I am a Native American man. The term Hispanic is a discriminatory word that denies and tries to hide, erase our true racial and cultural heritages. I speak Spanish and English, those languages don’t define my ancestry, culture, race. Carlos in DC blog: carlosqc.blogspot.com .

Justice David Souter has confirmed rumors of his retirement from the United States Supreme Court with a call to President Obama at the White House. Now comes speculation on who will replace him. This will be the first Supreme Court appointment for a Democratic President in more than fifteen years. The pick will most likely not change the ideological balance of the Supreme Court in that Souter was a liberal minded justice contrary to what was thought his leaning at the time he was appointed by then President George H. W. Bush. As might be expected, another liberal leaning justice will most likely be the pick. There is strong support for a female to be the replacement as there is only one female on the court as of now, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, seventy six years of age and not in the best of health having battled cancer several times during her tenure. This can be discerned by early discussions from liberal and feminist organizations weighing in on this as soon as it was rumored that Souter would be retiring leading one to assume they had been ready for any announcement of any retirement of justices several of whom will undoubtedly consider it soon. “We’re looking for President Obama to choose an eminently qualified candidate who is committed to the core constitutional values, who is committed to justice for all and not just a few.” So says Nan Aron, leader of the ultra-liberal/activist Alliance for Justice. Read: “We are looking for another liberal on the court to maintain the status quo.” They will undoubtedly push for a woman. It will be interesting to see their positions and recommendations. Now it gets sticky even if we assume President Obama will pick a liberal justice. Pressure will be on him to choose a woman – big time. Here we get into the arena of gender and/or ethnic politics. Critics of the Supreme Court have long accused it of being a bastion of conservative white males not reflective of the population as a whole. Cries have long echoed from various women’s groups to even the playing field by appointing more women to our nation’s highest judicial group. Several women possibilities have been mentioned as candidates including Judge Diane Wood of Chicago, Judge Sonia Sotomayor of  the appeals court in New York, and Judge Kim Wardlaw of the U.S. 9th Circuit among others. It will be interesting to see the complete list of women who surface as potential nominees. President Obama has not committed himself to appoint a woman as a matter of principle. He iterates he is looking for a good constitutional law candidate, one imminently qualified to do the job and not necessarily a candidate from this or that political activist group. But don’t underestimate the pressure from women’s groups to do just that. It will be immense and unrelenting to the point of being nearly insurmountable and not politically feasible to ignore. And ethnic groups, mainly the Hispanics, will weigh in heavily on nominating one of their choices. So the waiting begins. Will feminists prevail on the President? Will Hispanics clamor for their ethnic ‘dues’? It will be an interesting exercise in gender as well as ethnic politics – moreso than the most recent Presidential election process which was awash in such nonsense that it was about time we had a woman in the White House – as if that should have been the only consideration in our choice. Thankfully, not many succumbed to that argument although Hillary certainly pushed the limit on it. She may have claimed to having cracked the glass ceiling, but the voting public, who could have astoundingly shattered it, saw through her gender politics for just what it was – hogwash. Interestingly, the most sense I have heard so far on this selection process comes from the most unlikely of sources, Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School fame. In a conversation with Nora O’Donnell of MSNBC, the question of gender, ethnicity, as well as race was put on the table as a consideration in selecting the next justice. Mr. Dershowitz quickly quelled any thoughts of these factors by saying that “representational pressure” should not be a consideration in Obama’s choice. Instead he strongly advocated the most qualified should be the selected candidate – no other factors should be part of the decision. He especially denounced picking any judges as replacements. This was an astounding proclamation by Alan considering his liberal bent evidenced by his past legal discussions. The flip side of Dershowitz’s cautionary advice is the clamor from gender/ethnic affiliations to appoint one from their group. Immediately following O’Donnell’s segment on MSNBC, Chris Matthews of ‘Hardball’ hosted several guests to discuss the upcoming nomination. “Does President Obama’s Supreme Court pick need to be a woman? Does it need to be a Hispanic nominee?” Chris asked of his guests. One was a National Organization for Women representative who subtly advocated for a woman replacement for Souter. “It makes a difference. It increases the voice. It increases a perspective. And it adds something to the entire body. There’s actually research that says that male judges tend to vote a little differently when there are women on the court with them.” said NOW President Kim Gandy. But the most egregious example of what Dershowitz warns about was supplied by Ruben Navarrette, a staff columnist for The San Diego Union-Tribune and an avid pro-immigration advocate favoring the immigration invasion of our country by especially Mexicans – his heritage – here legally or illegally. Ruben revealed his perverse, ethnically unbalanced position when he answered a query from Chris concerning appointing a Hispanic to the Court: “We’re due!” he defiantly exclaimed as if this is some sort of lottery. “And I don’t just mean we’re due from the Obama administration. I mean we’re due throughout history…the real reason that you need to put a Latino on the Supreme Court, this is the fastest growing minority… this is a minority that, by 2032, will represent a quarter of the entire country…It’s the Latinos` turn to break their barrier.” Ruben continues his whiny tirade for justice for Hispanics: “It’s easy enough for white males to come forward and say that race and ethnicity or gender shouldn’t matter. But the fact is, this is the way we have always done this. And whether it was important for Italian-Americans to get Antonin Scalia there, or important for African-Americans to get Thurgood Marshall there, why is it, all of a sudden, when it’s Latinos` turn, that, oh, that’s identity politics? …It’s just not fair.” Imagine that? Have we really come to the juncture in our country where the spoils of government are appropriated according to gender, ethnicity, or race? Apparently, and regrettably, so. This will be the first of what will likely be numerous Supreme Court justice appointments that President Obama will be privileged to make. There are perhaps three rumored retirements in the near future in addition to Souter. His choices will be scrutinized by left and right groups to the extent each will be contentious. It is his call. Let’s keep our eyes open and our minds clear on this first one to see if it reveals any hidden agendas, political motivation, character traits, or what Dershowitz warns of: “representational pressure”.

Justice David Souter has confirmed rumors of his retirement from the United States Supreme Court with a call to President Obama at the White House. Now comes speculation on who will replace him. This will be the first Supreme Court appointment for a Democratic President in more than fifteen years. The pick will most likely not change the ideological balance of the Supreme Court in that Souter was a liberal minded justice contrary to what was thought his leaning at the time he was appointed by then President George H. W. Bush. As might be expected, another liberal leaning justice will most likely be the pick. There is strong support for a female to be the replacement as there is only one female on the court as of now, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, seventy six years of age and not in the best of health having battled cancer several times during her tenure. This can be discerned by early discussions from liberal and feminist organizations weighing in on this as soon as it was rumored that Souter would be retiring leading one to assume they had been ready for any announcement of any retirement of justices several of whom will undoubtedly consider it soon. “We’re looking for President Obama to choose an eminently qualified candidate who is committed to the core constitutional values, who is committed to justice for all and not just a few.” So says Nan Aron, leader of the ultra-liberal/activist Alliance for Justice. Read: “We are looking for another liberal on the court to maintain the status quo.” They will undoubtedly push for a woman. It will be interesting to see their positions and recommendations. Now it gets sticky even if we assume President Obama will pick a liberal justice. Pressure will be on him to choose a woman – big time. Here we get into the arena of gender and/or ethnic politics. Critics of the Supreme Court have long accused it of being a bastion of conservative white males not reflective of the population as a whole. Cries have long echoed from various women’s groups to even the playing field by appointing more women to our nation’s highest judicial group. Several women possibilities have been mentioned as candidates including Judge Diane Wood of Chicago, Judge Sonia Sotomayor of  the appeals court in New York, and Judge Kim Wardlaw of the U.S. 9th Circuit among others. It will be interesting to see the complete list of women who surface as potential nominees. President Obama has not committed himself to appoint a woman as a matter of principle. He iterates he is looking for a good constitutional law candidate, one imminently qualified to do the job and not necessarily a candidate from this or that political activist group. But don’t underestimate the pressure from women’s groups to do just that. It will be immense and unrelenting to the point of being nearly insurmountable and not politically feasible to ignore. And ethnic groups, mainly the Hispanics, will weigh in heavily on nominating one of their choices. So the waiting begins. Will feminists prevail on the President? Will Hispanics clamor for their ethnic ‘dues’? It will be an interesting exercise in gender as well as ethnic politics – moreso than the most recent Presidential election process which was awash in such nonsense that it was about time we had a woman in the White House – as if that should have been the only consideration in our choice. Thankfully, not many succumbed to that argument although Hillary certainly pushed the limit on it. She may have claimed to having cracked the glass ceiling, but the voting public, who could have astoundingly shattered it, saw through her gender politics for just what it was – hogwash. Interestingly, the most sense I have heard so far on this selection process comes from the most unlikely of sources, Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School fame. In a conversation with Nora O’Donnell of MSNBC, the question of gender, ethnicity, as well as race was put on the table as a consideration in selecting the next justice. Mr. Dershowitz quickly quelled any thoughts of these factors by saying that “representational pressure” should not be a consideration in Obama’s choice. Instead he strongly advocated the most qualified should be the selected candidate – no other factors should be part of the decision. He especially denounced picking any judges as replacements. This was an astounding proclamation by Alan considering his liberal bent evidenced by his past legal discussions. The flip side of Dershowitz’s cautionary advice is the clamor from gender/ethnic affiliations to appoint one from their group. Immediately following O’Donnell’s segment on MSNBC, Chris Matthews of ‘Hardball’ hosted several guests to discuss the upcoming nomination. “Does President Obama’s Supreme Court pick need to be a woman? Does it need to be a Hispanic nominee?” Chris asked of his guests. One was a National Organization for Women representative who subtly advocated for a woman replacement for Souter. “It makes a difference. It increases the voice. It increases a perspective. And it adds something to the entire body. There’s actually research that says that male judges tend to vote a little differently when there are women on the court with them.” said NOW President Kim Gandy. But the most egregious example of what Dershowitz warns about was supplied by Ruben Navarrette, a staff columnist for The San Diego Union-Tribune and an avid pro-immigration advocate favoring the immigration invasion of our country by especially Mexicans – his heritage – here legally or illegally. Ruben revealed his perverse, ethnically unbalanced position when he answered a query from Chris concerning appointing a Hispanic to the Court: “We’re due!” he defiantly exclaimed as if this is some sort of lottery. “And I don’t just mean we’re due from the Obama administration. I mean we’re due throughout history…the real reason that you need to put a Latino on the Supreme Court, this is the fastest growing minority… this is a minority that, by 2032, will represent a quarter of the entire country…It’s the Latinos` turn to break their barrier.” Ruben continues his whiny tirade for justice for Hispanics: “It’s easy enough for white males to come forward and say that race and ethnicity or gender shouldn’t matter. But the fact is, this is the way we have always done this. And whether it was important for Italian-Americans to get Antonin Scalia there, or important for African-Americans to get Thurgood Marshall there, why is it, all of a sudden, when it’s Latinos` turn, that, oh, that’s identity politics? …It’s just not fair.” Imagine that? Have we really come to the juncture in our country where the spoils of government are appropriated according to gender, ethnicity, or race? Apparently, and regrettably, so. This will be the first of what will likely be numerous Supreme Court justice appointments that President Obama will be privileged to make. There are perhaps three rumored retirements in the near future in addition to Souter. His choices will be scrutinized by left and right groups to the extent each will be contentious. It is his call. Let’s keep our eyes open and our minds clear on this first one to see if it reveals any hidden agendas, political motivation, character traits, or what Dershowitz warns of: “representational pressure”.

Al Bermudez Pereira (49) – of a Puerto Rican heritage and raised in Brooklyn, found inspiration to portray in this book his 20 years of experience as a correctional officer in one of the most repressive facilities in the nation. Sing Sing located in Ossining, New York, is considered as the warehouse for society’s worst criminals.

As the economic downturn worsens and unemployment rises in America, civil rights advocates and lawyers and Hispanic, Latino and Mexican-American discrimination attorneys in California fear the result may be an increase in discrimination toward Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans in the U.S. If you have been the victim of discrimination toward Hispanics, Latinos or Mexican-Americans, visit our website at http://www.CaliforniaAttorneysLawyers.com and call us at any of the numbers easily found on our website. While America has always stood for being a country with diverse ethnic cultures that make us great, the fear is that those who have the least, may suffer the most in this economic downturn as unemployment rises and jobs, even those that were previously unwanted, now become a precious commodity. At the Law Firm of R. Sebastian Gibson, California Hispanic, Latino and Mexican-American Discrimination Lawyer, Sebastian Gibson has always stood for the protection of the civil rights of everyone living in the U.S. We fight for the rights of Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans to be treated with the same respect and the protections afforded to them under the law as every one else should be in America. And we are concerned that in these uncertain times, Hispanic, Latino and Mexican-American families do not become the object of discrimination when we should all be pulling together to help each other in times of need. While African-Americans in this country have for many decades, always suffered the most unemployment, Hispanics and Latinos are not far behind. And while African-Americans can now look to President Obama as an inspiration to what a person can do of any race, Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans as well as other minorities, still suffer from discrimination in the work place and in daily life. Instead of becoming a society where the rich cultures of Hispanics and Latinos are shared with other cultures in America, too much of the country remains segregated where Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans either choose to live or can only afford to live where the majority of their citizens are concentrated in parts of cities away from where Caucasians, African-Americans or other minorities live. There are many causes of discrimination, all of which are idiotic, but the less interaction different cultures have, the more likely it is there will be discrimination by those who do not relate to each other. Studies have found that nearly three in every ten Hispanic workers feel they have been discriminated against in their employment. Some report being referred to with racial slurs at work while one in four feel they are paid less and have reduced career advancement prospects than their Caucasian counterparts. In many organizations, there is a scarcity of Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans in management positions. FBI statistics show a dramatic increase in anti-Hispanic hate crimes. And sadly, hate groups are increasing due to anti-illegal immigration concerns. One would have thought that as a result of this situation, that there would be a flood of civil rights advocates and anti-discrimination lawyers fighting for the rights of Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans. Yet, that is not the case. A symbol of discrimination to many Hispanics, Latinos and Mexican-Americans is the construction of the U.S.-Mexico border fence which is actually several separation barriers designed to prevent illegal movement of goods and people across the U.S. and Mexico border. The U.S.- Mexico border fence is reportedly nearing completion as this article is being written in March 2009. While much of the purported reasoning for the multi-billion dollar fence was based on preventing the entry of terrorists into the country, many feel that reasoning is flawed while our border with Canada remains open. While the efforts have also been aimed at stopping the flow of drugs into the U.S. a secondary effort is to prevent the flow of weapons bought in the U.S. and smuggled into Mexico. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has said that even the fence will not stop illegal immigration along the border with Mexico, although it may help prevent those who are crossing illegally from blending immediately into some town populations. However, the fence is not continuous and where there are gaps, surveillance technology must be utilized. And then, there remains the fear that tunnels will be used even more extensively than in the past. Over forty tunnels have been found since 2001 and some have been extremely sophisticated. One such tunnel from Tijuana to San Diego was half a mile long, sixty to eighty feet deep, and eight feet tall. It had drainage, electricity and a concrete floor, and its entrance from the California side was in a modern warehouse. The entrance to the tunnel in Mexico was in another building. It should be noted that the border with Mexico is 1,951 miles in length. The fence that is reportedly nearing completion was only completed for approximately 600 miles in February 2009, when news reports came out that the fence was nearly finished. As a result of the construction of the barrier, there has now been an increase in the number of people trying to cross in such areas as the Sonoran Desert and over the Baboquivari Mountain in Arizona where no fence exists. This requires crossing 50 miles of inhospitable terrain to reach the Tohono O’odham Indian Reservation, which many fear may lead to an increase in migrant deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border if the smugglers try these more difficult routes. In the last thirteen years, there have been around five thousand migrant deaths along the border. The U.S. Border Patrol Tucson Sector reported on October 15, 2008 that its agents saved 443 illegal aliens from almost certain death after being abandoned by their smugglers. Without the efforts of these border patrol agents, many more deaths would have occurred and may occur in the future. The U.S.-Mexico border fence has been controversial, to say the least, since its inception. It has been condemned by the government of Mexico and opposed by many in the U.S. as well. Tribal lands of three American Indian Nations will be divided by the border fence and the campus of the University of Texas at Brownville will be divided into two parts according to a vice president of the university. A section of the barrier was even mistakenly built inside Mexican territory requiring its removal and rebuilding at a cost of over three million dollars. Visit our website at http://www.CaliforniaAttorneysLawyers.com and call us if you have been the victim of discrimination toward Hispanics, Latinos or Mexican-Americans. There is no excuse for discrimination in America. If you have been the victim of discrimination against Hispanics, Latinos or Mexican-Americans, call California Civil Rights Lawyer Sebastian Gibson for a consultation.

Weddings are costly of fares. Tremendous expenses are generally incurred. In the anglo american culture, the bride’s family pays for most of the wedding. In the Latino culture, immediate and extended families, of the bride and groom contribute their time, talents, and treasures to help the couple with some of the costs, thus making the wedding a community celebration.

Often, several pairs of godparents’ or a godfather or padrino and a godmother or madrina are chosen to provide invitations, the wedding cake, and other wedding necessities, or they give money to the couple for these items. Sometimes godparents’ pay for more than they can afford to avoid appearing less than generous. Because of their generosity of their gifts and the significance roll they play, the sponsors are acknowledged by having their names listed on special inserts and wedding invitations. Even if you’re fortunate to have supportive relatives and padrinos, one should not take advantage of their generosity. The engaged couple to be should take into consideration the responsibility of sticking with a realistic budget. A good idea for the future couple to be married is to work within a budget.

The budget should include rings, stationery, bridal attire, the groom’s attire, parents attire, godparents’ attire, specialty items, flowers, photography or video, music, transportation, accommodation for out of town guests, reception , accessories, decorations, honeymoon, gifts, parties, and any other miscellaneous items. By setting a budget you’ll be able to prepare for any unexpected surprises that may come up at the last minute. Here at the best-wedding-dress.com we hope to share with you helpful tips and ideas for that special day.

Next the couple to be married should check into the marriage License which is a civil contract. The couple to be married are entering a legal contract as well as an emotional and moral commitment. To make your marriage legal, you’ll need a license.

Marriage laws differ from state to state so check with the marriage licensing bureau about health prerequisites, age of consent, time of validity, documents required for presentation, and application fees. The engaged couple must apply for the marriage license in person. You may be required to bring your birth certificates, identification cards, death certificate of a former spouse if widowed, annulment or divorce decree if previously married, and results of any blood tests. Proof of U.S. citizenship may also be necessary. Call the marriage licensing bureau first to save time.

If you’re going to be getting married to someone who is a citizen of another country, be aware of the Immigration laws.. Americans are marrying foreigners at the rate of almost 225,000 year, and more than 2.5 million International couples have married and settled in the U.S. in the last three decades. The immigrant spouse must stay married and reside with a U.S. citizen for three years before the naturalization process can begin. One should be careful about violating immigration laws or else you and your non American spouse can be legally separated by deportation. Contact the INS for more affirmation about these issues and other international marriage laws .