Civil Rights

CIVIL RIGHTS

What's New?

Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act Goes to President for Signature
October 23, 2009. The Senate has voted to approve the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention as Division E (sections 4701-4714) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2010. Section 4707 of the new provisions add the following to the existing offenses listed in Section 249 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code. "Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin. . . . Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. . . ." It also extends coverage of these matters to U.S. maritime jurisdiction and to territories. (NOTE: The defense authorization act is a very large statute and therefore a large .pdf file).
Access the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 2010.

Southern Poverty Law Center Issues Report on Anti-Latino Racism in Suffolk County, New York
October 17, 2009. The November 2008 murder of Ecudaorian immigrant Marcelo Lucero in the Long Island community of Patchogue has prompted renewed attention to anti-immigrant and racially based discrimination in contemporary America. The Southern Povery Law Center in September issued a report on the problem in Suffolk County, New York entitled "Climate of Fear: Latinos Immigrants in Suffolk County, N.Y." Although attempts were made by local officals to dismiss the claim that the case was symptomatic of a much larger and more pervasive problem, the report found that: "THe situation in Suffolk County, in fact, is a microcosm of a problem facing the enture United States, where FBI statistics suggest a 40% rise in anti-Latino hate crimes between 2003 and 2007, the latest numbers available. The number of hate groups in America has been rising, too, climing more than 50% since 2000, mainly by exploiting the issue of undocumented non-white immigration." Id. at 5.
Access the Report.
Access the SPLC Homepage

Weschester County Housing Cases Produces Consent Agreement
August 10, 2009. The Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York and Westchester County, New York have announced an agreement to remedy a False Claims Act suit brought by the center, claiming that the county had falsely verified in federal grant applications that it was aggressively moving to address possible housing discrimination and a lack of low and moderate income housing in the county. Judge Denise Cote issued an opinion and order in March, granting partial summary judgment to the Center U.S. ex rel. Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York v. Westchester County, 06 Civ. 2860 (DLC).
   Read a summary of the provisions of the agreement .
   Read the full text of the order of settlement.
   The Judge Cote's March 24, 2009 opinion and order.
   Read the original complaint in the case.

President Commits U.S. to Sign U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
July 26, 2009. President Obama has issued a proclamation commemorating the enactment of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), proclaiming July 26 to be the anniversary of the Act, and committing the U.S. to sign the U.C. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
   Read the Proclamation on the Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
   Access U.N. Enable, the Website on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
   Read Convention and Optional Protocol.

Supreme Court Delivers Ruling in the New Haven Firefighters Case
June 29, 2009. The Supreme Court has delivered its opinion in the Ricci v. DeStefano case, concerning the New Haven, Connecticut firefighters promotion test. The 5-4 ruling was delivered by Justice Kennedy, striking the city's decision not to use the results of the test for promotions. Justice Kennedy wrote: "We conclude that race-based action like the City's in this case is impermissible under Title VII unless the employer can demonstrate a strong basis in evidence that, had it not taken the action, it would have been liable under the disparate-impact statute. The respondents, we further determine, cannot meet that threshold standard. As a result, the City's action in discarding the tests was a violation of Title VII. IN light of our ruling under the statutes, we need not reach the question whether respondents' actions may have violated the Equal Protection Clause." Slip opinion at 2-3. Justice Ginsburg wrote for the four dissenters, warning that the Court had ignored law, history, and the clear facts of the New Haven case.
   Read the opinions in the Connecticut case.
   Read the oral argument transcript.
   Read Brief for Petitioners.
   Read the Brief for Respondents.
   Read the Brief Amicus Curiae of the U.S..

Supreme Court Issues Major Ruling Limiting Remedial Authority of Federal Courts in Arizona English Language Learners Case
June 26, 2009. A sharply divided Supreme Court has issued an opinion in Horne v. Flores, a case that originally came from English language instruction in the school district of Nogales, Arizona. However, the focus of the case as it came to the Supreme Court was not on ELL, but actually on the judge's continuing rulings about the remedy for the problem. As the Justice Alito put it, writing for the majority, "the question at issue in these cases in not whether Arizona must take 'appropriate action' to overcome the language barriers that impede ELL students. Of course it must. But petitioners argue that Arizona now is fulfilling its statutory obligation by new means that reflect new policy insights and other changed circumstances." Slip opinion at 2.
   The court of appeals upheld the federal district court's actions in the face of demands by some state officials, most notably the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate of the Arizona legislature, that the court should end its role in the case. Ironically, the State of Arizona and the Arizona State Board of Public Education filed a brief in support of the family in the case, as did a number of the state's other school districts. The United States filed as amicus curiae also in support of the family.
   The Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Alito for a five person majority found that the judge had indeed exceeded his authority. Four justices dissented in an opinion written by Justice Breyer. The importance of the case as a precedent for the future is more about the manner in which judges exercise remedial authority in cases than it is just about the particular facts of the Arizona dispute. The Court's language warns judges in "institutional reform" cases to return control to state and local officials as soon as possible once there is a remedy in place or circumstances have changed. The majority found that, in this case, the lower court did not "fairly consider" the changes that had taken place in the education policy that gave rise to the legislation. However, writing for the dissenters, Justice Breyer disputed both the Court's interpretation of the law governing the judge's remedial authority and the facts of the case. He argued that the focus of the case in the lower court at the time of this ruling was not on how to teach ELL students, but whether the state and school district had provided the resources essential to meet the conditions that were central to the ELL problem in the first place and the proposed state and local response to it. As to the majority's application of a new standard, he warned: "insofar as the Court goes beyond the technical reord-based aspects of this case and applied a new review framework, it risks problems in future cases. The framework it applies is incomplete and lacks clear legal support or explanation. And it will be difficult for lower courts to understand and apply that framework, particularly if it rests on a distinction between 'institutional reform litigation' and other forms of litigation." Slip opinion at 44. And to the degree it meant to be an even wider statement, there are additional difficulties. "[T]he Court may mean its opinion to express an attitude, cautioning judges to take care when the enforcement of federal statutes will impose significant financial burders upon states. An attitude, however, is not a rule of law. . . . I do not see how this Court can now require lowere court judges to take yet greater care, to proceed with even greater caution, while at the same time expecting those courts to enforce the statute as Congress intended. " Id. at 44-45.
   Both the majority's discussion of the law that must control efforts by lower courts to remedy civil rights violations and the focus on limiting judicial rulings affecting financial aspects of the problem are likely to be broadly applicable to a variety of cases involving state institutions and services.
   Read the Horne v. Flores opinion.
   Read the oral argument transcript.
   Read the Brief for Petitioner Horne, State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
   Read the Brief for Petitioner, Speaker of the Arizona House.
   Read Brief for Respondents State of Arizona and Arizona State Board of Education.
   Read Brief for Respondent Flores.
   Read Brief of the United States as Amicus Curiae in support of Repondent.

Supreme Court Rules in School Strip Search Case
June 25, 2009. The Supreme Court, in an 8-1 opinion, ruled against school officials in a case in which they had engaged in a strip search of a young girl. The opinion in No. 08-479, Stafford Unified School District v. Redding. Writing for the Court, Justice Souter concluded that the type of search involved was both intrusive and degrading and therefore was not justified by the facts. "We do mean . . . to make it clear that the T.L.O. concern to limit a school search to reasonable scope requires the support of reasonable suspicioy of danger or of resort to underwear for hiding evidence of wrongdoing before a search can reasonably make the quantum leap from outer clothes and backpacks to exposure of intimate parts. The meaning of such a search, and the degradation its subject may reasonably fee, place a search that intrusive in a category of its own demanding its own specific suspicions." Slip opinion at 11.
   Read the opinion.
   Read the oral argument transcript.
   Read Brief for Petitioners.
   Read the Brief for Respondents.
   Read the Brief Amicus Curiae of the U.S..

Supreme Court Avoids Constitutional Question in Challenge to Voting Rights Act
June 23, 2009. The Supreme Court has issued a ruling in a case brought by a Texas special district, but it avoided the important constitutional questional raised by the briefs and oral argument. Indeed, the Court in Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v. Holder, refused to strike Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The utility district sought to apply a doctrine developed long after passage of the Act and the rulings of the Supreme Court upholding it as a valid exercise of the Fifteenth Amendment to strike the preclearance requirement of Section five on grounds that it is not a "proportional and congruent" remedy for voting rights problems. However, the Court's interpretation of the statute suggests that the will be more conflicts ahead.
   Read the opinion.
   Read the oral argument transcript.
   Access the audio of the oral argument via CSPAN.
   Read Brief for Petitioners.
   Read the Brief for Respondents.

Congress Moves Apologies for Civil Rights Violations
June 19, 2009. Senator Tom Harkin (D. Iowa) led the successful effort in the Senate to pass S. Con. Res. 26, An Apology For Enslavement And Racial Segregation Of African-Americans. The resolution apologizes for slavery and for Jim Crow segregation laws and other actions. It has been sent to the House. As a concurrent resolution, this measure would not need to go to the president.
   There is also an effort led by Senator Brownback (R. Kansas) and Representative Dan Boren (D. Oklahoma) to adopt a resolution "To acknowledge a long history of official depredations and ill-conceived policies by the Federal Government regarding Indian tribes and offer an apology to all Native Peoples on behalf of the United States." The Senate version is S.J. Res. 14 and the House number is H.J. Res. 46. The language as the resolutions stand currently is provided below. If the measure passes, as a joint resolution it will go to the president.
   Access S. Con Res. 26.
   Access Senator Harkin's Speech on the Apology.
   Read S.J. Res 14.
   Read H.J. Res 46.

The Supreme Court Once Again Rejects Navajo Suit for Breach of Trust Obligations
April 10, 2009. Writing for the Court, Justice Antonin Scalia rejected Navajo claims against the government for misconduct in the Department of the Interior in the United States v. Navajo Nation case. For links to the opinion, oral argument, and briefs, see the Public Law, Policy, and Public Administration page of this website.

Cobell Case Continues into Obama Administration
April 5, 2009. The latest round in the Indian Trust Fund case, Cobell v. Salazar, continues with reports that the data security issues continue. A Department of the Interior Inspector General report from 2008 surfaced as the Justice Department provided information to the U.S. District Court. The report has not yet been published since reports on data security are generally not made public, though news sources indicate that it was filed by the government with the federal district court in Washington in the past week. The following sites contain information on the current status and historical information on the case.
   Department of the Interior, Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians.
   Department of Justice Filings in the Cobell case.
   Native American Rights Fund Individual Indian Money (IIM) Accounts site.
   Indian Trust: Cobell v. Salazar, case website operated by the Blackfeet Reservation Development Fund.

Iowa Supreme Court Strikes Marriage Law Restrictions
April 4, 2009. The Iowa Supreme Court has announced its opinion in the case of Varnum v. Brien in which it affirmed a lower court, finding that the state's marriage statute limiting marriage to a man and a woman was unconstitutional. The Court began its discussion of the constitutional basis of the case by noting that the question posed by the parties was: "How can a state premised on the constitutional principle of equal protection justify exclusion of a class of Iowans from civil marriage." Slip opinion at 18. The Court based its ruling on the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution which reads: "All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation; the general assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens, privileges or immunities, which, upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens." Id., at 19. The Court approached the case with what it termed a heightened level of scrutiny: "Because we conclude Iowa's same-sex marriage statute cannot withstand internediate scrutiny, we need not decide whether classifications based on sexual orientation are subject to a higher level of scrutiny. Id., at 49.
Read the opinion.

Federal District Court Overturns FDA Limit on Plan B Access
March 24, 2009. Judge Edward R. Korman of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York issued a ruling in Tummino v. Torti, No. 05-CV-366, a case brought to challenge the denial by the Food & Drug Administration of a petition by a number of groups and individuals to make the "Plan B" medications available to women of all ages for nonprescription over-the-counter sales. The FDA had denied the petition and said the drug could be available to women 18 and older. The challengers argued that the decision was arbitrary and capricious and the judge agreed. In fact, the judge wrote, the FDA actions were characterized by "political considerations, delays, and implausible justifications for decision-making." Slip opinion at 3. The judge went on to find that the decision was largely controlled by political intervention rather than expert decision-making. He vacated and remanded the FDA decision for further action, but ruled that the drug is to be available to women 17 years of age and older, the position taken by expert staffed at FDA.
Read the opinion.

President Signs Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
January 31, 2009. President Obama has signed S. 181, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which is intended to reverse the ruling by the Supreme Court in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007). The act is now P.L. 111-2. The bill states that it is intended to "amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice." The Supreme Court had rejected Ledbetter's claim because it did not satisfy filing limits relative to the alleged discrimination. However, Ledbetter had asserted that she could not have filed the action earlier because she did not know at the time that there was discriminatory pay and only learned that much later. The bill is now headed to the White House for the president's signature.
Read S. 181 as passed by the Senate.
Read the Ledbetter v. Goodyear opinion.

Supreme Court Overturns Narrowing Interpretations of Reprisals in Harassment Cases
January 27, 2009. The U.S. Supreme Court has issued a ruling in Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County that interprets protection against reprisal for reports of sexual harassment broadly. The opinion for the Court written by Justice Souter announced" "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 . . . forbids retaliation by employers against employees who report workplace race or gender discrimination. The question here is whether this protection extends to an employee who speaks out about discrimination not on her own initiative, but in answering questions during an employer's internal investigation. We hold that it does." Slip opinion, at 1. There were no dissenting opinions, but Justice Alito wrote a concurring opinion that was joined by Justice Thomas.
Read the opinion.

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Title IX as Sole Option for Sexual Harassment Claims in Schools
January 21, 2009. The Supreme Court has handed down an unanimous ruling rejecting a finding by lower courts that Title IX of The Education Amendments of 1972 is the only route available for sexual harassment claims in schools as compared to 42 U.S.C. �1983 or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Alito wrote for the Court, holding that: Section 1983 suits based on the Equal Protection Clause remain available to plaintiffs alleging unconstitutional gender discrimination in schools." Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee, No. 07-1125, Slip Opinion, p. 11. In this case, parents had launched actions under Section 1983, claiming gender discrimination in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in addition to their claim of a violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The lower courts had dismissed the 1983 claim and ruled against the plaintiff on the Title IX issue. The Supreme Court reversed.
Read the opinion.

Airline Removes Nine Islamic Americans from Flight
January 3, 2009. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Washington based advocacy organization, has filed a civil rights complaint alleging discrimination with the U.S. Department of Transportation following an incident in which an Islamic family was removed by AirTran airlines from a flight from Washington to Orlando, Florida following a report by other passengers of what they thought was suspicious behavior. Some of the family members were simply discussing where the safest place to sit on an airliner was. They were removed from the flight and the airline refused to rebook them after FBI authorities promptly determined that there was no problem and that the family had been inappropriately excluded from the flight. The airline initially rejected any criticism, but later issued an apology to all passengers inconvenienced by the episode and to the families targeted by the removal action.
Read the CAIR Release on DOT Complaint.
Read the AirTran Release Apologizing to Passengers.

Nation Congress of American Indians Advances Transition Agenda for Obama Administration
December 22, 2008. The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) has provided a report that outlines key transition issues for the Obama administration as it comes to office. This agenda provides a number of unique characteristics relative to other groups who have been advocating priorities for the new administration because of the special government to government relationship of sovereign Native American tribes and nations with the U.S. Government. The document is entitled Indian Nations and the 2009 Presidential Transition.
Access the Report.

Two Ecuadorians with One Dead in Brooklyn Attack
December 16, 2008. Soon after a Suffolk county hate crime left one Ecuadorean dead, two men from Ecuador were attacked and one is now dead in Brooklyn. The two brother, Jose and Romel Sucuzhanay, were reportedly attacked by seven African-Americans who shouted racial and anti-gay epithets at they attacked. Jose Sucuzanay, a local businessman, later died of his injuries. His brother was visiting the family in New York.
Read the statement of the National Council of LaRaza on this case.

Teenagers Indicted in Suffolk County Hate Crime
November 22, 2008. .
   Read Access the indictment.
   Read the Suffolk County District Attorney statement on the case.
   Read the statement of civil rights groups on recent hate crimes.

Congress Passes the ADA Amendments Act of 2008
September 19, 2008. Congress has passed and President Bush has promised to sign S3406, the ADA Amendments Act of 2008. The legislation was designed to reverse a number of U.S. Supreme Court rulings that limited eligibility for Americans with Disabilities Act protections and a variety of other purposes.
Read S. 3406 as approved by the House and Senate.

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 Signed Into Law
May 28, 2008. Congress has passed and the president has signed H.R. 493, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. One title of the act addresses discrimination by insurance companies on the basis of genetic information and the other major title deals with disrimination by employers based on genetic information about employees.
Access H.R. 493.

D.C. Circuit Strikes Rules that U.S. Paper Currency Violates the Rehabilitation Act
May 20, 2008, 2008. The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has ruled that the current manner in which U.S. paper money violates Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For details and links, see the Health Care, Disability, and Development page of this website.

Urban Indian Health Commission and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Issue Report "Invisible Tribes" Report
December 5, 2007. The Urban Indian Health Commission has issued a report entitled Invisible Tribes: Urban Indians and Their Health in a Changing World. For further information and links, see the Health Care, Disability, and Development.

Report Finds One in Five Latinos in the U.S. Faces Food Insecurity
December 20, 2006. The National Council of La Raza has issued a report entitled Sin Provecho: Latinos and Food Insecurity. Among the conclusions reached by the report is the finding that: "Nearly one in five Latinoes (19.6%) faces food insecurity each year, which compromises their health and well-being. If the trends of food insecurity within the Latino community persist, the impact of insufficient nutrition will greatly increase the risk that the next generation will become even less healthy." p. iii.
Read full report.
Read the executive summary.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules that the Burden of Proof in IDEA Hearings Rests on the Family Challenging an IEP
November 14, 2005. Writing for the majority in Shaffer v. Weast Docket No. 04-698, Justice Sandra O'Connor rejected a call by parents that the burden of proof in a due process hearing challenging the adequacy of an Individual Education Plan under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) should be on the school district. Justices Breyer and Ginsburg dissented.
Read the Schaffer v. Weast Opinion.

Civil Rights Law: Constitution, Statutes, and Regulations

Constitution of the United States
Access the U.S. Constitution via Cornell Legal Education Insittute.

Civil Rights Act of 1964
   Title VI -- Discrimination in programs receiving federal funds.
   Access Title VI
    Title VII -- Discrimination in Employment.
   Access Title VII

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
Access Title IX.

Civil Rights Act of 1991
Access the 1991 Act.

Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Reauthorized
Read P.L. 108-446

Americans with Disabilities Act
U.S. Department of Justice ADA page provides a great deal of information on the act and regulation.
Access the DOJ page on the Americans with Disabilities Act
Read the ADA

The Developmental Disabilities Assistanceand Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (DD Act)
Read the DD Act

The Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
Read the Act

The Equal Pay Act of 1963
Access the Equal Pay Act

Fair Housing Law
    The two most commonly employed statutes in this field are the Fair Housing Act of 1968 and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The other commonly cited statute in this field is the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of
   Access the Fair HousingAct
   Access the Civil Rights Act of 1866
   Access the Equal Credit Opportunity Act

Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968
Read the Act.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Access the Declaration

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
Read the Act.

Voting Rights Act of 1965
Access the Voting Rights Act.

Executive Orders
   Executive Order 13160 To Prohibit discrimination because of "Race, Sex, Color, National Origin, Disability, Religion, Age, Sexual Orientation, and Status as a Parent in Federally Conducted Education and Training Programs"
   Read EO 13160.
   Executive Order 13145 [.pdf format] To Prohibit Discrimination in Federal Employment Based on Genetic Information
   Read EO 13145
   Executive Order 13166 Required Access to Federally Funded Programs for Persons With Limited English Proficiency
   Read EO 13166

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Regulations
Access EEOC regulations.

Cultural Competency and Equity Issues and Civil Rights Policy

National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services in Health Care
    The national standards for culturally and linguistically appropriate services in health care were developed and explained in detail in the Final Report: National Standards for Culturally and LinguisticallyAppropriate Services in Health Care issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesOffice of Minority Health in March 2001. (Note: it is easiest to download the file and then open it offline.} The standards themselves are provided on the website of the Office of Minority Health.
   Access the CLAS Standards National Standards for Culturally and LinguisticallyAppropriate Services in Health Care.
   Access the Final Report.
   Access the Oficina de Salud de law Minor�as en espa�ol.

National Center for Cultural Competency
   Georgetown University Center for Child and Human Development (one of the University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities See AUCD below under Professional Associations and Family Support Organizations)).
   Access the National Center for Cultural Competency Site.
   Access the National Center for Cultural Competency Site, en espanol Language.

Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Cultural Competence Resources for Health Care Providers
Access the HRSA Cultural Competency Site.

National Council on Disabilities Studies and Resources for Native American Communities
People with Disabilities on Tribal Land: Education, Health Care. Vocational Rehabilitation, and Independent Living.
Understanding Disabilities in American Indian and Alaska Native Communities:Toolkit Guide.

Proceedings of the Oregon Cultural Competency Summit
Access the Summit Report

Governmental Bodies in Civil Rights Policy

Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice
The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice has a wide variety of responsibilities under various civil rights statutes and executive orders.
    http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/
    Access the "Disability Rights Home Page."
    Access the "Disability Rights Online News."

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
.
http://www.eeoc.gov/

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
.
Access the Commission Homepage

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights
.
Access the HHS Civil Rights Homepage

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Civil Rights
.
Access the Homepage

Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD)
The ADD is part of the Administration for Children & Families of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/add/

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
The AHRQ, among other things, publishes the National Health Care Disparities Report.
AHRQ Home Page.
Access National Health Care Disparities Report 2006.

National Institute of Mental Health
The ADD is part of the Administration for Children & Families of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/

DisabilityInfo.gov
This site is operated by the president's New Freedom Initiative.
http://www.disabilityinfo.gov/digov-public/public/DisplayPage.do%3fparentFolderId=500

National Council on Disability
http://www.ncd.gov/

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation
http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/index.html

Civil Rights Advocacy and Policy Organizations

Asian American Legal Defense Fund
Access the AALDF Homepage

Civil Rights. org
"CivilRights.org is a collaboration of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund."
Access Civil Rights.org

Council on American Islamic Relations
Access the CAIR Homepage

Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
Access the DREDF Homepage

LatinoJustice PRLDEF
LatinoJustice is the name of the organization that began as the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.
Access the LatinoJustice Homepage

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
Access the LCCR Homepage

League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)
Access the LULAC

Mexican American Legal Defense Fund
Access the MALDF Homepage

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
Access the NAACP Homepage

NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund
Access the LDF Homepage

Native American Youth and Family Center
Access the NAYFC Homepage

National Congress of American Indians
Access the NCAI Homepage

Native American Rights Fund
Access the Native American Rights Fund Homepage

National Council of La Raza
Access the La Raza Homepage

National Organization for Women
Access the NOW Homepage

National Women's Law Center
Access the NWLC Homepage

Southern Poverty Law Center
Access the SPLC Homepage

Civil Rights Glossary

Civil Rights Glossary from CivilRights.org
Civil Rights.org Civil Rights Glossary

Civil Rights Glossary Via Findlaw.com
Civil Rights Glossary via Findlaw.com

Civil Rights Glossary of the USDA/FSIS
Civil Rights Glossary of the Food Safety and Inspection Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture

Civil Rights Glossary of the Civil Rights Coalition for the 21st Century
Civil Rights Glossary by the Civil Rights Coalition for the 21st Cntury