Isaac Christopher Samuel, Author at Stephen and Sandra Sheller Center for Social Justice

Making sense of the legal headlines

November 23, 2021March 17, 2017

If you’re confused about the legal issues in the headlines these days, you’re not alone; it’s complex stuff, and there’s a lot of it. In an upcoming series of panel discussions organized by the Sheller Center, law faculty and others will sort through the confusion in several key areas, with the goal of clarifying what the law says now, what changes are proposed, and where the controversies are. These discussions are open to the Law School, the University, and the community.

Dates and topics are: Border Security and Interior Enforcement, 3/28; Crime and Policing, 4/3; The Refugee and Travel Bans, 4/10; and Climate Change and Federal Policy, 4/18. All sessions are from noon to 1:00, in Klein Hall (the main Law School Building) K1D. More information is here, together with an opportunity to RSVP (not required, but helpful). Please share the information with anyone who you think might be interested. We hope to see you!

City Council hearing this week on charging parents for their child’s incarceration

November 23, 2021February 28, 2017

On Friday, March 3, 2017 at 1:00 p.m. (note new time), Councilman Kenyatta Johnson is coordinating a hearing on the impact of fines and fees levied by the juvenile justice system on Philadelphia youth and their families. The hearing will be at City Hall, in the Council’s main chamber, Room 400. We hope you will join us.

This hearing will be focused on the City’s practice of charging parents for the cost of their child’s incarceration. Affected parents, advocates, and the City’s Department of Human Services are scheduled to testify. The practice of charging parents for the child’s cost of confinement has been occurring in Philadelphia since the 1990s, with little oversight, and acts as a second punishment for children and families. Double Punishment, a report by Justice Lab and the Youth Sentencing and Reentry Project, contains more information on the practice and its harm to families.

If you or your organization know of parents affected by the City’s practice of charging parents for their children’s incarceration costs and would like to submit their stories to be part of the record, please reach out to us. It is also possible to have additional parents testify in-person if we can connect with those parents quickly. If you have any questions, please contact Wes Stevenson at Wesley.stevenson@temple.edu.

What’s in a Name? The “Sanctuary” Label

November 23, 2021February 13, 2017

The Washington Post just announced that Bedford County, PA has reversed its policy of refusing to honor detainers by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The county did so in response to being labeled as a “sanctuary city” by immigration-restrictionist groups like Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

Using the Sheller Center’s Report on ICE detainers in Pennsylvania, written by students in the Social Justice Lawyering Clinic, groups like FAIR have been slapping labels on jurisdictions within Pennsylvania. These groups, however, overlook the essential details of the Report, which never once uses the word “sanctuary.” Rather, the Report discusses local policies on ICE detainers in the aftermath of the Third Circuit decision in Galarza v. Szalczyk.

Some background: detainers are requests by ICE to local authorities to hold individuals, who would otherwise be released, for pick-up by ICE. In Galarza, the Third Circuit held not only that ICE detainers constitutionally could only amount to requests (as opposed to mandatory orders), but also that local jurisdictions could be held liable for choosing to wrongfully imprison someone solely on the basis of an ICE detainer. Our Report subsequently found that nearly half of Pennsylvania’s counties had decided, for these and other reasons, not to honor ICE detainers. Officials who volunteered their motivations mostly referred to the Galarza decision, while several mentioned the practicalities of limited bed space or the lack of reimbursement from the federal government.

But now Bedford County is backtracking because of the “sanctuary” label. Would Bedford County have left its policy in place if it had been called something else? Maybe. In our discussions with one Bedford County official, we were left with the impression that the policy change had been carefully considered after realizing that ICE holds were not mandatory and that the county faced potential legal liability.” Had the “sanctuary” label not been applied, county officials might have drawn on these discussions to explain to their residents the value of the policy in protecting the county from liability. Or one could imagine county officials convincing residents of the need to conserve law enforcement resources to address local problems rather than federal concerns.

So is the lesson for immigrant advocates to back away from the word “sanctuary”? As the Bedford County story confirms, the term has become pejorative in some circles (legislators in Harrisburg currently have four bills targeted against sanctuary cities and campuses). Some also believe that the term sanctuary is problematic because it inaccurately describes a refuge or place of safety – while the truth is that, regardless of a city’s policy regarding cooperation with ICE, ICE can enforce federal laws in any jurisdiction. But other people embrace the term “sanctuary,” because it connects to historical efforts to protect people from unjust arrest – such as the underground railroad in the nineteenth century, or the refuge provided to Central Americans refugees during the civil wars of the 1980’s.

The strategic use of language is crucial to the success of social justice movements. But how do you decide on whether a term like sanctuary should be used in the advocacy context? In answering this question, I like the conclusion that our class arrived at the other day. As social justice lawyers, we should leave the choice of language to the people who are directly impacted by the issues.

Continued questions about Philly’s “Rental Assistance Demonstration Program”

November 23, 2021January 19, 2017

Last summer, students in the Center’s Justice Lab Clinic released their Philadelphia Rental Assistance Demonstration Program Advocacy Guide. The “RAD” program, an initiative of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, allows municipalities to invite investors to support “conversions” of housing units from public to private ownership. But according to Justice Lab, which studied the program in collaboration with Community Legal Services, inadequate steps have been taken to protect low-income tenants as conversions go forward.

As a follow-up, Fall 2016 Advanced Clinic student Martha Guarnieri analyzed new RAD conversion data and discovered that the Philadelphia Housing Authority is not disclosing how much housing RAD is creating or which private developers have contracts in Philadelphia. This information was used in testimony offered by CLS to the Philadelphia Housing Authority and the Philadelphia Division of Housing and Community Development concerning the City’s draft “Assessment of Fair Housing.” Justice Lab and CLS urged PHA to revise its Assessment to include more transparency and data about the RAD program and its potential impact on the City’s already-insufficient low-income housing supply.

“First lockup, then debt”: Philly practice of charging parents for their children’s incarceration hits the news

November 23, 2021November 21, 2016

Earlier this year, Justice Lab students Wesley Stevenson, Kelsey Grimes, and Sela Cowger, in collaboration with the Youth Sentencing and Reentry Project, began to investigate Philadelphia’s practice of billing families for the cost of incarcerating their children. The students’ efforts caught the attention of the Inquirer, which ran an in-depth article on the practice today, with quotes from student Wes Stevenson and Clinical Professor Colleen Shanahan.

Besides noting the hardship imposed on Philadelphia households, the article points out that the city’s practice reflects a national pattern in which juvenile justice systems are increasingly passing on their costs to families already living in poverty.

After receiving the Justice Lab analysis and working with the students since last spring, City officials told the Inquirer that they want to end the practice of billing parents, and are in discussions with the state Department of Human Services. (Meanwhile, the private attorney who does the collections under a contract with the City told the paper that being billed for their children’s incarceration can actually help families, “because once the child‐support payments end, it’s like getting ‘a raise.’” )

For the full article, click here.

Guest Post: Learning to be a Social Justice Lawyer in Trump’s America

November 23, 2021November 11, 2016

Our first guest post comes from Tony Sierzega, a second-year student in the Sheller Center’s Social Justice Lawyering Clinic. Of course, guest posts reflect the personal views of the authors; we welcome a diversity of viewpoints.

Learning to be a Social Justice Lawyer in Trump’s America

Tony Sierzega

“No martyr is among ye now

Whom you can call your own

So go on your way accordingly

But know you’re not alone” – Bob Dylan, “I Dreamed I Saw St. Augustine”

During my first class after Donald Trump’s victory, several friends and classmates posed heartbreaking questions: How can we be social justice lawyers in a country which has validated a campaign where racist and misogynistic sentiments were expressed? Or after an election where many were so apathetic toward justice that they stayed home? We further questioned what the fight for social justice would even look like in the United States and how we, or anyone, could have the strength to do this work in a world where it no longer seemed to matter. So far, the only answer to these questions I have found has been in the strength and courage of the students in that classroom and in the wisdom and drive that I have found in my clinic partners and professors. At this moment, we feel scared and alone, but in time we will have the same realization as Dylan’s worried dreamer; that when we pursue social justice, we are not alone.

I chose to go to law school because I wanted to serve the most vulnerable, oppressed, and impoverished communities. The Sheller Center has provided all students with these feelings the opportunity to do good work early in our legal training. This semester, my clinic classmates and I have worked on a variety of issues, including advocating for the rights of migrant families and children detained at the Berks Family Detention Center and representing low-wage workers who have been denied their fair compensation. This work is not going to disappear in President Trump’s America, though it is going to get harder. As my classmates and professors in the Sheller Center have taught me, that just means we need to be braver.

A dear friend and Philadelphia community organizer posted a message on Facebook, asking, “what have I done today to make the people whose lives are most impacted by these conditions better . . . what have I done today to dismantle the conditions that make it difficult or impossible for the folks most effected by them to make their lives better for themselves?” I am proud that he is a friend who should not be ashamed of his answer. Further, I am fortunate that Temple and the Sheller Center have provided students with the opportunity to also not be ashamed of our answer. Tuesday demonstrated how much more work we have to do, but it should also provide the powerful inspiration needed to complete that work. Although we have new questions about what it means to be a social justice lawyer, at this moment, we at least have the Sheller Center to try and find an answer.

Following Trump’s election, the Social Justice Lawyering Clinic and Justice Lab held a joint class in which we discussed how our heroes would respond. First, I thought about Bryan Stevenson, the civil rights attorney and one of my inspirations for becoming a lawyer. In his memoir “Just Mercy,” Mr. Stevenson, following the execution of his client Jimmy Dill, asked himself, “Why am I doing this?” His response was, “we are bodies of broken bones . . . I do what I do because I’m broken too . . . You can’t effectively fight abusive power, poverty, inequality, illness, oppression, or injustice and not be broken by it . . . Our shared brokenness connects us.” The shared sadness, and seeing the tears and fear in a room full of strong future lawyers demonstrated that the election of Donald Trump has broken us all. The very real threat that it poses to the lives of our family, friends, neighbors, and selves is a source of collective brokenness that Mr. Stevenson believes ought to unite us as humans, not discourage us from committing to the hard work we have ahead. Being a social justice lawyer means seeing the humanity we share with our clients (and their oppressors) and seek healing. Like the resetting of a broken bone, this healing will hurt, but it is necessary to find the common humanity among us all that can lead to achieving justice.

Next, I considered the work of one of my favorite writers, James Baldwin. In his essay, “Nothing Personal,” Baldwin writes, “One discovers the light in darkness. That is what darkness is for. But everything in our lives depends on how we bear the light. It is necessary, while in darkness, to know that there is a light somewhere, to know that in oneself, waiting to be found there is a light. What the light reveals is danger, and what it demands is faith.” I see this light in the work of my fellow clinic students every day, and now fully realize the danger of bearing that light. But I also have faith that the work done in the Sheller Center will be done with Baldwin’s light in the face of America’s darkness. Baldwin concludes his essay, writing, “the sea rises, the light fails, lovers cling to each other, and children cling to us. And the moment we cease to hold each other, the moment we break faith with one another, the sea engulfs us and the light goes out.” Working with my partners this semester has convinced me of the truth that faith in each other keeps the light on and is necessary to be a social justice lawyer.

At the beginning of our joint class, students were encouraged to listen to Robert Kennedy’s speech following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I knew this was a good sign because in times of national tragedy, I have turned to the same speech and the poem Kennedy delivered written by the Greek poet, Aeschylus: “And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget/falls drop by drop upon the heart/until, in our own despair/against our will/comes wisdom to us/by the awful grace of God.” In these tragic times, I have found wisdom in my fellow Sheller Center students and professors; I only hope our nation can find it too. We still have a lot of difficult questions to consider when thinking about what it means to be a social justice lawyer, but at the very least, we must know that, because of our shared brokenness and despite the discouraging darkness, we are not alone.

Next steps on Traffic Court issues affecting returning citizens

November 23, 2021October 20, 2016

This fall, Justice Lab students are continuing to work with their client, Philadelphia Lawyers for Social Equity (PLSE), on problems identified in our report, Proposed Solutions for Improving the Experience of Returning Citizens with the Philadelphia Traffic Division. That report showed that traffic fines and license suspensions dating from before an individual’s incarceration can present a major barrier to employability years later.

Students are surveying Philadelphians at expungement clinics and other community events in order to gather more data about the experiences of returning citizens with traffic issues. The students are also developing a pilot legal services program through which PLSE will offer direct help to returning citizens, with the hope that the program will eventually be implemented around Pennsylvania.

Gabrielle Green L’18, a Justice Lab student, had this to say after attending a community event: “I think the biggest learning moment today was meeting people where they are. One of our client’s missions is for the past to not affect an individual’s future in regard to their employment potential, and it is good to hear about some of the barriers, and the hopeful solutions. It made me understand that although we may be small in number, we can still have a big impact in making change happen.”