WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice today reached a settlement in a case against Beaulah Stevens alleging housing discrimination on the basis of race or color in renting properties owned and managed by the defendant in Saraland, Ala.

The government’s complaint alleged that the defendant violated the federal Fair Housing Act when she discriminated against the victim, Michele Jones, upon learning that her child is biracial and that she associated with African Americans. The complaint also alleged that two fair housing tests conducted by the Mobile Fair Housing Center (now known as the Center for Fair Housing, Inc. of Mobile, Ala.) showed that the defendant treated white testers who inquired about the availability of units for rent more favorably than African American testers.

“The intent of the Fair Housing Act is to provide all Americans equal access to housing unencumbered by the pernicious obstacle of racial discrimination,” said Wan J. Kim, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “This type of racial discrimination is against the law and will not be tolerated.”

“This case shows that the Department of Justice and this office believe that housing discrimination is a serious violation of the law,” said Deborah J. Rhodes, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama. “We will enforce federal laws against racial discrimination.” The case was initiated when Ms. Jones filed a fair housing complaint on behalf of herself and her daughter with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). After investigating the matter, HUD issued a charge of discrimination, and the matter was referred to the Justice Department, which filed the lawsuit in May 2005.

“HUD commends the Department of Justice's ongoing commitment to enforcing this nation's fair housing laws,” said Kim Kendrick, HUD's Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. “No one should be denied housing because of his or her race or because of the race of any member of that household. This settlement was not just a victory for this mother and daughter, but it was a greater victory for the principles of justice and equality.”

The settlement, which must be approved by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, resolves the government’s case as well as the related claims of Ms. Jones and Angela Macon, a neighbor of Ms. Jones, both of whom intervened in the government’s lawsuit. Under the settlement, the defendant has agreed to pay more than $40,000 in damages and penalties; to post a nondiscriminatory rental policy; to undergo training on the requirements of the Fair Housing Act; and to submit periodic reports to the Justice Department.

Fighting illegal housing discrimination is a top priority of the Justice Department. In February 2006, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales announced Operation Home Sweet Home, a concentrated initiative to expose and eliminate housing discrimination in America. This initiative was inspired by the plight of displaced victims of Hurricane Katrina who were suddenly forced to find new places to live. Operation Home Sweet Home actively targets housing discrimination all over the country.

A North Carolina state court judge Monday ruled that a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the families of four US contractors killed in Iraq against Blackwater Security Consulting could move forward after being stayed for nearly two years. The company has argued that the case should be litigated in federal court, but the US District Court hearing the dispute remanded the case to state court. That decision was upheld  by the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and Blackwater's lawyers are preparing to ask the US Supreme Court to consider the case.

In October, Chief Justice John Roberts refused to issue a stay pending appeal. Lawyers for Blackwater have argued that cases against the contractor should be dismissed because the security firm is an extension of the military. An undersecretary of the US Army denied any legitimate ties between Blackwater and the military in her testimony in a congressional hearing two months ago

The lawsuit, filed in January 2005, alleges that Blackwater did not provide the four men with the proper weaponry or personnel to defend themselves when they encountered a group of insurgents who attacked their supply convoy in March 2004. The videotaped ambush showed the four men being burned and tortured.

A Romanian citizen who resides in Davenport, Fla., has pleaded guilty to a charge of inducing aliens to enter the United States illegally, Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Paul I. Perez for the Middle District of Florida announced today.

Constantin C. Durbalau, 30, entered the plea today before U.S. District Judge Anne C. Conway at the federal court in Orlando.

In his plea agreement, Durbalau admitted that during the past three years he personally helped as many as 24 Romanians enter or remain in the United States through fraudulent means. As part of this scheme, Durbalau and another individual prepared fraudulent visa applications for the aliens that falsely stated that they were circus performers coming to work in Florida circuses. In fact, the aliens were not circus performers and were not needed at any of the circuses listed in the applications. Rather, the visa applications were simply a means for the aliens to enter or remain in the United States and were provided by Durbalau in return for a fee of between $2,000 and $3,500 per alien. As part of his plea agreement, Durbalau agreed to be removed to Romania upon the completion of his prison sentence. Sentencing is scheduled for Feb. 12, 2007. Durbalau also agreed to forfeit to the United States approximately $50,000 he earned in smuggling fees.

The case was investigated by the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at the Department of Homeland Security. The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Cynthia Hawkins of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida and Trial Attorney Arlene Reidy of the Domestic Security Section of the U.S. Department of Justice.

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Greenville, S.C., has permanently barred John Howard Alexander of Greenville from promoting several tax-fraud schemes, the Justice Department announced today. The civil injunction order, to which Alexander consented, bars him from promoting schemes that promise tax benefits based on statements to customers that U.S. citizens are not subject to tax, that residents of South Carolina are not required to file federal tax returns while working in the United States, and that customers can escape tax by revoking or rescinding their Social Security numbers. District Judge Henry F. Floyd of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina signed the order.

The government complaint in the case alleged that Alexander and his ex-wife, Heather Ferguson, operated a business in Greenville promoting the so-called “861 Argument.” Named after the section of the Internal Revenue Code that it misinterprets, the 861 Argument is a frivolous position that courts across the country repeatedly have rejected. The court permanently barred Ferguson last July. That injunction required Ferguson to notify her and Alexander’s customers of the injunction, and Ferguson provided a list of the customers to the Justice Department. More information can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/tax/txdv06440.htm

According to the government complaint, Alexander also sold sham-trust packages to customers for as much as $2,495 and helped customers hide their income from the IRS using offshore sham trusts. The complaint said that the IRS estimated the loss to the U.S. Treasury from Alexander’s schemes might exceed $48 million. The IRS lists misuse of trusts on its “Dirty Dozen” list of most notorious tax scams. A list of the IRS Dirty Dozen tax schemes can be found at http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=154293,00.html. The injunction bars Alexander from making false or fraudulent statements in connection with selling trusts or other arrangements, and bars him from obstructing IRS investigations.

WASHINGTON - A federal grand jury in Pensacola, Fla., has indicted former Pinnellas County Deputy Sheriff, Richard G. Farnham, on federal civil rights charges relating to the assault of a man while on storm patrol in the aftermath of Hurricane Ivan.

The indictment alleges that on Sept. 20, 2004, Farnham, while acting in his capacity as a deputy sheriff, kicked and deployed a taser on an unnamed victim, and in so doing, willfully deprived the victim of his civil rights. The victim suffered bodily injury as a result of the assault.

The charges contained in the indictment carry a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is investigating this matter. The case is being jointly prosecuted by the Criminal Section of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division and by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Florida.

An indictment is merely an accusation and the defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

USDOJ

DETROIT –(ACLU) The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Michigan today urged a federal appeals court to uphold a lower court ruling declaring the government’s warrantless National Security Agency wiretapping program illegal, calling the government’s assertion of unchecked spying powers "radical" and a threat to American democracy.

"Executive spying on Americans without a warrant is precisely the kind of illegal practice that the founders of our country designed the Constitution to prevent," said Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the ACLU. "In a democracy, no one is above the law, not even the President."

At issue is a program, secretly authorized by President Bush in 2001, directing the National Security Agency to listen in on the phone calls and emails of people within the United States, including U.S. citizens, without a warrant.

On August 17, in the first and only ruling by a federal court to strike down the controversial program, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan ruled that the warrantless wiretapping program is illegal.

"There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all ‘inherent powers’ must derive from that Constitution," Judge Anna Diggs Taylor said in a widely quoted opinion.

Judge Taylor found that the program violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was passed in the 1970s to curb executive abuses that included spying on civil rights leaders and Members of Congress. FISA requires a warrant before the executive can wiretap Americans. Judge Taylor also found that the program violated the separation of powers because it circumvented Congress’s power to regulate presidential authority, and that it violated Americans' rights to free speech and privacy under the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. The government appealed the decision to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which granted a stay of the decision pending appeal.

According to legal papers filed by the ACLU today, "The government seeks not simply to dismiss this case, but to prevent any court from reviewing the legality of the Program … perhaps most disturbingly, the government’s sweeping theory of executive power would allow the President to violate any law passed by Congress. This theory presents a profound threat to our democratic system. The government complains that the district court overreached, but it is the government’s theory that is radical, not the district court’s rejection of it."

The ACLU also today challenged the district court’s dismissal of claims that the government is illegally data-mining the phone and email records of Americans, arguing that dismissing the claims on state secrets grounds was premature in that the claims could be decided based on publicly available facts.

The ACLU filed its lawsuit in January on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys and national nonprofit organizations who frequently communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. The ruling found that the NSA program is disrupting the plaintiffs' ability to talk with sources, locate witnesses, conduct scholarship and engage in advocacy.

The case, ACLU v. NSA, was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Attorneys in the case are Beeson, Jameel Jaffer and Melissa Goodman of the national ACLU, and Kary Moss and Michael Steinberg of the ACLU of Michigan.

In Washington, the ACLU is urging Congress to live up to its constitutional responsibility to provide checks and balances to the executive and judicial branches, de-fund the illegal spying program and undertake a thorough investigation into the NSA warrantless eavesdropping. Between its return on November 13 and its adjournment, the 109th Congress may vote on key issues such as a potential $15 billion give-away to telephone companies which would immunize companies from any liability for participating in the NSA spying program. President Bush has also made clear his intention to push through legislation legitimizing the illegal NSA spying program during the "lame-duck" Congressional session.