Talk:United States Commission on Civil Rights

message: Merge them. Lou Sander 02:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge what? --DThomsen8 (talk) 21:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I need input on this case, involving my children. Please call or discuss this case with me. Also, they have violated my due process rights and made up numerous lies, in this CHIN's case. 
 Janepfender (talk) 14:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taking away my parental rights and putting them up for adoption, initially,  due to disability. Since then, they have made up lies about the situation. 

message: The article currently says two of the commissioners are appointed by the Speaker of the House, and two are appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate.  However, it goes on to say that one of the current commissioners was appointed by Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader.  Reid has never been President Pro Tempore of the Senate, so these statements can't both be correct.
The statement on the USCCR's "About Us" webpage doesn't specify:  "The United States Commission on Civil Rights is composed of eight Commissioners: four appointed by the President and four by Congress. Not more than four members shall at any one time be of the same political party."
However, the statute posted elsewhere on USSCR's website gives the details:
"(1) 4 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the President.
(2) 2 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the President pro tempore of the Senate, upon the recommendations of the majority leader and the minority leader, and of the members appointed not more than one shall be appointed from the same political party.
(3) 2 members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives upon the recommendations of the majority leader and the minority leader, and of the members appointed not more than one shall be appointed from the same political party."
Source:  www.usccr.gov/about/pdfs/Commission-on-Civil-Rights-Legislation.pdf
In light of this, I'm adding clarifying parentheticals to the description about appointments, and I'm changing Reid to Daniel Inouye because he was President Pro Tem when David Kladney was appointed in January 2011.  It also seems safe to infer that Michael Yaki must have been appointed by the Speaker of the House (since the other seven are already explained, leaving the Speaker's second appointment as the one missing), so I'll update that as well; in April 2011, that was John Boehner.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCTodd (talk • contribs) 16:58, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appointments made by Congress 

message: I updated the article to note that the Commissions statutory authority has terminated . My edit was reverted  with the comment "The commission has been reauthorized by statute multiple times since 1975."
While that is true, it is also true that the Commission has terminated and not been reauthorized after it's last sunset provision. The last time the Commission was reauthorized was 1994 in the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994 . Pursuant to Section 6 of that Act, the Commissions statutory authority terminated on September 30,1996. That provision is currently codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1975d. 
 Can you please explain why you think the statement I added was incorrect? I'll be re-adding it if I do not hear from someone soon.
-Obsidi (talk) 14:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever, I'll add a secondary source for it as well. -Obsidi (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Per WP:RS, sources should be reliable, independent and secondary. Citing the original act implies that the Commission is illegally constituted, which is WP:SYN. A bit like including the termination without including the fact that Congress has continued to pass appropriations, so clearly approves of the commission's continued existence. Guy (Help!) 22:20, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Reliable absolutely. But there is no requirement that sources be secondary sources in WP:RS. Secondary sources are preferred, but as long as analysis or synthesis of primary sources is not done, there is no prohibition on their use. Claiming the Commission is acting illegally would be analysis or synthesis, which could not be done from a primary source. -Obsidi (talk) 03:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Termination