|
|
“In 1971, for the first time in our Nation's history, this Court [the Supreme Court of the United States] ruled in favor of a woman who complained that her State had denied her the equal protection of its laws. Reed v. Reed. Since Reed, the [Supreme] Court has repeatedly recognized that neither federal nor state government acts compatibly with the equal protection principle when a law or official policy denies to women, simply because they are women, full citizenship stature--equal opportunity to aspire, achieve, participate in and contribute to society based on their individual talents and capacities.” |
|
|
This is the vision of social equity for women that Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought for and won as a lawyer in the US Supreme Court in 1971, and was able to confirm as a Justice for the Supreme Court in US v. Virginia in 1996. It is the same vision of “full citizenship stature” that PLSE has been seeking for people with criminal records since we were formed by three civil rights attorneys in 2011.
Mourning the passing of RBG, PLSE honors her life’s work and pledges equal persistence.
|
|
Success! Board Fundamentally Revamps “Present Status” Investigation of Applicants |
|
After a pardon application is filed, the next step is for a parole agent to conduct an investigation. For as long as anyone can remember, that investigation not only was “wide-ranging,” but went deep into the applicant’s income, assets and wealth. Why? Because the Board believed that the less money someone had, the more likely they would (have to) turn to crime if they experienced a loss of job or income. They called it a “criminogenic risk factor.”
That was nonsense, pure and simple. PLSE first objected to the questions October 2018. In January 2019, PLSE provided the Board of Pardons (BOP) with an extensive memo proving that the questions were premised on stereotypes and bias, and without scientific support. In October 2019, the Philadelphia Bar Association unanimously urged their immediate elimination and declared that they “criminalized poverty.” In March 2020, the Pardon Project Steering Committee took up the issue. Meeting with the Secretary of the BOP, the members powerfully demonstrated why the questions were unreasonably intrusive, threatening, and demeaning from the perspective of the applicants, and proposed many edits.
After further communications, Secretary Flood advised the Steering Committee on June 30 “that your proposed changes have been adopted and will be incorporated in the Present Status Interview letters/questionnaires.” And just this month, in September, the BOP began using a new questionnaire that does not include any of the offensive questions!
We thank the Steering Committee for its leadership, the Bar Association for its support, but most of all BOP Secretary Brandon Flood for his willingness to listen, to rethink past practices, and to make changes that a system of justice requires.
|
|
PLSE Releases Report on (Non) Recidivism of Pardon Applicants |
|
Some officials have cautioned that the Board of Pardons needs to pay attention to “public safety concerns”, and that appears to be a reason that the process takes so long.
Thanks to summer associates from three law firms (White & Williams, Fox Rothschild and Parker McCay), PLSE examined ten years of PA pardon data – the same years that the Economy League examined in its report showing that pardons generated $16 million in new revenues – to see what crimes the pardon applicants later committed. This involved not only the 1,082 who were granted a pardon, but the1,955 who were denied. The point was to see whether there was any reason to be concerned for public safety.
The findings could not have been more clear: Only 53 of the 3,037 pardon applicants or 1.7% were sent to prison for subsequent offenses, and only 2 applicants, or less than 1/100 of 1%, were later convicted of a crime of violence. Meaning: there’s no cause for concern.
|
|
Attorney General Shapiro called the findings “valuable and important.” Rachel Barkow, Vice Dean of NYU Law School, tweeted "Great study showing how clemency is good for public safety and the economy." BOP Secretary Flood said the report was “very compelling” and “debunks a lot of the myths and flat-out falsehoods” about people who go through the pardon process, and said he will be sharing the report with the members of the legislature. And in a Penn Live podcast that has already received over 7,300 views, Capital Star reporter and host Joyce Davis held a public forum on the report and its importance. She got it exactly right when she said, "The results of the PLSE study gives Flood and his pardons board a powerful tool to galvanize community support to provide more opportunities for ex-offenders to erase the blotches in their past."
We’re on it, Joyce! Public education campaign to follow….
|
|
Governor (Finally!) Acts: Signs 170 Pardons, Denies None … but Hundreds Remain |
|
On August 27, Governor Wolf finally acted on recommendations that had been made by the Board of Pardons in September and December 2019. As he has since first taking office, he pardoned 99% of the people recommended to him (170 of 172) and denied none (two remain). That’s the (very) good news. The BAD news is that there remain 124 people (and their families) waiting for him to use his pen, for whom pardons were recommended at the March and June hearings -- and that's not counting the 131 that are now on their way to his desk from September’s hearings (see next story).
In her September 14 letter sent to the Governor, Rev. Dr. Michelle Simmons, Chair of the Pardon Project Steering Committee, called the delays “wrong” and “shameful”:
|
|
|
|
'None of that [all the reforms made by the Board of Pardons] means anything if those who make it through the process and get a recommendation from the Board don’t get help from you. In fact, it’s far worse: you get excited and make plans, and then they all come crashing down when nothing happens. You are heaping despair on them." |
|
|
The Committee called on the Governor to “make it a part of your day, EVERY day, to spend 20 minutes signing pardons. People need hope. People who have made it to your desk deserve the second chance in life that only you can give.”
To read Rev. Michelle’s letter to the Governor, click here.
As of today, the Governor has not yet responded. Give him a nudge: email him!
|
|
Kudos (Again!) to the Board of Pardons |
|
They could have punted. They could have yielded to the IT staff who were telling them it couldn’t (or needn’t) be done. They could have called it a day when technology glitches tried the patience of everyone. They could have flat out refused to put in three incredibly long days –that included not just endless hours of public hearings but interviews of incarcerated applicants late into the night.
But they persisted. And they excelled.
September 1-4 saw the Board of Pardons – all five members – hold their first hearings using “advanced communications technology” (Zoom). There were video delays, unintended and inexplicable mutings, audio feedback, dropped calls, and more than enough stress to go around. They slogged their ways through a VERY long list of pardon applicants – the most, so far, of any session.
The outcome: 131 of the 158 pardon cases they heard (83%) were approved! This follows their decision, in August, to grant hearings to a record number (88%) of the candidates they “merit reviewed.” This resulted in an astonishing bottom line: 73% of those who applied for a pardon are being recommended to the Governor!
Kudos indeed to the Board of Pardons! And here’s the clear message to all of you who are thinking about applying for a pardon: Just Get Going, Persist, and Get It Done!!!
|
|
Juvenile Court Judges Add Their Voices, Urge Pardon Reform |
Three months later, the Juvenile Court Judges Commission voted unanimously to do likewise. In a letter to the Board dated August 5, the Commission cited "the inherent differences between the juvenile and criminal justice systems, the otherwise predominantly confidential nature of juvenile records as per the Juvenile Act, Pennsylvania's statutory emphasis on Balanced and Restorative Justice as the focus of juvenile proceedings, and the ever-growing adolescent brain development research."
The Commission urged the Board “to exclude the request for information related to juvenile adjudication and consent decrees in ongoing considerations of clemency.” This has been a priority for PLSE since December 2018. And we will persist.
|
|
The Pardon Project Goes Statewide:
Pittsburgh, Wilkes-Barre, Stroudsburg, Harrisburg, Lancaster …
|
One thing is beyond clear: criminal records are causing major, intergenerational problems for people, families and neighborhoods across Pennsylvanians.
PLSE has been contacted by organizations well outside the City of Philadelphia who are interested in helping fight this blight. Thanks to zoom, PLSE has led training programs hosted and arranged by an increasing number of partners all over the state: Pittsburgh Community Services, Inc., the Allegheny County Bar Foundation, the Dauphin, Lancaster and Monroe County Bar Associations, and the Wilkes-Barre Library and Law Association, to name just the more recent.
These new Pardon Projects will succeed thanks to partnerships with PLAN, the Pennsylvania Legal Aid Network - the statewide umbrella organization of the local legal aid programs that are key to getting the word out to people impacted by criminal records. Today finds PLSE partnering with Neighborhood Legal Services, Mid-Penn Legal Services, North Penn Legal Services, and Legal Aid of Southeastern PA.
We’re convinced: it’s the strong connections between legal aid (who are trusted by the clients) and the private bar (who have the numbers, time and talent) that will make pardons truly accessible to the tens if not hundreds of thousands of low-income Pennsylvanians who were once justice-involved and now deserve second chances. If you are an attorney or work in a law firm, YOU can help.
|
|
THIS MONTH’S TIP:
Attorney Pardon Coaches CAN Sign For Their Clients
|
|
Because face-to-face meetings are often difficult to arrange due to covid, the Board of Pardons has agreed to “receive” and review pardon applications that are signed by the applicant’s representative, as long as the representative signs Section 6 “for the applicant – original signature to be provided.” That will allow your client to get in line and the administrative review process to begin when the application is received in Harrisburg. You will receive an “Application Number” by return mail. Use it to submit the client’s original signature page.
IMPORTANT: the application will NOT be “accepted” or officially “filed” unless and until the client’s signature page is received.
|
|
Wonderful Words from a Supporter |
|
Thanks to zoom, we’re now teaching pardons all around the state. Here’s some feedback we received earlier this month from Stroudsburg, PA, up in the Pocono Mountains:
“This is a great program! You did awesome and I think that we should be able to get our members involved. I hope this initial training and the fact that we are adding pardons to our MCBA pro-bono program will make a difference in our community.”
-Denise M. Burdge, Executive Director, Monroe County Bar Association
|
|
Three Ways You Can Help:
-
Email the Governor and urge him to make it a daily priority to review and sign pardon applications that have been recommended to him by the Board of Pardons: www.governor.pa.gov/contact/#OnlineForm
-
Invite PLSE to host a CLE program for your law firm/in-house legal department – lawyers and non-lawyers alike can be Pardon Coaches!
-
Stay informed! Sign up to receive this newsletter every month, and look for ways to help when you can.
Stay energized, optimistic and healthy,
Tobey Oxholm
Executive Director
|
|
Philadelphia Lawyers for Social Equity
1501 Cherry Street Philadelphia, PA 19102
(267) 519-5323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
