A Canadian company's fight to build the proposed Keystone XL pipeline is taking a decidedly personal turn. TransCanada is suing dozens of landowners for access to their properties in order to build the pipeline. But many of the property owners say they're not going down without a fight.
According to the New York Times, TransCanada -- acting through its U.S. subsidiary, Keystone -- has been ordering people to hand over their land, claiming eminent domain. Yet the company doesn't actually have the green light from the U.S. government to start construction. Regardless, TransCanada officials say they're still able to start securing land, which is exactly what they're doing to the chagrin of property owners along the pipeline's proposed 1,700-mile path. A final decision from the State Department is expected by the end of the year; but a report claiming the project would have "minimal environmental impact" strongly suggests the State Department will give Keystone XL the go-ahead.
The pipeline would cross through six states on its way from northern Canada to the U.S. Gulf Coast, carrying crude oil to refineries. Supporters say it would be a boon for job seekers, and a source of security for those worried about foreign energy dependence. But opponents -- including us here at The Overbrook Foundation -- are concerned about the environmental repercussions of Keystone XL. The pipeline runs the risk of contaminating the Ogallala Aquifer, the source of water for more than a quarter of the nation's crops. Critics are also worried about the devastating effects of extracting and burning heavy crude in Canada's oil sands.
The Overbrook Foundation invites you to check out Tar Sands Action, a project of 350.org, to learn more about the dangers the pipeline poses and what you can do to help.
To read the full article on the New York Times' website, click here.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Defending Women's Rights in Oklahoma
Another victory for one of our grantees, the Center for Reproductive Rights -- this time, in Oklahoma. That's where a judge blocked a new law intended to reduce the number of abortions performed in the state. Lawmakers passed the measure earlier this year, which would have prohibited doctors from prescribing drugs for off-label uses, including abortions. Attorneys for Oklahoma argue the drugs should only be used in accordance with FDA guidelines. But opponents contend drugs are often prescribed for uses other than those stated on their labels; and the bill puts vulnerable women at risk -- not to mention, undermines their constitutional rights. The Center filed the lawsuit earlier this month, on behalf of the Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, an abortion rights group, and Nova Health Systems, an abortion provider. Yesterday's temporary injunction prevents the measure from going into law next month.
"We are extremely pleased that women in Oklahoma will continue to have access to treatment options for pregnancy terminations that have been widely recognized as safe and effective by medical experts and organizations around the world," said Michelle Movahed, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights.
The Overbrook Foundation praises the Center for its ongoing commitment to protecting women's rights in the face of constant legal attacks.
To read the full press release on the Center for Reproductive Rights' website, click here.
"We are extremely pleased that women in Oklahoma will continue to have access to treatment options for pregnancy terminations that have been widely recognized as safe and effective by medical experts and organizations around the world," said Michelle Movahed, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights.
The Overbrook Foundation praises the Center for its ongoing commitment to protecting women's rights in the face of constant legal attacks.
To read the full press release on the Center for Reproductive Rights' website, click here.
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Anti-Immigrant Law in Alabama
As one in a string of recent anti-immigrant laws in several US states, Alabama’s HB 56 has been decried as the harshest anti-immigrant law passed and enacted in our nation’s recent history. This law will increase instances of racial profiling and civil rights abuses since Alabamian law enforcement officers are required to ask anyone they suspect of being an undocumented immigrant for proof of citizenship papers. In addition, illegal immigrants cannot enter into a contract between private parties (i.e. sign a lease) or a contract between private individuals and the state (i.e. receive state-provided utilities). Legal challenges from the Department of Justice and several legal advocacy groups have led to judges’ blocking several of the law’s provisions from being enforced, including a provision that would criminalize harboring or transporting illegal immigrants. Most recently, the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit has the section of the law that would require schools to identify and record the citizenship statuses of their K-12 students. The court has also temporarily suspended the provision that makes it a state crime for individuals to travel without documentation of citizenship. While this was a victory for many in Alabama, these provisions had already led to the detention of some immigrants and many other harsh, restrictive regulations from HB 56 continue to be implemented in the state.
After hearing accounts from advocacy and legal organizations in Alabama, we have learned of many upheavals both inside and outside of immigrant communities. For some, this law has prevented them from going to work or attending school because of the risks of travelling without papers. For others, it has even pushed their families to flee the state in the middle of the night. Additionally, the impact of this law on the state’s economy has already been felt. Farms are missing employees, many of whom are undocumented, and these jobs do not seem to have widely appealed to the Americans who were supposed to take them. Activists are fighting this law and offering services to affected populations through advocacy campaigns, grassroots organizing, public education clinics and messaging to sway public opinion with economic and civil rights based arguments.
As a Foundation concerned with human rights in the US, we urge all of our readers to learn more about HB 56, the local ramifications of its implementation and the legal battles that surround it. The ACLU, an Overbrook grantee, has described its efforts against HB 56 and its assessment of the situation in Alabama at http://www.aclu.org/crisis-alabama-immigration-law-causes-chaos. Major news sources have also provided in-depth coverage of the progression of this discriminatory law.
Friday, October 7, 2011
2011 Nobel Peace Prize Winners and PBS's Women, War & Peace
The 2011 Nobel Peace Prize has just been awarded to Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee and Tawakkul Karman “for their non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women’s rights to full participation in peace–building work”. Congratulations to these women on their well-deserved recognition for important efforts to promote peace, gender rights, and democracy in Africa and the Middle East.
If you want to learn more about two of the prize recipients, Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee, you can watch their interviews and their stories in the second episode of Overbrook Grantee Thirteen’s upcoming series Women, War & Peace. This episode, Pray the Devil Back to Hell, examines the obstacles that female Liberian peace activists faced as they challenged Liberian warlords and the regime of dictator Charles Taylor during a violent civil war. These women and their partners are incredible leaders, who achieved an enormous victory for peace in 2003. The second episode premieres October 18, 2011.
On Tuesdays between October 11 and November 8, PBS will air its new five-part series, Women, War & Peace, which examines the position of women as influential leaders and activists in peace movements during brutal wars and their aftermaths around the world. The impact of the series will extend beyond initial viewers through the use of these videos and accompanying learning guides in classrooms across the country. Overbrook is proud to support this powerful series that brings stories of international gender rights to the attention of a broad U.S. audience.
Here is the schedule for those interested in viewing this powerful series:
Tuesday, October 11th - I Came to Testify (Bosnia - Narrated by Matt Damon)
Tuesday, October 18th - Pray the Devil Back to Hell (Liberia)
Tuesday, October 25th - Peace Unveiled (Afghanistan - Narrated by Tilda Swinton)
Tuesday, November 1st - The War We Are Living (Colombia - Narrated by Alfre Woodard)
Tuesday, November 8th - War Redefined (Overview - Narrated by Geena Davis)
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Innocence Project Helps Free Wrongfully Convicted Man
A Texas man gets his first taste of freedom, after spending nearly 25 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit -- and the Innocence Project, one of our grantees, led the charge for his release. Michael Morton was convicted of beating his wife to death in 1986, and sentenced to life in prison. But DNA tests now show he didn't commit the crime, and that in fact, a convicted felon was responsible for the murder. The Innocence Project helps exonerate inmates, using DNA testing that often wasn't available when they were tried.
Morton's story raises more concerns about the district attorney in his case, who was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry. John Bradley wasn't the original DA who tried Morton -- but he's now accused of suppressing evidence that could have led to an earlier release. And that's not all. Bradley has come under scrutiny for his tenure as chairman of the Texas Forensic Science Commission. During that time, the commission investigated the 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham for the arson deaths of his three children. Bradley refuted many of the findings that would have cleared Willingham of any wrongdoing, calling him a "guilty monster." Bradley no longer heads the commission. The Innocence Project originally filed the complaint about the case, which has drawn national attention.
The Overbrook Foundation applauds the Innoncence Project for its latest victory, leading to the release of a wrongfully convicted man, and for its ongoing commitment to criminal justice reform.
To read the full article in the Washington Post, click here.
Morton's story raises more concerns about the district attorney in his case, who was appointed by Gov. Rick Perry. John Bradley wasn't the original DA who tried Morton -- but he's now accused of suppressing evidence that could have led to an earlier release. And that's not all. Bradley has come under scrutiny for his tenure as chairman of the Texas Forensic Science Commission. During that time, the commission investigated the 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham for the arson deaths of his three children. Bradley refuted many of the findings that would have cleared Willingham of any wrongdoing, calling him a "guilty monster." Bradley no longer heads the commission. The Innocence Project originally filed the complaint about the case, which has drawn national attention.
The Overbrook Foundation applauds the Innoncence Project for its latest victory, leading to the release of a wrongfully convicted man, and for its ongoing commitment to criminal justice reform.
To read the full article in the Washington Post, click here.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Say No to Keystone XL
There have been some key new developments in the case of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. According to a New York Times article this week, a round of emails is revealing a "warm and collaborative relationship" between lobbyists for TransCanada (the company building the pipeline) and the U.S. State Department. Back in August, the State Department issued its final environmental report on the proposed pipeline, which could carry 700,000 barrels of oil from Canada to Texas. The report found the pipeline would have "no significant impact" on the environment. The Obama administration now appears poised to approve the project by the end of the year.
But critics are hoping the new evidence stops the U.S. government from giving the green light. An editorial published in the New York Times cites concerns which The Overbrook Foundation also shares: "the stripping of the Canadian boreal forest, the further carbon-loading of the atmosphere, and the threat to the Midwest's water supplies." And the oil wouldn't necessarily be destined for domestic markets. According to the editorial, six companies "have already contracted for three-quarters of the oil. Five are foreign, and the business model of the one American company... is geared toward export."
It's for all the reasons that The Overbrook Foundation is supporting 350.org's campaign "Tar Sands Action," to stop the U.S. government's approval of the pipeline. We're hoping we can continue to get the word out -- say no to the Keystone XL pipeline.
But critics are hoping the new evidence stops the U.S. government from giving the green light. An editorial published in the New York Times cites concerns which The Overbrook Foundation also shares: "the stripping of the Canadian boreal forest, the further carbon-loading of the atmosphere, and the threat to the Midwest's water supplies." And the oil wouldn't necessarily be destined for domestic markets. According to the editorial, six companies "have already contracted for three-quarters of the oil. Five are foreign, and the business model of the one American company... is geared toward export."
It's for all the reasons that The Overbrook Foundation is supporting 350.org's campaign "Tar Sands Action," to stop the U.S. government's approval of the pipeline. We're hoping we can continue to get the word out -- say no to the Keystone XL pipeline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
