Durante más de 120 años, los ciudadanos americanos que nacen o residen en Puerto Rico han vivido bajo una bandera que los protege, pero que no los representa plenamente. Han servido en las guerras de Estados Unidos con honor y valentía, han contribuido a la economía y la cultura de esta gran nación, y han jurado lealtad a una Constitución que, sin embargo, los trata como ciudadanos de segunda clase.

Hoy, 3.2 millones de almas—seres humanos con sueños, familias y esperanzas—viven en lo que muchos llaman "la colonia más antigua del mundo". No pueden votar por el Presidente de los Estados Unidos. No tienen un solo senador ni representante con voto pleno en el Congreso que decide las leyes que rigen sus vidas. Y a pesar de contribuir al sistema federal, reciben menos beneficios en salud y programas sociales que cualquier estado de la unión.

Esta no es una queja política. Es un clamor por justicia. Es una demanda de igualdad.

Por eso, nos unimos para apoyar a la Puerto Rico Equality Foundation, una organización sin fines de lucro fundada en Florida por ciudadanos comprometidos con la dignidad de sus hermanos en la isla. Su misión es educar, investigar y abogar por políticas públicas que garanticen que ser puertorriqueño no signifique ser menos americano.

No pedimos caridad. Pedimos lo que nos corresponde por derecho: igualdad plena, representación justa y respeto a nuestra ciudadanía.

Hoy, al firmar esta petición, no solo alzamos la voz por Puerto Rico. Alzamos la voz por el principio fundamental sobre el que se fundó esta nación: que todos los seres humanos son creados iguales, y que todos los ciudadanos americanos merecen los mismos derechos, sin importar el código postal donde residan.

Que la historia recuerde este momento como el punto de inflexión. Que la justicia, finalmente, llegue a Puerto Rico.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, United States of America
v.
Echandza Dianca Maxie,
Defendant.

Case No.: 1:24-cr-00112-TFM-2

DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO RECUSE JUDGE FOR BIAS AND MOTION FOR RELEASE PENDING TRIAL COMES NOW,

The Defendant, Echandza Dianca Maxie, by and through undersigned counsel, and respectfully moves this Honorable Court for the following relief:

An order recusing both Judge Katherine P.Nelson and Judge Terry F.Moorer from further proceedings in this case due to demonstrated judicial bias in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 455.
An order granting the Defendant's release pending trial, with appropriate conditions, pursuant to the Bail Reform Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 3142.
In support thereof, Defendant states as follows:

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Defendant has been detained on the basis of alleged violations of house arrest terms.
The presiding judge, without sufficient factual evidence or proof, has labeled the Defendant a flight risk, disregarding relevant mitigating factors.
This determination was made despite the absence of any substantive evidence or legal justification, suggesting improper bias against the Defendant.

II. LEGAL BASIS FOR MOTION

A. Judicial Bias Violates 28 U.S.C. § 455

28 U.S.C. § 455(a) requires a judge to disqualify themselves “in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
Bias may be found where a judge’s statements or rulings indicate prejudgment or hostility toward the defendant. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994).
a. In United States v. Holland, 519 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 2008), the court held that even the appearance of bias undermines the integrity of the judicial process.
b. Statements or rulings lacking evidentiary support may demonstrate prejudice.
By deeming the Defendant a flight risk without factual support, the judge has exceeded judicial discretion and appears biased, thereby failing to uphold their oath to “administer justice without respect to persons” under 28 U.S.C. § 453.

B. Denial of Release Violates the Bail Reform Act

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b), a defendant shall be released on personal recognizance or an unsecured bond unless the government proves by clear and convincing evidence that no conditions will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant and the safety of the community.
The Defendant acknowledges the alleged violation of house arrest terms but asserts that this does not substantiate a finding of flight risk:
a. The Defendant remains committed to complying with reasonable conditions of release, including GPS monitoring or stricter supervision.
b. There is no evidence of attempts to flee or evade prosecution.
In United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987), the Supreme Court emphasized that pretrial detention must meet due process requirements and not infringe on liberty without sufficient justification.

III. THE JUDGE’S ACTIONS VIOLATE JUDICIAL ETHICS AND DUE PROCESS

The judge’s unfounded characterization of the Defendant as a flight risk disregards the principles of impartiality and the presumption of innocence, violating:
a. Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges: Judges must avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.
b. The Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, as articulated in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976).
The judge’s actions undermine the fairness and integrity of the proceedings, warranting recusal and immediate reconsideration of the Defendant’s release.

“He who allows oppression shares the crime.”
[Erasmus Darwin - Charles Darwin’s Grandfather; who amongst other things was one of the leading campaigners against the British Slave Trade in the UK]

Ending or diminishing the Net Metering policy would only result in fewer Puerto Rican lives protected by solar and batteries, and would affect low-income and vulnerable people the most. We cannot and will not allow that to happen.

The Puerto Rico Financial Oversight and Management Board (FOMB) - a federally created entity with unusual, extreme control over the entire Puerto Rico government - attacked this policy in April, alleging that Puerto Rico’s net metering law itself is, to them, nothing more than “political interference."
Puerto Rico’s Law 10 simply extends the pre-existing Net Metering law’s protection from 2024 to 2030. Respecting this law is vital to moving toward Puerto Rico’s commitment to convert to 100% renewable energy, and it is crucial for continuing Puerto Rican’s ability to protect their homes and businesses with solar power and battery backup.

For Australian businesses that have a desire to #BridgeTheVoiceGap for First Nations people - irrespective of The Voice Referendum outcome - we believe that Industry possesses the power to enact real, lasting change and create sustainable outcomes for First Nations people by helping to address the inequalities they face via their business operations.

The Challenge:

Australian businesses are now prioritising Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) priorities with financial incentives attached (and penalties for falling short) However, there is still a clear need to #BridgeTheVoiceGap between intent and practical action and this can be achieved by connecting Reconciliation Action Plans (RAP) and ESG Plans so that RAP action progress also create financial consequences in the same way.

Our beaches have been open since Ponce de Leon discovered Florida in 1513.

Stop land grabs & help us keep Florida Beaches Open to ALL.

EVERY one of us matters and not just those who own beach front property.

By Supporting the Freeing of 30A Beaches you help ensure all have access to the beaches that God made for ALL Floridians and tourists alike.

Everyone out to Dennis’s East London Employment Tribunal Hearing 25th – 29th September.

BRING OUR MOVEMENT OF WORKERS & THE COMMUNITY INTO THE STREETS AND INTO THE COURTROOM

We must stop Newham Council from getting away with sacking one of Newham's best known and most effective union and community leaders, Dennis Carabott. Mr. Carabott has worked for Newham Council for sixteen years. He has been a refuse truck driver, team leader and teacher and mentor for new drivers for most of those years. He has an unblemished record of service. He was sacked by Newham Council on blatantly false, manufactured charges of misconduct because he was so successful at fighting for his co-workers as a union leader and for the community he served.

Mr. Carabott played a decisive role in the decision of Newham and Tower Hamlets refuse workers overwhelmingly yes votes on their recent strike ballots despite his termination. Win or lose his employment case, he is ready and eager to lead our upcoming strikes.

Dennis Carabott’s Employment Tribunal case begins on 25th September at the East London Employment Tribunal. The case is slated to go for 5 days. The Newham Strike to Win Committee must win Mr. Carabott’s reinstatement. We need our natural allies to join the fight, including the traders and shoppers at Queens Market who are also fighting against the Newham Refuse and Waste Department managers to save and improve the market.

We can win in court if we are putting the movement back into our strike movement by taking our fight to the streets, to the picket lines and to Newham’s Labour Party Council and Mayor. A win for Dennis is inseparable from the forging and emerging of new leaders for our movement. We need to win Mr. Carabott’s case to send a message to every Tory MP and Labour Party Council that victimising our leaders will accomplish nothing more than the strengthening of our movement.

Dennis’s Tribunal hearing Monday 25th – Friday 29th September, 9.30am onwards, East London Employment Tribunals, Import Building, 2 Clove Cres, London E14 2BE. Nearest station East India DLR.

Read Dennis’s full witness statement at movementforjustice.co.uk

The Island became a beloved slice of Paradise. The Community grew. City Government and resources grew alongside.

People of all types started making the Island a full or part time home. Movies were filmed here. Baseball players loved the proximity to Spring Training. People loved the fact the Island had a true community who were welcoming all who passed through or chose to call The Island home.

Then the sleepy slice of Paradise "got discovered." Tourists began to fill our rooms 12 months a year. The Community and the Cities learned to adapt to this New Normal, ensuring we neither lost the visitor-resident balance nor the charm that made the Island a destination that was hard to be beat.

The City of Holmes Beach was incorporated in 1950. The City of Bradenton Beach was incorporated in 1952. The City of Anna Maria was incorporated in 1923. Now, our Elected Representatives want to take away ALL vestiges of Home Rule. Our Legislators are asking the State to decide if the Cities should retain the privilege of incorporation. Now they want The State to decide if the three Cities should be incorporated into one or completely dissolved and put completely under County Control. And they want to do it with NO INPUT from the People of Anna Maria Island.

In other words, the County wants to ask the State to decide what Cities are allowed to exist, and whether Counties have the right to a hostile takeover of long established Cities. They want to take the voice from t he actual people and put it in the hands of County and State legislators.

We cannot allow this to happen. Florida likes to tout itself as "The Freedom State," yet wants to enact legislation that will usurp the rights of the voters, investors, and businesses to self govern. How is this consistent with Freedom at all?

As Manatee County Residents, we must assert our right to self-govern our own communities. We must uphold the right to of the people who live in an area to decide if and how incorporation persists. As Is;land Lovers, you must make your voices heard so those threatening them may see the negative impact on tourism such changes would bring.

The Island became a beloved slice of Paradise. The Community grew. City Government and resources grew alongside.

People of all types started making the Island a full or part time home. Movies were filmed here. Baseball players loved the proximity to Spring Training. People loved the fact the Island had a true community who were welcoming all who passed through or chose to call The Island home.

Then the sleepy slice of Paradise "got discovered." Tourists began to fill our rooms 12 months a year. The Community and the Cities learned to adapt to this New Normal, ensuring we neither lost the visitor-resident balance nor the charm that made the Island a destination that was hard to be beat.

The City of Holmes Beach was incorporated in 1950. The City of Bradenton Beach was incorporated in 1952. The City of Anna Maria was incorporated in 1923. Now, our Elected Representatives want to take away ALL vestiges of Home Rule. Our Legislators are asking the State to decide if the Cities should retain the privilege of incorporation. Now they want The State to decide if the three Cities should be incorporated into one or completely dissolved and put completely under County Control. And they want to do it with NO INPUT from the People of Anna Maria Island.

In other words, the County wants to ask the State to decide what Cities are allowed to exist, and whether Counties have the right to a hostile takeover of long established Cities. They want to take the voice from t he actual people and put it in the hands of County and State legislators.

And to start the takeover process, they have announced they are going to build a multi-level parking garage, in violation of local ordinances, and to make it even worse, they are going to build it HIGHER than Island Height Limits allow. This is a small, 7 mile Island, with one main North-South route, and a very finite amount of space. Over 40k cars enter and exit AMI on an average day, and more on a busy one. Yet their solution is to encourage MORE cars.

The ecological impact of this will be devastating. AMI prides itself on being a top eco-tourism destination. A garage will have severe negative impact, as will the addition of more cars. We want mass transit solutions that are not as much of a hit on our precious ecosystem. They want to pave paradise.

We cannot allow this usurpation of Home Rule, and a plan that will destroy the unique characteristics that make AMI so special. We must allow Cities to make their own ordinances, ones that are best for the Island, and demand The State not force unwanted changes on to this precious small Island. Sign today to tell our State Reps that you do NOT want Anna Maria befouled with illegal, over height parking structures.