NEW G20 Police Brutality video from the climate camp protest in London SKY NEWS 18th May 09

New footage shows an officer using a police shield as a weapon on a G20 protester
G20 Police Face Legal Review On Tactics
A group of G20 protesters, who claim they were the victims of overly aggressive police tactics, say they are considering mounting a legal challenge against Scotland Yard. Lawyers acting for a group of climate camp demonstrators have put the Metropolitan police on notice that they may launch a Judicial Review of the tactics used to contain demonstrations.
Activists who staged the Bishopsgate climate camp want an explanation of how the Metropolitan Police handled the controversial City of London events last month.
Sky News has obtained exclusive new pictures of police attempts to break-up the climate camp on the evening of April 1.
They show one officer using his shield to hit out at demonstrators, who are sitting in the middle of the road. Another officer is seen apparently hitting out with his fist.
The climate campaigners’ legal representatives are also demanding that senior officers provide a legal basis for the practice known as “kettling”, where protesters are corralled into tight groups for extended periods of time. A “pre-action” legal letter is being submitted on their behalf to Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson by solicitors at London law firm Bindmans.
A spokesman for the group said it explains they will have no option but to seek a judicial review unless the force addresses their concerns.
Protesters have singled out decisions to hold climate camp participants in one place for more than four hours and then to forcibly clear the road.
Solicitor John Halford said justification for “kettling” a peaceful demonstration remains “entirely opaque”.
He said no reason has been given as to why people were held for so long and it was not clear if the force used by police was “reasonable”.
Protester Hugh Morris said: “The policing of climate camp in the City was totally disproportionate and in all probability unlawful.
“Yet again we are faced with another David and Goliath battle in the courts to put this right when the real battle should be in halting climate change, after all, that’s why we were in Bishopsgate.”
Activists are busy raising £40,000 for a legal fighting fund, although it is believed many of those bringing cases are entitled to legal aid.
Several reviews and inquiries are already under way after a barrage of complaints of police brutality during the demonstrations.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is probing four allegations of violence by police officers and claims the media were misled by the Met.
The most high-profile complaint followed the death of newspaper seller Ian Tomlinson after he was hit with a baton and pushed to the ground.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/G20-Protests-Climate-Camp-Protesters-In-Bishopsgate-Are-Considering-Legal-Challenge-Against-Police/Article/200905315283494?lpos=UK_News_First_Home_Article_Teaser_Region_6&lid=ARTICLE_15283494_G20_Protests%3A_Climate_Camp_Protesters_In_Bishopsgate_Are_Considering_Legal_Challenge_Against_Police

Duration : 0:2:22

Read more about NEW G20 Police Brutality video from the climate camp protest in London SKY NEWS 18th May 09

1st Amendment Misconceptions (Part 1 of 5)

This video begins by examining the origin of the 1st Amendment when Congress drafted it in 1789. This has the powerful effect of telling listener what the 1st Amendment really means in the words of the people who actually wrote it.
The video then continues to examine the harmful effects of case law, which I call the ‘Progressive Precedent’. I conclude with Constitutional strategies for combatting case law.
This video is actually part of my campaign for Governor of Tennessee for 2010, but I intentionally designed it to be apolitical, so it can benefit Christians long after this campaign is over.

Duration : 0:8:44

Read more about 1st Amendment Misconceptions (Part 1 of 5)

Abolish Religious Exemptions from the Law? (Part 2)

In the United States and other countries, religious institutions have traditionally enjoyed a privileged position, i.e., they have been granted exemptions from compliance with certain laws (including, without limitation, laws against discrimination in employment and laws requiring the payment of taxes). Is it appropriate or even useful for religion to have this privileged status?

Links:

1. Wisconsin Supreme Court’s use of the “ministerial exception” to dismiss an age discrimination case against a Catholic school system

http://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=38088

2. New York Court of Appeals decision in Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Serio

http://www.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I06_0127.htm

3. California Supreme Court’s decision in Catholic Charities of Sacramento v. Superior Court (Unfortunately, I can’t find a generally accessible URL for this decision. The citation is 85 P.3d 67 (2004).)

4. Jonathan Turley’s Op-Ed piece entitled “When it comes to religious groups, who’s really facing discrimination?”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/16/AR2010041602027.html

5. Employment Division v. Smith

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0494_0872_ZO.html

6. Bob Jones University v. United States

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0461_0574_ZO.html

7. New York Times article on the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association case

8. Part 1 of this video series

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5TBxCfnFiw

Duration : 0:9:56

Read more about Abolish Religious Exemptions from the Law? (Part 2)

Abolish Religious Exemptions from the Law? (Part 1)

In the United States and other countries, religious institutions have traditionally enjoyed a privileged position, i.e., they have been granted exemptions from compliance with certain laws (including, without limitation, laws against discrimination in employment and laws requiring the payment of taxes). Is it appropriate or even useful for religion to have this privileged status?

Links:

1. Regarding Christian Legal Society v. Martinez–

–the decision of the federal district court in favor of the law school

http://www.alliancealert.org/2006/20060417.pdf

–the decision of the 9th Circuit affirming the trial court’s ruling

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/08-1371_ca9.pdf

–SCOTUS WIKI’s entry on the case (lots of information and material)

http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Christian_Legal_Society_v._Martinez

2. Archbishop Donald Wuerl’s talk entitled “Religious Freedom and Marriage”

3. Washington D.C.’s marriage equality and nondiscrimination law and related material

http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/lims/legislation.aspx?LegNo=B18-0482&Description=RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-AND-CIVIL-MARRIAGE-EQUALITY-AMENDMENT-ACT-OF-2009.&ID=23204

http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/images/00001/20100409103713.pdf

4. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm

5. McClure v. The Salvation Army (the first federal appeals court decision to recognize a “ministerial exception” to Title VII)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=7674766003352112619&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

6. Part 2 of this video series

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHVxMDRx6o

Duration : 0:10:29

Read more about Abolish Religious Exemptions from the Law? (Part 1)