President Obama weighed in on the controversy over a proposed Islamic community center/mosque to be built just two blocks from Ground Zero.  The property is owned by a Muslim Iman and a public utility company.  The proposed building would be a thirteen story facility used as an educational community center with a mosque included.  Obama made his first remarks on it at the annual White House dinner honoring the Islamic holy days of Ramadan.  Obama said that he supports the right of the property owners to build the mosque.  After the headlines hit the presses that Obama voiced his support of the building of the center, he “clarified,” saying he doesn’t necessarily think the project is wise.  Obama claims he meant to say he supports the right of the Islamic community to build an educational center and mosque there, but that he did not mean it was the right thing for them to do.  His point was meant to be the right of freedom of religion of all Americans would allow the center.  ABC News Full Article

On August 22, 2010, approximately a thousand or people gathered near the proposed building site, some supporting the building of a mosque at Park Place and more opposing it.  Protestors carried signs about freedom and religion, speaking for God and about America.  With such strong opinions surrounding the proposed Mosque, many New Yorkers are gaining resentment toward the Islamic Community.  It is important to remember that discriminating against an individual based on race or national origin may be prosecuted under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Please visit the EEOC’s website for further information: www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html.

The attorneys at Leeds Morelli & Brown, P.C., dedicate a large amount of their practice to discrimination claims.  For any questions, contact an attorney at the Leeds Morelli & Brown P.C. law firm for a free consultation at 1-800-585-4658. Leeds Morelli & Brown P.C.’s website is located at www.lmblaw.com

On June 17, 2010, the United States Supreme Court unanimously decided City of Ontario v. Quon, holding that the city’s review of an employee’s text messages on an employer-issued device was a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.  The City issued pagers and advised police officers that text messages would fall under the City’s policy as public information and would be eligible for auditing.  Quon and others exceeded their allotted number of texts, but claimed that a supervisor had informed them that their messages would not be audited as long as the officers paid for any overage charges.  An audit to determine why the officers were exceeding their limits revealed Quon, while on duty, was using his employer-issued pager to send sexually explicit text messages.  The Supreme Court unanimously held that the city’s review of the text messages was a reasonable search under the Fourth Amendment.  However, the Court declined to address the privacy expectations of employees when using employer-provided communications devices.  Quon Opinion

It is important to understand your right to privacy when it comes to the workplace, especially in this technological driven society.  The Quon decision suggests that employers should exercise good judgment in monitoring employee use of the employer’s computer or communications facilities, whether the employment is in the public or private sector.  Employers must establish the level of privacy expectations with a policy that covers all the technologies given to employees.  Employers may be at risk if they delve into the content of messages without a work-related purpose for the investigation.  The Quon decision provides that employers must have a legitimate, work-related objectives for the search.

Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC is a nationally recognized firm in the area of employment law.  Our firm has had considerable success in matters of employment discrimination throughout Long Island and the New York City area.  For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free consultation

President Obama’s nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court has triggered much media scrutiny.  One of the things in her record that is being given a great deal of attention is a widely circulated 2003 memo, that Kagan drafted while serving as the Dean of Harvard Law School.  The memo condemned the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy for gay soldiers as “a moral injustice of the first order.”  Essentially, the military’s policy effectively permits deeply closeted gays and bisexuals to serve in the military as long as they do not “out” themselves and they are not “outed” by others.  Kagan’s remarks were made during the 2005 controversy over whether Congress could withhold federal funding from universities that discriminate against the military.  Kagan joined a friend-of-the-court brief opposing the government.  Now, her comments are drawing a great deal of attention as the Military’s policy is under fire and the issue of gay marriage seems to be coming to head.  CNS News 

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is the only law in this country that authorizes the firing of an American simply for coming out as gay, lesbian, or bisexual.  The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) does not enforce the protections that prohibit discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation.  To date, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.  Please visit the EEOC’s website for further information: www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html.

The attorneys at Leeds Morelli & Brown, P.C., dedicate a large amount of their practice to employment discrimination claims.  For any questions, contact an attorney at the Leeds Morelli & Brown P.C. law firm for a free consultation at 1-800-585-4658. Leeds Morelli & Brown P.C.’s website is located at www.lmblaw.com.

Republican Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into Arizona law a statute which gives the local police to the right to verify immigration status if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is in the country illegally. Brewer stated Arizona was forced to pass the law because the federal government has failed to act on it the state’s high influx of illegal immigrants.  Civil rights groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union, say the law will equate to racial profiling which unfairly targets Hispanics who are in the country legally or were born in Arizona.  President Obama has ordered a review by the Justice Department to determine whether the Arizona law is Constitutional before the law goes into effect in July.  The Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund is a civil rights group which claims that the law infringes on federal responsibility and violates the 14th Amendment’s equal-protection clause.  Other states such as Arizona, Ohio, Utah, Delaware, Missouri, and Texas are planning to sign similar laws.

See: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-05-02-immigration_N.htm

According to the United States Department of Labor, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in hiring, promotion, discharge, pay, fringe benefits, job training, classification, referral, and other aspects of employment, on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. This law is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  In addition, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance. This law is enforced by the Civil Rights Center.

See: http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/ethnicdisc.htm

As well established equal opportunity and anti-discrimination firms in New York, Leeds Morelli & Brown P.C. works to achieve successful judgments that are in the best interests of their clients.  If you or someone you know has been affected by employment discrimination or seeking a class action please feel free to contact Leeds, Morelli & Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free consultation or view their web page at www.lmblaw.com.

On Monday, April 26, 2010, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco affirmed a federal judge’s decision to award class action status to potentially one million women or more in a bias lawsuit against Wal-Mart.  The class action status will aggregate many claimants with similar experiences into one action as opposed to presenting each lawsuit individually, thus allowing individuals with relatively small sums at state to participate in the lawsuit.  The initial suit was filed in June 2001 by six former and current female hourly workers and managers who accused Wal-Mart of systematically denying women workers equal pay and opportunities for promotion.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.  Sex discrimination involves treating someone (an applicant or employee) unfavorably because of that person’s sex.  The law forbids discrimination when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, and any other term or condition of employment.  Please visit the EEOC’s website for further information: www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html.

Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC is a nationally recognized leader in the area of employment law.  Our firm has had considerable success in matters of employment discrimination throughout Long Island and the New York City area.  For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free consultation.

On March 4, 2010, the recently elected Attorney General of Virginia, Kenneth Cuccinelli, sent a letter to Virginia’s Public Colleges and Universities writing that, “the law and public policy of Virginia prohibit a college or university from including “sexual orientation,” “gender identity,” “gender expression,” or like terms in its non-discrimination policy unless the General Assembly of Virginia specifically authorize doing so.  The letter was reprinted in The Washington Post here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/metro/Cuccinelli.pdf

Reacting to this letter, more than 1,000 students gathered in the state capitol of Richmond, Virginia to protest the Attorney General’s prohibition on expanding anti-discrimination rights absent legislative authorization.  National news outlets published the story and Jon Stewart lampooned the policy on his television show.

Responding to this outcry against the Attorney General’s legal opinion, Governor Bob McDonnell (R-VA) issued a directive on March 10, 2010 to all 102,000 Virginia state employees that prohibits discrimination in the state workforce, including on the basis of sexual orientation.

Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC is a nationally recognized leader in the area of employment law.  We believe that discrimination based on a person’s sexual orientation, gender, race, religion, ethnicity age or disability has no place in a democratic society.  Our firm has had considerable success in matters of employment discrimination throughout Long Island and the New York City area.  We take great pride not only in providing quality legal service and representation, but also in being there for clients when they need it most.

For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free consultation.

By Brandon Sipherd

The YMCA of the United States has been accused of systemic discrimination against black employees in compensation, promotions, and other employment practices.  Black employees are unrepresented in mid- and upper-level positions at the YMCA, and are paid less and receive fewer promotions than their coworkers.

Since about 2003, black employees have consistently earned less than non-blacks holding similar job positions, received promotions less frequently than non-blacks, and were assigned lower-earning positions at disproportionately lower rates than non-blacks.  This resulted in a higher turnover rate of black employees than white employees.

Last week, present and former employees filed a lawsuit against the YMCA in federal court in Chicago.  The plaintiffs allege that there exists a culture of discrimination at the YMCA that resulted in denying black employees equal employment opportunities.

In August 2005, the YMCA ordered a salary review study of its various employees.  The results of the study showed an existing need to make adjustments in salary, including salary equity adjustments for black employees who were underpaid as compared to their coworkers.  The YMCA allegedly knew of the results but failed to take any corrective measures.   Instead, organization executives chose to ignore the studies’ results and continued with the status quo.

Representatives of the YMCA vigorously deny the allegations stating that such behaviors and actions are inconsistent with the core values of the organization.

It appears that this lawsuit will continue to move forward since neither side has yet to agree to any settlement offer.

At Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC, we believe that discrimination has no place in a democratic and free society.  Our employment law attorneys are dedicated to resolving issues of discrimination based on race in the workplace and elsewhere.  Our firm has had considerable success in handling matters such as these throughout Long Island and the New York City area.  We take great pride not only in providing quality legal service and representation, but also in being there for clients when they need it most.

For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658.

By Karen Best

Romell Broom was sentenced to death for the September 14th rape and murder of 14 year old Tryna Middleton. Broom was just a needle away from being executed in the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility when his vein collapsed. A prison log book blames the problem on Brooms previous drug use. The log book also indicated that the medical team took an hour to find the vein that did not work.

Broom was reportedly cooperating with the medical team because he  was ready to die. He assisted the team in trying to find other veins in his arms and legs but nothing worked. The execution had to be called off because the medical team didn’t believe the vein would be able to hold once the execution reached the point for the lethal drugs to be administered.

Governor Ted Strickland ordered Broom a one week reprieve after Broom’s lawyer faxed and e-mailed a request to the Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice. There is an Ohio law that requires executions to be quick and painless. His lawyer also stated, continuing the effort would have been a violation of Broom’s constitutional right against cruel and unusual punishment.

It is possible that Broom’s execution might not occur in a week if there are legal challenges. A representative from Death Penalty Information Center believes there might be an issue of Ohio’s standards of decency to subject an individual to multiple executions. The Americans Civil Liberties Union of Ohio also interjected on behalf of Broom. Counsel from the organization stated “Ohio’s execution system is fundamentally flawed. If the state is going to take a person’s life, they must ensure that it is done as humanely as possible.”

Civil rights are different from any other rights we have as citizens of a free country. They represent basic principles of democracy and fairness, and protect our individual abilities to live life on our own terms. Because of that, whenever a person’s civil rights are violated by another — whether that person is an employer, a police officer or a government agency — the violation is deeply personal. As a firm, we have experience in all aspects of civil rights litigation, and are frequently sought out by radio, television and print media journalists to discuss these topics. For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free consultation.

By Karen Best

On a trip to Ukraine to do charity work Elton John visited a hospital for HIV-infected children. While touring the hospital John and his partner David Furnish met and fell in love with a baby named Lev. The couple took to Lev so much they decided they wanted to adopt him.

Unfortunately for John, he did not meet the qualifications to adopt under Ukrainian law. Ukrainian family minister, Yuriy Pavlenko, informed John that because he is over 45 years older than Lev and isn’t in a traditional marriage he was ineligible to adopt. In Ukrainian homosexual marriages are not recognized. Also, the adopting parents must not be over 45 years of the adopted child and John is 62.

Pavlenko stated, “Foreign citizens who are single have no right to adopt children … and the age difference between the adopter and the child cannot be more than 45 years.” “The law is the same for everybody: for a president, for a minister, for Elton John.”

At Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC, we try to accommodate as many of our clients’ legal needs as possible. This builds trust and provides value to the client in many ways. And although our firm has earned a tremendous reputation in cases that can generally be described as civil rights or employment litigation, the experience and skills we have developed in those matters translate very well to matters involving family law. For more information, contact Leeds, Morelli and Brown, PC at 1-800-585-4658 for a free consultation.

Written By: Rodrigo C. Tordecilla

In a recent speech before the NAACP Convention, President Obama told attendees that “an African-American child is roughly five times as likely as a white child to see the inside of a prison.” Unfortunately for a Harvard Scholar, this statistic became a reality. A few hours before President Obama made this statement, Henry Louis “Skip” Gates Jr., a distinguished professor at Harvard University and considered one of the most powerful and influential black scholars in U.S. history, was arrested.

Gates had returned from a research trip to China only to find the front door to his Harvard-owned house jammed shut. His driver helped him in trying to open the door, but by the time Gates was on the phone with his leasing company, a policeman had arrived after a neighbor spotted two men looking as if they were breaking into the house. Supposedly upon arrival, the policeman asked Gates to step outside, but Gates refused. The officer entered the home and asked for Gates’ ID, which he initially refused to show, and finally had him arrested for allegedly “exhibiting loud and tumultuous behavior.”  Gates said that he in fact did show the officer his ID and asked the officer to identify himself. He refused and proceeded to arrest Gates. The charge against Gates was eventually dropped and the city of Cambridge issued a statement calling the incident “regrettable and unfortunate.”

It is argued that had Gates been a white professor, he would not have been arrested nor would his neighbors have alerted the police. His arrest has called the attention of individuals who are against the notion that America can now be considered a “post-racial paradise,” especially because the nation’s president is black. Until such incidents cease to occur, race will still remain an issue and paradise will continue to be out of reach.

It truly is sad and unfortunate when individuals are subjected to racism or discrimination, especially in a nation that was created on premises such as equal rights for all. The lawyers at Leeds Morelli & Brown, PC, located in Nassau County, New York, have fought against discrimination for over two decades with much success. If you have been a victim of discrimination because of your age, gender, race, or sexual orientation, call 1-800-585-4658 to schedule an appointment for free consultation.