<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Discrimination</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/discrimination/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 21:55:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Judge tells lesbian couple to separate &#8212; or lose kids</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/23/judge_tells_lesbian_couple_to_separate_or_lose_kids/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/23/judge_tells_lesbian_couple_to_separate_or_lose_kids/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 11:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judicial activism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Same-sex marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's Picks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lesbian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[divorce papers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACLU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13306333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How unmarried sexual relationships -- including straight ones – can be grounds for losing child custody ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few weeks ago, Dallas Judge John Roach <a href="http://www.dallasvoice.com/judge-lesbian-moms-partner-10147997.html">told</a> Page Price she had to move out of her partner’s house in 30 days -- or else that partner of three years, Carolyn Compton, would lose custody of her children. The judge's reasoning? They aren’t married.</p><p>Compton’s ex-husband, Joshua, who had once been charged with stalking her (he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge) had asked for enforcement of a "morality clause" in the couple’s original divorce decree, which bars overnight guests who aren’t related by blood or marriage while the children are there. Of course, as a lesbian couple in Texas, they <em>can’t</em> be married. Never mind the fact that their children “are all happy and well adjusted,” according to Price.</p><p>Faced with the choice between Compton's children and sharing a home, the couple has said they will reluctantly follow the order, though they believe it to be unconstitutional.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/23/judge_tells_lesbian_couple_to_separate_or_lose_kids/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/23/judge_tells_lesbian_couple_to_separate_or_lose_kids/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>82</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Colorado judge rules Abercrombie parent company violates Disabilities Act</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/colorado_judge_abercrombie_brand_hollister_violates_disabilities_act_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/colorado_judge_abercrombie_brand_hollister_violates_disabilities_act_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 16:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Independent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abercrombie and fitch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hollister]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colorado]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Americans with Disabilities Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Disabled]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clothing stores]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13304584</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The SoCal-themed retailer Hollister was sued for failing to make its stores wheelchair-accessible]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.americanindependent.com"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/06/TheAmericanIndependent.jpg" alt="The American Independent" /></a>A Denver-based federal judge has ruled that the entrances to hundreds of <a href="http://www.hollisterco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/StoreView?catalogId=10201&amp;langId=-1&amp;storeId=10251" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Hollister</a> stores nationwide violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.</p><p>Two months after U.S. District Judge Wiley Daniel ordered Hollister parent company Abercrombie &amp; Fitch to work with disability rights advocates to make its Hollister teen stores accessible, the two sides failed to come to agreement.</p><p>“They’re digging their heels in. They’ve been digging in their heels all the way,” said Julie Farrar, a named plaintiff in the four-year legal battle. The case grew from complaints filed against two stores in Colorado. It’s now a class-action suit targeting 248 Hollister stores around the country.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/colorado_judge_abercrombie_brand_hollister_violates_disabilities_act_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/colorado_judge_abercrombie_brand_hollister_violates_disabilities_act_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Teen activist to meet with Abercrombie CEO</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/teen_activist_to_meet_with_abercrombie_ceo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/teen_activist_to_meet_with_abercrombie_ceo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 15:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abercrombie and fitch]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mike jeffries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Change.org]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fatphobia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bullying]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13304516</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Benjamin O’Keefe is petitioning A&#038;F to expand its sizes and is now set to discuss the matter with Mike Jeffries]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Teen activist Benjamin O'Keefe's <a href="http://www.change.org/petitions/abercrombie-fitch-ceo-mike-jeffries-stop-telling-teens-they-aren-t-beautiful-make-clothes-for-teens-of-all-sizes" target="_blank">petition</a> calling on Abercrombie &amp; Fitch to stop discriminating against people who wear above a size 10 quickly went viral, and it seems to have caught the attention of company CEO Mike Jeffries. O'Keefe will meet with Jeffries at the retailer's Ohio headquarters on Tuesday to discuss the CEO's <a href="http://www.salon.com/2006/01/24/jeffries/" target="_blank">2006 comments to Salon</a> that Abercrombie only sells clothes to "cool kids," the "attractive all-American kid with a great attitude and a lot of friends. A lot of people don’t belong [in our clothes], and they can’t belong."</p><p>O'Keefe's petition urges the retailer to expand its sizes, citing how his own struggle with body image and an eating disorder was exacerbated by Abercrombie's limited sizes: "As a young adult who suffered from an eating disorder through much of middle and high school, I remember looking at the ads for Abercrombie &amp; Fitch and combing the racks and not seeing anything that fit me,” <a href="http://www.change.org/petitions/abercrombie-fitch-ceo-mike-jeffries-stop-telling-teens-they-aren-t-beautiful-make-clothes-for-teens-of-all-sizes" target="_blank">wrote</a> O’Keefe. “As silly as it seems, it made me feel worthless to not be able to wear the ‘it’ styling that everyone else was wearing.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/teen_activist_to_meet_with_abercrombie_ceo/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/21/teen_activist_to_meet_with_abercrombie_ceo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Columbia University seeks to change terms of whites-only fellowship</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/columbia_university_seeks_to_change_terms_of_whites_only_fellowship/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/columbia_university_seeks_to_change_terms_of_whites_only_fellowship/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 16:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[columbia university]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[College]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethnicity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13299360</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The university has petitioned to remove the condition that the recipient must be "a person of the Caucasian race"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Columbia University has moved to change the conditions of a fellowship that stipulates it can only be awarded to "a person of the Caucasian race."</p><p>In addition to the whites-only restriction of the award, the Lydia C. Roberts Graduate Fellowship can only be given to a person from Iowa, who may not study law or certain other fields, and must return to the state for two years after graduation.</p><p>As the New York Daily News <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/columbia-university-seeks-change-caucasians-requirement-fellowship-article-1.1343568#ixzz2TNSg9tpH" target="_blank">reports</a>, the fellowship has not been awarded since 1997, but Columbia administrators would still like to see the terms of the award opened up to other students:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/columbia_university_seeks_to_change_terms_of_whites_only_fellowship/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/columbia_university_seeks_to_change_terms_of_whites_only_fellowship/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Georgia town allegedly diverting sewage to black neighborhood</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/town_to_hold_first_integrated_prom_now_allegedly_discriminating_via_sewage_treatment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/town_to_hold_first_integrated_prom_now_allegedly_discriminating_via_sewage_treatment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 21:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Georgia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sewage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clean Water Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13288132</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Earthjustice claims that black Rochelle, Ga. residents do not get the same sanitation as whites]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rochelle, Ga. made national <a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/04/georgia_high_school_students_fight_for_first_ever_integrated_prom/">headlines</a> recently when Wilcox County high school held its first-ever integrated prom last weekend.</p><p>Now, nonprofit environmental law organization Earthjustice is <a href="http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2013/african-american-citizens-sue-city-of-rochelle-georgia-over-decades-of-sewage-dumping">targeting the town</a> for another instance of racial discrimination: its sewage treatment.</p><p>According to Earthjustice, "White residents of Rochelle live on the south side of the city’s railroad track. African-Americans live on the other side." The city maintains pipes in the predominantly white neighborhood, but not the African-American side. "As a result," writes Earthjustice, "untreated sewage backs up and overflows into the streets and the yards of residents on the north side of the tracks."</p><p>“Sewage overflows my pipes and flows under my house. It’s time somebody did something about it. They [the white community] live comfortably and I want to live comfortably, too,” said Rochelle resident Rufus Howard.</p><p>Howard is one of nine Rochelle residents represented by Earthjustice, who will <a href="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/Rochelle-NOI.pdf">file a lawsuit</a> under the Clean Water Act if the city does not resolve the issue in 60 days.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/town_to_hold_first_integrated_prom_now_allegedly_discriminating_via_sewage_treatment/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/town_to_hold_first_integrated_prom_now_allegedly_discriminating_via_sewage_treatment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Washington state Republicans introduce measure to legalize LGBT discrimination</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/26/washington_state_republicans_introduce_measure_to_legalize_lgbt_discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/26/washington_state_republicans_introduce_measure_to_legalize_lgbt_discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13283005</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The law would allow businesses to discriminate based on "sincerely held" religious and philosophical beliefs]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Washington state Sen. Sharon Brown and 11 other Republican lawmakers have introduced a bill to legalize discrimination against gays and lesbians based on a business owner's "sincerely held" religious beliefs, philosophical beliefs or "matters of conscience." The measure would also undermine current state anti-discrimination law.</p><p>Senate Bill 5927 would not allow businesses to deny services to people based on race, religion, disability or other protected classes under federal law; but being gay or transgender is not a protected class, so discriminating against them is fair game, <a href="http://www.thenewstribune.com/2013/04/25/2573106/bill-seeks-exemption-to-non-discrimination.html" target="_blank">according to</a> the bill:</p><blockquote><p>The right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief, philosophical belief, or matter of conscience may not be burdened unless the government proves that it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act or refusal to act and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/26/washington_state_republicans_introduce_measure_to_legalize_lgbt_discrimination/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/26/washington_state_republicans_introduce_measure_to_legalize_lgbt_discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>206</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Will Congress finally outlaw anti-gay workplace discrimination?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/will_congress_finally_stop_anti_gay_workplace_discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/will_congress_finally_stop_anti_gay_workplace_discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 22:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gay Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Merkley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment discrimination]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13282214</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sponsor Sen. Jeff Merkley explains why this might be the year for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today, a group of lawmakers is trying to succeed where Congress has failed for almost two decades, by <a href="http://www.merkley.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=065CE7B6-D02A-4369-8656-15F5899DC333">introducing a bill</a> to finally end workplace discrimination against gay and transgender Americans. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has been a top-ticket item for advocates since it was first introduced in 1994, but principle sponsor Sen. Jeff Merkley told Salon in an interview this afternoon that he thinks this will be the year they succeed.</p><p>"I think most Americans would be surprised to find out that it is legal to discriminate against the GLBT community, and to do so in employment, which is fundamental to the opportunity for the pursuit of happiness and for equality under the law and general fairness," the Oregon Democrat said in an interview.</p><p>Indeed, though it's almost hard to believe, with no federal statute on the books, it's <a href="http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/congress-has-historic-opportunity-to-take-action-on-employment-discriminati">perfectly legal to fire someone</a> for being gay in 29 states that don't have their own non-discrimination laws. In 34 states, you can fire transgender people.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/will_congress_finally_stop_anti_gay_workplace_discrimination/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/will_congress_finally_stop_anti_gay_workplace_discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kansas bill could allow for the quarantine of HIV-positive people</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/29/kansas_bill_could_allow_for_the_quarantine_of_hiv_positive_people/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/29/kansas_bill_could_allow_for_the_quarantine_of_hiv_positive_people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIV/AIDS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HIV-positive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13255771</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The state Senate passed a measure with language allowing officials to medically isolate people living with HIV/AIDS]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Kansas state Senate has approved a measure broadly deregulating when medical and other institutional officials can institute quarantines for patients in their care, including those living with HIV or AIDS.</p><p>State Sen. Marci Francisco attempted to restore an amendment to the <a href="http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/measures/documents/hb2183_00_0000.pdf" target="_blank">bill</a> that exempted people living with HIV/AIDS from medical isolation, explaining that the disease is not spread through casual contact and warning the measure could encode discrimination in Kansas law. Francisco's Senate colleagues passed the measure without updating the language based on her recommendations.</p><p>The bill in its current form has many HIV/AIDS health advocates concerned.</p><p>"We live in a very conservative state and I’m afraid there are still many people, especially in rural Kansas, that have inadequate education and understanding concerning HIV/AIDS," Cody Patton, executive director of sexual health nonprofit Positive Directions, <a href="http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/kansas-bill-calls-hiv-positive-people-be-quarantined270313" target="_blank">told</a> Gay Star News. Patton is concerned that intentionally broad language in the bill, combined with a lack of education and medical understanding of HIV/AIDS, could lead to state-sanctioned discrimination, explaining:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/29/kansas_bill_could_allow_for_the_quarantine_of_hiv_positive_people/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/29/kansas_bill_could_allow_for_the_quarantine_of_hiv_positive_people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chipotle pulls sponsorship of Utah Boy Scout event</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/19/chipotle_pulls_sponsorship_of_utah_boy_scout_event_ap/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/19/chipotle_pulls_sponsorship_of_utah_boy_scout_event_ap/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Associated Press]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Utah]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chipotle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Boy Scouts of America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[homosexuality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Arnold]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13246175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The restaurant chain's anti-discrimination policy prohibits it from supporting discriminatory organizations]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Chipotle Mexican Grill has pulled its sponsorship of Utah's "Scout-O-Rama" because of the Boy Scouts of America's long-standing ban on gays.</p><p>The popular Colorado-based restaurant chain initially signed on to provide about $4,200 worth of coupons to the Utah Boy Scouts' annual event, scheduled for May 4 in a Salt Lake City suburb. The Boy Scouts' Great Salt Lake Council is one of the largest in the country, with the majority of troops sponsored by Mormon churches.</p><p>Chipotle's anti-discrimination policy states that the company shouldn't support organizations that exclude based on sexual orientation. When company leaders found out about the promise to offer coupons, they nixed the idea, Chipotle spokesman Chris Arnold said.</p><p>"It was never our intention for this to be this some kind of an endorsement of broader Boy Scout policies," said Arnold, adding that the company sponsors community events across the country to make connections with residents.</p><p>"Ultimately, we decided that the right thing to do was to remain consistent with our policy and terminate the sponsorship," Arnold said.</p><p>The rescission of the offer was first reported by Think Progress.org.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/19/chipotle_pulls_sponsorship_of_utah_boy_scout_event_ap/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/19/chipotle_pulls_sponsorship_of_utah_boy_scout_event_ap/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>GOPer at CPAC: I&#8217;ll &#8220;make&#8221; Republicans fix the Voting Rights Act</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/goper_at_cpac_ill_make_republicans_fix_the_voting_rights_act/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/goper_at_cpac_ill_make_republicans_fix_the_voting_rights_act/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jim Sensenbrenner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voter suppression]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wisconsin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[House Republicans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13228977</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If the Supreme Court strikes down the Voting Rights Act, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner says, Congress will have to act]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, a conservative Republican, told Salon that if the Supreme Court strikes down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, he'll "make" Republicans take action to fix it.</p><p>"I think we should see what they did and I think we should, if possible, figure out a way to fix the Supreme Court's objections," Sensenbrenner, who represents Wisconsin, said at CPAC. "The Voting Rights Act has been, I think, the most effective of all of the civil rights laws. It enfranchised all minorities in the south, and that includes both African Americans and Republicans."</p><p>He added: "If you look at what happened after Section 5 was amended in 1982, the number of African-American and Republican representatives in Congress and in state legislatures has gone way up."</p><p>When asked if Republicans have the political will to act if the VRA is struck down, Sensenbrenner told Salon: "I'm gonna make them fix it."</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/goper_at_cpac_ill_make_republicans_fix_the_voting_rights_act/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/goper_at_cpac_ill_make_republicans_fix_the_voting_rights_act/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kentucky bill could protect discrimination as &#8220;religious freedom&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/kentucky_bill_would_protect_discrimination_as_religious_freedom/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/kentucky_bill_would_protect_discrimination_as_religious_freedom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kentucky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Beshear]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gay Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religious Freedom]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13225285</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The bill advanced despite concerns that it would make it easier to discriminate against gays and lesbians]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The governor of Kentucky is considering a bill that would expand protections for religious freedom, but that in practice could give cover for discrimination against gays and lesbians.</p><p>The bill, which would give protections to people who refuse to follow state laws based on "sincerely held" religious beliefs, was sent to Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear after the state Senate approved it last Thursday. "Once we get it, we will review it and make some determination," Beshear said.</p><p>From the <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/03/11/185409/rights-groups-urge-kentucky-gov.html">Lexington Herald-Leader</a>:</p><blockquote><p>Opponents contend that the bill could be used to circumvent fairness ordinances approved by Lexington and three other Kentucky cities that ban discrimination against gay, lesbian and other populations not covered by federal civil rights laws.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/kentucky_bill_would_protect_discrimination_as_religious_freedom/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/11/kentucky_bill_would_protect_discrimination_as_religious_freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>35</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Racism and sexism are killing the U.S. economy</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AlterNet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minorities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social injustice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13215799</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Economists see discrimination as a form of economic inefficiency -- and a massive misallocation of human resources]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Discrimination isn’t just an insult to our most basic notions of fairness. It also costs us money, because those who are discriminated against are unable to make the best use of their talents. This not only hurts them, it hurts us all, as some of our best and brightest players are, in essence, sidelined, unable to make their full contributions to our economy.</p></blockquote><blockquote><p>Over the past half century, America has made considerable strides in reducing discrimination against women and racial minorities. But recent research suggests that we still have a long way to go. What’s even worse: Progress against discrimination – particularly racial discrimination — seems to have largely stalled out. And there are signs that other forms of discrimination are getting worse. -<em>-<a href="http://business.time.com/2013/02/19/discrimination-doesnt-make-dollars-or-sense/">David Futrelle, Time Magazine</a></em></p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.alternet.org"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://images.salon.com/img/partners/ID_alternetInline.jpg" alt="AlterNet" /></a> The struggle against social injustice is fueled by a narrative of moral appeals. The logic of good guys vs bad guys, and how the long arc of justice inevitably bends true is compelling and beautiful. In appealing to the heart, the hope is that the mind, and the body politic, will inevitably be moved in the direction of the Common Good, and towards a set of forward thinking and evolved public policies</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/01/how_racism_and_sexism_are_net_drains_on_the_u_s_economy_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Being a pregnant waitress can get you fired</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/07/being_a_pregnant_waitress_can_get_you_fired_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/07/being_a_pregnant_waitress_can_get_you_fired_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2013 18:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The American Prospect]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pregnancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jobs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13193604</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Women at the bottom half of the workforce face point-blank discrimination when they're expecting]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.prospect.org"><img align="left" style="margin: 0 10px 0 0;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/10/TAP_new_logo6.png" alt="The American Prospect" /></a> Having a family shouldn’t cost you your job. It does, again and again—especially if you’re female. Which is one of the reasons women’s pay still isn’t equal.</p><p>I’ll be writing about this in the months to come, but for today, here’s one way having a family can cost you your job: women still get fired for being pregnant. Although it’s been illegal since the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act, women are still refused a job or let go if they’re pregnant. You’d be shocked, EEOC and employment law folks tell me, at how often employers say so point-blank: Come back after you have the baby. The guys don’t want to look at a pregnant waitress. Housekeeping is hard work; your pregnancy is a potential liability. Our customers are uncomfortable with a pregnant driver.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/02/07/being_a_pregnant_waitress_can_get_you_fired_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/02/07/being_a_pregnant_waitress_can_get_you_fired_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Judge clears DoJ over post-9/11 confinement of Muslims</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/judge_clears_doj_over_post_911_confinement_of_muslims/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/judge_clears_doj_over_post_911_confinement_of_muslims/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[September 11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[9/11]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Muslims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arabs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13175963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Federal court rules immigrants subjected to harsh confinement can't proceed with suit against federal officials]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A federal judge ruled Thursday that a lawsuit against Department of Justice officials brought by men detained for immigration violations in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 cannot proceed.</p><p>The men, whose complaints were brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights, are immigrants in the U.S. who hail from from Pakistan, Egypt, Algeria and Turkey, as well as natives of India and Nepal. "In the weeks following the attacks, they said they were held in federal custody on the pretext of minor immigration violations while the FBI investigated them for potential links to terrorism," <a href="http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2013/01_-_January/Post-9/11_detainees__suit_vs_federal_officials_can_t_proceed__judge/">Reuters </a>reported.</p><p>The dismissed complaint claimed that former U.S. attorney general John Ashcroft, FBI director Robert Mueller and former Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner James Ziglar oversaw federal policies which led to the men's harsh detention. However, on Thursday the judge ruled that although the men were certainly detained on the basis of "race, religion and national origin," the federal officials named in the suit did not intend to discriminate.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/judge_clears_doj_over_post_911_confinement_of_muslims/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/judge_clears_doj_over_post_911_confinement_of_muslims/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cafe owner pens anti-gay screed to lesbian customers</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/cafe_owner_pens_anti_gay_screed_to_lesbian_customers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/cafe_owner_pens_anti_gay_screed_to_lesbian_customers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gay Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LGBTQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13168523</guid>
		<description><![CDATA["My daughter also was gay. It destroyed her life and my grandson"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lesbian couple Ariel and Shawnee McPhail recently had a meal at the Stingray Café in New Bern, N.C., but left with more than a doggie bag. While on their way out, owner Ed McGovern handed them a rambling anti-gay missive:</p><blockquote><p>God said in the last days that man and wom[a]n would be lover of self, more [than] the lover of God.</p> <p>That man and woman would have unnatural [affection] for one another. Then, the coming of the Son of Man, who is Jesus. So please, look at your life. See how it hurt[s] everyone around you. And ask the Lord to open your eye[s] before it [is] to[o] late.</p> <p>The Love of Christ</p> <p>P.S. my daughter also was gay. It destroy[ed] her life and my grandson.</p></blockquote><p>McGovern <a href="http://www.wcti12.com/news/Lesbian-couple-Restaurant-owner-hands-them-letter-condemning-homosexuality/-/13530444/18086232/-/n0mfvd/-/index.html" target="_blank">confirmed</a> with NewsChannel 12 that he did give the couple the letter, and has given other gay patrons similar letters -- "out of love."</p><p>The McPhails said McGovern has the right to his own opinion, but believe what he did crossed the line. "If we're experiencing it, then other people are too and that's not fair," said Ariel McPhail.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/cafe_owner_pens_anti_gay_screed_to_lesbian_customers/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/cafe_owner_pens_anti_gay_screed_to_lesbian_customers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Iowa Supreme Court: Woman can be fired for being &#8220;irresistible&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/iowa_supreme_court_woman_can_be_fired_for_being_irresistible/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/iowa_supreme_court_woman_can_be_fired_for_being_irresistible/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2012 21:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iowa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender Equality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13152617</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The court ruled that a dentist can fire a woman for being an “irresistible attraction" to him]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a dentist did not commit sexual discrimination when he fired a woman he said was an “irresistible attraction" to him.</p><p>The <a href="http://qctimes.com/news/local/article_6c0d8440-4b97-11e2-a741-0019bb2963f4.html#.UNS9sX6blhU.twitter">Associated Press</a> reports:</p><blockquote><p>Justices rejected a discrimination lawsuit filed by Melissa Nelson, who was fired by Fort Dodge dentist James Knight in 2010.</p> <p>Nelson had worked in Knight’s office for 10 years. She and Knight eventually started texting outside work about personal matters. Knight’s wife, who also worked at the office, found out and demanded Nelson’s firing.</p></blockquote><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/iowa_supreme_court_woman_can_be_fired_for_being_irresistible/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/21/iowa_supreme_court_woman_can_be_fired_for_being_irresistible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>High court to take new look at voting rights law</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/11/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_voting_rights_law_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/11/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_voting_rights_law_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[From the Wires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://http://www.salon.com/2012/11/10/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_voting_rights_law_2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court will consider whether to eliminate the law that prevents discrimination at the polling places]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will consider eliminating the government's most potent weapon against racial discrimination at polling places since the 1960s. The court acted three days after a diverse coalition of voters propelled President Barack Obama to a second term in the White House.</p><p>With a look at affirmative action in higher education already on the agenda, the court is putting a spotlight on race by re-examining the ongoing necessity of laws and programs aimed at giving racial minorities access to major areas of American life from which they once were systematically excluded.</p><p>"This is a term in which many core pillars of civil rights and pathways to opportunity hang in the balance," said Debo Adegbile, acting president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund.</p><p>In an order Friday, the justices agreed to hear a constitutional challenge to the part of the landmark Voting Rights Act that requires all or parts of 16 states with a history of discrimination in voting to get federal approval before making any changes in the way they hold elections.</p><p>The high court considered the same issue three years ago but sidestepped what Chief Justice John Roberts then called "a difficult constitutional question."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/11/11/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_voting_rights_law_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/11/11/high_court_to_take_new_look_at_voting_rights_law_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No high court action on voting rights law</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/no_high_court_action_on_voting_rights_law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/no_high_court_action_on_voting_rights_law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[From the Wires]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13056016</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court sidestepps cases that would end the Voting Rights Act's advance approval requirement]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WASHINGTON (AP) — Three years ago, the Supreme Court warned there could be constitutional problems with a landmark civil rights law that has opened voting booths to millions of African-Americans. Now, opponents of a key part of the Voting Rights Act are asking the high court to finish off that provision.</p><p>The basic question is whether state and local governments that once boasted of their racial discrimination still can be forced in the 21st century to get federal permission before making changes in the way they hold elections.</p><p>Some of the governments covered — most of them are in the South — argue they have turned away from racial discrimination over the years. But Congress and lower courts that have looked at recent challenges to the law concluded that a history of discrimination and more recent efforts to harm minority voters justify continuing federal oversight.</p><p>The Supreme Court took no action Monday on cases asking it to end the Voting Rights Act's advance approval requirement that has been held up as a crown jewel of the civil rights era.</p><p>The justices sidestepped this very issue in a case from Texas in 2009. In an opinion joined by eight justices, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote then that the issue of advance approval "is a difficult constitutional question we do not answer today."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/no_high_court_action_on_voting_rights_law/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/29/no_high_court_action_on_voting_rights_law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Rise in discrimination charges on Capitol Hill</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/18/study_rise_in_discrimination_charges_on_captiol_hill/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/18/study_rise_in_discrimination_charges_on_captiol_hill/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitol Hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13044159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Racial and sexual discrimination claims have increased over the last five years, according to a new report]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new study by the Office of Compliance (OoC) in Washington D.C. finds that complaints of discrimination and harassment on Capitol Hill have more than doubled in the last five years.</p><p>The Hill <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/news/262689-study-finds-rise-in-discrimination-harassment-claims-on-capitol-hill">reports</a>:</p><blockquote><p>"The number of discrimination and harassment claims has risen from 64 allegations in 2006 to 196 brought forward in 2011. And alleged instances of retaliation have grown from 44 cases in 2006 to 108 charges in 2011.</p> <p>The majority — 63 percent — of allegations raised by employees on Capitol Hill came from the U.S. Capitol Police, the OoC found in its study, which looked at the time period from Oct. 1, 2010 to Sept. 30, 2011."</p></blockquote><p>The OoC, which is tasked with protecting workplace rights, also found that there were 142 total complaints that alleged 332 different violations of the Congressional Accountability Act, and 23 of the cases resulted in financial settlements.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/18/study_rise_in_discrimination_charges_on_captiol_hill/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/18/study_rise_in_discrimination_charges_on_captiol_hill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Morgan Stanley sued for subprime discrimination</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/morgan_stanley_sued_for_subprime_discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/morgan_stanley_sued_for_subprime_discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2012 18:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Morgan Stanley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Racism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Subprime Loans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACLU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mortgage Crisis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13041052</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A class-action suit alleges that the investment bank steered black borrowers to bad mortgages]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The American Civil Liberties Union Monday filed a class action lawsuit against investment bank Morgan Stanley alleging racial discrimination in subprime mortgage practices.</p><p>As Colorlines <a href="http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/10/aclu_sues_morgan_stanley_for_discrimination_in_subprime_mortages.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&amp;utm_medium=twitter">noted</a>, "The class-action lawsuit, submitted in a federal court a stones throw from the New York Stock Exchange, alleges that Morgan Stanley [via now-bankrupt financial agent, New Century Mortgage Company] intentionally steered blacks in the Detroit metropolitan region into subprime loans. Blacks who were credit-worthy and qualified for traditional mortgages were caught up in Morgan Stanley’s biased dragnet."</p><p>Of the 9 million foreclosures since 2007, four out of 10 have been against people of color. Both Bank of America and Wells Fargo have settled discrimination lawsuits over steering black and Latino borrowers into subprime loans. "Race was laced throughout Wall Street’s activities," Colorlines' Imara Jones commented.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/morgan_stanley_sued_for_subprime_discrimination/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/10/15/morgan_stanley_sued_for_subprime_discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
