Tag Archives: Division

California immigration forum highlights state’s red-blue divide

People protest outside before the start of a town hall meeting being held by Thomas Homan, acting director of enforcement for ICE, in Sacramento, California, U.S., March 28, 2017. REUTERS/Stephen Lam

By Sharon Bernstein

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Reuters) – Supporters and critics of President Donald Trump’s deportation policy packed a gymnasium in California’s heartland on Tuesday, trading jeers and ridicule during a raucous town hall meeting attended by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement chief.

Sacramento County Sheriff Scott Jones, a pro-Trump Republican who enjoys strong backing in the region’s conservative suburbs, invited acting ICE Director Thomas Homan to address the public forum in the state capital.

The gathering got off to a boisterous start, with Jones’ opening remarks interrupted by shouts and heckling as he warned that spectators who continued to disrupt the meeting, attended by about 400 people, would be ejected.

About a dozen people were eventually escorted out of the hall.

Homan, whose agency has drawn fire for what some civil liberties advocates have criticized as heavy-handed tactics in rounding up and deporting illegal immigrants, insisted ICE was acting in a targeted fashion against those with criminal records.

He said ICE was also focused on individuals who have violated final deportation orders or have returned after being removed from the country.

“We don’t conduct neighborhood sweeps,” he said over cat-calls. “I don’t want children to be afraid to go to school. I don’t want people to be afraid to go to the doctor.”

Still, he warned that ICE intended to “enforce the laws that are on the books.”

Democratic officials in the Sacramento area, home to about 2 million people in California’s Central Valley some 90 miles (145 km) east of San Francisco, have opposed the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and are leading a charge in the state legislature to fight his policies.

The division illustrates the complicated politics of the capital region, straddling jurisdictions where the predominantly liberal California coast bleeds into the more conservative interior of the state.

Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, a former top Democrat in the heavily blue state legislature, said at an earlier protest rally that ICE had failed to earn the community’s trust.

He called on Jones to end a county agreement with U.S. authorities in which jailed immigrants sought by federal agents for deportation are kept incarcerated beyond their scheduled release to allow ICE to take them into custody.

Among members of the public who spoke was Bernard Marks, 87, a Holocaust survivor, who said: “I spent 5 1/2 years in a concentration camp because we picked up people. Mr. Jones, history is not on your side.”

Another elderly participant, who identified himself only by his first name, Vincent, suggested those entering the United States illegally violated more than just immigration laws.

“How can an illegal alien get a job unless they’ve stolen a Social Security number,” he asked, visibly shaking with emotion after protesters yelled at him while he spoke.

Jones said earlier the town hall was an attempt to “find common ground by reducing conflicting information, eliminating ambiguity and reducing fear by presenting factual information.”

So many groups vowed to protest at the event that it had to be moved to a larger venue than originally planned.

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein; Editing by Steve Gorman, Cynthia Osterman and Paul Tait)

Several states jointly sue to block Trump’s revised travel ban

DAY 46 / MARCH 6: President Donald Trump signed a revised executive order banning citizens from six Muslim-majority nations from traveling to the United States but removing Iraq from the list, after his controversial first attempt was blocked in the courts.

By Mica Rosenberg

(Reuters) – A group of states renewed their effort on Monday to block President Donald Trump’s revised temporary ban on refugees and travelers from several Muslim-majority countries, arguing that his executive order is the same as the first one that was halted by federal courts.

Court papers filed by the state of Washington and joined by California, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Oregon asked a judge to stop the March 6 order from taking effect on Thursday.

An amended complaint said the order was similar to the original Jan. 27 directive because it “will cause severe and immediate harms to the States, including our residents, our colleges and universities, our healthcare providers, and our businesses.”

A Department of Justice spokeswoman said it was reviewing the complaint and would respond to the court.

A more sweeping ban implemented hastily in January caused chaos and protests at airports. The March order by contrast gave 10 days’ notice to travelers and immigration officials.

Last month, U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle halted the first travel ban after Washington state sued, claiming the order was discriminatory and violated the U.S. Constitution. Robart’s order was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Trump revised his order to overcome some of the legal hurdles by including exemptions for legal permanent residents and existing visa holders and taking Iraq off the list of countries covered. The new order still halts citizens of Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States for 90 days but has explicit waivers for various categories of immigrants with ties to the country.

Refugees are still barred for 120 days, but the new order removed an indefinite ban on all refugees from Syria.

Washington state has now gone back to Robart to ask him to apply his emergency halt to the new ban.

Robart said in a court order Monday that the government has until Tuesday to respond to the states’ motions. He said he would not hold a hearing before Wednesday and did not commit to a specific date to hear arguments from both sides.

PROVING HARM

Separately, Hawaii has also sued over the new ban. The island state, which is heavily dependent on tourism, said the executive order has had a “chilling effect” on travel revenues.

In response to Hawaii’s lawsuit, the Department of Justice in court papers filed on Monday said the president has broad authority to “restrict or suspend entry of any class of aliens when in the national interest.” The department said the temporary suspensions will allow a review of the current screening process in an effort to protect against terrorist attacks.

There is a hearing in the Hawaii case set for Wednesday, the day before the new ban is set to go into effect.

The first hurdle for the lawsuits will be proving “standing,” which means finding someone who has been harmed by the policy. With so many exemptions, legal experts have said it might be hard to find individuals who would have a right to sue, in the eyes of a court.

To overcome this challenge, the states filed more than 70 declarations of people affected by the order including tech businesses Amazon and Expedia, which said that restricting travel hurts their revenues and their ability to recruit employees.

Universities and medical centers that rely on foreign doctors also weighed in, as did religious organizations and individual residents, including U.S. citizens, with stories about separated families.

But the Trump administration in its filings in the Hawaii case on Monday said the carve-outs in the new order undercut the state’s standing claims.

“The Order applies only to individuals outside the country who do not have a current visa, and even as to them, it sets forth robust waiver provisions,” the Department of Justice’s motion said.

The government cited Supreme Court precedent in arguing that people outside the United States and seeking admission for the first time have “no constitutional rights” regarding their applications.

If the courts do end up ruling the states have standing to sue, the next step will be to argue that both versions of the executive order discriminate against Muslims.

“The Trump Administration may have changed the text of the now-discredited Muslim travel ban, but they didn’t change its unconstitutional intent and effect,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement on Monday.

While the text of the order does not mention Islam, the states claim that the motivation behind the policy is Trump’s campaign promise of “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” He later toned down that language and said he would implement a policy of “extreme vetting” of foreigners coming to the United States.

The government said the courts should only look at the text of the order and not at outside comments by Trump or his aides.

(Reporting by Mica Rosenberg in New York; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and Grant McCool)

U.S. civil liberties group, ACLU, seeks to tap anti-Trump energy

By Joseph Ax

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The American Civil Liberties Union is launching what it bills as the first grassroots mobilization effort in its nearly 100-year history, as it seeks to harness a surge of energy among left-leaning activists since the November election of Republican Donald Trump as U.S. president.

The campaign, known as PeoplePower, kicks off on Saturday with a town hall-style event in Miami featuring “resistance training” that will be streamed live at more than 2,300 local gatherings nationwide.

It will focus on free speech, reproductive rights and immigration and include presentations from legal experts, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero and “Top Chef” television star Padma Lakshmi.

Membership in the civil rights organization, which was founded in 1920, has tripled to more than 1 million since Trump’s election, the group says.

As activists have marched in streets, demonstrated at airports and confronted U.S. lawmakers regularly since election day, progressive groups like MoveOn and the newly formed Indivisible have sought ways to translate that frustration into local action.

That is the idea behind PeoplePower, which represents a major strategic shift for an organization that has traditionally focused on courtroom litigation, Romero said in a phone interview on Friday. Approximately 135,000 people have signed up for the campaign.

“Before, our membership was largely older and much smaller,” he said. “Our members would provide us with money so we could file the cases and do the advocacy. What’s clear with the Trump election is that our new members are engaged and want to be deployed.”

For example, the Miami event will encourage individuals to engage local officials in conversations about immigrant policies in their town or city. The ACLU has prepared “model” ordinances ensuring the protection of immigrant rights that supporters can press legislators to adopt, part of a campaign to create “freedom cities,” according to ACLU political director Faiz Shakir.

Suggested tactics, like the use of text messages as a mass mobilization tool, will mirror some of those employed by the insurgent presidential campaign of U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, who mounted a surprisingly robust challenge to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination.

“It’s completely unprecedented,” Romero said of the response since Trump’s victory. “People are wide awake right now and have been since the night of the election.”

(Editing by Matthew Lewis)

Women worldwide rally for equality, and against Trump in U.S.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) speaks to supporters during the 'Day Without a Woman' on International Women's Day at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., March 8, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

By Joseph Ax and Lisa Fernandez

NEW YORK/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Women protested around the world on Wednesday for equal rights and in the United States against President Donald Trump, with many Americans skipping work or boycotting stores to demand economic fairness on International Women’s Day.

American women seized upon the momentum of the Women’s March on Washington on Jan. 21, the day after Trump’s inauguration, once again denouncing his policies on abortion and healthcare.

Dubbed “A Day Without a Woman” in the United States, the nationwide events were modeled in part after pro-immigrant demonstrations on Feb. 16, the latest in a series of anti-Trump protests since his Nov. 8 election.

By having women, who make up 47 percent of the U.S. civilian labor force, flex their economic muscle, organizers hope to call attention to the gender pay gap, access to reproductive health services, and Trump’s actions that have restricted abortion overseas.

Debra Sands, 37, a middle school teacher, joined thousands of women at New York City’s Central Park after her students convinced her to attend.

“This past year’s election made me realize that voting in November isn’t enough,” Sands said.

New York police reported 13 arrests at the protest in midtown Manhattan. Details on the possible charges were not immediately available.

In San Francisco, where about 1,500 people gathered, Christine Bussenius, 37, said she and her female colleagues at Grey Advertising convinced their all-male managers to give them the day off and participate in the rally.

“We were nervous,” she admitted. “But the men stepped up to fill in the void.”

Rallies were held in numerous U.S. cities, including Washington, where demonstrators gathered at the U.S. Labor Department.

Female staffers at Fusion Media Group’s Gizmodo declared they were striking for the day.

At least three U.S. school districts, in Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina, closed because of staff shortages after teachers requested the day off.

Nearly 1,000 women converged outside Los Angeles City Hall, many of them critical of the Republican-backed healthcare bill that would strip women’s health and abortion provider Planned Parenthood of funding.

“It’s terrifying. It’s anti-woman,” said Kassia Krozsur, 53, a finance professional.

About 200 gathered in Atlanta, where signs read “We are sisters” and “Stop Trump.”

“If we want to change what is going on, we need to turn anger into action. People need to run for local office,” organizer Rebekah Joy said.

An activist attends a demonstration outside the White House as part of "A Day Without a Woman" strike on International Women's Day in Washington, U.S., March 8, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

An activist attends a demonstration outside the White House as part of “A Day Without a Woman” strike on International Women’s Day in Washington, U.S., March 8, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

RALLIES AROUND THE WORLD

Events large and small were held in cities around the world.

Across the Texas border, women in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, painted crosses on lamp posts in solemn remembrance of the hundreds of women who have gone missing or were murdered there in recent years.

In Tbilisi, Georgia, women performed “Glass Ceiling,” simulating being trapped by the barely visible barrier that stands between women and workplace equality.

They banged drums in Kiev, Ukraine, and played soccer in Nairobi, Kenya. In Sanaa, capital of war-torn Yemen, women dressed in niqabs, the all-black garments that cover the entire body except for an opening over their eyes, held up a sign reading, “You keep silent while our children die!”

Not all American women, however, were on board with the call for a women’s strike, with some critics citing the vagueness of the movement’s aims and the disruption of work stoppages.

Trump, whose 11-year-old comments about grabbing and kissing women against their will surfaced during the campaign, took to his Twitter account early on Wednesday to cite International Women’s Day and the “critical role” of women around the world.

“I have tremendous respect for women and the many roles they serve that are vital to the fabric of our society and our economy,” the Republican president tweeted.

(Reporting by Joseph Ax and Gina Cherelus in New York, Letitia Stein in St. Petersburg, Florida, Ben Gruber in Los Angeles, Rich McKay in Atlanta, and Lisa Fernandez in San Francisco; Writing by Peter Szekely; Editing by Daniel Trotta and Diane Craft)

Challenges to Trump’s immigration orders spread to more U.S. states

Massachusetts attorney with several people who don't like trump's immigration ban

(In this Jan. 31 story, in 11th paragraph corrects to show two Iranian plaintiffs are a man and a woman, not two men)

By Scott Malone and Dan Levine

BOSTON/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Legal challenges to President Donald Trump’s first moves on immigration spread on Tuesday, with three states suing over his executive order banning travel into the United States by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries.

Massachusetts, New York, Virginia and Washington state joined the legal battle against the travel ban, which the White House deems necessary to improve national security.

The challenges contend the order violated the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of religious freedom.

San Francisco became the first U.S. city to sue to challenge a Trump directive to withhold federal money from U.S. cities that have adopted sanctuary policies toward undocumented immigrants, which local officials argue help local police by making those immigrants more willing to report crimes.

The legal maneuvers were the latest acts of defiance against executive orders signed by Trump last week that sparked a wave of protests in major U.S. cities, where thousands of people decried the new president’s actions as discriminatory.

Both policies are in line with campaign promises by Republican businessman-turned-politician Trump, who vowed to build a wall on the Mexican border to stop illegal immigration and to take hard-line steps to prevent terrorist attacks in the United States.

The restrictions on the seven Muslim-majority countries and new limits on refugees have won the support of many Americans, with 49 percent of respondents to a Reuters poll conducted Monday and Tuesday saying they agreed with the order, while 41 percent disagreed.

Massachusetts contended the restrictions run afoul of the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits religious preference.

“At bottom, what this is about is a violation of the Constitution,” Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said of the order halting travel by people with passports from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. The order also barred resettlement of refugees for 120 days and indefinitely banned Syrian refugees.

“It discriminates against people because of their religion, it discriminates against people because of their country of origin,” Healey said at a Boston press conference, flanked by leaders from the tech, healthcare and education sectors who said that the order could limit their ability to attract and retain highly educated workers.

Massachusetts will be backing a lawsuit filed over the weekend in Boston federal court by two Iranian men who teach at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. A federal judge blocked the government from expelling those men from the country and halted enforcement of the order for seven days, following similar but more limited moves in four other states.

The attorneys general of New York and Virginia also said their states were joining similar lawsuits filed in their respective federal courts challenging the ban.

“As we speak, there are students at our colleges and universities who are unable to return to Virginia,” Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring told reporters. “This is not an action I take lightly, but it is one I take with confidence in our legal analysis.”

On Monday, liberal-leaning Washington state became the first U.S. state to have its attorney general initiate a lawsuit against Trump to challenge the travel ban.

Multiple foreign nationals have also filed lawsuits challenging the ban. They included one filed in Colorado on Tuesday by a Libyan college student and two filed in Chicago, including one on behalf of an Iranian father of three children all living in Illinois.

Protests against Trump’s executive action continued on Tuesday in several cities.

A crowd of several thousand demonstrators gathered at the federal courthouse in Minneapolis, chanting “Hey, hey, ho, ho Muslim ban has got to go!” Dozens of protesters chanted the same slogan at Los Angeles International Airport, and more than 400 demonstrators gathered in downtown Miami to protest both the travel ban and Trump’s crackdown on sanctuary cities.

SANCTUARY CHALLENGE

San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera filed suit over Trump’s order threatening to cut funds to cities with sanctuary policies, a move that could stop the flow of billions of dollars to major U.S. population centers including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.

“If allowed to be implemented, this executive order would make our communities less safe. It would make our residents less prosperous, and it would split families apart,” Herrera said.

Sanctuary cities adopt policies that limit cooperation, such as refusing to comply with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer requests. Advocates of the policies say that, beyond helping police with crime reporting, they make undocumented immigrants more willing to serve as witnesses if they do not fear that contact with law enforcement will lead to their deportation.

Both the San Francisco and Massachusetts actions contend that Trump’s orders in question violate the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that powers not granted to the federal government should fall to the states.

Michael Hethmon, senior counsel with the conservative Immigration Reform Law Institute in Washington, called the San Francisco lawsuit a “silly political gesture,” noting that prior federal court decisions make clear that the U.S. government “can prohibit a policy that essentially impedes legitimate federal programs.”

(Additional reporting by Mica Rosenberg, Curtis Skinner, Adam Bettcher, Olga Grigoryants, Zachary Fagenson, Alex Dobuzinskis, Timothy McLaughlin, Ian Simpson and Keith Coffman; Editing by Tom Brown and Cynthia Osterman)

U.S. public opinion of police improving: surveys

Citizen and husky greet police officers during a riot

By Joseph Ax

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Americans’ opinion of the police has bounced back from last year’s historic lows, amid continuing national debate over police treatment of minorities, two polls released this week suggested.

The polling group PRRI released a survey on Tuesday showing that a slight majority of respondents, 52 percent, believe police officers generally treat nonwhite and white Americans the same. Only 41 percent said that was the case in 2015, PRRI said.

A Gallup poll published on Monday showed 76 percent of Americans have a “great deal” of respect for their local police, up 12 points from 2015’s 22-year low.

The surveys, however, showed a significant racial gap. While both white and nonwhite respondents were more likely to express respect for police in the Gallup poll, 80 percent of white Americans did so compared with only 67 percent of minorities.

Nearly 80 percent of nonwhite respondents in the PRRI disagreed that police treat all people the same, while two-thirds of white Americans said police generally do so.

Delores Jones-Brown, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York who studies police-community relations, said she was surprised at the finding that public views on police had improved. The difference between white and nonwhite respondents was telling, she said.

“People may have a false sense of security about the fact that we’re having open discussions,” she said. Dialogue, while helpful, will not solve any problems without concrete policy changes, she added.

Michael Skolnik, a civil rights activist, said many people deserve credit for focusing attention on police brutality.

“At the same time, we all know there are persistent problems between the police and communities of color,” he said.

In recent years, a string of police killings of unarmed black Americans have sparked protests and calls for accountability.

Last week, the president of a major police organization apologized for law enforcement’s part in the historical mistreatment of minorities. [L1N1CN1SH]

One day later, an emotionally disturbed black woman was killed by a New York City police officer, prompting the mayor to criticize the shooting. [L1N1CP1M8]

Justin McCarthy, a Gallup analyst, wrote that the poll may reflect changes in public opinion following the killing of police officers this summer in Dallas and Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

“It’s unclear whether the spike in respect for police will have staying power or if it reflects mostly a reaction to the retaliatory killings against police officers,” he wrote.

(Reporting by Joseph Ax; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Dozens of demonstrators arrested at North Dakota pipeline

North Dakota Pipeline protesters

(Reuters) – More than 80 protesters were arrested on Saturday after clashing with police near a pipeline construction site in North Dakota, according to the local sheriff’s department, which said pepper spray was used on some demonstrators.

The 83 protesters were arrested near the site of the Dakota Access pipeline on numerous charges ranging from assault on a peace officer to rioting and criminal trespass, the Morton County Sheriff’s department said in a statement.

Law enforcement was alerted early Saturday morning to an SUV on private property near the pipeline construction site and found that four men had attached themselves to the vehicle, according to the sheriff’s department. Police removed the men from the SUV before arresting them.

Later, around 300 protesters marched toward pipeline construction equipment and tried to breach a police line keeping them from the equipment, the sheriff’s department said.

Some were pepper sprayed by law enforcement. One protester attempted to grab a can of pepper spray from an officer, resulting in the officer being sprayed.

The demonstration closed a section of a local highway, but it was reopened on Saturday afternoon.

“Today’s situation clearly illustrates what we have been saying for weeks, that this protest is not peaceful or lawful,” sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier said in a statement.

“It was obvious to our officers who responded that the protesters engaged in escalated unlawful tactics and behavior during this event. This protest was intentionally coordinated and planned by agitators with the specific intent to engage in illegal activities.”

The Standing Rock Sioux tribe and environmental activists have been protesting construction of the 1,100-mile (1,886-km) pipeline in North Dakota for several months, saying it threatens the water supply and sacred sites. Numerous protesters have been arrested near the pipeline.

It was unclear who organized and led the protest. A spokesman for the Standing Rock Sioux could not immediately be reached for comment.

The pipeline, being built by a group of companies led by Energy Transfer Partners LP, would be the first to bring Bakken shale from North Dakota directly to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast.

Supporters say it would provide a safer and more cost-effective way to transport Bakken shale to the U.S. Gulf than by road or rail.

Earlier this week, pipeline equipment in Iowa was intentionally lit on fire causing about $2 million in damage, according to local authorities and company officials.

(Reporting by Timothy Mclaughlin in Chicago; Editing by David Gregorio)

Texas to consider Mexican-American textbook critics decry as racist

School bus

By Jon Herskovitz

AUSTIN, Texas (Reuters) – The State Board of Education in Texas is expected to hear testimony next week from critics of a new textbook for Mexican-American studies who say the tome is riddled with mistakes and perpetrates demeaning stereotypes.

The book’s publisher, run by an evangelical Christian and self-described Republican patriot, argues it is academically sound and is being targeted by those advancing a liberal political agenda.

A decision by the Texas State Board of Education to approve the book could have wide ramifications. The conservative board is responsible for buying 48 million textbooks a year, and volumes that win its support often are marketed by publishers to school districts nationally.

The textbook being considered at a hearing on Tuesday in Austin, titled “Mexican American Heritage,” was the only one submitted after Texas put out a request for a book to be used in a proposed high school elective course on Mexican-American studies.

One of the few liberal members of the board, Ruben Cortez, said in a statement this week that the book “describes Mexicans as lazy, alleges that Mexican culture does not value hard work and that Mexicans bring drug and crime into the country.”

He commissioned a body of academics, mostly professors of history, to examine the book. They said in a report this week it was filled with errors and did not meet state standards.

“We have a web of racist assertions that are built in passages, that are built on multiple errors. This is a textbook that is a polemic against the Mexican-American community,” said Trinidad Gonzales, a history instructor at South Texas College who was on the book review team.

One passage regarded as biased concerned views employers have had of Mexican workers.

It reads: “Stereotypically, Mexicans were viewed as lazy compared to European or American workers … It was also traditional to skip work on Mondays, and drinking on the job could be a problem.”

Cynthia Dunbar, chief executive of Momentum Instruction which published the book, said in a phone interview the criticism is unfounded.

“There is absolutely no context, motivation and no agenda to in any way do anything negative or detrimental to Mexican-Americans or Mexican-American history,” said Dunbar, a former Texas state school board member from 2007 to 2011 who is now based in Virginia.

She is listed as a contributor to the book, which was written by two people whose credentials are not listed.

The state board likely will make a decision later this year whether to approve the book.

(Reporting by Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Colleen Jenkins and Marguerita Choy)

Shooting of unarmed black man in Florida heightens calls for police review

North Miami Police Department

By Zachary Fagenson

NORTH MIAMI, Fla. (Reuters) – The shooting by police of an unarmed black man as he lay on the ground with his hands in the air in North Miami, Florida, raised calls on Thursday for U.S. police to review their training programs and policies.

Behavioral therapist Charles Kinsey was shot on Monday as he tried to get an autistic patient back to a nearby group home from which he had wandered. A cell phone video showed Kinsey with his hands extended above his chest moments before a bullet struck his leg.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida said the incident showed more police training was needed, particularly for situations involving people with disabilities.

“We are grateful that both Mr. Kinsey and his patient are alive, but without changes in policy and improved training of officers, we will very likely see more needless shootings and deaths at the hands of police,” Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, said in a statement.

North Miami Police Chief Gary Eugene said on Thursday that an investigation into the shooting would be conducted by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement at his request.

Kinsey’s lawyer, Hilton Napoleon of the firm Rasco Klock Perez & Nieto in Coral Gables, Florida, sent the video to Reuters on Thursday. Napoleon did not provide information about who filmed it. Neither he nor Kinsey were immediately available for comment.

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on Thursday the U.S. Justice Department was gathering information about the incident, the latest controversial shooting of a black man by police in the United States.

Kinsey told Miami’s WSVN-TV that he was trying to calm the autistic patient when police showed up on Monday evening. Media reports have said Kinsey is 47 years old.

Kinsey said he dropped to the ground and lay on his back with his hands up and open to comply with commands from the police officers.

“As long as I’ve got my hands up, they’re not going to shoot me. This is what I’m thinking,” Kinsey said in an interview with WSVN-TV from a hospital bed on Wednesday. “Wow, was I wrong.”

Kinsey said he kept his hands up throughout the incident and that he asked the officer, “Sir, why did you shoot me?”

“He said, ‘I don’t know.'”

Police said in a statement that the officers were responding to an emergency call about an armed man threatening suicide. They said the officer, who has not been identified, is on administrative leave according to standard procedures.

The shooting itself was not recorded, but in the video, which has been widely circulated on social media, Kinsey can be heard talking to his patient and police while lying flat in the street.

“All he has is a toy trunk in his hands … I am a behavior therapist at a group home,” Kinsey yelled in the video. He also urged his patient, who was sitting nearby, to lie down and be still. The autistic man told him to “shut up” and did not comply.

Clint Bower, chief executive for the Miami Achievement Center for the Developmentally Disabled, which runs the group home where Kinsey has worked for more than a year, said, “My employee saved that young man’s life.”

The United States has seen demonstrations from coast to coast over the use of excessive force by police, especially toward black men.

In the past month there have been deadly shootings of black men in Louisiana and Minnesota and eight police officers have been killed in Dallas and Baton Rouge.

Police in North Miami have offered few details about the shooting. Chief Eugene told reporters that officers had responded to the scene with the threat of a gun in mind, but no gun was recovered.

“There are many questions about what happened on Monday night,” he said. “I assure you we will get all the answers.”

Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokeswoman Molly Best said the agency would not comment on the shooting.

(Reporting by Brendan O’Brien, Colleen Jenkins and Michelle Gershberg; Writing by Colleen Jenkins; Editing by Toni Reinhold)