Jackson Free Press

The American Cancer Society is urging local residents to sign up so that cancer’s greatest mysteries can be unlocked.

Update: According to Jackson Director of Communications Chris Mims, Babe's was seeking $300,000 in damages. He added that the actual payout is likely to be around $105,000, give or take a few thousand dollars.

A lawsuit City Attorney Pieter Teeuwissen called "the last lawsuit against the city from the Melton administration" has been decided in favor of Babes Showclub vs. the city of Jackson.

The adult entertainment venue is seeking damages for loss of revenue "in the hundreds of thousands." On Tuesday, the city council voted 5-2 to settle with the club, closing the door on the final civil lawsuit against the former administration.

The history:

The Jackson Police Department shut down Babe's Showclub, an adult entertainment venue in the 1100 block of West Street back in March of 2006 on the grounds the city had no record of Babe's adult entertainment renewal application.

Attorneys for Babes called the closure illegal, and local attorney Chris Ganner and Tampa, Fla., attorney Luke Lirot argued that the city had also squelched the owner's rights to appeal the closure.

Babes General Manager Bo Powell argued that his club had applied for its 2006 license in October 2005 and complained that the city's application process was "confusing." He also claimed that city officials, whether accidentally or intentionally, had misdirected his application efforts.

Powell re-applied for a temporary license, but the city said it couldn't legally give out temporary licenses, despite Babes' attorneys' protestations that a temporary license is the only kind Babes could get if the city didn't follow through with the licensing process on its end.

Powell testified that an employee filed an application with the city's sign and license division because no one was available in JPD to take the application. Two city employees in the sign and license division testified that they'd accepted a $200 license renewal fee and stamped the document as a receipt. City employee Yolanda Shaw said she told JPD that Babes had made the payment, though JPD license and permit officer Samuel Gardner claimed at the time he had no record of the application.

Gardner also said he'd told Babes two months later that they had no license registered, but Powell said he had no hint of the problem until police showed up to close his club down in March.

I was thrilled to hear today that the Associated Press, of which the Jackson Free Press is now a member, has rejected the use of "illegal" and "illegals" to describe undocumented immigrants. Media diversity expert Richard Prince blogs about the move:

The battle to eliminate use of the term "illegal" or "illegal alien" to describe human beings has been proceeding at least since 1994, when the four associations that staged the first Unity convention "issued a joint statement on the term 'illegal aliens':

" 'Except in direct quotations, do not use the phrase illegal alien or the word alien, in copy or in headlines, to refer to citizens of a foreign country who have come to the U.S. with no documents to show that they are legally entitled to visit, work or live here. Such terms are considered pejorative not only by those to whom they are applied but by many people of the same ethnic and national backgrounds who are in the U.S. legally,' " as a 2006 statement from the National Association of Black Journalists recalled.

The AP released its statements on its blog today:

The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term “illegal immigrant” or the use of “illegal” to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.

Why did we make the change?

The discussions on this topic have been wide-ranging and include many people from many walks of life. (Earlier, they led us to reject descriptions such as “undocumented,” despite ardent support from some quarters, because it is not precise. A person may have plenty of documents, just not the ones required for legal residence.)

Prince reported that The New York Times expected to follow suit, as early as this week.

It's about time. The Jackson Free Press has long adhered to the principle that a human being cannot be "illegal" and that the phrasing is not only not precise, but it is dehumanizing. We're glad that the AP and The New York Times have realized that it is no place of journalism to encourage offensive labels for human beings.

Right on.