top of page

Grupo Planejados & CIA

Público·10 membros

Best Of Fashion Tv Part 40 Model Oops ~REPACK~

Search best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos PhotosSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos XXX VideosSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos HD VideosSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos Indian VideosSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos MP4 VideosSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos Indian ImagesSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos Leaked VideosSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos Leaked PicsSearch best nipples on the catwalk modelsww riya sen sex 3gp videos XXX Posts

best of fashion tv part 40 model oops


Speaker 1: 00:00 The Supreme court reviews, a law favoring, California farm worker unions,Speaker 2: 00:05 A fundamental tenant of labor organizing is the ability to communicate with workers to convey information.Speaker 1: 00:11 I'm Andrew Bowen with Maureen Kavanaugh. This is KPBS mid day edition. Thousands of inmates in California jails are spending years behind bars while they wait trialSpeaker 3: 00:30 In San Francisco, where, you know, only about 5% of the population is black. 50% of the unsentenced inmates who've been there for more than a year are black.Speaker 1: 00:41 How feces could shed light on the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines and from our port of entry podcast across border love story. That's not about romance that's ahead on midday edition.Speaker 3: 00:52 Yeah.Speaker 1: 01:01 Today is the birthday of the late labor and civil rights activist says are Chavez observed in California as an official holiday. Now almost 30 years after Chavez's death. A key part of his legacy is in jeopardy earlier this month, the us Supreme court heard arguments in a case surrounding a 1975 California law that affords union organizers limited access to farms to organize workers. Growers can tend the law violates their property rights while unions and the California department of justice say it's necessary to protect the right of farm workers to unionize. Joining me to discuss the case is Richard Paul, a founding partner at Paul Plevin, LLP as well as a professor at the university of San Diego school of law, specializing in employment and labor law. Richard, welcome, glad to be with you. Let's start by giving us some background on this case. What is the basis of this original 1975 law? And why are we seeing a challenge to it? Now?Speaker 2: 02:00 The basis of the access regulation was the recognition that agricultural labor is fundamentally different than labor in the private sector. Elsewhere seasons are short and at the time many of the workers lived on the premises. A fundamental tenant of labor organizing is the ability to communicate with workers. Workers have a right to receive information and union organizers have a right to, to convey information. So the origin of the rule was the Frank recognition that in the short season where election cycles are very short and expedited method of getting information to farmers, farm workers, so they could make intelligent votes was necessary. That's the origin of the rule itself. The basic challenge by the growers is that the rule has become out of date back in, uh, 1975 when the act was passed. And shortly thereafter, when the regulation was, uh, there weren't sufficient alternate means of communicating with farm workers, but now there are, uh, through cell phones, social media and the like, um, communication is essential. And the growers in their petition observed that none of these workers actually lived on the premises at the farms that were involved. And so there was really no need for a regulation that, that allows outsiders to come onto the premises.Speaker 1: 03:23 Do other States give unions the right to enter farms and speak with workers, or is this unique to California?Speaker 2: 03:30 It is unique to California in this respect, federal labor law governs labor relations generally in the private sector, but it excludes agricultural labor relations from its coverage. So States are free to have their own versions of the national labor relations act. California has by far the most developed version. And by far the most liberal access regulation. Uh, my sense is that it is likely that no other state has a rule that is quite as permissive as California.Speaker 1: 04:03 The argument from growers is that this law violates the takings clause in the fifth amendment to the U S constitution. Explain what that is and how they want it to apply. In this case.Speaker 2: 04:14 Takings clause of the constitution basically says, uh, that, uh, if the government takes the property of a private citizen for public use, the government has to pay for the property that it is taken. So if the government condemns your land to build a freeway, the government has the power to condemn your land, but it has to pay for that. Land of edit has taken, uh, in the last 30 years, an issue has arisen that we call regulatory taking, and that is where the government doesn't actually physically take the property, but by regulation, it diminishes or impairs the value or use of the property in the nature of an easement that allows non invited people, union organizers to come on the property and therefore the government has to pay for it.Speaker 1: 05:05 You said that growers argue this law is outdated, that it was passed before social media or when farm workers, most for the most part lived on farms. What do unions counter to that argument? They say, of course, that it is still necessary. What are their arguments?Speaker 2: 05:21 Well, their arguments are several fold. First. They say it is necessary to be able to speak with workers where they are, especially given the fact that workers may come from lots of different locations and then meet together before the Workday or stay together in groups after the Workday. And frankly, it's just more efficient for organizers to meet with them at those points in time. Uh, workers often will get on buses and then be driven to various fields where they work and they're dispersed. And it's very difficult to keep track of them in that fashion. The other argument that labor makes, uh, is that because election cycles are very, very quick in agriculture because the season is short, the workers are only there for a short period of time. So if there's going to be a union election, campaigning has to be done. Quickly, elections have to be done quickly. And the like that this is heightened access is really necessary to effectuate the purpose of the act, which is the having farm workers have free choice in deciding whether they want to unionizeSpeaker 1: 06:25 U us Supreme court has a solid conservative majority now, and past decisions have shown they're somewhat skeptical of labor rights. How might the justices rule in this case, could the largest be overturned completely?Speaker 2: 06:38 Uh, I doubt it, uh, it's possible that it, that it could be overturned, but I think that the major concern based on the questions that the justices asked from the bench, uh, is that this doctrine of, uh, regulatory taking is in danger of being expanded in a way that will be difficult to contain it. The questions from justice Roberts, from justice, SOTA, Moyer, and others seem to be suggesting that they're looking for a way potentially to rule with the growers, but without having to expand the idea that incidental government have restrictions on the use of property violate the constitution. Uh, I read a blog, uh, earlier today, uh, that, that gives you an idea of what is at stake, at least in one person's viewpoint. And that is that the civil rights era laws, uh, w w where, where we said, essentially that owners of private businesses that are businesses of public accommodation hotels, and the like, uh, have to allow patrons of all colors, imposes an incidental burden, uh, that otherwise wouldn't be there.Speaker 2: 07:50 If property owners had free choice to exclude anybody they want. Uh, but we have long since, as a society grown very comfortable with the idea that that's an appropriate use of governmental power and pursuit of governmental objectives of equity and inclusion. And so I think that the majority of the Supreme court is very much aware that this doctrine, uh, if, if expanded to make potentially a taking out of, uh, relatively minor intrusions of governmental power, uh, is troublesome and some of the justices on the court, as I'm sure you know, are, um, our, our fans, if you will, or have shown, uh, and awareness of, um, the importance of government being able to function, uh, without significant restriction, others seem to be more sensitive to property rights, but the, I predict that there will be, uh, an Alliance of different viewpoints in this decision when it comes out. That will be very non-traditional.Speaker 1: 08:53 I've been speaking with of San DiegoSpeaker 4: 08:56 Law, professor Richard, Paul and Richard. Thank you. You're very welcome. The Corona virus pandemic has shaken up the state's criminal justice system for months. Courts were closed, and many inmates were released early as the threat of COVID raged through prisons and jails, but there is also a fundamental problem facing the legal system. That's been around longer than the virus. It's the large number of people accused of crimes. Who've been left, waiting in jail for years for their day in court. And investigative report by Cal matters has found that there are more than 1200 people in this state who have been in jail for more than three years waiting for their trials to begin. One man accused of murder has been waiting in jail for his day in court for 12 years. Johnny Ms. Reporter Robert Lewis, author of the Cal matters report waiting for justice and Robert, welcome to the program. Thanks for having me. Is this a problem in jails and court systems throughout the state?Speaker 5: 10:07 It is. I mean, up and down the state, uh, many courts within California just have had historically a difficult time closing cases in a timely manner. And the pandemic has, has certainly made the situation worse in a lot of places,Speaker 4: 10:23 KPBS, investigative reporter, Claire Traeger, sir, calculated that approximately 350 people have been in San Diego County jail waiting a year or more for trial, but it was hard to get a firm number on that. Did you also encounter that problem,Speaker 5: 10:41 Huge issue? Uh, there, there is not good data on this, which, which just completely calls into question, the ability of, of state judicial branch administration to, uh, to provide any effective oversight. Um, they're, they're just, I asked a number of, of sort of state bodies, trying to figure out basic questions about how long cases are taking, how many people are behind bars for extended periods of time, and it just doesn't exist. And so I ended up having to put in, uh, public records requests to, uh, all 58 County Sheriff's departments, uh, scrape online, inmate locators use court records to really just try to even begin to understand, uh, the scope of the problem.Speaker 4: 11:23 Are there racial disparities involved in who winds up behind bars for years before their trials?Speaker 5: 11:29 Certainly I was able to get a racial demographic breakdowns for about 21 of the counties and the majority of the, uh, pretrial detainee, uh, the unsentenced inmates in those counties, uh, do appear to be black or Latino, Hispanic, uh, as listed in the, in the various reports. And one small example in, in San Francisco where, you know, only about 5% of the is black, um, 50% of the, uh, unsentenced inmates who've been there for, for more than a year are black.Speaker 4: 12:01 And our jails are quick to house inmates for long periods of time.Speaker 5: 12:07 You know, the advocates that I talked to in the inmates themselves, uh, say, no, um, they say that jails really aren't made to hold people for a long time. There's often not outdoor space. There's often not the same types of programs, say like educational programs for the folks inside. And so, uh, you know, one inmate who who's currently there who has spent time in prison, uh, said being in jail is hard to time. Uh, that's what, that's what he called it. It's, um, it's really not, it's not the best situation. And, and, you know, a number of the, the inmates I talked to, you know, also said, you know, when you're in prison, you can work on bettering yourself. It's just, it's a different quality of life. And you know, that the next stage from there is, is home. Um, whereas you're in jail, you're locked down. Uh, there's not as much outdoor space. There's not as much to do. And you're just in this sort of state of limbo, not knowing what is going to happen to youSpeaker 4: 13:02 Now, does the recent state Supreme court ruling that people can't be held in jail simply because they can't afford bail. Does that have any impact on these cases?Speaker 5: 13:13 You know, it could have some impact going forward in the future. Um, but not an immediate impact. I mean, it's, it's not like the jail doors are suddenly flung open and these people are getting out. Um, you know, that the attorneys that I talked to say in many of these cases, uh, the defense attorneys are going to have to file motions for reconsideration. Judges are going to have to figure out how they're going to handle this. Um, and you know, they still can decide to hold someone in jail if there's a public safety reason, uh, or potentially if, uh, if they think they might not show back up in court. So there's a lot of while advocates certainly hailed that decision. Uh, there's a lot that is, is left. Uh, in question after that decision came outSpeaker 4: 13:56 Now, in your report, you go through some of the reasons that people wind up waiting for months and years for their trials, the things like court continuances, sentence enhancements, multiple defendants cuts to court budgets, but overall, what has happened to the defendant's right to a speedy trial?Speaker 5: 14:16 Well, if, if you talk to prosecutors, they put a lot of the blame on defense attorneys and they say, look, there, there are speedy trial rights. It's the defense attorneys who are waiving those rights and are continuously asking for continuances, asking for delays so they can prepare a case. Um, and, and what prosecutors will say is their cases don't age well that, that, uh, witnesses die. They, they, their memories fade. And so there is an interest for prosecutors to moving things, moving things quickly, however, uh, defense attorneys and advocates sort of counter and say, you know, the sentences, uh, the sentence enhancements, the three strikes law here in California, or our soldier konijn that, that they need to, uh, spend extra time with these cases because the system is so stacked against their clients, that if they lose, uh, you know, their clients are facing life behind bars. And they also, uh, allege that prosecutors will, will sort of pile on the charges, knowing that a defendant is gonna gonna sit in jail and, and it's going to pressure them to take, to take a plea deal. So, um, there's sort of a lot of blame to go around. And, and, you know, one thing to mention is of course the courts as well, they have a role to play. The judges, have the ability to, uh, to say, they're not going to grant a continuance or to, or to push things to resolve more quickly.Speaker 4: 15:32 So have many of the defendants held for years refused a plea deal?Speaker 5: 15:38 Uh, conceivably, yes. I mean, the ones I talked to, a number of the attorneys, I talked to that that is the case. Um, although there's also a number of, you know, cases I looked into where there wasn't a plea deal on the table, or at least not initially, and that the prosecutors were taking a very hard line. Uh, the elected prosecutor, prosecutors, I should add, we're taking a very hard line in specific cases. So, um, you know, every case is, is different and their unique situations and circumstances at play.Speaker 4: 16:05 Is there any compensation for someone held for months, even years if they are acquitted or if the case has been droppedSpeaker 5: 16:14 Likely not? Um, I mean there are, uh, civil remedies available, but, um, you know, the, the attorneys that I talked to say, it's, it's, those are, it's fairly difficult to, um, to, to get money, prove a claim, uh, through those routes. So, so no, I mean, it's not like, uh, you know, you're acquitted after three years behind bars and they say, oops, here's a, here's a whole bunch of money for your, for your time. Uh, it doesn't really work that way.Speaker 4: 16:40 Now your report also documents what these delays due to the victims of crime and their families. What is it like for them waiting for justice?Speaker 5: 16:49 I, it sounds horrible. I, I, you know, I talked to a number of victims and victim families and, and, you know, they talk a lot about, about closure and wanting to move on with their life. I interviewed the mother of a 21 year old man who was, who was murdered in Sacramento. She lives in Texas and she, you know, she flew out for the first hearing, uh, with, with a friend, she, she flew out on the anniversary to meet the new, uh, prosecutor in the case she's logged on to every zoom hearing and she could still have months and years of, of this case dragging out. I talked to the brother of a woman who was murdered nearly 12 years ago. Uh, and he's just completely fed up with the judicial system, uh, and any hope of, of sort of closure through, through justiceSpeaker 4: 17:37 And our lawmakers coming up with any answers to solve these long waits behind bars.Speaker 5: 17:43 You know, I think that's really going to be a big question going forward. Uh, you know, you talk to judges, you talk to judicial administration. And, and one thing they say is that historically for years, the court system has been underfunded. Um, and so, you know, as we have this amazing, uh, pandemic related backlog contributing to what the backlog that already existed, um, you know, I, I do think there are some questions to the legislators, you know, at what point, uh, do they use the power of the purse to maybe help the court system, uh, use their oversight function to, to maybe look a little bit more closely at what's going on.Speaker 4: 18:22 I've been speaking with reporter Robert Lewis, author of the Cal matters report waiting for justice and Robert. Thanks a lot. You're welcome. Thank you for having me. This is KPBS midday edition. I'm Maureen Cavenaugh with Andrew Bowen gang involvement has led to jail time, substance abuse and even deaths. We're going to hear from an organization helping at-risk North County youth overcome their gang involvement for a chance at a new life KPBS North County reporter, Tonya thorn has this story about the group called resilience.Speaker 6: 19:02 Send that I'm older. I grew up surrounded by gangs drugs and an unstable home.Speaker 7: 19:06 I didn't have nobody there. So I ended up turning to gangs and everything that I was looking for at home. I found it in the streets. I'm a recovering addict. I started using drugs when I was 13. Um, I had some traumatic experience when I was growing up at the age of eight. And, um, it just skyrocketed from thereSpeaker 6: 19:28 At 21 more. I went to prison she's as prison and letting her family down where the turning points to her turbulent life.Speaker 7: 19:35 I just, you know, it was time, time to change my life aroundSpeaker 6: 19:39 Moda. Now, 45 years old chose to give back to the community she grew up in. She is studying drug and alcohol counseling at Palomar college and expects to graduate in the next two years. Mora is also a mentor for resilience, a nonprofit organization, helping at-risk North County, youth on probation or leaving juve


Bem-vindo ao grupo! Você pode se conectar com outros membros...
bottom of page