American bar associations. Its members include solo practitioners, large firm lawyers, corporate counsel, legal service and non-profit attorneys, and lawyers serving at all levels of government. NAPABA continues to be a leader in addressing civil rights issues confronting Asian Pacific American communities. Through its national network of committees and affiliates, NAPABA provides a strong voice for increased diversity of the federal and state judiciaries, advocates for equal opportunity in the workplace, works to eliminate hate crimes and anti-immigrant sentiment, and promotes the professional development of people of color in the legal profession.

Posted on

2013 NAPABA Convention Scholarship Application Deadline: August 30, 2013

NAPABA strives to keep the Convention affordable for our members and offers one of the best values among legal education conferences. NAPABA also maintains a scholarship fund to help further defray costs for attendees through full or partial registration waivers, travel stipends, and lodging stipends.

Scholarship applications for the 2013 Convention are due August 30. Apply today if you need assistance with travel and registration costs. We look forward to seeing you in Kansas City, Missouri on November 7-10.

Please fill out the online form by clicking here.

Posted on

NAPABA Condemns Voting Rights Act Decision

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 25, 2013

Contact: Emily Chatterjee
(202) 775-9555


Urges Bipartisan Congressional Action to Protect Voters

WASHINGTON, DC – The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) is dismayed by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today to strike down Section IV of the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder. Section IV includes the coverage formula for the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was reauthorized by Congress as recently as 2006. NAPABA joined an amicus brief in Shelby County earlier this year that argued in support of upholding the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act.

“The Voting Rights Act has been a crucial tool in combatting voter discrimination, which unfortunately continues today,” said Wendy C. Shiba, president of NAPABA. “We are deeply disappointed by the Court’s decision in Shelby County, which does not reflect current realities facing voters, including vulnerable Asian Pacific American voters. We strongly urge Congress to act swiftly in a bipartisan manner to develop a new coverage formula. All Americans who are eligible to vote must be able to do so.”

In 2006, the Senate voted 98-0 to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act, while the House of Representatives voted 390-33. The Voting Rights Act was first passed by Congress in 1965. Prior to today’s decision, the Court had previously upheld the Voting Rights Act four times.

###

The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) is the national association of Asian Pacific American attorneys, judges, law professors, and law students. NAPABA represents the interests of over 40,000 attorneys and 66 state and local Asian Pacific American bar associations. Its members include solo practitioners, large firm lawyers, corporate counsel, legal service and non-profit attorneys, and lawyers serving at all levels of government. NAPABA continues to be a leader in addressing civil rights issues confronting Asian Pacific American communities. Through its national network of committees and affiliates, NAPABA provides a strong voice for increased diversity of the federal and state judiciaries, advocates for equal opportunity in the workplace, works to eliminate hate crimes and anti-immigrant sentiment, and promotes the professional development of people of color in the legal profession.

Posted on

AALDEF Press Release on SCOTUS Decision in Shelby

AALDEF Press Release on SCOTUS Decision in Shelby

The Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) and Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC (Advancing Justice-AAJC) (formerly known as Asian American Justice Center) criticize the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down Section 4, the coverage mechanism of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder.  Earlier this year, AALDEF and Advancing Justice-AAJC filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of 28 Asian American groups to uphold Section 5, which was reauthorized by Congress in 2006 and is intended to stop voter discrimination before it occurs. 

Please click on the link in the title to read the full press release.

Posted on

CBAC Reassured by Supreme Court’s Decision in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

imageimageimageimage

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 
June 24, 2013

HNBA Contact: Erika Lopez (202) 223-4777 
NAPABA Contact: Emily Chatterjee (202) 775-9555 
NBA Contact: Erika Owens (202) 842-3900 
NNABA Contact: Mary Smith (405) 761-1723 

Coalition of Bar Associations of Color 
Reassured by Supreme Court’s Decision in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin

WASHINGTON – The Coalition of Bar Associations of Color (CBAC) – the Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA), the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA), the National Bar Association (NBA) and the National Native American Bar Association (NNABA) – is reassured by the Supreme Court’s decision today to reaffirm the principle that diversity in higher education is a compelling national interest. We remain cautiously optimistic about the Court’s decision to send the case back to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Supreme Court partially vacated a lower court ruling that had upheld the right of the University of Texas at Austin to partially consider race in its admissions’ policy. However, in deciding Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, it left intact the precedent it set in Grutter v. Bollinger, which allows schools to consider racial diversity as an admissions factor.

Last summer, CBAC filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in the Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin case. The brief highlights the progress made in diversifying the legal profession since the Court’s ruling in Grutter v. Bollinger, while discussing the continued need for race-conscious admissions programs to further the diversification of the legal profession.

“We are encouraged that the United States Supreme Court’s ruling affirmed the Grutter v. Hollinger decision which allows racial and ethnic diversity to be considered as one of many factors in a carefully crafted admissions policy,” stated HNBA National President Peter M. Reyes, Jr. “These are important factors to consider when taking a holistic admissions approach, and the Court in a 7-1 strongly supports our position.”

“We are encouraged by the Court’s decision today in Fisher,” said Wendy C. Shiba, president of NAPABA. “A strong majority of the Court has stood in support of diversity as a compelling interest, and members of the Asian Pacific American community are heartened by this outcome. We see evidence of the importance of a diverse workforce every day in the legal profession, and are thankful that our nation’s commitment to the values of diversity and inclusion has been ratified today.”

“Today’s decision underscores diversity as a compelling interest for all institutions of education and higher learning,” stated John E. Page, President of the National Bar Association. “Even with strict scrutiny of the methods used to achieve such diversity, the US Supreme Court continues to agree that many factors, including race, can be a factor in an admissions program.”

“Diversity is important to educational opportunities for all and furthers classroom discussion and understanding,” said Mary Smith, President of the National Native Bar Association. “We are heartened that the Supreme Court has recognized the importance of diversity.”

###

Posted on

//static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/picasaweb.googleusercontent.com/slideshow.swf

On June 18, 2013, the AABANY In-House Counsel and Corporate Law Committees co-sponsored AABANY’s 6th Annual Wine Tasting & Networking Reception, at Inside Park at St. Bart’s.  This year’s event was highly successful, with over 125 people in attendance, including in-house attorneys from 46 organizations, such as AIG, BBC, Hess, JP Morgan Chase, Prudential and Xerox. The In-House Counsel Committee is comprised of current in-house lawyers and the Corporate Law Committee is comprised of current and prospective corporate law firm attorneys.

Proudly powered by WordPress