Juan C. Calzetta, III and Joseph Naegele, Jr. will be honored at a conference on critical race scholarship for their paper Fernandez v. California: How a Workplace Injury Suit Became a (Step Towards) Successful Regulatory Change, a case study developed for Professor Stephanie Wildman’s Law and Social Justice seminar.
The conference will take place April 2-4, 2009 at the University of Iowa College of Law. "CRT 20: Honoring Our Past, Charting Our Future” commemorates the first twenty years of Critical Race Theory ("CRT”) scholarship since the historic first meeting of CRT scholars. Participants will examine the development of CRT in presentations and workshops and the conference will honor CRT pioneers Kimberlé Crenshaw, Neil Gotanda, and Stephanie Phillips with the CRT 20 Founders Award, and will feature a keynote address from CRT 20 award winner, Professor Richard Delgado.
The conference will celebrate the history of CRT scholarship but with a sharp focus on the future. According to CRT 20’s website, CRT scholars historically offered guidance to young scholarly voices trying to break through the silence around race and racism. To that end, the new generation of scholars and the CRT movement needs the renewed support of CRT thinkers. "In this new era, where silence about race is once again being promoted as the only appropriate response to injustice, we need to hear these voices again and anew.”
"It’s a great honor to be recognized by such a terrific group of people,” says author Juan Calzetta. "Fernandez is the result of many hours and much emotion. In my time at CRLA, I saw what field workers tolerate and suffer just to survive, to make some money , to support a family, and the experience changed my view on law and society. I met field workers poisoned and crippled over time by pesticide exposure. They can’t avoid the danger and it angers me, hence, the Fernandez case study. Moreover, pesticides are notoriously destructive to our atmosphere and environment. Pesticides exemplify "pure waste” because they don’t biodegrade – they just hang around in the air, soil, and water. So I’m expecting better solutions…for the farmer, the worker, and certainly the consumer.”
In brief, "Fernandez is about a worker’s injury case that turned into a regulatory challenge against a California state agency. Specifically, the Department of Pesticide Regulation used improper procedures to make regulations for some very dangerous pesticides. The Fernandez case provided a compelling plaintiff and a jurisdictional basis for the regulatory challenge. From there, CRLA and the EDC filed complaints and DPR’s regulations were struck down,” says Calzetta. "The punch line? After losing the appeal, it was pesticide trade groups that begged for California Supreme Court review, not the agency. They were denied, so the case was a victory for the fieldworkers, but there’s no guarantee forthcoming regulations will be any safer. So there’s still much work to do.” Joe adds, "The greatest lesson from this research project came from interviewing lawyers who truly care about being of service to others. It has given me the encouragement to continue to keep service to others as my main sense of vocation."
