Through the glass doors you can almost see the Supreme Court building across the street. The Supreme Court is many times the last stop when it comes to c human rights, civil rights, after all the work thats been done by the congress but by ther president many times is the Supreme Court that has the last word. In the case of plessy versus ferguson when the supreme fecou held segregation was constitutional the last word was a disappointment. In abversus United States and the Supreme Court upheld the tournament of japanese americans during world war ii it was another disappointment. But other times the court has risen to the challenge the famous case of brown versus board of education which finally struck down the concept of separate but equal where the Supreme Court recognized the right to marriage equality. Today the Supreme Court faced another humans right issue involving another group. Now its become standard and defines a group of americans. People living in america. In their case th
Please call the role. [roll call] [roll call] thank you both. Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I would like to welcome all of you here this evening for the special joint hearing hosted by the Human Rights Commission. I would like to welcome our human rights of commissioners. Thank you for joining us this evening, on behalf of my colleagues we are delighted to be cohosting this hearing with you. We look forward to a good, and open conversation this evening. We have some excellent speaker testimony that we are looking forward to gathering. We very much look forward to hearing from members of the community on the issue of the border crisis, our first order of business to are there any announcements . Thank you. Office of Civic Engagement and veterans affairs. To members of the public, this is special joint meeting at the San Francisco immigrant rights commandant commission on the Human Rights Commission cosponsored by yee and ronan. Please silence all cell phones so speakers are commiss
It also looks at all cachet, just not federal cachet, but state or local cash assistance programs and barring some of them getting a green card or entering the United States. It English Proficiency as a positive factor or lack of proficiency has a negative factor. It would look at medical conditions, whether or not they have private Health Insurance and whether or not theyve ever used a fee waiver to waive a filing fee for past immigration application. It would also allow to potentially overcome a public charge determination if they pay a bond, the minimum amount of which would be 8,100. The rule will not take effect until midoctober, until that time, all pending green card applications and those that are postmarked before that date, october 15, 2019 will be adjudicated under what our current standards for public charge. As i mentioned, under existing policy, the only programs i look at our federal cachet that people receive, and whether or not they are in long term institutionalized c
We need to focus the staff people on doing the research for whats coming next. Its the same people. Its appraisers doing market data research. Supervisor excuse me. It seems as though what im hearing from president yee is at one time the Assessors Office requested more assistance, more ftes to address the backlog for so long and through diligent work, youve gone through the backlog at an impressive rate so i think what president yee is asking is why are you keeping them in the budget and youre saying theres new work now. Thats right. Supervisor but actually the funding for those particular ftes were specifically tied to the request of the backlog. I think what im paraphrasing is what president yee is questioning whether those ftes should be reevaluated by the board since the board was the one to first grant the additional ftes to address the backlog and whether the ftes should be assigned to the new job of collecting the data. I dont think were questioning theres a need but the process
Ourselves. We are not scientists. For us to review a bible like this or to review thats nice, ill accept the data. I dont know. Maybe youre suggestion is correct one. As we sit right now with the advice that you are projecting to us, im not dismissing your advice and counsel. I know the law because we experience on a weekly basis. We might as well save the public the filing fee for the appeals if its the appeal includes any identifications as health is an issue. We can just dismiss it because wash our hands and by saying, f. E. C. , were not in control. My personal conscious wont allow me to do that. Again, we can tell the chances are slim or none because San Francisco Health Department, this is not an attack, does not want to take up this issue and does not want to fight federal statute. You can understand the position. Sure. President swig we want to protect people. I hear what youre coming from. I will take issue with your statement that the Health Department doesnt want to take on