Proposed national park celebrates César E. Chávez and the farmworker movement
Could a national park to recognize Latino icon and civil rights leader César E. Chávez and the Farmworker Movement be established soon?
That is what the César E. Chávez and the Farmworker Movement National Historical Park Act, a bicameral legislation, aims to do.
U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Coachella) introduced this week — on César E. Chávez Day — a bill to preserve the nationally significant sites associated with César E. Chávez and the farmworker movement across California and Arizona.
This week, thousands of workers from across the state including farmworkers marched in Delano in Kern County in solidarity with immigrant workers and to denounce the Trump administration's mass deportation policies. The three-mile march commemorated Chavez's 98th birthday.
Chávez empowered Latinos and farmworkers to fight for fair wages, health care coverage, pension benefits, housing improvements, and other protections.
Padilla said establishing the César E. Chávez and the Farmworker Movement National Historical Park 'would pay proper homage to César Chávez's tireless work for the dignity, respect, and equal treatment of workers — priorities facing immense threats under the Trump administration.'
'Our National Park system should memorialize the diverse legacy and culture of all Americans and give farm workers the recognition they deserve,' Padilla said.
According to Padilla's office the legislation would create the César E. Chávez and the Farmworker Movement National Historical Park, which would include the existing the César E. Chávez National Monument, which includes La Nuestra Señora Reina de la Paz in Keene, California. The monument was established by President Barack Obama in 2012.
'I think recognizing the work that Cesar Chavez did, the sacrifices that he made, and the difference that he made in people's lives and farm workers lives, it's something that we should continue to do,' said Teresa Romero, president of United Farm Workers. 'He was a civil rights leader, and because of them, we are here today and continue to fight for farmworkers.'
The National Historical Park would include the following sites upon written agreement from sites owners: Forty Acres in Delano, California, the Santa Rita Center in Phoenix, and McDonnell Hall in San Jose. The Forty Acres site is where the historical 1965 grape strike took place in protest of the anti-immigrant climate against largely Latino communities.
The bill would conduct a National Historic Trail Study for the 'Farmworker Peregrinación National Historic Trail,' the 300-mile march route taken by farm workers between Delano and Sacramento in 1966.
In 2013, the NPS provided the Special Resource Study to Congress that evaluated over 100 sites significant to César Chávez and the farm labor movement in the western United States. The study included five potential management alternatives to protect those sites, and it recommended that Congress establish a National Historical Park that would incorporate nationally significant sites in California and Arizona related to the life of Chávez and the farm labor movement.
Ruiz, a son of farmworkers who grew up in the Coachella Valley, said 'it's vital that we amplify the voices of communities whose stories are too often left unheard.'
The bill, Ruiz said, 'aims to empower the National Park Service to honor and share these important stories, celebrating the diverse and vibrant history of our country.'
Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who is cosponsoring the legislation, said Chávez 'expanded and defended the rights of farm workers through the power of organizing.'
'The designation of the César E. Chávez and the Farmworker Movement National Historical Park recognizes the countless contributions he made which paved the way for better wages and working conditions for millions of farm workers,' said Schiff.
Many Latino, civil rights and labor organizations including UFW are in favor of the national park.
In 2008, Congress enacted bipartisan legislation from the late Arizona Sen. John McCain and former California congresswoman Hilda Solis to direct the NPS to conduct a special resource study of sites significant to Chávez and the farm labor movement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Brazil's Supreme Court justices agree to make social media companies liable for user content
BRASILIA, Brazil (AP) — The majority of justices on Brazil's Supreme Court have agreed to make social media companies liable for illegal postings by their users, in a landmark case for Latin America with implications for U.S. relations. Brazil's top court decided to rule on two different cases to reach an understanding on how to deal with social media companies as reports of fraud, child pornography and violence among teenagers become rampant online. Critics warn such measures could threaten free speech as platforms preemptively remove content that could be problematic. Gilmar Mendes on Wednesday became the sixth of the court's 11 justices to vote to open a path for companies like Meta, X and Microsoft to be sued and pay fines for content published by their users. Voting is ongoing but a simple majority is all that is needed for the measure to pass. The ruling will come after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned of possible visa restrictions against foreign officials allegedly involved in censoring American citizens. One such official reportedly is Brazilian Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who has taken measures against social media outlets he deemed to have not complied with Brazilian law. The only dissenting Brazilian justice so far is André Mendonça and his vote was made public last week. The court is yet to decide how such regulations will be enacted. Mendonça said free speech on social media is key for the publication of information that "holds powerful public institutions to account, including governments, political elites and digital platforms.' Justice Flávio Dino, the first to vote on Wednesday, reminded his colleagues that recent cases of school shootings in Brazil were stimulated on social media. He read out postings by one user who said he was happy by watching families of dead children 'weeping, bleeding, dying.' 'I think social media has not made humanity closer to what it has produced in best fashion,' he said. The social media proposal would become law once voting is finished and the result is published. But Brazil's Congress could still pass another law to reverse the measure. The current legislation states social media companies can only be held responsible if they do not remove hazardous content after a court order. Public debate on regulating social networks increased in Brazil in the aftermath of the Jan. 8 riot in 2023, when supporters of former president Jair Bolsonaro ransacked Congress, the presidential palace and the Supreme Court in the capital, Brasilia. Platforms need to be pro-active in regulating content, said Alvaro Palma de Jorge, a law professor at the Rio-based Getulio Vargas Foundation, a think tank and university. 'They need to adopt certain precautions that are not compatible with simply waiting for a judge to eventually issue a decision ordering the removal of that content,' Palma de Jorge said. Wednesday's ruling brings Brazil's approach to big tech closer to the European Union's approach, which has sought to rein in the power of social media companies and other digital platforms. Rendering platforms automatically accountable for content on their platforms may infringe freedom of speech as they could resort to preemptively removing content, according to the Sao-Paulo based Brazilian Chamber of Digital Economy, an organization that represents sectors of the digital economy. 'This type of liability favors large companies with robust legal structures, to the detriment of smaller, national players, which negatively impacts competition,' said the organization, adding that the decision may increase barriers to innovation. ___ Hughes reported from Rio de Janeiro.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Donald Trump and Josh Hawley Are Wrong To Call for Jailing People Who Burn the American Flag
One of the more relevant maxims today, particularly in the age of social media, is the fact that saying the same thing over and over again does not make it a reality. There are many people—across the political spectrum—who should internalize this. President Donald Trump is one of them. While speaking at Fort Bragg on Tuesday, he re-upped an idea he has floated many times: "People that burn the American flag should go to jail for one year," he told a crowd of U.S. service members in a now-viral clip. "And we'll see if we can get that done." They cannot, in fact, get that done. Trump is, of course, entitled to oppose flag burning on moral grounds. Many understandably find the act tasteless and offensive, as is their right. His administration will not be able, however, to address that using the blunt force of the law, as the highest law of the land already protects it as a form of free expression. This isn't new. "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment," wrote U.S. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan in 1989, "it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." That came from his opinion in Texas v. Johnson, in which the Court said it was unconstitutional when Texas used a law criminalizing flag desecration to prosecute Gregory Lee Johnson, who had burned an American flag to protest President Ronald Reagan during the Republican National Convention. Johnson was sentenced to one year in jail. Sound familiar? Some lawmakers weren't happy with the Court's decision, so Congress passed the Flag Protection Act of 1989. The law prescribed up to one year of incarceration for anyone who "knowingly mutilates, defaces, physically defiles, burns, maintains on the floor or ground, or tramples upon" any American flag. In trying to dance around the Court's recent ruling, legislators got creative and shifted the focus of the law to preserving its literal physical integrity, which they hoped would be seen as content neutral. They were unsuccessful. "Punishing desecration of the flag dilutes the very freedom that makes this emblem so revered, and worth revering," wrote Brennan the next year in United States v. Eichman. The Court ruled the law unconstitutional. But what about recent high-profile prosecutions against people who burned the pride flag? There is a reason those cases were allowed to proceed under the Constitution: They concerned defendants who burned flags they stole. Law enforcement should not pursue hate crime enhancements for such offenses—or for any offenses, as prosecutors should be in the business of punishing bad acts, not bad thoughts. But there is a difference under the law between burning a flag you own, and stealing someone's property so you can then destroy it. You have a right to burn any type of flag you want, so long as it belongs to you, whether that be a pride flag, a pirate flag, a Pizza Hut flag, a "NO STEP ON SNEK" flag, an unofficial Antarctica flag (which appropriately looks a bit like a mistake), and an American flag. The list goes on. The debate here is increasingly fraught in a political climate that has a large appetite for red meat. "I'm with Trump on this one," said Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.), an attorney, on X. "Anyone who burns our flag committing a crime should go to jail—double the sentence. Evidently all of Fort Bragg agrees." His phrasing is clever. Someone who "burns our flag committing a crime" will already be subject to arrest, prosecution, and jail for the crime they committed, because crimes are already illegal. That includes, for example, stealing and destroying an American flag—or any property—that doesn't belong to you. And, as Hawley certainly knows, if he is "with Trump on this one," then he is on board with prosecuting the expressive act itself, as the president has made clear over and over again. The latter idea is what some U.S. troops were heard cheering during Trump's speech. Their service in defense of freedom is admirable. But it's worth noting that they take oaths to the Constitution, not to the political moment. As Brennan reminded us decades ago, that document also protects the freedoms of people whose expression you may completely despise; any effort to uphold it has to include your ideological opposites, or it doesn't mean a lot. Perhaps ironically, nothing is more emblematic of that ideal than the American flag itself—and your right to do with it what you wish. The post Why Donald Trump and Josh Hawley Are Wrong To Call for Jailing People Who Burn the American Flag appeared first on
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New York's Ritchie Torres donates to Andry Hernández Romero fund demanding freedom for gay asylum-seeker
Gay Afro-Latino U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres isn't ambiguous about his support for an innocent gay man sent to a modern-day gulag in El Salvador. Keep up with the latest in + news and politics. In a stark video released Wednesday, the New York Democrat condemned the Trump administration for deporting Andry José Hernández Romero — a 31-year-old gay asylum-seeker from Venezuela — to El Salvador's notorious CECOT mega-prison. 'These aren't gang signs,' Torres said, referring to the tattooed crowns on Hernández Romero's arms that immigration authorities used to justify the deportation. 'These are symbols of love, faith, and family.' Related: Hundreds rallying at Supreme Court demand Trump return disappeared gay asylum-seeker Andry Hernández Romero Torres explained that Hernández Romero comes from Capacho Nuevo, a Venezuelan village where Día de los Reyes, or Three Kings Day, is a treasured tradition. As a child, Hernández Romero designed costumes and performed in pageants, discovering a calling in creative work. 'Those crowns are a tribute to that festival and his parents,' Torres said. 'They're marked with the words 'Mom' and 'Dad.'' He said ICE's interpretation of the tattoos was both 'false and bigoted,' a projection of criminality onto cultural expression. Related: Gay Venezuelan asylum-seeker 'disappeared' to Salvadoran mega-prison under Trump order, Maddow reveals Hernández Romero's story is not merely a tale of bureaucratic overreach. It is, according to Torres and a growing coalition in Congress, the embodiment of a deeper erosion: of due process, of humane immigration policy, and of the basic protections once presumed to be guaranteed under the Constitution. 'What happened to Andry could happen to anyone,' Torres said in an interview with The Advocate. 'an attack on the due process rights of anyone is an attack on the rights of all of us.' Torres added, 'Without due process, what is to stop the Trump administration from labeling anyone a gang member and abducting them in the dead of night?' Related: Coalition of 52 Democrats push for proof of life for deported gay asylum-seeker Andry Hernández Romero He continued: 'Of all the abuses of the Trump presidency, none has been more egregious than his assaults on due process — on habeas corpus, which predates the American Republic itself.' The administration has offered no evidence that Hernández Romero was ever involved in criminal activity. He entered the United States legally through the CBP One app, passed a credible fear interview, and was awaiting his asylum hearing when Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers detained and removed him in March. His attorney was never notified. No judge issued a deportation order. He was last seen in chains, his head forcibly and roughly shaved, sobbing and shouting, 'I'm gay! I'm a stylist!' Since then, there has been no proof of life. Related: Kristi Noem won't say if gay asylum-seeker deported to El Salvador's 'hellhole' prison is still alive On Monday, Torres joined Rep. Robert Garcia, a fellow gay congressman from California, and 50 other Democratic lawmakers in a letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio demanding a welfare check, legal access, and Hernández Romero's immediate release. 'The United States government, alone, is responsible for Mr. Hernández Romero's imprisonment,' the letter stated. 'It's been over 80 days since we've had any confirmation that he's alive,' Garcia told The Advocate. 'His story has particularly galvanized the LGBTQ+ community.' The administration deported Hernández Romero under a 2025 executive order invoking the Alien Enemies Act, a centuries-old law last used to imprison Japanese Americans during World War II. Human rights groups say the CECOT prison he was sent to is functionally a black site — cut off from outside contact and designed to break prisoners. On Friday, about 300 people rallied on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court, demanding Hernández Romero's return and condemning the policy that led to his disappearance. 'He would have loved to be here at WorldPride with all of us,' Lindsay Toczylowski, executive director of the Immigrant Defenders Law Center, which represents Hernández Romero', told the crowd. 'Instead, he is suffering in a prison that officials have bragged people only leave in a coffin.' Related: Gay asylum-seeker's lawyer worries for the makeup artist's safety in Salvadoran 'hellhole' prison At the rally, gay Crooked Media cofounder Jon Lovett told supporters, 'They can bring Andry back any time they fucking want.' Human Rights Campaign senior vice president Jonathan Lovitz declared, 'Our Constitution does not say due process only for citizens. It says that all people — all people — deserve justice.' Writer and podcaster at The Bulwark Tim Miller, who is gay, added, 'We did this to Andry — not some crooked cop or some foreign government. We did it.' Gay California U.S. Rep. Mark Takano invoked his own family's internment during World War II to denounce the deportation. 'Let's be crystal clear,' he said. 'We must repeal the Alien Enemies Act. None of us gets to sit this out.' Later that evening, at a live show taping and fundraiser hosted by Crooked Media and The Bulwark at the Lincoln Theatre, Garcia described the stakes in personal terms. 'Regardless of your opinion on immigration, this is about due process. This is about the Constitution of the United States,' he said. He recounted a face-to-face exchange with U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador William Duncan, who told him that Hernández Romero's case was 'the first I've heard of this,' despite weeks of public advocacy. 'That day, he promised to do an inquiry,' Garcia said. 'We never got a wellness check.' Longwell, a former Republican strategist, pressed the moral argument of another wrongly deported person, Maryland father Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who the administration returned to the U.S. to face what some call dubious criminal charges. 'I don't care if [Kilmar] Abrego Garcia is a bad guy. He still deserves due process,' she said. 'How do Republican college kids justify disappearing people to foreign countries without a trial?' Related: Jon Lovett and Tim Miller team up to 'raise hell' over gay asylum-seeker vanished to El Salvador by Trump Garcia responded sharply. 'They can't,' he said. 'The Constitution means nothing to them anymore. Most of them were born into this incredible honor and privilege of being in the United States — and they forget where their parents or grandparents came from.' The California congressman said immigrants like Hernández Romero — and like himself — often have a deeper connection to American values. 'I fought for the thing most folks were born with,' Garcia said. 'I believe in the Constitution. And it affords all persons the right to due process, not just citizens.' Torres, who could not attend the event in person, donated $1,000 in campaign funds to support legal efforts to free Hernández Romero, a spokesperson confirmed. 'It's now Pride Month when we celebrate the right to live freely and love openly,' Torres said in the video. 'The very reason Andry came to America. Instead of celebrating Pride like the rest of us, Andry is suffering as we speak in a torture chamber. We cannot remain silent.' Torres was also among the 75 House Democrats who joined Republicans on Monday in passing a resolution that expressed 'gratitude' to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The vote came amid widespread protests in Los Angeles after ICE raids swept up more than 50 people, including some legally present in the United States. As tensions escalated, President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard, and on Tuesday, the U.S. Marine Corps over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, and local officials, who warned of 'an unprecedented power grab.' The resolution also condemned antisemitism in the wake of a recent attack by an Egyptian man who threw fire bombs at members of the Jewish community in Colorado. Editor's note: This article was updated to include additional reporting.
