On the 100th Anniversary of the first International Women’s Day (IWD), Mass Dissent takes a look at the current state of women affairs – women’s achievements, challenges, obsticles, and hopes.

In March of 1911, over a million people across Europe observed IWD for the first time. In 2011, women across the world still face difficulties set in place by patriarchal social, legal, and political structures. Now as then, women are victims of patriarchy, but they also emulate their sisters from past eras as they challenge the system in any way possible – in the street, in courtrooms, and in their private spheres.

Lily Huang, a lead organizer for the Student Immigrant Movement, in her article “The Wonderful Women of the Student Immigrant Movement” presents to us women who build, maintain, and lead the organization and the movement to achieve equal education for undocumented immigrant youth.

In “Human Trafficking: Redefining Progress,” Julie Dahlstrom analyzes the complex and difficult phenomenon of trafficking women. She stresses the fact that none of the initiatives undertaken by governments to cure the problem focus on human trafficking survivors, mostly women.

Barb Dougan, in her article “Tough Love: Drug Sentencing Law and their Impact on Women,” describes how mandatory minimum sentencing laws can result in particularly harsh penalties for women convicted of drug offenses.

In “Family Rights Discrimination Claims: Breaking More Barriers in the Workplace,” David Conforto discusses ever-present discrimination in the workplace because of stereotypical perceptions of women as the main caregivers in a family.

Our last article, “Statewide Campaign to Respect All Workers,” written by Natalicia Tracy and Lydia Edwards from the Brazilian Immigrant Center, describes a new Massachusetts campaign to pass a Domestic Workers Bill of Rights. This is a tremendously important and inspiring undertaking which would help many working poor women.

- Editors -

By Julie Dahlstrom

Human trafficking, long-recognized as a compelling and complex human rights issue, has generated considerable recent discussion. Politicians and prosecutors have re-examined existing tools and proposed new initiatives to confront it. While such initiatives are, on the whole, welcome and necessary, serious problems of definition, focus, and best practices remain.

In 2000, Congress passed the Trafficking Victim Protection Act (“TVPA”), which greatly enhanced the ability of the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute human trafficking. The legislation also offered certain protections to trafficking victims, including public benefits and legal immigration status. The law established a new “T visa” for non-citizens, designed to encourage undocumented victims to cooperate with law enforcement in exchange for legal immigration status. This merger of humanitarian and prosecutorial agendas has largely marked the field.

This mixed model has had some positive results. Since the passage of the TVPA, prosecutions have risen, and an estimated 1,300 victims from about 80 different countries have escaped situations of trafficking. However, despite such successes, significant challenges remain. For example, despite the availability of 5,000 T visas annually, only 1,300 such visas were granted from 2000 until 2009. As there are an estimated 20,000 non-citizens trafficked into the United States annually, questions about the comprehensiveness and the efficacy of this method continue to be raised.

Furthermore, the increase of prosecutions has not stemmed the growth of this profitable trade. Human trafficking remains tied with the illegal arms industry as the largest criminal industry in the world. The problem is both global and – surprisingly to many – local. According to the Boston Globe, in March 2010, law enforcement arrested five individuals accused of using apartments in Newton, Watertown, Wellesley and Somerville as brothels in an interstate prostitution ring. Furthermore, WBUR reported in July, 2010, about a Dorchester-based man suspected of using nail salons as fronts for human trafficking in Springfield and in other states, including Connecticut.

In recognition of the need for new approaches, there have been several efforts locally and nationally to address human trafficking. On January 20, 2011, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley filed new legislation, entitled An Act Relative to the Commercial Exploitation of People, which would create new criminal offenses, such as crimes of trafficking of persons for sexual servitude or forced labor. The legislation also would create an inter-agency task force to examine the prevalence of human trafficking.

On the federal level, a similar prosecution-focused model has been unveiled. On February 1, 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder announced the launch of a nationwide Human Trafficking Enhanced Enforcement Initiative, seeking to streamline federal criminal investigations and prosecutions. The initiative calls for the creation of Anti-Trafficking Coordination Teams, known as ACTeams, comprised of prosecutors and federal law enforcement in pilot districts across the country.

The proposed Massa-chusetts legislation and new federal initiative, while laudable and needed, focus heavily on a prosecution-based model that seeks primarily to punish traffickers. Notably absent from these efforts is a substantial focus on human trafficking survivors.

As state Senator Mark Montigny opined in a recent press conference, we as a society have a “moral responsibility” to protect and to provide services to human trafficking survivors. However, Massachusetts, like many states, has failed to live up to such lofty ambitions. State budget cuts have slashed social safety nets. Services to survivors, already woefully underfunded, have been deeply hit. In addition, other services of last resort for survivors, such as domestic violence shelters, are increasingly underfunded and overcrowded. As a result, existing safety nets are broken – if not altogether absent – for survivors.

This has two major negative consequences. First, many survivors do not have a “way out” of human trafficking. Without shelter, food, and basic services, survivors are less likely to leave trafficking situations. Second, survivors are much less likely to cooperate with law enforcement if they do not have sufficient support throughout the process. As U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz recently stated, “[s]uccessful prosecutions of traffickers rely heavily on the cooperation of victims and law enforcement’s ability to gain their trust.” However, cooperation is only possible if survivors have real protection. This means access to social and legal services as well as a clear right to immigration status for the undocumented.

The roots of the trafficking problem are deep and complex, implicating gender roles and vast disparities of wealth and power across the world. Criminal prosecutions are important tools. But we must also pay attention to the causes of trafficking and to hearing the voices of its survivors.

Julie Dahlstrom is an immigration attorney and the program manager of the Immigration Legal Assistance Program of Lutheran Social Services of New England (LSS).  She manages the LSS Anti-Trafficking Program, which provides legal and social services to non-citizen survivors of human trafficking in Massachusetts.  She is also a member of the Massachusetts Human Trafficking Task Force.

By Barb Dougan

Some women get flowers and chocolates from their partners. Others get 10 years in a prison cell.

For three decades, Massachusetts has used mandatory minimum sentencing laws as its weapon of choice in the disastrous “war on drugs.” These laws were enacted without any evidence that they would work and, in fact, they don’t. They have failed to reduce drug sales or drug dependency or to protect public safety. Instead, one-size-fits-all penalties result in disproportionately harsh sentences for low-level offenders, egregious racial disparities, packed prisons and unsustainable correctional costs. Drug offenders often serve longer sentences than those who commit violent crimes. If that were not bad enough, Massachusetts’ drug sentencing laws have a particularly harsh effect on women.

Small role, big trouble.
With mandatory minimums, the sentence is typically based on the type and quantity of the drug in question, not the person’s role in the offense, prior criminal record or need for treatment. Thus, those at the bottom of the drug trade are subject to the same harsh punishments intended for major traffickers and kingpins. And the drug trade is no different from so many other commercial ventures — women fill the low level positions. But they can pay the same big price, with sentences up to 10 and 15 years.

Drug offenses by women are often linked to the men in their lives. Those who knowingly participate may, for example, drive their partner to a transaction. Others act as couriers, a potentially lethal practice when a woman uses her body to transport drugs. In February, a 21-year old woman was arrested at Logan airport with a deadly 50 pellets of cocaine inside her. In 2008, another young woman died at a New Hampshire motel after a similar smuggling attempt. Many low level “mules” are also addicts who feel they have little choice but to assist their suppliers. For others, their culpability is based on who they live with or the fact that drugs were stored in their homes, without their knowledge or consent.

But wait. It gets worse.
Remarkably, such low-level offenders may end up serving longer sentences than their partners or suppliers. Depending on the prosecutor, drug offenders may be offered reduced charges in exchange for their “cooperation,” i.e., by providing information or by forfeiting drug money and drug-related assets. Many women can’t “cooperate.” They aren’t privy to information about a drug operation and they don’t get the drug money. So they take the full brunt of mandatory sentencing laws.

By 2009, nearly one-third of the female prisoners in Massachusetts were serving drug-related sentences. Over half of them were serving mandatory minimum sentences, compared to only 12 percent in 2003. It is no surprise that drug sentencing laws contribute to longer sentences for female offenders. This, in turn, creates problems for the next generation. The majority of the state’s incarcerated women have children under 18. Children are five times more likely to end up in foster care when the mother is in prison, compared to the father. Children with either parent in prison are much more likely to become involved with the criminal justice system.

Moving toward change.
A 2005 review panel on female offenders unanimously endorsed parole eligibility for drug offenders serving mandatory minimum sentences. This is a critical reform for those who are already incarcerated, allowing for a more successful re-entry to the community. A good first step was made in 2010, when a new law was enacted that made drug offenders serving less-serious county sentences eligible for parole in certain situations. But what’s really needed is the outright repeal of mandatory sentencing laws in the first place. In any system of justice, punishment must fit the crime. Several sentencing reform bills have been filed for the new legislative session, including a ground-breaking bill by Gov. Patrick that would repeal several mandatory minimums. Surely the women – and men – of Massachusetts deserve that much.

Barb Dougan, a NLG Massachusetts Chapter board member, is the Massachusetts project director for Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM).

By David Conforto

Imagine this scenario: You’ve worked at the same Fortune 500 company since graduating from college. Over the past 15 years, you’ve steadily climbed the ranks, impressing numerous colleagues and superiors along the way. For as long as you can remember, you’ve had your eye on your division’s coveted Vice President position. Finally, it appears that the position will soon open up and, thanks to your hard work and dedication, you’re a shoe-in for the job.

There are two variables, however, that you didn’t account for in evaluating your candidacy and which, unfortunately, the powers-that-be did: You’re female and you just gave birth to your second child. To your utter disbelief, you’re informed that Joe Smith has been named Vice President over you. By all objective measures, he’s the second-best candidate for the job. Mr. Smith joined the company just a couple years back, has less experience, and does not possess the MBA that you juggled work and family obligations for several years to obtain. When you inquire why you weren’t selected for the position, you get the following matter-of-fact response, “We didn’t think you’d be up for the job since you just had a baby. The position requires a ton of travel, which we assumed you wouldn’t like.” Notably, Mr. Smith and his partner have three kids.

Unfortunately, the scenario described above represents an all-too-common fact pattern for the individuals whom I represent. At its core, this is gender discrimination, which a Massachusetts Superior Court recognized in 2006 in Sivieri v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In denying the Commonwealth’s motion for summary judgment in that case, the court confronted the obvious, stating: “It would blink reality to deny that a considerable part of our society believes that mothers are principally responsible for the care of young children and are therefore less effective as employees.” The U.S. Supreme Court articulated a similar sentiment in Nevada Department of Human Resources v. Hibbs in 2003 and noted the “cycle of discrimination” that results from such a mentality:

Because employers continued to regard the family as the woman’s domain, they often denied men similar accommodations or discouraged them from taking leave. These mutually reinforcing stereotypes created a self-fulfilling cycle of discrimination that forced women to continue to assume the role of primary family caregiver, and fostered employers’ stereotypical views about women’s commitment to work and their value as employees.

This particular type of gender discrimination has also been referred to as family rights discrimination and, more recently, maternal profiling – a term popularized by members of the national grassroots group, MomsRising. According to the Center for WorkLife Law, the number of lawsuits filed by workers alleging family rights discrimination has grown exponentially over the past three decades, from a total of eight in the 1970s to 358 in the first half of the 2000s. Such cases have provided meaningful recourse to the numerous female employees who suffer workplace discrimination when trying to maintain their dual role as mothers and productive members of the workforce.

Many people unknowingly hold damaging stereotypes based on immutable characteristics like race, disability, and gender. With respect to the latter, the propensity to engage in gender stereotyping is well-documented. In a 2009 study by Dr. Eugene Caruso of the University of Chicago, for instance, researchers asked study participants to consider hypothetical job opportunities with the following variables: starting salary, location, holiday time, and sex of the potential boss. The participants’ decisions matched their stated preferences with respect to the first three variables. The boss’s sex, however, turned out to be far more important than the participants stated. Amazingly, on average, participants were willing to pay a 22% tax on their starting salary to have a male boss. This surprising gender-tax manifested itself regardless of whether the study participant was male or female.

As our own First Circuit in Thomas v. Eastman Kodak acknowledged in 1999, “Unwitting or ingrained bias is no less injurious or worthy of eradication than blatant or calculated discrimination.” This could not be truer than in the workplace, where people rely on their paychecks to provide basic necessities for themselves and their family. While significant progress has been made, new barriers will need to be broken as women continue to strive for senior-level, historically male-dominated positions. Recognizing and aggressively litigating such claims will be an essential component in leveling the playing field for women in the workplace.

David Conforto is the founder of Conforto Law Group, P.C., a Boston employment law firm.

By Lily Huang

At the Student Immigrant Movement (SIM), we recruit youth and develop them to become leaders in our communities and to fight for equal access to education for all, regardless of immigration status. Many of our youth are young women who have grown to become the leaders and organizers of our SIM movement and organization. We are young immigrant women – undocumented and unafraid – and allies! We are the photographers and writers of SIM, the aspiring teachers, businesswomen, and social workers of tomorrow, high school and college students, non-profit employees, housekeepers and restaurant hostesses. Our many women in leadership in SIM affect how we work, from how we organize our communities to how we care for one another within SIM. We cultivate a community that organizes in a unique and compassionate way, full of courageous love, and also pushes for individual and collective growth.

Katherine (right), a growing leader, spaks out at a Dream Act Rally with Ada (left), a dynamite organizer.

Being women permeates every aspect of our organizing, from doing one-on-ones and facilitating meetings to planning strategies. We build our relationships on a deep level with our young men and women. We start every meeting with sharing how we are feeling and catching up on family, school, love, and life. As we plan events, we ensure that we do not take on too much by going around the room to voice our current personal and SIM responsibilities and our ability to commit to additional tasks. As women, the strategies and campaigns we choose are out of courageous love in the face of ignorance and hatred. We, as women, are always thinking about our siblings, children, parents and neighbors. We are always present to teach and help each other when needed and to challenge one another through our SIM organizing and also in our friendships.

Our Mass Hope 2010 vigil against anti-immigrant amendments. The vigil, held outside the State House, lasted 19 days and 18 nights.

The many women in the leadership of SIM create an open space for all our students to have beautiful friendships with each other and to participate in raw conversations about our unique and shared experiences. We are constantly pushing ourselves to talk about our shared social constrictions and stereotypes of us, our bodies and our cultures. We break down the fetishization of our Asian bodies alongside the “goodness” of our Afro-Latino hair, the negotiation of our indigenous to Guatemalan or Latino in the U.S. identity, and the white-ness or brown-ness of our skin. We share the fear we felt as we crossed the border, of taking care of our immigrant families, of being an immigrant woman in high school and college. We celebrate our victories together, from speaking in public and organizing a meeting to enrolling into college. We understand when one has to take a step back but push others when they need it to become leaders. By having this respect and love for our friends and being surrounded by wonderful discussions, good food and supportive atmosphere, we better understand our own identities, bodies and roles and, as a result, better organize our community.

Everything is for the movement but it is also for our SIM community. Being a woman in SIM has been empowering and inspiring to me and to all our young women in SIM. We recognize our fears and obstacles but cast them away so that we can become stronger together. It makes us the proudest when we see this growth of our youth as they become leaders, organize our communities and fulfill their own potential. As women in SIM, we are changing the nature of organizing, community and friendships within SIM, and are building a community with members full of courageous love.

Here are some voices of women involved in the Student Immigrant Movement

Elizabeth: I was so frustrated that, as an undocumented woman, I could not develop my inner leader in the community. I knew I can do so much and give so much, yet I couldn’t feel the connection. But it made me stronger to be in the position of not having status and having to come out to a community that is indifferent to my situation. When I see new girls come to our meetings and I tell them my story, I see how by opening myself to them it makes them want to share what they too have been hiding for so long. They no longer feel afraid or embarrassed by their situation. That’s what keeps me involved in this movement. I know that I can help awake their inner leadership.

Lai wa: When deciding on campaign strategy, advocacy, and funding, it’s critical to our immigrant justice struggle to focus on the marginalized within the marginalized and to see how various oppressive paradigms intersect and may inform one another. For example, a woman who is an undocumented immigrant dealing with domestic violence will feel doubly vulnerable. The police protection system exploits immigration status and the woman will fear reporting violence due to her equal or greater fear of the repercussions of her lack of documentation. The national immigrant youth movement is currently led by women and we will hold the responsibility and power to shape our struggle in a women-centric framework. We must not conflate the “immigrant justice” movement into a unified movement, but one that is complex and at times oppressive to those within our immigrant community.

Yessica: When one thinks of a leader, one usually thinks of a strong, intelligent man. There is no doubt that throughout history we have seen many of those. However, this is not a representation of what I have seen throughout my life time. The people that I admire the most are all females. Therefore, when I stepped into a SIM meeting, I was so pleased to see all these young females as leaders. They demonstrate that gender has absolutely nothing to do with the ability to be an efficient leader. Both girls and boys have something to contribute, but when a young woman is leading something, people pay more attention. Some underestimate young women’s capability to organize something and make it work effectively. But SIM has proved that young women can be great coordinators and can make a positive changel. These young women help many of students who are unaware that being undocumented is not an obstacle to obtaining a higher education. They inspire a young woman like me to apply to college and become a leader, just like them.

Lily Huang is a volunteer organizer with the Student Immigrant Movement and, by day, she works as an affordable housing agent.

By Natalicia Tracy & Lydia Edwards

The Brazilian Immigrant Center (BIC) is a grassroots membership organization whose mission centers on training, advocacy and organizing of immigrant workers. The BIC’s goal is to address the root causes of abuse and discrimination, defend and advance labor, civil, and human rights of immigrants, and promote their empowerment as workers and civic participants.

Board Members of the Domestic Worker Campaign coalition.

Historically, the majority of the workers that came to the Center concerning their rights came from the construction and restaurant industries. Domestic workers are usually women of color who face multiple levels of oppression that traditional labor movements either have not or are not willing to address. Domestic workers also must face the current anti-immigrant xenophobia that prevents many from speaking up for fear of being deported. At BIC, it became increasingly clear that protecting domestic workers was not only a necessary action, considering how vulnerable many are legally, but also that a domestic workers rights initiative was a very natural extension of the already effective, long-standing workers’ rights organizing at BIC.

BIC is operating on two levels, first within our own Brazilian community of women domestic workers, and secondly in alliance with sister organizations representing other immigrant groups. As the largest workers’ center serving New England Brazilians, our constituents come to us from greater Boston, eastern Massachusetts in general, and the wider six-state New England region. Our domestic workers rights project is targeted mostly at immigrant women, for whom domestic work is a very common form of employment. For Brazilian women, whatever your class, when you first come to the US, if you can’t speak English well, your first job is usually as a domestic worker. Together with other women immigrant workers, this project will serve all of Massachusetts.

BIC launched its Domestic Service Worker Initiative during the summer of 2010 and began meeting and organizing domestic workers. The meetings were an eye opening view into the abuses many domestic workers face. Wage theft was by far the largest abuse. Housecleaners discussed their experiences that involved cleaning in small groups as many as 10 to15 houses a day and receiving $50 to $80 on average a day. Other women talked about hiding their pregnancies to prevent being fired, or to avoid being deliberately forced to work in an uncomfortable position until they had to quit. We also heard about experiences of isolation and having no idea where to turn when their employers (in many cases the landlord) began to make sexually suggestive overtures. BIC continues to hold worker organizing meetings and to document experiences. It has become clear that the experience of abuse is not limited to the Brazilian community. BIC understands that for systemic change to occur, all immigrant communities and women’s organizations must be united in this effort.

During the fall of 2010, representatives from the National Domestic Workers Alliance visited Massachu-setts and met with several representatives from various immigrant, workers’ and women’s rights organizations including the Brazilian Immigrant Center. Those organizations formed the Massa-chusetts Coalition for Domestic Workers, that now also includes Women’s Institute for Leadership Development (WILD), Dominican Development Center, Matahari, the Massachusetts Alliance of Professional Nannies, Brazilian Women’s Group, Vida Verde Housecleaners Cooperative, Jobs with Justice, the Chinese Progressive Association, Total Assistance, Metrowest Workers Center of Framingham/Casa do Trabalhador, Brazilian Workers Party, National Lawyers Guild, MassCOSH, and the UMass Labor Resource Center.

The Massachusetts Coalition for Domestic Workers was formed with several goals in mind, among them being to bring about a state Domestic Service Workers Bill of Rights, connect various communities whose members are engaged in domestic work, and win long withheld respect for domestic work and acknowledgement that domestic work is real WORK and should be treated under the law like any other job.

Engagement and leadership development among workers is foundational to this effort. The BIC expects increasing numbers of workers, mostly women, to become engaged in activist roles in the movement, attending meetings, contributing to decision-making, and participating in actions. In the longer term, a Domestic Workers Bill of Rights will advance rights for all workers. New rights will be especially important for women of color, as a remedy for the long history of their exclusion from labor law protection, a continuing legacy from the eras of slavery and Jim Crow. A Bill of Rights will also bring these women more into the mainstream of the labor movement and broader struggles for workers’ rights.

Natalicia M. Tracy is Executive Director of the Brazilian Immigrant Center in Allston; Lydia Edwards is a member of the BIC’s Board of Directors and a local attorney.

February NLG Presents…

Michael Rodriguez (center) discusses the case of Oscar López Rivera and his struggle to be released from prison. Benjamin Evans (l.), a Guild member from Providence, RI, moderated the discussion. Lenore Glaser (r.).

On February 9, we met with Michael Rodríguez-Muñiz, of the National Boricua Human Rights Network, who spoke about the campaign to free Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera, and Judith Berkan, who reported on the continuing crisis in Puerto Rico, where she practices law. Both situations highlight the colonial status of the island nation and the Puerto Rican people’s struggle for self-determination, which the Guild has long supported.

Among the participants of the February “NLG Presents...” (l.-r.): Judith Berkan (Guild lawyer from Puerto Rico), Elke Perkuhn (Suffolk law student), Barb Dougan, Daniel Werner (New England law student), Sara DeConde, Judy Somberg, Brigitt Keller, and Benjamin Evans.

NLG Annual Meeting
This year’s meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 15, 14 Beacon St., Conference Rm.  We will start with a reception at 5:30pm and continue with elections of Chapter Board and officers.  After the elections, we will welcome Patty Garin of Stern Shapriro Weinsberg & Garin who will talk about the crisis and future of parole in Massachusetts.

If you would like to serve on the Chapter’s Board of Directors, please consider nominating yourself.  The deadline for all nominations is Tuesday, March 8 (International Women’s Day!).  Please send us your name and contact information (nlgmass-director@igc.org or 617-227-7335).

Goldstone Report Series
NLG student chapters at local law schools organize a series of presentations with two editors of the recently published book “Goldstone Report” – Lizzy Ratner & Philip Weiss.  The book contains analysis and commentary by Desmond Tutu, Naomi Klein, and Rashid Khalidi, among others.

The series schedule is as follows:
Wed., 3/30
noon         – Northeastern, 220 Dockser Hall
6:00pm    - Boston Univ., Barristern Hall
Thu., 3/31,
2:00pm    - Suffolk, Room 335
7:00pm    - Harvard, Austin North

_____________________

2011 NLG NORTHEATERN REGIONAL CONFERENCE
Ready, Represent, Radicalize!  Demystifying the Dominant Ideology
Friday, April 1 – Sunday, April 3, 2011
Roger Williams University School of Law
10 Metacom Ave., Bristol, RI

The purpose of the conference is to bring together NLG members, local communities, partners, and allies
to focus on demystifying dominant ideologies in an effort to build communities that foster activism and human dignity.
For more information rwunlg@gmail.com.

_____________________

Street Law Clinic Report
The following Guild members conducted (or are scheduled to conduct) trainings for law students and/or clinics for members of Boston area community organizations and agencies:
February 9:   Tenants’ Rights  clinic at Crossroads Family Shelter in East Boston, by Jeff Feuer and Northeastern students Sharlyn Grace, J. Kirby, and Jeremiah Meyer-O’Day.
February 17: Stop & Search clinic at Youth Build in New Bedford, by Chris Williams.
February 17:   Legal Observer training for WNEC law students, by Urszula Masny-Latos.
February 22:   Stop & Search training at Boston University School of Law, by David Nathanson.
February 22:   Civil Disobedience training for WENC law students, by Bill Newman.

ARTICLES FOR MASS DISSENT
The April issue of Mass Dissent will focus on domestic policies and economy.
If you are interested in submitting an article, essay, analysis, or art work (cartoons, pictures) related to the topic,
please e-mail the articles to nlgmass-director@igc.org.
The deadline for articles is March 15.

It is our pleasure to announce that this year the Massachusetts Chapter of the NLG will recognize and honor four outstanding Guild members. Karen Blum and Emily Yozell will receive 2011 Lawyer Award; Chip Berlet will receive the Legal Worker Award, and Liz Dedrick will receive the Student Award.

Karen is an Associate Dean and Professor of Law at Suffolk University Law School where she teaches Civil Procedure, Federal Courts and Police Misconduct Litigation. She is a member of the Advisory Board for the National Police Accountability Project – a project of the NLG, and sits on the State Advisory Committee for the United States Commission on Civil Rights. Karen is co-author of “Plice Misconduct: Law and Litigation.”

Emily used to practice as a public defender and as a public interest lawyer specializing in criminal defense, immigration and refugee law. In 1988 she moved to Central America to work with non-governmental human rights organizations. In 1994, she founded Central America’s first public interest environmental litigation project motivated by her experiences as local counsel for banana farm workers injured by toxic pesticides suing US chemical and banana companies.

Chip is Senior Analyst at Political Research Associates in Somerville and a vice-president of the Defending Dissent Foundation. Chip writes about how political repression, authoritarian ideology, and supremacist bigotry undermine civil liberties and civil rights. A Guild member for over 35 years, he co-founded the NLG staff union.

Liz is a third year student at Northeastern University School of Law. Before starting at Northeastern, she organized community members and labor activists in upstate New York to pressure government officials to recognize and meet the needs of low-income and working class people. During law school, Liz continued her commitment to social justice by advocating for the unemployed and for hotel and hospitality workers.