Black students and the student loan crisis: African Americans suffer most

Judith Scott-Clayton and Jing Li published a report for the Brookings Institution last month on the disparity in student-debt loads between blacks and whites. Essentially, Scott-Clayton and Li told us us what we should already know, which is this: African Americans are suffering more from student-loan debt than whites.

Scott-Clayton and Li's findings

Here are the report's key findings:

• On average, blacks graduate from college with $23,400 in college loans compared to whites, who graduate with an average debt load of $16,000.

• The disparity in debt loads between blacks and whites nearly triples four years after graduation. By that time, the average debt load for African Americans  is $52,726, compared to $28,006 for white graduates.

• Four years after graduation, black graduates are three times more likely to default on their student loans than whites. For African Americans the rate is 7.6 percent; among whites, only 2.4 percent are in default.

• Four years after graduation, almost half of African American graduate (48 percent) owe more on their undergraduate student loans than they did when they graduated.

• Although African Americans are going to graduate school at higher rates than whites, blacks are three times more likely to be in a for-profit graduate program than whites. Among whites, 9 percent enroll in for-profit graduate programs; for blacks, the rate is 28 percent.

Growing debt loads for black graduates and high numbers of blacks attending for-profit graduate programs: Disturbing

In my mind, Scott-Clayton and Li's most disturbing findings are set forth in the last two bullet points. First, almost half of African American college graduates owe more on their undergraduate loans four years after graduation than they did on graduation day,  What's going on? 

Clearly, people who are seeing their total indebtedness grow four years after beginning the repayment phase on their loan are not making loan payments large enough to cover accruing interest.  Those people either defaulted on their loans, have loans in deferment/forbearance, or are making token payments under income-based repayment plans that are not large enough to pay down the principle on their loans.

Surely it is evident that people with growing student-loan balances four years after graduation are more likely to eventually default on their loans than people who are shrinking their loan balances.

Scott-Clayton and Li's finding that a quarter of African American graduates students are enrolled in for-profit colleges is also alarming. We know for-profit colleges charge more than  public institutions and have higher default rates and dropout rates. It should disturb us to learn that blacks are three times more likely than whites to be lured into for-profit graduate programs.

Income-Based Repayment Plans do not alleviate the high level of student indebtedness among African Americans

The Obama administration and the higher education community tout long-term income-based repayment plans (IBRPs) as the way to alleviate the suffering caused by crushing levels of student debt. But as Scott-Clayton and Li correctly point out, new repayment options such as  REPAYE "may alleviate the worst consequences of racial debt disparities," but they fail "to address the underlying causes."

Lowering monthly payments and extending the repayment period from 10 years to 20 or 25 years does not relieve African Americans from crushing levels of student debt. We've got to shut down the for-profit college sector to eliminate the risk that people will enroll in overpriced for-profit graduate programs that are often of low quality..And we've got to fundamentally reform the federal student-loan program so that African Americans and indeed all Americans can graduate from college without being burdened by unreasonably high levels of debt.

References

Judith Scott-Clayton and Jing Li. Black-white disparity in student loan debt more than triples after graduation. Evidence Speaks Reports, Vol. 2, #3, Brookings Institution, October 20, 2016. Available at https://www.brookings.edu/research/black-white-disparity-in-student-loan-debt-more-than-triples-after-graduation/

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Warns Student Borrowers: Paying Extra on Loans May Not Help You Pay Them Off Early

OK, let's assume for a few moments that you are a super responsible student-loan debtor who wants to pay off your college loans early and get on with your life.

And let's assume you have a few extra bucks at the end of the month and you want to make larger monthly payments on your student loans so you can reduce the principle faster and pay off your loan more quickly. That should work, right?

Maybe not. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a warning recently that some student borrowers who pay more than the minimum monthly payment on their loans may actually be extending the period of their indebtedness.  

According to the CFPB, some student borrowers have reported that their loan servicers are thwarting borrowers who try to pay off their loans early by making larger payments.. In fact, some servicers have constructed a loan collection system that penalizes people who may more than the minimum monthly payment.

How does this system work? In some cases, loan servicers have unilaterally lowered borrowers' minimum monthly payments, thereby extending these  borrowers' repayment period and the amount of interest that borrowers pay, and they have often done this without the borrowers' knowledge.

This arbitrary practice of resetting borrowers' monthly payment amounts is called "redisclosure," and the CFPB warns borrowers that they could trigger redisclosure by making extra payments to pay their loans off sooner.

As CFPB's Mike Pierce explained:

When borrowers pay more than they owe, they expect to save money on interest charges and get out of debt faster. But the practice we highlighted can hold these borrowers back, making it harder and more expensive for student loan borrowers to pay back their loans and get out of debt.

Of course the practice of impeding college borrowers from paying off their loans early is outrageous and should be illegal. But CFPB places the responsibility on the borrower to avoid being duped. Here is CFPB's advice:

1) "Double check to make sure you're still on track to meet your goals." In other words, check to see if your servicer lowered your monthly loan payment without your knowledge.

 2) "Tell your servicer what to do with your extra money." Make sure the extra money goes to             paying down your loan with the highest interest rate and that extra money goes toward paying down principle.

3) If something doesn't look right, ask for help."

Of course, this is good advice, but wouldn't it be better if the CFPB simply required student-loan servicers to do business honestly and transparently? Shouldn't borrowers be able to pay off their student loans early by making extra payments? And shouldn't servicers be prohibited from changing payment terms without the borrower's permission or knowledge?

References

Tim Grant. Financial protection bureau concerned by some student loan servicers' practices. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 3, 2016. http://www.post-gazette.com/business/money/2016/10/03/Be-cautious-when-repaying-student-loans/stories/201609280032

.Seth Frotman. You have the right to pay off your student loan as fast as you can, without a penalty. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, September 26, 2016. http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/you-have-right-pay-your-student-loan-fast-you-can-without-penalty/

Psychological Costs of Student-Loan Debt: A Critique of Game of Loans by Beth Akers and Matthew Chingos

As I have pointed out more than once, several policy organizations argue tirelessly that worries about the nation's student-debt crisis are overblown. In particular, scholars at the the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution have repeatedly published articles that minimize the magnitude of what I have long called a crisis.

It is not surprising then that Beth Akers, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Matthew Chingos, a fellow at the Urban Institute, published a book recently called Game of Loans, that essentially argued that the federal student-loan program is basically sound and under control.

In my view, Akers and Chingos widely missed the mark regarding the student loan crisis. They did not misrepresent the data about this problem or say anything that is technically inaccurate. Rather, in my view, they seriously misinterpreted data that warn of a coming catastrophe.

I won't attempt to articulate all my criticisms of Game of Loans in this essay. Rather I will focus on one point that Akers and Chingos made in Chapter 5, where they admit that "education debt is having negative psychological impacts on borrowers" (p. 95).

Of course this is true.  As Kathryn Hancock explained in a 2009 law review article, "Studies have consistently found that socioeconomic status and debt-to-income ratios are strongly associated with poor mental health." Student loans, in particular, Hancock wrote, "can be a chronic strain on an individual's financial and emotional well-being." Indeed, "[t]he mere thought of having thousands upon thousands of dollars worth of debt can severely impact those with already fragile mental health, especially if they will carry that debt for the rest of their lives" (Hancock, 2009, 160-161, internal quotation marks omitted).

But what solutions do Akers and Chingos offer for this problem? Solution number one, they say, is to dial down the rhetoric about the student loan crisis.  We need "to change the tone of the public discourse on this issue," Akers and Chingos counsel. In their mind, the "hysterical treatment" of the student-loan problem has caused some borrowers to worry more about their student loans than they should.

And solution number two? Akers and Chingos suggest that the psychological costs of student indebtedness could be reduced by creative repayment plans, including income-driven repayment plans.

In essence, Akers and Chingos are aligned with the Obama administration when it comes to addressing the student-loan crisis. Let's pretend there is no crisis and shove more students into long-term repayment plans.

Thanks, Ms. Akers and Mr. Chingos. You've been a big help.

References

Beth Akers and Matthew Chingos. Game of Loans: The Rhetoric and Reality of Student Debt. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016).

Katheryn E. Hancock, "A Certainty of Hopelessness, Depression, and The Discharge of Student Loans Under the Bankruptcy Code," 33 Law & Psychology Review 151, 160-161 (2009) (internal citations and internal quotation marks omitted). psychology 

Huma Abedin: Hillary will throw her under the bus. A Catholic reflection on politics and fame as All Souls Day approaches and we remember our honored dead

Eleven days before the presidential  election, FBI director James Comey announced he is reopening the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

Those of us who live in fly-over country will never know all the facts about Hillary's private emails, but this much I believe we can safely conclude:

1) James Comey is a decent and honest man. Mr. Comey was fully aware of the political and legal risks he was taking when he sent a letter to Congressional leaders telling them the FBI had discovered new evidence on Anthony Weiner's computer about Clinton's private email traffic.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch objected to Comey's decision to alert Congress, and Comey sent the letter anyway. Surely he is a man of integrity and courage.

2) Whatever the FBI found on Weiner's computer must be significant. At the very least, I think Weiner's computer will show that Huma Abedin, Weiner's estranged wife and Hillary's closest confidant, lied to the FBI when she testified about Hillary's private server. And the new evidence may show that Hillary lied as well. Otherwise, why would Comey write such an explosive letter?

3) Regardless of who wins the election, this latest revelation will destroy Hillary Clinton's political career. Hillary may still win the election next week, regardless of what the FBI found on Anthony Weiner's computer, but this scandal won't go away until Hillary Clinton's political career is over.

4) Hillary will throw Huma Abedin under the bus. Hillary makes all her decisions out of expediency, and she has no sense of personal loyalty. If necessary, Hillary will throw Huma under the bus to save herself. I predict that will happen before election day.

5) Journalists and politicians who sold their integrity to support Hillary Clinton will never regain the public's trust. Bill Richardson, former governor of New Mexico and a Democrat, chastised Mr. Comey on Fox News this morning for sending a bombshell letter to Congressional Republicans just a few days before the election. But as the Fox News commentator quickly reminded Richardson, Comey sent the letter to both Republicans and Democrats. Richardson's characterization of the letter, like Hillary's, was a deliberate misrepresentation.

In my mind, Richardson's pathetic dissembling destroyed his credibility forever. And the same can be said for dozens of other obsequious Clinton supporters. For example, Froma Harrop, insinuated in an op ed column that Bernie Sanders is a racist when Bernie was running against Hillary in the Democratic primaries last spring. Bernie Sanders--a racist?

Will Froma Harrop ever recover her integrity after writing that sleazy essay? No, she won't.

The Cemetery at St. Francis Cabrini Catholic Church in Livonia, Louisiana

Yesterday, while Hillary's latest email scandal simmered and boiled, I drove to Livonia LA to visit the Catholic cemetery at St. Francis Cabrini Catholic Church near Bayou Grosse Tete. This is the weekend before All Souls Day; and in South Louisiana, every Catholic family has a duty  to place flowers on the graves of departed loved ones. I was determined to honor this tradition by placing bouquets of flowers on the graves of Ivy Alford, Sr. and his wife Mary Alice, my wife's grandparents.

To my surprise, fresh flowers had been placed on about  two thirds of the graves in Cabrini cemetery. The Cajuns were honoring their dead,  knowing the parish priest would sprinkle holy water on the grave sites on All Souls Day. No one wanted to appear indifferent to their ancestors as this Holy Day of Obligation approached.

Before leaving the cemetery, I noticed two men standing at Mr. Alford's grave; they were obviously paying respect to his memory. I introduced myself and the men told me a little about Mr. Alford, who had died 30 years ago. They testified to his kindness, his willingness to help anybody who needed aid. They recalled his humility and his sense of humor. A teardrop appeared on one man's face as he testified to Mr. Alford's extraordinary goodness.

Ivy Alford, Sr. was not a wealthy man; he left this world without leaving much of anything other than a good duck-hunting shotgun. But he was loved, and he is still remembered 30 years after his death.

Hillary Clinton will go down in history as America's most prominent woman politician. If she is elected President, she will have a presidential library; and win or lose,  scholars will write books about her for centuries to come. And when she dies, she will lie beneath a stately monument.

But no one will stand before Hillary's grave 30 years after her death and shed a tear for her remembered kindness. And so who lived the greater life--Hillary Clinton or Ivy Alford, Sr?

References

Froma Harrop. Bernie Sanders and Racism Lite. Seattle Times, May 19, 2016. Accessible at http://www.seattletimes.com/author/froma-harrop/

Educational Credit Management Corporation and the U.S. Department of Education: Are They Co-Conspirators in Accounting Fraud?

Last March, an Arizona bankruptcy court discharged $245,000 in student loan debt owed by  Rita Gail Edwards, a 56-year-old single woman earning a tenuous living as a counselor. Educational Credit Management Corporation (ECMC), her student-loan creditor, fought the discharge. ECMC wanted Edwards placed in a 25-year income-based repayment plan. Under such a plan, Edwards would only pay $84 a month on her loans for 25 years.

ECMC's position was absurd, of course. A woman in her late 50s  will never pay off a $245,000 loan by making monthly payments of $84. The only possible purpose that is served by jamming Ms. Edwards into a 25-year repayment plan is to carry her student-loan debt on the Department of Education's books as a performing loan.

In ruling for Ms. Edwards, the bankruptcy judge questioned the wisdom of a system that allowed Edwards to borrow so much money. "In hindsight, it is a shame that [Edwards] ever incurred these student loan debts," the court observed.

While her Ottawa University education may have given her the tools and credentials to work in an emotionally satisfying role [as a counselor] and may have provided a well needed skilled counselor in her rural community, the predictable economic burden was never likely to justify the massive economic burden she incurred.

The Edwards case demonstrates the insanity of the federal student-loan program. Our government allows people to borrow extravagant amounts of money for educational programs that will never pay off, and then it engages debt collectors to push borrowers into long-term income-based repayment plans that stretch out over 25 years and will almost never result in the loans being repaid.

And the Edwards case is not an anomaly. In the Roth case, ECMC opposed a bankruptcy discharge for an elderly woman with chronic health problems who was living on less than $800 a month. In fact, Roth's income was so low that ECMC acknowledged that Roth's monthly payments under an income-based repayment plan would be zero!

In the Halverson case, ECMC opposed a discharge for a man in his sixties making less than $14 an hour as a substitute teacher and who owed almost $300,000 in student loan debt. Mr. Halverson borrowed less than half the amount he owed when he filed bankruptcy and was never in default. His debt ballooned mostly due to accruing interest while his loans were in deferment.

The Department of Education itself has taken the same irrational stance regarding bankruptcy discharge for student debtors. In the Myhre case, DOE opposed a discharge for a quadriplegic, and in the Abney case, it opposed a discharge for  a single father of two children who was living on less than $1200 a month and could not even afford to own a car.

Why?

 I can think of only one reason. ECMC and DOE are engaged in a massive accounting fraud, trying to convince the public that the federal student loan program is solvent and fiscally sound. But in fact the student loan program is a disaster. Eight million people are in default and and one out of four debtors are either in default or behind on their loan payments.

ECMC benefits from the status quo--that is clear. According to a Century Foundation report, it has $1 billion in unrestricted assets, most of it obtained from its loan-collection activities. The Westlaw database shows that ECMC has  appeared as a named party in over 500 federal court rulings; it has spent literally millions of dollars in attorney fees chasing after people like Gail Edwards and Janet Roth.

And who pays those fees?  According to a law review article written by Rafael Pardo, ECMC draws money from a Federal Reserve Fund to finance its loan-collection activities and has access to "significant [federal] resources when litigating against student-loan debtors" (p. 2145).  Pardo cites a document showing that DOE allowed ECMC to keep a quarter of a billion dollars that it drew from DOE's Federal Reserve Fund to finance its activities in 2008 (p. 2145).

So you, Mr. & Ms American taxpayer, are paying ECMC to engage in unproductive litigation against impoverished debtors--litigation intended to keep the student-loan crisis under wraps.

And ECMC is a nonprofit organization--supposedly devoted to the public good.

But ECMC is not acting for the public good. On the contrary, ECMC is DOE's hit man--the entity DOE sends to beat down bankrupt student debtors and prevent them from getting the bankruptcy relief they deserve.

 ECMC's senior executives are getting well paid to be DOE's "Mac the Knife."  Its CEO makes at least a million dollars a year.

References

Annual Report of the CFPB Student Loan Ombudsman. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, September 2016. Available at http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/102016_cfpb_Transmittal_DFA_1035_Student_Loan_Ombudsman_Report.pdf

Edwards v. Educational Credit Management Corporation, Adversary No.. 3:15-ap-26-PS, 2016 WL 1317421 (Bankr. D. Ariz. March 31, 2016). Available at http://www.azb.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/024139558300_dmd.pdf

In re: Halverson, 401 B.R. 378 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2009).

Rafael Pardo. The Undue Hardship Thicket: On Access to Justice, Procedural Noncompliance and Pollutive Litigation in Bankruptcy. 66 Florida Law Review 2101-2178. Available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2426744

Roth v. Educational Credit Management Corporation, 490 B.R. 908 (9th Cir. BAP 2013). Available at http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/bap/2013/04/16/RothV%20ECMC%20opinion-FINAL%20AZ-11-1233.pdf

Sued Because You Defaulted On a Private Student Loan? Read Richard Gaudreau's blog in Huffington Post about National Collegiate Student Loan Trust

If you defaulted on a private student loan and got sued, you should read Richard Gaudreau's recent blog essay in the Huffington Post.

As Gaudreau explained, there are big differences between federal student loans and private loans. The federal student-loan program offers alternative repayment plans that lower monthly payments for borrowers who run into financial trouble.  In addition, the Department of Education offers loan forgiveness for people who borrowed to attend an institution that closed while they were enrolled and for people who were defrauded by the institution they attended.

Private student loans offer none of these protections, and private creditors have responded heartlessly toward their defaulted student-loan debtors. In many instances, private lenders have turned over their defaulted student loans to collection agencies. In particular, National Collegiate Student Loan Trust (NCT), a debt collector with a deceptively benign name, has filed law suits against numerous student-loan debtors, as many as one a day in some states, according to a Bloomberg Business Week article.

In some cases, however, NCT has not been able to show that it is the real party in interest in those lawsuits. In other words, NCT cannot always produce the paperwork that demonstrates it has the authority to collect the loan.

In such cases, some debtors have been able to persuade judges to dismiss these collection suits. So if you have been sued because you defaulted on a private student loan, your lawyer should demand that the debt collect produce evidence that it has the right to sue you for your student-loan debt.

Why would a debt collector sue someone without being  able to show it has the authority to collect on the debt? I am not certain, but here is my best guess. I think private banks and lenders (Wells Fargo, Sallie Mae and some other prominent names) have bundled thousands of basically noncollectable student loans and sold them to debt collectors like NCT, without providing the debt buyers with all the necessary legal documents for the individual loans. The debt collectors may have bought these loans for pennies on the dollar.

The debt collectors then sue distressed borrowers, betting the borrower are too unsophisticated to know how to find out whether the debt collector has the legal authority to collect the debt. .

In most instances, it is a safe bet. Distressed student-loan debtors usually do not have enough money to hire lawyers to defend their interests. In some cases, they naively admit to damaging "Requests for Admissions" that the creditors send them in the mail. By doing so, debtors give up their legal rights without knowing it.

In essence, private student-loan debt collectors maybe engaging in the contemporary equivalent of the "robo-signing" scandal that occurred during the home-mortgage crisis of 2008. A lot of home owners lost their homes in foreclosure actions even though the agencies that confiscated their houses sometimes couldn't prove they had the legal authority to sue the homeowner in the first place.

So if you have been sued by NCT or another student-loan debt collector, read Gaudreau's article and then hire a lawyer. The first thing your attorney will probably do is demand that the debt collector produce the evidence that is has the authority to sue you. If it can't produce that evidence, it shouldn't have sued you, and you have a good chance of getting your case dismissed.

Justice! Wouldn't it be nice to see a little of it come your way?


References

Richard Gaudreau. In Spate of National Collegiate Student Loan Trust Lawsuits One Defense Stands Out. Huffington Post, April 25, 2016.  Available at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-04/the-student-debt-collection-mess

Jamie P. Hopkins & Katherine A. Pustizzi. A Blast From the Past: Are the Robo-Signing Issues That Plagued the Mortgage Crisis Set to Engulf the Student Loan Industry? 45 University of Toledo Law Review 239 (Winter 2014). Available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2413848

Natalie Kitroeff. The Lawsuit Machine Going After Student Debtors: "This is robosigning 2.0". BloombergBusinessweek.com, June 3, 2015. Available at
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-04/the-student-debt-collection-mess

Gloria J. Liddell & Pearson Liddell, Jr. Robo Signers: The Legal Quagmire of Invalid Residential Foreclosure Proceedings and the Resultant Potential Impact on Stakeholders. 16 Chapman Law Review 367 (Winter 2013).

Suicides and a Jail Death in Anadarko, Oklahoma: Bitter, Angry and Frightened, Oklahomans will not vote for Hillary

Last January, the Washington Post reported on a spate of suicides in Anadarko, Oklahoma. Four people committed suicide over a period of less than two months. All were young, all were racial minorities, and all killed themselves with guns.

And last April, Darius Robinson, an African American father of seven, was killed in his Anadarko jail cell, asphyxiated by jail employees. Jailers say Robinson was trying to escape, but the Oklahoma Medical Examiner ruled the death a homicide.  A small demonstration was organized a couple months after Robinson's death; about 50 people attended. Robinson, by the way, was not in jail for a violent crime; he was in the slammer for failing to pay child support.

You might think these tragedies would draw the attention of President Obama. Four desperate young people killed themselves with handguns--what a great opportunity for the President to talk about gun control. A black man strangled by his jailers while in police custody--that's as least as shocking as the death of Freddie Gray in Baltimore/

Nevertheless, as far as I can determine, Barack Obama has said nothing about these deaths, and Hillary Clinton has said nothing about them. And, to the best of my knowledge, neither Al Sharpton nor Jessie Jackson has shown up in Anadarko.

Why? Because the Oklahomans don't matter. The Democratic political operatives have written off Oklahoma, and well they should. In the Democratic presidential primary, Oklahoma Democrats voted overwhelmingly for Bernie Sanders--Bernie Sanders! And  God knows they didn't vote for Bernie because they are socialists. No, Oklahoma Democrats loath Hillary Clinton, and Bernie was their only alternative. And if Oklahoma Democrats loath her, you can imagine what Oklahoma Republicans think.

In truth, Oklahomans are bitter, angry and frightened. Outside a few pockets of urban prosperity--Oklahoma City, metropolitan Tulsa, and Bartlesville--the state is in deep depression. From the Winding Stair Mountains in the east to the short grass country of western Oklahoma, there are no jobs. Anadarko, my home town, may be the epicenter of Oklahoma's desperate condition. Abandoned houses, suicide, alcohol abuse, drug addiction--rural Oklahomans are among the casualties of the new global economy.

Hillary and Barack despise these people, and the Oklahomans know it.  Barack sneeringly dismissed poor white Americans generally when he said they comfort themselves with guns and religion. When Hillary condemned the "basket of deplorables," she was talking about the people I grew up with.

Eighty years ago, John Steinbeck wrote The Grapes of Wrath, a tribute to the strength and courage of the Oklahomans who were driven off their land during the Dust Bowl years and migrated to California in rattletrap cars. "We're the people that live," Ma Joad says in the novel. "They can't wipe us out; they can't lick us. We'll go on forever, Pa, 'cause we're the people."

Do you think Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton have read The Grapes of Wrath? Not likely. Do you think they give a damn about contemporary Oklahomans who are suffering now just as much as their ancestors did during the Great Depression? No, of course not.

Darius Robinson: "We're the people"

References

Sarah Kaplan.'It has brought us to our knees': Small Okla. town reeling from suicide epidemic. Washington Post, January 25, 2016. It https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/25/it-has-brought-us-to-our-knees-small-okla-town-reeling-from-suicide-epidemic/


Xin Xin Liu. Protesters Gather At Caddo Co. Courthouse After Inmate's Death, new9.com, July 22, 2016. Available at
http://www.news9.com/story/32507009/protest-planned-at-caddo-co-courthouse-after-inmates-death