WSSN Stories

By Lue Dowdy, LUE Productions

Smart, talented, gifted, and more: Jazzlynn Woods is a youth that brings along a light and positive energy when she enters a room, but please do not get it twisted because when she hits the floor for competition, the light turns into a flame, and that positive energy becomes competitive energy but still positive. I love, love, love her spirit, so let’s hear it! Below is more about this amazing young lady.

Jazzlynn Woods is 19 years old and is the daughter of Lawrence and Kimberly Woods. She has two older brothers, Tobias VanBuren Jr., 32, and Charles Smith 22. Jazzy has been a resident of the City of Rialto for her whole life. She graduated from Kucera Middle School with honors and was a Kucera cheerleader and also participated in a program at Kucera Middle School called ‘Shine Bright like a Diamond”, a Mentoring After School Program designed for girls. 

Jazzlynn graduated from middle school and the SBLD Mentoring program where she became a ‘Diva Ambassador’ of the program helping other young ladies. Jazzlynn attended Carter High School in Rialto. In her freshman year she was on the CHS Cheer Team. In her Senior year she participated in the nursing program.

Jazzy has been a cheerleader the age of five. She was a professional cheerleader for ‘California All Stars Cheer’ in Ontario and has won two National Champion Rings. She also cheered at ‘Prime Cheer and Stunt’ in Corona for two seasons as a flyer. Now that she has aged out to cheer, she is now training to become a cheer coach. Jazzy wants to become a registered nurse and is planning on attending a CNA school to become a CNA this summer. She will then attend a four-year college to become a registered nurse. 

Currently, Jazzy is helping her mom with her business Fabulous Chic Boutique in San Bernardino and working part time at Youthbuild in San Bernardino as she waits to attend her CNA school. 

I’m extremely proud of this young lady and all her accomplishments thus far. Jazzy is definitely a firework and someone to watch for. Until next week Folks. L’s!

By Aldon Thomas Stiles | California Black Media

Watching your tax dollars, elected officials and legislation that affects you.

The electoral process is foundational to the durability of America’s democratic structure.

And as the battle for fairer voting laws rages on, politicians and activists on the political Right claim they are responding to allegations of widespread voter and election fraud. Those on the Left say they are rallying to fight a coordinated political offensive to restrict access to the polls and increasing reports of voter suppression.

Recently, in some states, most notoriously Georgia and Florida, lawmakers have taken steps to restrict voting access and rights for many Americans.

But in California, policymakers and legislators are doing the opposite, making proposals to simplify the voting process and expand access to the polls.

Invoking the violent history of voter suppression in the South that her parents endured, which sometimes involved murders — California Secretary of State Shirley Weber says it is a priority of hers to “ensure the right to vote.”

“I tell people all the time that no number is good unless it’s 100% in terms of voter participation,” Weber told the Public Policy Institute of California. “Why didn’t 5 million go to the polls? We need to figure out where they are and what stopped them from going.”

In the California Legislature, an amendment to Senate Bill (SB) 29, which passed earlier this year, was one bill in a broader legislative effort to secure the right to vote in vulnerable communities.

Before that amendment passed, California law dictated that a ballot would be mailed to all eligible voters for the Nov. 3 statewide general election in 2020 as well as use a Secretary of State vote-by-mail tracking system to ensure votes are counted.

SB 29, which the governor signed into law in February, extended those requirements to any election “proclaimed or conducted” prior to Jan. 1, 2022.

2020 saw a record number of voter participation in California. Some political observers attribute that spike to the vote-by-mail system instituted last year.

“To maintain a healthy democracy in California, it is important to encourage eligible voters to vote and to ensure that residents of the state have the tools needed to participate in every election,” the bill reads.

Senate Bill (SB) 583, introduced by California State Sen. Josh Newman (D-Fullerton) would require the Secretary of State to register or preregister eligible citizens to vote upon retrieving the necessary paperwork from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).

Citizens who do not wish to be registered can opt-out of the process altogether.

Newman stressed the importance of access and simplifying the voter registration process.

“In our state there are an estimated 4.6 million U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote who have not yet registered,” Newman said. “Our obligation as the people’s elected representatives is to make the process simpler and more accessible for them.”

On April 27, the Senate Transportation Committee passed SB 583 with a 13 to 3 vote. The Appropriations Committee has set a hearing for May 10.

Senate Bill (SB) 503, introduced by Sen. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park), proposes that if a signature shares enough characteristics with a previous signature from the same voter, then it would be recognized as official on voting paperwork.

Current law dictates that a signature has to match exactly for it to be considered valid.

Disability Rights California (DRC), a non-profit advocacy organization that

advances and protects the rights of Californians living with disabilities, has come out in support of SB 503.

“Studies have shown that signature matches disproportionately impact voters with disabilities,” Eric Harris, director of public policy for the DRC wrote in a letter.

“Voters with disabilities, including seniors, are more likely to vote by mail and would have to sign their name on their ballots,” Harris argued. “A voter’s signature changes over time and for people with disabilities, a signature can change nearly every other time one is written. Some people with disabilities might have conditions that make it difficult to sign your name the same way multiple times.”

For now, the Senate Appropriations Committee has tabled SB 503, placing the bill in what the Legislature calls a “suspense file,” where it awaits further action by lawmakers.

At the federal level, lawmakers have introduced two bills in the U.S. Congress to expand voting rights, the For The People Act of 2021 and the John L. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

The For The People Act, or H.R.1, proposes a three pronged approach to expanding election access: Voting, campaign finance, and ethics.

Hilary Shelton, Director to the NAACP’s Washington Bureau and Senior Vice President for Advocacy and Policy, compared the current voting rights battle to that of the Civil Rights Movement in a press conference about H.R.1 and the John L. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

“If you look at some of those 1960s shots of the C.T. Vivians of the world, of the Joe Lowerys and so many others that helped lead Americans to those registration sites, you’ll see them actually literally being beaten to the ground,” Shelton said, referring to well-known Civil Rights Movement activists.

The John L. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021, or S.4263, would amend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to restore the powers it lost after the

Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Shelby v. Holder. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that laws requiring states and local communities to first clear any changes to voting their local laws with the feds, was unlawful.

“Well, we’ve become more sophisticated in our disenfranchisement,” Shelton continued. “We want to make sure that we stop that disenfranchisement all along the way and that’s why we’re convinced that a bill named for John Lewis and a bill that speaks for the people are bills that need to pass.”

Because, according to the Courts, there’s no such thing as racism. It doesn’t exist.

By Dr. G.S. Potter, Senior Editor of the b |e note

If we are talking about justice, we are talking about structural reform. If we are talking about structural reform, we are talking about policy. And if we are talking about policy, then we are talking about the Courts. 

And according to the Courts, there is no such thing as racism.

You’re rubbing your eyes, but you read that correctly. The closest thing we have to racism, under the law, is discrimination.  There are a number of communities that have been legally designated as a “class” of people. And race can qualify as a protected class, as can sexual orientation or disability or age.  But racism does not, legally, exist. Discrimination does … and barely, at that.

Discrimination in general wasn’t outlawed until Congress passed the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868 which reads …

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Yet, immediately following its passage, Jim Crow was allowed to take hold and lynchings soon entered their golden era.  Why?

The white supremacists in the South were given shelter for their efforts by the Supreme Court. Congress passed the Reconstruction Acts with the intent of preventing white supremacists from denying Black men and women their freedom.  SCOTUS responded by gutting the Fourteenth Amendment. 

In 1872, despite the fact that the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment starts with the phrase “No state shall”, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the privileges and immunities clause only applied to federal institutions and not the state.  As Justia describes, the primary holding of the Supreme Court was …

The Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is limited to federal citizenship rather than extending to state citizenship.

As a result, we saw states and localities pass law after law abridging the rights and threatening the lives of Black Americans. Legally. For the next century.

In the 1950s, a Civil Rights Movement began in America and once again discrimination against Black Americans was pushed to the forefront of the nation’s politics.  This time SCOTUS and Congress fell in line to end segregation through Brown v. Board of Ed (1954) and pass the Civil Rights Act (1964) and the Voting Rights Act (1965).

But as the courts grew more conservative, their determination to, once again, provide shelter for white supremacists expanded. By 1976, SCOTUS was willing to go on the offensive against freedom from discrimination. They did so by formally attacking the definition of discrimination itself.

Again, there is no such thing as racism in the United States legal system. Racism has traumatic impacts on Black communities and communities that are otherwise not White.  Discrimination doesn’t. At least, in efforts to protect a white nationalist’s most powerful weapon, SCOTUS moved to legally redefine discrimination itself by eliminating the ability to use the impact of a policy as the standard to prove discrimination.  They attempted to set a precedent by which discrimination only exists if it can be proven that it was intentional. 

In the case of Washington v. Davis (1976), SCOTUS ruled that testing applied in the District of Colombia Police Department’s hiring process was not discriminatory even though it served to prevent Black applicants from being brought onto the force.  They ruled …

Though the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment contains an equal protection component prohibiting the Government from invidious discrimination, it does not follow that a law or other official act is unconstitutional solely because it has a racially disproportionate impact regardless of whether it reflects a racially discriminatory purpose.

According to the Equal Justice Society …

[B]ecause contemporary discrimination is frequently structural in nature, unconscious, and/or hidden behind pretexts (despite the fact that a tangible harm has resulted from their actions), the showing of “intent” becomes a near impossible burden for plaintiffs.

There are still fields of law where the intent standard is still applied.  Police misconduct and education are two examples.  We can see the fruits of that standard by watching the inequalities unfold in the criminal justice system and achievement gaps.  But Congress finally mustered the fortitude to push back when white nationalists were looking for SCOTUS to provide them cover in their efforts to disenfranchise Black voters. 

In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled in City of Mobile v. Bolden.  This case was a class action lawsuit launched on behalf of the Black citizens of Mobile. Rather that electing representatives for local districts, as is done with city councils nationwide, Mobile, Alabama deployed a system of local representation in which a three member commission was elected at large. This meant that a white majority would be able to dilute the voting power of the Black electorate.  The plaintiffs argued that this practice violated the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution, and the District court agreed. 

The Supreme Court, however, did not. They ruled …

(a) Only if there is purposeful discrimination can there be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. And this principle applies to claims of racial discrimination affecting voting just as it does to other claims of racial discrimination.

(b) Disproportionate effects alone are insufficient to establish a claim of unconstitutional racial vote dilution. Where the character of a law is readily explainable on grounds apart from race, as would nearly always be true where, as here, an entire system of local governance is brought into question, disproportionate impact alone cannot be decisive, and courts must look to other evidence to support a finding of discriminatory purpose.

In other words, the results of a policy can be clearly racist, but unless it can be proven that the policy was written and applied with the intent to discriminate against a person or community because of race it does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment. The intended effects of this ruling was to establish a precedent in which intent, not impact, was the standard by which to analyze violations of voting rights. 

Congress took note and in 1982, they did their part to restore the right to vote by amending the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The original text of the Voting Rights Act (1965) reads …

No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.

In response to the SCOTUS ruling in City of Mobile v. Bolton, Congress amended the passage to read …

No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.

This amendment ensured that the disparate impact standard would be applied to cased involving the Voting Rights Act (1965).

SCOTUS is currently positioned to take another swing at giving the current generation of white nationalists and insurrectionists cover to deprive non-White Americans their right to vote with the case of Brvonich v Democratic National Committee, but Congress can and should be prepared to immediately pass legislation designed to formalize disparate impact as the official standard for all discrimination claims involving the right to vote. 

While they are at it, they should present legislation that removes the Intent Standard from cases of discrimination in all areas of Civil Rights. Congress can and should immediately present a new Civil Rights Act that restores our Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Protections by updating the areas in which protection is secured and installing a disparate impact standard across the board. 

As a nation, we are in the throes of a new Civil Rights Movement.  We need a Civil Rights Act to match it. 

The Civil Rights Act of 2021 should ensure that disparate impact is not only applied to voting rights, housing rights, and employment rights. It should be expanded to also provide protection in education, health care, criminal justice, and environmental justice.  It should come with sharp teeth and devastating consequences for those that violate it.  And it should provide funding for lawyers for protected classes. 

There is no doubt that white supremacy is aggressively attacking our communities and institutions.  We need legal protections that are not only about us being equal, but provide better defense against those attacks. We need a new Civil Rights Act that closes the loophole of intent and gives us the tools to fight back against what is being done to our communities, whether a bigot admits it or not.  Congress has the power to give this to us.  And it’s time that we demand that from them. 

The news of Derek Chauvin’s guilty verdict in the murder of George Floyd has caused many to reflect on the seemingly endless challenges—and endless hope, fight and resilience—that the Black community has experienced and demonstrated, particularly over the past year. Chronicling “the year that changed the world,” ESSENCE—the leading and only 100% Black-owned media, technology and commerce company at scale dedicated to Black women and communities—today debuted its May/June 2021 issue cover as a striking visual interpretation that juxtaposes the challenges and triumphs of a community after an unprecedented year of heightened social and political unrest, police brutality, economic and health inequities, COVID-19 and more. The quilt artwork cover, created by contemporary artist Bisa Butler and commissioned exclusively by ESSENCE, is one-of-a-kind and the first-of-its-kind used by ESSENCE for a cover in its more than 50-year history.  Butler is widely recognized for her depictions of African-American identity and life in the American experience, combining portraiture and the highly skilled craft and tradition of quilting to deliver engaging pieces that spark dialogue.

ESSENCE assembled an array of notable voices—from activists, journalists, artists and writers—who shared their perspectives on witnessing history unfold, creating change and being champions for freedom. Guest contributors include: activist and author Tamika Mallory, who shared an excerpt from her upcoming book State of Emergency; CNN anchor Abby Phillip; journalist and scholar Clint Smith; Paris-based producer Robin Allison Davis; race, culture and identity writer Kovie Biakolo; writer/activist Kimberly Latrice Jones; activist Lynee Vanee Bogues; and more. The issue also features ESSENCE CEO Caroline Wanga’s debut column entitled “Plate Full of Parsley,” which accentuates power, equity and authenticity as key ingredients for a new kind of soul food for the sisterhood.

“Some events are so defining that they continue to transform generations long after they occur, and such have been the collective events of the past year,” said Latraviette D. Smith-Wilson, Chief Strategy & Engagement Officer, ESSENCE.  “Whether those sworn to protect us having no regard for our lives, health and economic disparities heightened under a global pandemic, violent attacks on the U.S. Capitol and American democracy and more, we have witnessed a deluge of inhumanity that has only been rivaled by the resilience of our humanity.  This is what our incredible team has captured throughout the pages of ESSENCE’s  May/June Issue and what we are so honored that Bisa Butler has visually interpreted through the colors, textures, fabrics and patterns of this amazing quilt artwork—the first of its kind for an ESSENCE cover. Each stitch tells the story of these times and threads together the narrative of the work left undone and the future of social justice and racial equity that we must create.”

ESSENCE’s ongoing focus on social justice, economic inclusion and equity issues will be highlighted this week in its upcoming airing of the 2021 ESSENCE Black Women in Hollywood Awards, on ESSENCE.com and ESSENCEStudios.com this Thursday, April 22. Building on its years of providing platforms to ensure Black creatives were recognized when others ignored them and that they continue to “receive their flowers” for their contributions to Hollywood and global culture, this year’s experience, with the theme “Mastering Our Stories,” will focus on the resiliency of Black women in Hollywood through the years—including during the unprecedented pandemic.

ESSENCE’s May/June issue will hit newsstands on Tuesday, April 27. For more on this issue, visit ESSENCE.com.

ABOUT ESSENCE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

Essence Communications is the number one—and only 100% Black-owned—media, technology and commerce company at scale dedicated to Black women and communities. With a community of more than 31 million Black women, ESSENCE inspires a global audience through diverse storytelling and immersive original content rooted in Culture, Equity and Celebration. The brand’s multi-platform presence in publishing, experiential and online encompasses its namesake magazine; digital, video and social platforms; television specials; books; and signature live events, including Black Women in Music, Black Women in Hollywood, Street Style and the ESSENCE Festival of Culture.

By Sunita Sohrabji | Ethnic Media Services

Combating domestic violence requires a healing-centered approach which doesn’t always remove an abuser from the household nor criminalizes him, said Dr. Aleese Moore-Orbih, incoming director of the California Partnership to End Domestic Violence (CPEDV).

“I have never come across a woman who did not want to help her abusive partner. Leaving an abusive relationship is an old paradigm. Women of color want to stay with their partners and want agencies to help the abusive partner break out of their cycle of violence,” said Moore-Orbih, in an interview with Ethnic Media Services. “For me, the call has been to help people see one another, with all their shortcomings, and still love them.”

Moore-Orbih will officially joined the CPEDV team April 19.

The Partnership founded nearly 40 years ago, represents over 1,000 survivors, advocates, organizations and allied individuals across California. The organization has successfully advocated for over 200 pieces of legislation on behalf of domestic violence victims and their children, and it brings a racial justice focus to the issue.

Moore-Orbih, a United Church of Christ pastor, whose career has focused on racial justice and violence against women, hopes to bring a new paradigm to the role, focusing on the intersectionality of factors that can contribute to an abusive relationship, including race and ethnicity, socioeconomic class, gender and sexual orientation, age, ability, and immigrant identity. The Partnership noted in a press release that she “will raise the visibility of the Partnership’s anti-oppression work, move the public discourse, and support policy and community advocacy toward more effective prevention and intervention solutions.”

“People of color already live in an environment that is hostile towards them. Their survival mechanisms are seen as criminal and violent,” said Moore-Orbih, noting the generational trauma of slavery and Jim Crow laws, the continuous murders of young Black men without cause, poor economic conditions, and housing insecurity.

“It is a system that has traditionally tried to kill people of color, who are brought up with generations of disempowerment. When things are out of control most of the time, you attempt to control it, sometimes with violence,” she said.

For Black and Brown men, masculinity is determined by power. “They have spent a lifetime trying to prove their power to their communities, and their partners,” she said, noting that Black men have traditionally been underemployed while Black women are often over-employed. Women have had to do the delicate dance of bringing in the family’s income, raising their children, and pleasing their man.

“For a woman of color, domestic violence may be fourth or fifth on the list of things they have to deal with,” she said. “I can handle him, but this is all the stuff I cannot handle.”

COVID has added an extra layer of pressure for both survivors and their abusers. “Women doing the cha cha cha all these years are quickly learning the flamenco,” said Moore-Orbih. “But this is nothing new. Our communities have been doing the survival dance for decades.”

Domestic violence has spiked alarmingly as victims are trapped at home with their abusers amid lockdown orders during the COVID pandemic. The New England Journal of Medicine reported last year that one out of every four women in the U.S. and one in 10 men are currently facing abuse from a spouse or intimate partner. At the same time, traditional safety nets have largely been shut down. Domestic violence hotlines have seen a drop in calls as many victims cannot find safe spaces from which to make calls.

Shelters are closed or operating at full capacity, and thereby cannot take on new clients. Black and Brown victims of domestic violence are less likely to call police because of a mistrust of law enforcement or language barriers.

“When COVID broke, we were all struggling trying to figure out how to provide services,” said Moore-Orbih, adding that the number of people sent to hotels tripled, as survivors had to quarantine for 14 days before they could be sent to a shelter.

“COVID became another layer of pressure for people who were already drowning in anxiety, fear, ad trauma. If a person is trying to save you, you can’t see that,” she said.

Getting a woman out of her home and into a shelter to build self-esteem and self-reliance is just one small piece, said the reverend. “She is not healed.”

Similarly, Moore-Orbih does not support criminalizing perpetrators who must also be healed via the same holistic approach.

An integrative holistic approach must be brought to both survivor and perpetrator, said Moore-Orbih. “If we are looking to make people whole again, we must address the psyche, the physical ailments, forced immigration, and slavery.”

By Manny Otiko | California Black Media

California’s newest and first Latino Democratic Senator, Alex Padilla, says he supports reparations for Black American descendants of enslaved African people. He made the statement during an online news briefing with members of California’s ethnic press organized by Ethnic Media Services.

“It’s the morally right thing to do,” said Padilla. “For me, it’s not a difficult conversation.”

Padilla said reparations would go a long way to “address institutional injustices.”

For nearly two centuries now, Black American descendants of enslaved Africans have been making the case to an unbudging U.S. government for reparations. Advocates say payments would compensate for centuries of unpaid labor and an opportunity for the federal government to make good on its promise to provide 40 acres and a mule to each formerly enslaved Black person after the Civil War.

A shift in the national consciousness last year — some attribute to organizing around Black economic and political empowerment led in part by the American Descendants of Slaves Movement and the national reckoning on race that began last summer after the killing of George Floyd — has ushered in a political environment in the United States where many legislators are much more open than they have been in the past to reparations.

“We have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time,” Padilla said. “We should be able to negotiate and advance and infrastructure package, and immigration reform and protect the rights of voters, and work on environmental protection, and address historical injustices like this.”

Earlier this month, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee voted to approve forming a committee to study the idea of providing reparations to African Americans.

Padilla is a veteran politician who’s worked his way up the political ladder, previously serving as a Los Angeles city councilman, as a state senator and as secretary of State before he was nominated in January to replace outgoing Sen. Kamala Harris.

Padilla said that he has been senator for less than 100 days, but he’s packed a lot into that short period. During his first couple of months, he participated in President Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial, and voted to approve the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 intended to help Americans devastated economically by the coronavirus pandemic.

In the Senate, he is pushing and supporting a number of bills on a range of issues, including proposals focused on immigration reform (providing a pathway to citizenship for essential workers) and hate crimes against Asian Americans.

Padilla, the son of Mexican immigrants, grew up in the Pacoima, Los Angeles, a neighborhood in the San Fernando Valley. His father worked for 40 years as a short-order cook and his late mother cleaned houses. Both parents were local activists who fought against violence in their community. Padilla said they were the inspiration for his political career.

“Through their hard work, we had a modest upbringing to put it mildly,” said Padilla. “We grew up with the values of service to others, and hard work, but we also saw our parents get very involved in the community.”