Jami Nakamura Lin Nicole Cardoza Jami Nakamura Lin Nicole Cardoza

Abolish the grand jury.

Many of us are still reeling from the grand jury decision that brought no charges against the police officer that killed Breonna Taylor, as we covered in a previous newsletter. And yet, of course, many of us were not surprised. We’ve seen this before. We’ve seen how the grand jury cleared the officer that killed Michael Brown in Ferguson (NYTimes), and how things haven’t changed since then. We’ve seen how rarely officers are convicted even if they do get charged (FiveThirtyEight). We have learned not to expect justice from our legal system.

Welcome back! Yesterday many of you emailed with one question: is there anything we CAN do to block this Supreme Court appointment? And aside from calling your senators, we don't have much power to exercise as citizens. But we can get more involved in other aspects of our justice system, which matters more than you may think. I was going to publish this next week, but I feel Jami's thoughtful analysis of the grand jury is a strong follow-up from our conversation yesterday. Read and let me know what you think.

Tomorrow is Study Hall – our weekly reflection on the topics we unpacked this week (and there was a LOT we covered). Send me your questions / thoughts by responding to this email.

You can help our work thrive by making a one-time or monthly contribution. Thank you to everyone that makes this newsletter possible.

ps – the Anti-Racism Daily Podcast is here! I'll be hosting conversations on the most impactful ways to take action around critical current events, and interviewing inspiring changemakers. Listen to the trailer on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

TAKE ACTION

  • Write to your state legislators asking to abolish the grand jury process for criminal indictments (Connecticut and Pennsylvania already have!)

  • Spread awareness about the injustice in the grand jury system, as many people do not understand how it works

  • Reflect: What privilege(s) may you have based on your identity that shapes your understanding of the criminal justice system?

GET EDUCATED

By Jami Nakamura Lin (she/her)

Many of us are still reeling from the grand jury decision that brought no charges against the police officer that killed Breonna Taylor, as we covered in a previous newsletter. And yet, of course, many of us were not surprised. We’ve seen this before. We’ve seen how the grand jury cleared the officer that killed Michael Brown in Ferguson (NYTimes), and how things haven’t changed since then. We’ve seen how rarely officers are convicted even if they do get charged (FiveThirtyEight). We have learned not to expect justice from our legal system. 

“The police and law were not made to protect us Black and Brown women.”  

Tamika Palmer, Breonna Taylor’s mother (VOA News)

Clearly, the grand jury process failed Breonna Taylor. But what is important to note is that it’s not that this grand jury failed her, it’s that all grand juries are inherently structured in a way that is unjust. At a grand jury, there are no defense attorneys present (that is, the defendant does not have access to counsel). There is no judge. The prosecutor is the one asking all the questions, the one who decides what to charge the defendant with, what sentencing to recommend, and whether to offer a plea deal (Harvard Law Review). In other words: all the power lies with the prosecutor, and the prosecutor works for the government as a district or state’s attorney, or in Breonna Taylor’s case, Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron (NPR). 

A grand jury differs in many ways from a trial jury. A trial jury is what we think of when we think of the word “jury”: a group of people that decides whether or not the defendant is guilty. This takes place in a courtroom with a judge, with lawyers for both the defense and the prosecution (US Courts). The trial itself is usually public, and the defendant’s counsel can call its own witnesses. 

On the other hand, a grand jury happens before a trial. It consists of a group of 16-23 people that decides whether or not there is enough evidence to believe that the defendant has committed a crime (US Courts). As Stanford University law professor Robert Weisberg explains, “A grand jury doesn’t decide guilt or innocence. It decides the preliminary question of whether there’s enough evidence to justify [sending] him to trial in the first place” (Louisville Public Media). It’s an additional step, so it’s used for higher-order crimes. About half the states require a grand jury to press felony charges. In the other half, it’s up to the prosecutor whether to require a grand jury or whether to skip to a trial (FindLaw).

People have been concerned about the injustices inherent in the grand jury system for many years. England, from whom we inherited the system, by and large stopped using the grand jury in 1910s and formally abolished it in 1933 (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology); its other former colonies, including New Zealand, Australia, and Canada, all have done the same (Slate). The United States has kept this process despite the overwhelming evidence that grand juries “do not (and cannot) protect the accused” (Cornell Law Review). 

But these police shooting cases show that the problem is more complex than that. In Breonna Taylor’s case, the police officer was the accused (NPR). And yet he was the one protected by the process, because the grand jury system protects who the prosecutors choose to protect. In most capital criminal cases, they have no motivation to protect the accused—except when the accused are the police. 

“Prosecutors work with police day in, day out, and typically they’re reluctant to criticise them or investigate them,” law professor Samuel Walker told The Guardian. In the Guardian’s analysis of 2015 police killings, they found that in one-third of the killings that were ruled as justified “the criminal inquiry work was done by the officer’s own police department, meaning the evidence used to decide if an officer should be prosecuted was prepared by the officer’s co-workers” (The Guardian).

"[Grand juries] are said to be 'putty in the hands of the prosecutor.' In other words, the prosecutor really tells them what he or she wants and they will go along with it,” legal writer Joshua Rozenberg told the public radio newsmagazine The World. Because of the prosecutor’s power in a grand jury, he added: “It must be even easier [to get an acquittal] if that is what the district attorney may actually want." And there are many other problems with the grand jury process that we don’t have space for here. (Harvard Law Review presents a thorough overview of other problems although they call for reform, not abolition.) 

Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron was supposed to be prosecuting the police officers but his actions show that he was defending them. “I never had faith in him,” Breonna Taylor’s mother, Tamika Palmer, wrote (NBC News). “I knew he had already chosen to be on the wrong side of the law the moment he wanted the grand jury to make the decision.” The court even released the tapes of the usually-secret grand jury proceedings because of a juror’s complaints against Daniel Cameron (NPR). 

Cameron claimed the jurors decide independently of the prosecutor, but that is clearly not the case. In grand juries, the prosecutors shape the case: Cameron had only recommended the charge of wanton endangerment (CBS News). He claims he did this because he would not be able to prove other charges, were the case to go to trial—but convening a grand jury is an easy way to pass the blame onto jurors while also not holding the police accountable. 

While a lot of energy is now devoted to defunding and abolishing the police and prisons, we also need to focus on the legal institutions that link these two systems. We need to eliminate the grand jury and reimagine our legal system in general. Though only an amendment to the Constitution could remove the grand jury on a federal level, many states could eliminate it through legislation (Al Jazeera). Connecticut and Pennsylvania have already abolished the use of a grand jury in criminal indictments (FindLaw), so I believe it is possible to make change, state by state. 

So contact your legislators. Increase awareness. Promote understanding of the flaws in the system. The grand jury did not bring justice to Breonna, so we need to bring justice to the grand jury. It must be abolished.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The grand jury is an inherently unjust system. It is a secret proceeding whose power lies in the hands of prosecutors who work for the government.

  • In one-third of “justified” police killings, the “evidence used to decide if an officer should be prosecuted was prepared by the officer’s co-workers” (The Guardian).

  • The grand jury did not bring justice to Breonna, but we need to bring justice to the grand jury. It must be abolished.

  • England and its former colonies have all abolished the grand jury system—except for the United States (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology).

RELATED ISSUES

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.

Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza

Read More
Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza

Demand justice for Breonna Taylor.

Today's newsletter doesn't need context. We've been regularly publishing on the Breonna Taylor case since our start in June. Yesterday marked the conclusion of the investigation around her case and the continuation of our fight for justice.

Although signing the petitions and donating will be helpful, the most important action item for today is being inquiry with yourself. Consider how your participation in your community – from how you vote, what businesses you choose to support, and how you treat the people around you – will contribute to the next story like Breonna Taylor's. More importantly, consider how you can change your actions to prevent another act of violence like this from occurring again.

Thank you for your contributions. If you enjoy this newsletter, you can give one-time on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza), or subscribe for $5/mo on our Patreon.

– Nicole

TAKE ACTION

Tangible Actions


Reflect

Who is your local Attorney General? When did you last vote for them? What are the rulings they've made in similar cases? Note: there are 10 Attorney Generals on the ballot this year.

What was the last ruling re: police brutality in your community? What was the verdict? Who marched for them?

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza (she/her)

I'll keep this short: the justice system failed Breonna Taylor. On Wednesday, the Kentucky grand jury brought no charges against the police officers responsible for the death of Breonna Taylor back in March. Prosecutors said that the two officers who fired their weapons at Taylor were justified in using force (AP News).

The third officer, Brett Hankison, was charged with three counts of “wanton endangerment,” as he had threatened three people’s lives by firing bullets that traveled through Taylor’s apartment and into another. In that apartment, a pregnant woman, her husband and their 5-year-old child were sleeping. None of them were harmed (NYTimes). The other two officers, one of whom who fired the bullet that shot Taylor, were not charged (Washington Post). Somehow, the danger and ultimate loss of Breonna Taylor's life wasn't considered in the charges.

Many people are unfamiliar with the term "wanton endangerment." According to Kentucky law, this occurs “when, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, [a person] wantonly engages in conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person" (Kentucky Law, via Washington Post). This charge is interpreted as “in between” crimes of negligence and crimes of intent.

The two-page indictment created for this charge doesn't mention Breonna Taylor's name, a cruel detali of injustice after months of advocacy to #SayHerName as part of a campaign that aims to illuminate crimes against Black women (Ayman Mohyeldin on Twitter).

The city of Louisville started preparing for protests around this verdict days ago by adding blockades downtown and calling in reinforcements (Courier Journal). As I write this Wednesday evening, I see news stories of protests unfolding across the country, demanding accountability (Buzzfeed). Gov. Andy Beshear is urging the Attorney General Daniel Cameron to release the evidence from Breonna Taylor's case, including ballistics reports and the race and gender composition of the jury (Courier-Journal).

This story is ongoing. We'll add updates where relevant on the web version of this newsletter.

RELATED ISSUES

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.

Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza

Read More
Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza

Study Hall! Racist actions, doulas, and intersectional change.

Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›

Happy Saturday! It's Study Hall, our weekly recap of the content we reviewed through Q&A and additional resources shared by our community. We covered a wide range of topics, so we have a lot to dive into. Remember – you can submit a question by responding to this email for the week ahead!

You can also get weekly discussion guides for your workplace or university by subscribing to Anti-Racism Daily at Work. Quickly onboard colleagues, track their progress, and use the topics mentioned to create strategic change internally and the community around you. Learn more: antiracismdaily.com/corporate

We're posting daily recaps on Instagram @antiracismdaily. And stay tuned for more Study Hall sessions on our Patreon starting next week! Excited to keep learning with you.

This newsletter is a daily labor of love and I appreciate every contribution. You can give once on our website, PayPal or Venmo (@nicoleacardoza). Or, pledge $5/month on Patreon to help us stay sustainable for the months ahead.

Nicole

Share | Tweet | Forward

TAKE ACTION

1. Reflect on the questions prompted by our community.

2. Ask yourself two questions about one of the topics we discussed this week. Discuss these questions with a friend or colleague.

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza

Read the past week's content on the archives
 

June 31, 2020 | Keep fighting for Breonna Taylor.

June 30, 2020 | Support Black maternal health.

June 29, 2020 | Protect public workers.

June 28, 2020 | Denounce anti-Semitism.

June 27, 2020 | Support Asian Americans through COVID-19.

June 26, 2020 | Pay attention to the Portland protests.


An Asian American friend was called a racial slur by a Black person. How should society deal with racism from other marginalized communities?
From Support Asian Americans through COVID-19 on July 27

In short – in the same way we handle racism from dominant culture. Any type of racism, regardless of the perpetrator, is harmful. And because we've all become assimilated to a society with racism at its core, it's frustrating yet unsurprising that marginalized communities would apply the same discrimination and harm against each another. We touched on this a bit in the anti-Semitism newsletter we published the day after we received this question.

Anti-racism expert Ibram X. Kendi explains this well in his book How to be an Antiracist, which is required reading for this work, in my opinion. You can get a snippet of this topic in a 2019 interview with CNN.

Katie's post referenced that she doesn't believe BIPOC people should have to constantly be compared to white people. You often use the term non-white. Why use that term if it may continue to exacerbate that issue?
From Support Asian Americans through COVID-19 on July 27

First, it's important to note that our shifting use of "BIPOC" or "non-white" or "Black and Brown" or "people of color" reflects the perspectives of our writers (both our staff and the news we're quoting and referencing). All terms aim to identify a community that is often impacted by dominant culture, which is majorly influenced by whiteness.

I personally prefer to use "non-white" in those scenarios, and since I write most frequently, you hear it most often. To me, it intentionally separates so many communities not from white people, but the whiteness that has the power of normal in our society. It does name an entire group of diverse, multi-cultural people against whiteness itself, which can absolutely be considered a form of erasure. I just hope it reminds us why we're having the conversation in the first place. But I'm going to keep learning about this; language is important and I don't want to cause further harm.

Do you have suggestions on how to validate the pain of Jewish silence and the fact that being Black is more stigmatized than being Jewish, without inadvertently feeding into anti-Semitic sentiment?
From Denounce anti-Semitism on July 28

There's no reason we can't have complex, nuanced conversations on how racism and anti-Semitism show up at the same time. If we allow the anti-Semitism in the Black community and anti-Blackness in the Jewish community to divide us, we're both allowing white supremacy to win. And the impact of white supremacy won't discriminate between the two. Both communities will suffer.

So right now, we have an incredible opportunity to unite in favor of common goals and objectives, see our similarities over our differences, and commit to the deep and necessary healing to keep moving forward, together. If part of that includes, as you're referencing, focusing on the needs of Black people right now based on current events, then that just prioritizes one action item of many to tackle on the list. 

The critical work of doulas to support equitable maternal health.
From Support Black maternal health on July 30

This isn't a question, but a powerful response from Heather on how necessary doulas for the advancement of maternal care. I didn't touch on doulas in this newsletter; I tried to stay focused on the direct political changes that our government can make, and plan on focusing on doulas in another newsletter. But let's start that conversation now! I've shared Heather's thoughtful response below:
  
One way we can help advocate for the rights of birthing people is to make sure they all have access to a birth doula!

Doulas advocate for their clients rights, provide informational, physical & emotional and support to the birthing family. We significantly reduce the likelihood of negative outcomes for all birthing people. Sadly many women don’t even know what a doula does or the benefits. And many more can not afford one, despite the fact the most doulas are willing to work with a payment plan or sliding scale.

Currently, due to Covid, most hospitals across the US have told their clients they can only have one support person while birthing in the hospital. Of course, most people are going to choose their significant other. Myself and other doulas are working hard to pass legislation that makes doulas an essential worker, so that hospitals can not ban us from supporting our clients. I have personally witnessed via virtual care, my clients rights ignored during this time. Something I KNOW would not have happened if I were present in the room.

Actions I and other are working on so that every birthing person who wishes to have a doula can-
1. Have insurance companies 100% cover the costs. It is only in the insurance companies benefit since it significantly reduces health risks and negative outcomes.
2. Pass legislation that hospitals can never ban a birth doula from the birthing setting and is not counted as a visitor but an essential employee

I found a change.org petition advocating for doulas to be considered essential workers that you can sign here.

Do you have any advice for what people in other countries can do in situations like this? I’m Canadian and I want to help (and have donated to causes) but because a lot of petitions call for your zip code and to call your political representative in the US, I feel like I can’t be that effective. Is it better to keep sharing posts about her or to find issues like this in my own country / area instead?
From Keep fighting for Breonna Taylor on July 31

We're considering expanding the Anti-Racism Daily to other countries, as we know it's frustrating that we cover mainly U.S. based news! Thanks for your patience as we continue to plan.

Generally speaking, I recommend looking for ways to tackle the same issues in your own community – whether you're abroad or in the U.S. Breonna Taylor's story isn't unique – there are many Black women who still fight for justice. Consider who the Breonna Taylor is in your community, or more critically, who could be the Breonna Taylor in your community? What practices and policies make it easy for harm to happen on vulnerable populations like Black women where you live? And how can you take action each day to prevent it?

CLARIFICATIONS

From Support Black maternal health on July 30
My piece on Black maternal health failed to note that transmen and gender non-binary individuals are also impacted by the racial disparities of maternal care, not just cisgender Black women. Thanks for the catch, Stephanie!

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.

Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza

Read More
Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza Nicole Cardoza

Keep fighting for Breonna Taylor.

Get daily actions in your inbox. Subscribe Now ›

It's Friday and today's a great day to keep fighting for Breonna Taylor. Were you expecting a different punchline? Then maybe you’ll enjoy today's newsletter on the memeification of Breonna Taylor and what we must do as we fight for justice.

Although it's disheartening to write once again about Breonna Taylor, I also know that all of her killers are still walking free. And because of that, I must use my voice to keep advocating for her – and for all of us that have the privilege to still be here, and benefit from the changes that are coming. How do you choose to use yours?

We'd love your support to keep our reporting growing! Consider giving one-time on our website, (or Venmo @nicoleacardoza), or pledge $5/month on our Patreon. Many thanks to all that have supported so far!

Nicole

Share | Tweet | Forward

TAKE ACTION

Sign the Color of Change petition to demand that all police officers involved in the death of Breonna Taylor are fired.

Donate to the Louisville Community Bail Fund, and aid the protesters still rallying in Breonna's hometown.

Call Kentucky's local official and the public integrity unit of the Louisville Metro Police Department to demand the officers involved in Breonna's death are fired and charged with her killing. Go to StandWithBre.com and tap the button on your mobile phone and they will call for you!

GET EDUCATED

By Nicole Cardoza

O Magazine is ending regular print magazine issues in December 2020 to adopt a digital-first approach (Hollywood Reporter). But for the first time in 20 years, Oprah herself isn’t on the cover. Instead, this month’s cover is dedicated to Breonna Taylor, who was murdered 140 days ago by Louisville Metro Police Department officers Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison, and Myles Cosgrove after they entered her home with a no-knock warrant while she was sleeping and opened fire (The Cut). Although one of the three officers have been fired, the other two are only on administrative reassignment, and none of the officers face criminal charges (NYTimes). The magazine commissioned 24-year-old digital artist Alexis Franklin to create the cover, and she used a well-known selfie Breonna Taylor took shortly before her death (Washington Post).

You may have seen this photo on the cover because it’s been all over social media – in fact, Breonna Taylor’s name and image have been widely shared through memes, gifs, text-based posts, and more since the protests. Earlier this week, the controversial 'Women Supporting Women' Selfie Challenge dominated timelines when women encouraged others to share a selfie in black-and-white (Elle Magazine). Many people decide to use the moment instead to share photos of Breonna Taylor (The Lily). Echoes of calls for justice are heard in protests on the street, in window signs, and amplified by celebrities. Beyonce penned an open letter to the Kentucky State Attorney General (Beyonce). The WNBA dedicated its entire 2020 season to honoring Taylor and the Say Her Name movement (KPBS).

Breonna was murdered in March 2020, but her story became a key narrative in the Black Lives Matter protests in May, with specific attention towards how little press her story had received. Although Blavity and The Root, two major publications that focus on Black stories, published articles about her story in late March, mainstream news sources didn’t pick up her story until late May (used Google Search results for this one). Although the intense coverage of COVID-19 during this time likely played a factor (Courier Journal), many believe it’s our country’s longstanding tenuous relationship with Black women that minimize police brutality like this (PBS). And until we see more accountability for her death, we can expect that her story will continue to resonate with allies and activists as the anti-racism movement progresses.

But are all these memes and tributes and cover takeovers helping, or hurting? Some believe that these statements don’t do her life and legacy justice. And the statement “arrest the cops who killed Breonna Taylor,” a popular catchphrase, is misleading, according to film and culture pop critic Cate Young (Jezebel). How exactly is the community supposed to achieve that while they’re scrolling through Instagram? The more pertinent actions – like the ones in today’s Take Action section – are shared significantly less.

And what is the creator intending to do when posting a meme like this on social media: raise awareness about the injustice of over-policing Black women, or gain some easy likes? And the memeification of violence against Black women is perpetuating the same systems of discrediting and minimizing that pain (which we touched on briefly in yesterday’s Anti-Racism Daily).

“When she’s diluted down to a glib, cutesy meme it’s a dishonor to her. She was very much a real person, with real thoughts and dreams and dislikes. She leaves behind a world of hurting family, friends, and acquaintances”.

Christine Boyer, writer, for Jezebel

Others believe that these subliminal messaging shift perceptions and encourage action in a time where many people’s newsfeeds have gone back to normal. Allissa Richardson, a journalism professor at USC Annenberg and author, believes that it’s a powerful way Black people can trick the algorithm to hold conversations that advance critical issues that may otherwise go ignored (Washington Post). And when conversations persist, media pays attention, drawing the conversation back into the press cycle. (It has compelled me, too, to write about Breonna Taylor again for the Anti-Racism Daily. Very meta).

The power of media in this movement brings to mind the strength of Emmett Till’s mother for holding an open casket, putting her son’s mutilated body on display for the whole world to see. The photos, which were published in Jet Magazine and circulated broadly from there, forced America to confront the brutality of the racism that may have been easy to overlook (view the photo and corresponding story in Time Magazine). Unlike the memes of Breonna, these images were chosen by the family and approved to share, not user-generated memes with their own branding and hashtags. But for the time, these images achieved something similar to what we’re seeing today: it’s impossible to look away. But we shouldn’t need a meme to draw our attention back to injustices against Black women. It’s our responsibility to share these stories with respect and care, and continue the fight for justice even when we’re not reminded to while scrolling through Instagram.

Like the story of Breonna Taylor, the perpetrators of the murder of Emmett Till walk free. In fact, the Emmett Till Legacy Foundation, which was created by family members of Till and other community members, is asking the community to sign a petition to hold Carolyn Bryant Donham, the woman that falsely accused Emmett Till of a crime he did not commit, accountable. Learn more about Emmett Till and his story in our Anti-Racism Daily on lynching, and sign the petition here.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • It has been 140 days since Breonna Taylor was killed by Louisville Metro Police Department officers Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison, and Myles Cosgrove

  • Oprah joined a long list of celebrities, activists and individuals using their platforms to call for justice

  • The memeification of Breonna Taylor is helping to keep Breonna’s name in the media – and perpetuate the same systems that harm Black women

  • We must leverage our platforms to center the needs of other with care and grace

RELATED ISSUES

PLEDGE YOUR SUPPORT

Thank you for all your financial contributions! If you haven't already, consider making a monthly donation to this work. These funds will help me operationalize this work for greatest impact.

Subscribe on Patreon | Give one-time on PayPal | Venmo @nicoleacardoza

Read More