DOCSLIB.ORG

The Middleborough Public Schools Does Not Discriminate in His Educational Activities Or

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Middleborough Public Schools Does Not Discriminate in His Educational Activities Or Civil Rights Training and Compliance MIDDLEBOROUGH PUBLIC SCHOOLS What are Civil Rights? Civil rights are the nonpolitical rights of a citizen; the rights of personal liberty guaranteed to U.S. citizens by the 13th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and Acts of Congress. Civil rights refer to the fair and equitable treatment of all students and employees. Civil Rights Laws Title VII – Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended ØRace, color, religion, sex, and national origin (limited English proficiency) ØSex based discrimination now encompasses sexual orientation and gender identity Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ØSex Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ØDisability Americans with Disabilities Act ØDisability Civil Rights Laws Continued Age Discrimination Act of 1975 ØAge Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 ØRace, color & national origin Food Stamp Act of 1977 ØRace, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, and disability Civil Rights Laws Continued Presidential action was influential in adding sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classifications. Presidential Executive Orders added classifications of discrimination when they included sexual orientation and gender identity in employment or security clearance: ØPresident Clinton’s Executive Order 12968 in 1995 involved security clearance and included sexual orientation ØPresident Clinton’s Executive Order 13087 in 1998 prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation for the federal civilian workforce ØPresident Obama’s Executive Order 13672 in 2014 prohibits discrimination on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity in federal hiring and contracting practices Civil Rights Laws Continued President Obama added gender identity to the classifications of people protected by the EECO (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) in 2010. ØIn 2012, the EEOC ruled that gender identity-based discrimination is a form of sex discrimination and thus prohibited. ØIn 2015, the EEOC ruled that sexual orientation-based discrimination is a form of sex discrimination and thus prohibited. ØRecent U.S. Supreme Court cases reinforce these additions: ØR.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. EEOC (decision June 2020) ØBostock v. Clayton County (decision June 2020) ØAltitude Express v. Zarda (decision June 2020) Goal of Civil Rights Eliminate barriers to program benefits Provide equal treatment to all Explain rights and responsibilities Show respect and dignity to all Civil Rights Concepts Stereotyping Prejudice Discrimination **Civil Rights concepts apply to public schools in the employment context through our employment practices and also to the equal access and opportunity for all students Federal Law Prohibits Discrimination On the Basis of Any Protected Class What is a Protected Class? A protected class refers to any person or group of people who have a characteristic for which discrimination is prohibited by law Protected classes include but are not limited to: ü Race ü Color ü Religion ü National origin ü Age ü Sex ü Disability ü Sexual Orientation ü Gender Identity ü Military status Protected Classes The concept of a “protected class” is not static. It evolves over time and is impacted by several factors: ØPresidential Action through Executive Orders ØUnited States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) Decisions ØCongressional Action through Statutes and its associated Amendments ØDecisions by other governing bodies such as the EEOC- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ◦ Several classifications of protected classes didn’t exist 20-30 years ago ◦ It is important to stay current on how these classifications are treated for your own experience as an employee and also for your application of these classifications to the treatment of our students. What is Discrimination? Definition: Treating people differently through prejudice; unfair treatment of one person or group, usually because of prejudice about race, sex, ethnicity, age, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity The Middleborough Public Schools does not discriminate in his educational activities or employment practices on the basis of age, color, creed, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, genetic information, martial status, national origin, political affiliation, pregnancy, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, veteran or military status, or any other basis protected by federal and/or state law. Civil Rights Requirements 1. Provide public notification 2. Collect and report racial & ethnic data 3. Assure Equal Access to the program 4. Provide reasonable accommodations where appropriate 5. Handle civil rights complaints in accordance with prescribed procedures 6. Conduct annual civil rights training Provide Public Notification Purpose: To inform potentially eligible persons, applicants, participants and grassroots organizations of available programs To reach as many applicants, participants, and potentially eligible persons as possible To conduct outreach to unserved or underserved populations using appropriate translation materials To ensure program access The procedures must be included in student and employee handbooks “This institution is an equal opportunity provider.” Provide appropriate information in alternate forms, in appropriate translations as needed, and in appropriate formats for persons with disabilities. To convey the message of equal opportunity, program materials should reflect diversity and inclusion in all program-related information, photos, and graphics. Reasonable Accommodation for Persons with Disabilities What is a disability: ◦ Definition: physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of an individual’s major life activities, has a record of such an impairment, or is regarded as having such an impairment ◦ Disabilities are defined based on Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act/Americans with Disabilities Act and Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Services for Students with Disabilities (SWD) On the basis of disability, the school district may not exclude any qualified SWD from any course, course of study, or other part of its educational program or activity Provision of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) Placement decisions made by a group of people knowledgeable about the student, the meaning of the evaluation and data, and placement options Related instructional aids or services should be available as determined by Individualized Education Program (IEP) or Section 504 team Academic achievement tests should measure ability and achievement, rather than disability SWD placed in the educational setting most appropriate for the student’s individual needs (Least Restrictive Environment [LRE]) School to Career The Middleborough Public Schools does not discriminate in his educational activities or employment practices on the basis of age, color, creed, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, genetic information, martial status, national origin, political affiliation, pregnancy, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, veteran or military status, or any other basis protected by federal and/or state law. This includes all school programs and services including School to career learning opportunities. School to career agreements must contain a written assurance of nondiscrimination signed by the employer and school personnel. Employment The Middleborough Public Schools does not discriminate in his educational activities or employment practices on the basis of age, color, creed, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, genetic information, martial status, national origin, political affiliation, pregnancy, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, veteran or military status, or any other basis protected by federal and/or state law. This includes employment practices such as application forms, materials which are free from prohibited questions concerning protected classifications, salaries, and the responsibilities of employment. Facilities Accessible Facilities: individuals with disabilities may not be excluded from enjoying the benefits of a school’s programs or services because its facilities are inaccessible to or unusable by person with disabilities Facility Compliance What is a facility? Title II of the ADA ◦ “all or any portion of buildings, structures, sites, complexes, equipment … roads, walks, passageways, parking lots, or other personal property” Section 504 ◦ “all or any portion of buildings, structures, equipment, roads, walks, parking lots, or other real or personal property” Comparable Facilities Separate facilities provided for students who are male/female/gender nonconforming or with/without disabilities should be similar in quality and convenience Separate facilities should also be located in similar proximity to associated restrooms, classrooms, cafeteria, gymnasium, or labs Language Accommodations Reasonable steps must be taken to ensure meaningful access to programs for persons with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) All procedures must also be provided in the language of any community of national origin that is approximately equal to or greater than 5% of the total enrollment of the school division Recognizing a Civil Rights Complaint A complaint of unequal treatment can be: § Verbal § In Writing § Observed Handle Civil Rights Complaints In Accordance With Prescribed Procedures Basic procedures are in place to ensure nondiscrimination ◦ continuous notice of nondiscrimination ◦ grievance procedure must be disseminated to allow students, parents, and staff
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fired for Being Gay: Should Arkansas Ban This Form of Discrimination?
    Fired for Being Gay: Should Arkansas Ban This Form of Discrimination? I. INTRODUCTION Picture this—you were offered a new job and prepared to move across the country, only to learn that the job was no longer yours because the company discovered that you are gay.1 What if you were forced to resign following your wedding celebration because your boss and colleagues did not approve of your new spouse?2 Or, what if, while expecting your first child with your lesbian partner, you were dismissed from your job because your colleagues heard the good news?3 In this third scenario, you even consulted an attorney, only to discover that the law would not protect you unless you were pregnant.4 However, because your partner was carrying the child, you had no recourse. These real-world examples demonstrate the missed opportunities suffered by many based simply on their sexual orientation. Further, it is a fate that many Arkansans could face if they reveal their sexual orientation in the workplace.5 To prevent this, Arkansas should ban workplace discrimination on The author would like to thank Eva C. Madison, Shareholder, Littler Mendelson P.C., and Brittany H. Pettingill, J.D. 2014, University of Arkansas School of Law, for their guidance and thoughtful insight during the drafting of this comment. The author would also like to thank her family, especially Kenneth King, Sandra King, and Emmanuel Asamoa, for their endless love and encouragement. 1. See Sam Dillon, Marquette Rescinds Offer to Sociologist, N.Y. TIMES, May 7, 2010, at A16. 2. See David Koon, Mount St.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate the Senate Met at 10 A.M
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 117 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 167 WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 2021 No. 106 Senate The Senate met at 10 a.m. and was appoint the Honorable JACKY ROSEN, a Sen- INFRASTRUCTURE called to order by the Honorable JACKY ator from the State of Nevada, to perform the duties of the Chair. Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, on ROSEN, a Senator from the State of Ne- another issue, infrastructure, despite a vada. PATRICK J. LEAHY, President pro tempore. consensus in Washington that America f needs more investment in our infra- Ms. ROSEN thereupon assumed the PRAYER structure, it has been decades since Chair as Acting President pro tempore. Congress passed a stand-alone bill to The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- f address the issue. This Congress is fered the following prayer: RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME working hard to remedy that fact. Let us pray. As I have repeated, discussions about Eternal God, although we cannot see The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- infrastructure are moving forward You with our eyes or touch You with pore. Under the previous order, the along two tracks. One is bipartisan, our hands, we have experienced the re- leadership time is reserved. and the second deals with components ality of Your might and majesty. Every f of the American jobs and families plan, time we hear a newborn baby cry or which we will consider even if it lacks touch a leaf or see the sky, we know RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER bipartisan support—though, I would why we believe.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Orientation: Developments in the Law and Issues for the Courts
    Sexual Orientation: Developments in the Law and Issues for the Courts Prepared at Seattle University School of Law for the Washington State Gender and Justice Commission From Gay Marriage to Domestic Violence to Hate Crimes: What You Need to Know About the Cases Coming to Your Court Tuesday, October 4, 2011 53rd Washington Judicial Conference Primary Authors: Cynthia B. Jones, Seattle University School of Law Niloufar A. Park, Seattle University School of Law Tammy M. Sittnick, University of Washington School of Law Quita St. John, Seattle University School of Law With the Assistance of: The Honorable Mary I. Yu, King County Superior Court Professor David M. Skover, Seattle University School of Law Professor Julie Shapiro, Seattle University School of Law Professor Anne M. Enquist, Seattle University School of Law Stephanie Wilson, Reference Librarian, Seattle University School of Law Tracey A. Thompson, Staff Attorney, Teamsters Local Union No. 117 Jeffrey L. Nesiba, Seattle University School of Law Aaron Pritchard, Seattle University School of Law Additional Credits: The authors would like to thank Nancy Bradburn-Johnson, Bonnie Canada- Thurston, Corey Edmonds, Rudolph Hasl, Gloria Hemmen, Kimberley Prochnau, Doris Russell, Suzanne J. Thomas, and Kellye Testy for their support of and assistance with this project. Second Edition Edited by: E. Ross Farr Table of Contents I. Preface Preface to Second Edition............................................................................I-1 Introduction ..................................................................................................I-2
    [Show full text]
  • Gender Identity Sexual Orientation Discrimination Workplace
    Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Discrimination in the Workplace A Practical Guide Chapter 19: The Employment Non-Discrimination Act: Its Scope, History, and Prospects Suzanne B. Goldberg, Esq., Terra Hittson, Class of 2014 & Kevin Hu, Class of 2014 Editor-in-Chief Christine MiChelle Duffy, esq. Pro Bono Partnership Parsippany, New Jersey State Laws Executive Editor Denise M. VisConti, esq. Littler Mendelson, P.C. San Diego, California With the assistance of The National LGBT Bar Association and its Executive Director D’Arcy Kemnitz, Esq. AArlington, VA Copyright © 2014 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. Reprinted by permission Nothing contained herein is to be considered the rendering of legal advice for specific cases, and readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal counsel. These materials and any forms or agreements herein are intended for educational and informational purposes only. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gender identity and sexual orientation discrimination in the workplace : a practical guide / Editor-in-Chief Christine Michelle Duffy, Esq., Pro Bono Partnership, Parsippany, New Jersey ; State Laws Executive Editor Denise M. Visconti, Esq., Littler Mendelson, P.C., San Diego, California ; with the assistance of The National LGBT Bar Association and its Executive Director D’Arcy Kemnitz, Esq. pages cm Includes index. ISBN 978-1-61746-300-6 1. Transgender people--Employment--Law and legislation--United States. 2. Gays--Employment--Law and legislation--United States. 3. Gender identity-- Law and legislation--United States. 4. Transphobia--Law and legislation--United States. 5. Homophobia--Law and legislation--United States. I. Duffy, Christine Michelle, editor. II. Visconti, Denise M., editor.
    [Show full text]
  • PANEL TRANSCRIPT Recorded March 14, 2016 South by Southwest Interactive Festival Austin, Texas
    Transcript: America’s LGBT S pies – Secret Agents (of Change) PANEL TRANSCRIPT Recorded March 14, 2016 South by Southwest Interactive Festival Austin, Texas PARTICIPANTS Tracey Ballard – CIA Katrina Gossman – FBI / ODNI Kris Gill – NGA Rita Sampson - ODNI Rita Sampson: Good Afternoon. I’m Rita Sampson and I’m the Chief of the Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and we want to welcome you here today for the session on America’s LGBT spies, secret agents of change. I want to just let you know we are talking about the entire Intelligence Community, which is a collaboration of about 17 different intelligence agencies and today IC EEOD Chief Rita Sampson welcomes audience members we’re going to hear personal stories and to the “Secret Agents of Change” panel. perspectives from three of those agencies. But before we get going I also have the pleasure of introducing you to the number two person in the United States Intelligence Community and that is Stephanie O’Sullivan who has joined us here today from Washington DC to share some of her thoughts and perspectives. So if you will help me welcome Ms. O’Sullivan with a round of applause. Stephanie O’Sullivan: I am glad everybody is here this afternoon because I think we have some really important things to talk about. I asked Rita if I could say a few words and I won’t take longer than that because like you, I’m here to listen and learn even though I’ve heard some of these amazing stories before.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive Summary Affirmative Action Plan 2019-2020 Academic Year
    Executive Summary Affirmative Action Plan 2019-2020 Academic Year Eastern Illinois University Office of Civil Rights & Diversity 0 | P a g e Table of Contents 1. Overview ................................................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.1 University Mission Statement .......................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Eastern Illinois University Profile ................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Nondiscrimination Statement ........................................................................................................................... 3 2. Responsibility for Implementation.......................................................................................................................... 3 3. The Recruitment and Hiring Process ...................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Civil Service Positions ........................................................................................................................................... 4 4. Discussion: Placement Goals Report ....................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Faculty ........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • LGBTQ+ Nondiscrimination Laws in Kentucky
    University of Louisville ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository Electronic Theses and Dissertations 12-2017 LGBTQ+ nondiscrimination laws in Kentucky. Christopher M Wales University of Louisville Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.library.louisville.edu/etd Part of the American Politics Commons, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Studies Commons, Other Legal Studies Commons, Public Policy Commons, Social Policy Commons, and the Urban Studies Commons Recommended Citation Wales, Christopher M, "LGBTQ+ nondiscrimination laws in Kentucky." (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2874. https://doi.org/10.18297/etd/2874 This Master's Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ThinkIR: The University of Louisville's Institutional Repository. This title appears here courtesy of the author, who has retained all other copyrights. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LGBTQ+ NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS IN KENTUCKY By Christopher Michael Wales B.A. Northern Kentucky University, 2014 A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Louisville in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Public Administration Department of Public Administration University of Louisville Louisville, Kentucky December 2017 LGBTQ+ NONDISCRIMINATION LAWS IN KENTUCKY By Christopher Michael Wales B.A. Northern Kentucky University, 2014 A Thesis Approved on November 16, 2017 by the following Thesis Committee: Dr. Janet Kelly, Chair Dr. Matthew Ruther Dr. Catherine Fosl ii DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to Carrie Donald, who inspired and encouraged me to pursue social justice, and whose guidance will be greatly missed.
    [Show full text]
  • Gay Rights Law and Public Policy / Susan Gluck Mezey
    MEZEY LAW • POLITICS “Queers in Court is an excellent history of gay rights litigation in the U.S. It is thorough and yet readable. It covers topics ranging from marriage to the military, it covers them over an entire cen- tury of American history, it appreciates their nuances, and it places litigation in the context of pub- lic opinion. Queers in Court would be useful in a college or law school classroom and it would also be good company on a long plane flight. In one volume, it provides a solid, well-rounded, easily- QUEERS IN COURT digested introduction to all of gay law.” —William Rubenstein, UCLA School of Law; founding director, Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law; and former director, ACLU Lesbian and Gay Rights Project “I learned a lot from reading Queers in Court, and expect to consult it many times. The book is QUEERS IN COURT must reading for students of gay and lesbian politics, but it will also be useful for anyone inter- ested in social movements in the American courts. It provides that rare balance of a broad per- spective that still includes all of the details specialists require.” —Clyde Wilcox, Georgetown University “Queers in Court is a meticulously researched survey of gay rights cases in state and federal courts over the last fifty years. Susan Gluck Mezey provides a comprehensive and richly detailed reference that is indispensable to understanding the interplay in American policymaking among judges, other legal and political elites, and public opinion. A truly enlightening book.” —Daniel R. Pinello, author of Gay Rights and American Law and America’s Struggle for Same-Sex Marriage SUSAN GLUCK MEZEY is professor of political science and assistant vice president for research at Loyola University Chicago.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Orientation and the Federal Workplace
    SEXUAL ORIENTATION and the FEDERAL WORKPLACE Policy and Perception A Report to the President and Congress of the United States by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board MAY 2014 THE CHAIRMAN U.S. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 1615 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20419-0001 The President President of the Senate Speaker of the House of Representatives Dear Sirs: In accordance with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 1204(a)(3), it is my honor to submit this U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) report, Sexual Orientation and the Federal Workplace: Policy and Perception. The purpose of our study was to examine Federal employee perceptions of workplace treatment based on sexual orientation, review how Federal workplace protections from sexual orientation discrimination evolved, and determine if further action is warranted to communicate or clarify those protections. Since 1980, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management has interpreted the tenth Prohibited Personnel Practice (5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(10)), which bars discrimination in Federal personnel actions based on conduct that does not adversely affect job performance, to prohibit sexual orientation discrimination. As this prohibition has neither been specifically expressed in statute nor affirmed in judicial decision, it has been subject to alternate interpretations. Executive Order 13087 prohibited sexual orientation discrimination in Federal employment but provided no enforceable rights or remedies for Federal employees who allege they are the victims of sexual orientation discrimination. Any ambiguity in the longstanding policy prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in the Federal workplace would be resolved by legislation making that prohibition explicit. Such legislation could grant Federal employees who allege they are victims of sexual orientation discrimination access to the same remedies as those who allege discrimination on other bases.
    [Show full text]
  • Further Amendments to Executive Order 11478, Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal Government, and Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity
    EO 13672 Title 3—The President ‘‘Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited. (b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.’’ Sec. 4. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulga- tion of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the Presi- dent by IEEPA and the UNPA, as may be necessary to carry out the pur- poses of this order and Executive Order 13413, as amended by this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law. Sec. 5. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the pro- visions of this order and Executive Order 13413, as amended by this order. Sec. 6. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or ben- efit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person. BARACK OBAMA The White House, July 8, 2014. Executive Order 13672 of July 21, 2014 Further Amendments to Executive Order 11478, Equal Employment Opportunity in the Federal Government, and Executive Order 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including 40 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Obergefell and LGBT Employment Law Materials Submitted By
    Obergefell and LGBT Employment Law Materials Submitted by Jennifer L. Branch Gerhardstein & Branch Co. LPA [email protected] www.gbfirm.com December 2015 I. Sexual Orientation – Protections for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Employees. A. Has LGBT Discrimination Ended in the Workplace? 1. A 2014 report by the Center for American Progress1 compiled the following data on LGBT employment discrimination: i. 11 to 28% of lesbian, gay, and bisexual, or LGB workers are denied or passed over for a promotion because of the sexual orientation. ii. 47% of transgender people reported being fired, not hired, or denied a promotion because of their gender identity. Of the 47% discriminated against, roughly 26% report being fired from a job they already had simply because of their gender identity. iii. Gay and bisexual men make 10 to 32 percent less than straight men working similar jobs. iv. 7 to 41% of LGB workers were verbally or physically harassed or had their workplace vandalized. 2. Only 18 states and the District of Columbia have laws explicitly protecting LGBT workers from being fired because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.2 Ohio, Kentucky, Michigan, and Tennessee offer no protections. i. Will employers provide more employment benefits to same sex couples after Obergefell? Many Fortune 500 corporations already do. Check out the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index,3 where 13 Ohio corporations, including law firms, earned a 100% rating. According to HRC’s 2015 Corporate Equality Index, 89% of the Fortune 500 companies have policies that prohibit discrimination 1 https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/LGBT-WeThePeople-report-12.10.14.pdf.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter of Notification of Presidential Records Release (Clinton)
    VIA EMAIL (LM 2016-066) June 8, 2016 The Honorable W. Neil Eggleston Counsel to the President The White House Washington, D.C. 20502 Dear Mr. Eggleston: In accordance with the requirements of the Presidential Records Act (PRA), as amended, 44 U.S.C. §§2201-2209, this letter constitutes a formal notice from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to the incumbent President of our intent to open Clinton Presidential records in response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests listed in Attachment A. These records, consisting of 69,555 pages, have been reviewed for all applicable FOIA exemptions, resulting in 2,387 pages restricted in whole or in part. NARA is proposing to open the remaining 67,168 pages. A copy of any records proposed for release under this notice will be provided to you upon your request. We are also concurrently informing former President Clinton’s representative, Bruce Lindsey, of our intent to release these records. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 2208(a), NARA will release the records 60 working days from the date of this letter, which is September 1, 2016, unless the former or incumbent President requests a one-time extension of an additional 30 working days or asserts a constitutionally based privilege, in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 2208(b)-(d). Please let us know if you are able to complete your review before the expiration of the 60 working day period. Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 2208(a)(1)(B), we will make this notice available to the public on the NARA website.
    [Show full text]