Francisco Leal

Sotomayor: A Latina law student's view

With the recent confirmation of Sonia Sotomayor as the first Latina justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, Francisco Leal of Leal-Trejo, P.C., thought it would be interesting to get a current law student’s opinion about the historical implications of this momentous event.

After having watched Alejandra Velazquez’s interviews on Unvision and NBC, Leal believed she would be the perfect interviewee. Krystal Flores, a student intern at Leal-Trejo, P.C., sat down to speak briefly with Alejandra on the subject.

Krystal Flores: How did they approach you to do these news segments?

Alejandra Velazquez: I was first approached by a good friend in the immigration rights movement who said Univision was looking for a Latina Law student to share her thoughts about Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation. The segment aired on Thursday, Aug. 6, at 11 p.m. The next morning I received an e-mail from staff at Hispanas Organized for Politial Equality (HOPE). They had seen me on Univision and were impressed by what I had said. Because of this, they decided to invite me to participate at their panel celebrating Sotomayor’s swearing-in.

HOPE particularly wanted me to shed light on what Sotomayor’s confirmation means for the future of young Latinas.  They also chose me as a panelist because NBC had approached them looking for a Latina law student to profile on "NBC Nightly News" and they thought I would be perfect. I feel honored to have been thought of by my constituents for both Univision and NBC. I am truly thankful for these opportunities to participate in giving my opinion on Sotomayor’s historic confirmation.

KF: How are you like Sotomayor? 

AV: I believe that Sotomayor and I share a similar background.  As a Latina, raised in East Los Angeles, I also grew up believing in the American Dream -- that if I studied hard and was focused, I could succeed. My hard work led me to Yale, where, like Sotomayor, I encountered a new realm and culture that was entirely foreign to me. Like Sotomayor, who talked about being a lawyer from a young age, I also knew that I would go to law school as a child. Growing up, I continuously saw my immigrant parents struggle through the American system. Similar to Sotomayor, I also lost my father, who was an amazing person and a strong force in my life. After my father’s death, my mother had no choice but to carry the family forward by herself and despite the barriers presented to her. These hardships helped me to quickly realize that knowing the law was important to defending yourself from injustices. 

Through these experiences, I realized that I wanted to empower myself through the use of the law and develop both my theoretical and practical senses of justice.

KF: Why do you think Sotomayor's confirmation is significant to the general U.S. population, to females, to minorities, to Latinos, to the law field as a whole, etc.? 

AV: Sotomayor's confirmation is significant to the general U.S. population because her experiences reflect a variety of sectors of our society. She understands:

• What it's like to be poor and what it means to grow up with very little resources; 
• What are the gender politics rampant in our society and also the challenges and experiences of being  woman in our society, regardless of race;
• How racial politics work in our society. 

As a person of color, Sotomayor is aware of and sensitive to the struggles to overcome racism, racial profiling, stereotyping, and the need for Affirmative Action programs to undo historical and institutional discrimination. For women and people of color, this means another crack in the glass ceiling. And, though there is much left to be done to break barriers and undo stereotypes, this sends a message to not only Latinas, but all women, that we have the intellectual capacity and political endurance to be in positions of power.

It is important to acknowledge that just because we have a black president and a Latina Supreme Court justice, that our work is NOT done. On the contrary, now that we see our system opening up to accepting people of color in public positions of power and prestige, it is our responsibility as a community to ensure that young children of color have access to a quality education that provides the adequate tools to continue rising to these positions of power.

Background: Velazquez is a second-year law student at UCLA. She met Francisco Leal after she graduated from Yale, while working for Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez. Through alumni and shared political interests, Leal and Velazquez have kept in touch. At the end of the interview, Velazquez wanted to make known that Leal “has been a wonderful mentor as I continue my legal education." Leal and Velazquez both serve as at-large delegates to the first National Yale Latino Alumni Association.

Yale alums honor Judge Meza at summer fiesta

Yale students and alumni from all over California gathered as Francisco Leal of Leal-Trejo, P.C., hosted the annual Los Angeles Yale Latino Summer Fiesta at his home Aug. 8.  

Leal has hosted many Yale-sponsored events at his house ranging from welcoming sessions for incoming students to networking events for alumni within the community. He was especially pleased to host special guests Judge Amalia Meza, ’75, and newly appointed MALDEF President Thomas, ’87, ’91 JD.

Having heard about Meza’s work as a civil litigator, Leal was excited to welcome such a remarkable woman to his home. Many of her past cases focused on improving immigrant rights and representing underprivileged working-class communities.

During her speech, Meza talked about her background, explaining why helping others was her motive for joining the law profession.

Meza grew up in a meager immigrant family in East Los Angeles. At Garfield High, her college counselor recognized her as one of the school's smartest students. He pushed her to excel and think beyond Southern California -- he wanted her to attend Yale University. 

After difficult discussions with her parents and misogynistic remarks from her extended family, Meza ultimately chose to attend Yale. She received her bachelor's degree cum laude, and later attended Stanford Law School.

While at Yale, Meza was among the first class of admitted Latinas. During her recognition speech, she spoke of the hardships of the time, but also highlighted how her years at Yale reaffirmed her belief in doing something to make life better for others.

Meza was appointed to the Superior Court of the State of California by Gov. Gray Davis in August 2001. She began as a business civil litigation attorney in San Diego, eventually specializing in government-benefits civil litigation.

Since then she has won numerous awards, among them the Attorney General’s Award for Fraud Prevention in 1999, the FBI Special Recognition Award for Outstanding Prosecutorial in 1996, a DEA Special Commendation for Success in 1993, and the University of California at San Diego Hispanic Scholarship Council Excellence in Law Award in 2003. Meza also teaches at the Center for Judicial Education and Research.

Meza’s successes and her continually advancing prestige reflect the good works she has done on behalf of the community from which she came.

Diana Mendez, Yale ’00, remarked that Judge Meza was an inspiration for women like her. Mendez met Meza at the Yale Latino Alumni Reunion in April. “I was captivated by her good-humored account of her days as one of the first women and one of the first Latinas at Yale," Mendez recalled. "I had a hard time at Yale, but I can't imagine how wonderfully horrifying it must have been for her to be there with an 8-to-1 male-female ratio.

"Amalia is a pioneer and a role model. I never would have met her if I had not gotten involved in YLAA service," Mendez said."She has inspired me to continue my work with YLAA, to reach out to Latino alumni of all schools and years, so that we can all get to know the wonderful members of our community and be enriched by each other's experiences. We have so much to offer each other!”

Diana Mendez is a board member for the Yale Latino Alumni Association (YLAA) with Francisco Leal.

Sotomayor confirmed; first Latina on High Court

With a vote of 68-31, the Senate has confirmed Sonia Sotomayor as the first Latina ever elected to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Raised in the Bronx by a widowed mother, Sotomayor grew to be an intelligent, yet extremely shy student. After graduating from Princeton University summa cum laude, she attended Yale Law School where she found her voice among law professionals.  

During her tenure as a judge, Sotomayor has made many key decisions in controversial cases. While some of her major cases do not focus on ethnic issues, one did: Ricci v. DeStefano, for which she received a great deal of heat during her confirmation hearings.

In the case, test results for a 2003 firefighter’s exam in New Haven, Conn., were thrown out after having failed to produce an African-American firefighter with high scores. The 17 white and one Hispanic firefighters who scored high consequently sued.

Sotomayor faced this case when it reached the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Ricci vs. DeStefano created a commotion during the confirmation hearings because critics challenged Sotomayor’s ability to be anti-discriminatory in her case rulings.

Francisco Leal of Leal-Trejo, P.C., believes that Sotomayor will make an impartial, attentive Supreme Court justice. Leal is heartened by the news that a Latina will finally grace the bench of the Supreme Court.  

"This is a big step forward for all Latinos within the law profession," Leal stated. "What Sotomayor has just accomplished symbolizes that we and our children after us can and will dream higher.”

Leal-Trejo starts internship program

Leal-Trejo, P.C., would like to highlight the firm’s summer 2009 intern Krystal Flores. 

Flores is originally from Montebello and attended Bishop Amat High School in La Puente. She is a senior at Yale University, majoring in history.  

The firm is proud to have selected Flores because of her interest in law and passion for education reform.

She is a staff member for Yale’s La Casa Cultural and was formerly an executive board member of the Ivy Council, a student-government, philanthropic and diplomatic-centered student consortium of the Ivy League. As part of the Ivy Council, Flores traveled to China, Europe and the Middle East for student-based international diplomatic engagements.

She hopes to work as a diplomat or, here in the States, revolutionizing education within the public school system while continuing to work on multicultural relations. Flores is considering a joint MBA/JD program.

California budget: the good, the bad, the ugly

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed a package of bills aimed at closing the state’s $23.241 billion budget shortfall. The package of bills includes a total of $23.7 billion in "solutions." Here's a report from the Legislative Advocacy Group.

The California state budget signed on July 28 includes:

• $18 billion in spending cuts and fund shifts
• $3.5 billion in increases in revenues and transfers to the General Fund
• $2.2 billion in borrowing, including $1.935 billion from local government property tax revenues

Vetoes: The governor used his line-item veto authority to cut expenditures by $489 million, with the majority of that cut coming out of health and human services programs, including the Child Welfare Services Program, the Healthy Families Program, and Regional Center services for children with developmental disabilities.

The 27-bill Budget Package projects $89.5 billion of revenues and transfers to the General Fund, and authorizes total General Fund spending of $84.6 billion.

 The budget package presented to the governor the week before by the Legislature had a $156 million deficit with no reserve; consequently, the governor made $489 million in line-item cuts (vetoes); borrowed $50 million from one of the state’s special funds; and found about $117 million in savings from money not spent in the last fiscal year.

The plan ultimately leaves the General Fund with an estimated reserve of $500 million at the end of the 2009-10 fiscal year. 

The final budget does include several reform efforts, including: ending automatic annual cost-of-living increases (COLAs) for the welfare program CalWorks, the prison system and state universities, among other programs ($591 in savings starting next year); eliminating or consolidating several boards and commissions ($50 million savings); cutting the amount of time adults can collect welfare benefits continuously from five years to four (saving $510 million); and taking steps to root our $226 million worth of alleged fraud in the In-Home Supportive Services program for the elderly.

Overview of the final budget package

The governor characterized the rebalancing efforts as "kind of like the good, the bad and the ugly":

• "Good" because it contains no tax increases, makes government "live within our means" and includes reforms of some programs.
• "Bad" because it includes $18 billion in cuts to almost all state programs, particularly those serving California's neediest residents.
• "Ugly" because the final package legislators sent Schwarzenegger lacked a reserve and was $156 million short of being balanced; this caused the governor to veto $489 million from what was sent to his desk by the Legislature.

Expenditure-related budget reductions

K-14 education -- $6.5 billion

Reduces Proposition 98 appropriations for K-12 education by $5.3 billion.

Reduces Proposition 98 appropriations for community colleges by over $800 million.

Adjusts payments toward the Quality Education Investment Act program, resulting in $450 million in General Fund savings. (View an analysis of the K-12 budget cuts.)

Health -- $2.3 million

Assumes that future federal actions will reduce state Medi-Cal funding requirements by $1 billion and an additional state savings of $323 million are achieved.

Assumes $284 million in savings in developmental services.

Rejects proposal to eliminate Healthy Families Program, while reducing support by $179 million.

Reduces Proposition 36 substance abuse programs by $90 million.

Freezes cost-of-living adjustments for long-term care providers for savings of $76 million.

Various other reductions, including over $250 million of gubernatorial vetoes.

Higher education -- $2.0 billion

Reduces by $2 billion General Fund (to the minimum level required for federal stimulus funding) payments to UC and CSU.

Rejects Governor's proposal to eliminate the CalGrant program.

Local government -- $1.8 billion

Shifts $1.7 billion of local redevelopment funds to offset state General Fund spending for education and other programs.

Suspends various noneducation local government mandates for spending reductions of $66 million.

Employee compensation -- $1.8 billion

Delays by one day state payments related to June 30, 2010 payroll for state employees, thereby reducing 2009-10 costs by $937 million.

Assumes that the Legislature will not approve proposed agreements with largest state employee union, which will reduce currently budgeted costs by $210 million.

Accounts for $150 million of reduced costs due to CalPERS actions concerning state employee and retiree health premiums.

Furloughs most state employees of executive agencies a third day each month, reducing employee compensation costs by an additional $425 million.

Criminal justice -- $1.0 billion

Reflects a reduction of about $800 million in General Fund support for CDCR.

Assumes $50 million in savings from limiting the reimbursement rates paid to private contractors that provide medical care to inmates outside of prison.

Reduces court funding by 10 percent for $169 million of savings. Assumes one-day-per-month court closures.

Social services -- $1.0 billion

Reduces CalWORKS costs by $510 million by reducing funding to counties, temporarily exempting some families from work requirements, and other measures.

Reduces IHSS costs by $264 million by eliminating some services for all but the most severely disabled, making the least disabled ineligible for all services, eliminating the share-of-cost buyout program, and implementing several antifraud activities.

Reduces funding to counties for Child Welfare Services by $80 million.

Rejects Governor's proposals to eliminate CalWORKS, Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, and the California Food Assistance program.

Eliminates requirements for statutory COLAs for CalWORKs and SSI/SSP beginning in 2010-11.

Transportation -- $0.9 billion

Assumes $562 million of higher "spillover" gasoline sales tax and related revenues will be available for General Fund uses.

Shifts $225 million of Home-to-School Transportation funds to pay for public transit bond debt costs.

Other -- $0.7 billion

Assumes reduced cash-flow borrowing costs of $210 million by adjusting schedule of cash payments, including delaying billions of dollars of school payments to later in 2009-10.

Authorizes chief information officer to renegotiate information technology contracts and other costs. Assumes this generates savings of $100 million.

Increases in revenues and transfers to the General Fund: $3.5 billion

Increases schedules for payroll withholding by 10 percent: $1.7 billion

Assumes that parts of State Compensation Insurance Fund can be sold in 2009-10: $1.0 billion

Accelerates receipts of personal income and corporation tax estimated payments: $0.6 billion

Other revenue-related actions: $0.2 billion

Increases in borrowing -- $2.2 billion

Suspends Proposition 1A, borrowing local government property taxes to offset $1.9 state General Fund spending for education and other programs: $1.9 billion.

Lends $135 million from the State Highway Account to the General Fund and other special fund loans: $0.2 billion.

Total budget 'solutions': $23.7 billion

Legislation included in the budget sgreement

AB 1: Changes to 2009-10 Budget Bill

AB 2: Education

AB 3: Proposition 98 Guarantee

AB 4: Human Services

AB 5: Health

AB 6: Medi-Cal Managed Care Waiver

AB 7: Privatization of Medi-Cal and Human Services Program Eligibility Determination

AB 8: CalWORKs and SSI/SSP Policy Changes

AB 9: Developmental Services

AB 10: Transportation

AB 11: Resources and Environmental Protection

AB 12: General Government, Including State Compensation Insurance Fund

AB 13: Public Safety and Judiciary

AB 14: Suspension of Proposition 1A of 2004

AB 15: Proposition 1A Borrowing and Repayment

AB 16: Cash Deferrals

AB 17: Revenue Accelerations

AB 18: Revenue Compliance

AB 19: IHSS Policy Changes

AB 20: Board Consolidation and Elimination

AB 21: Procurement Policy Changes

AB 22: Surplus Property Sale and Lease

AB 25: Cash Management

AB 26: Redevelopment Agency Property Tax Shift

SB 63: Integrated Waste Management Board

SB 90: Supplemental Funding for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

Local governments take hit with Calif. budget

The two most relevant factors affecting local government as a result of the newly signed State of California budget package are:

1. The state’s borrowing of $1.935 billion from Proposition 1A local government property tax revenues in 2009-10
2. A funding shift of $2.05 billion in redevelopment agency property tax revenues in 2009-10 and 2010-11.

The Senate passed, but the Assembly failed to approve, a measure that would have authorized the state to borrow $1 billion in HUTA funds from local governments. The Senate measure provided that the loan would be repaid over a 10-year period. This measure differed from the agreement announced earlier, which would have shifted the funds to the state with no repayment obligation.

Both the Assembly and Senate passed another measure referred to as the "City of Industry" proposal to provide a 40-year extension to redevelopment plans after they expire in exchange for an infusion of cash to the General Fund in order to help pay the state’s deficit. Nonetheless, just before sending the package of bills to the governor’s desk, the Assembly pulled the bill off the table and killed the proposal.

Suspension of Proposition 1A

Perhaps one of the most controversial provisions of the budget agreement is combined in budget trailer bills AB 14 & AB 15 -- the borrowing of $1.935 billion of local government property tax revenues in 2009-10 to schools and/or counties to generate an equivalent amount of state savings.

The borrowed sums will be shifted to county‑level Supplemental Revenue Augmentation Funds (SRAF) where they will be used to fund K‑12 schools, courts and prisons, and Medi‑Cal, hospital and K‑12 school bond expenses that would otherwise be funded from the state General Fund. Pursuant to Proposition 1A (2004), the maximum diversion from any one jurisdiction would be 8 percent of an entity’s property tax collections and the state must repay the amount shifted, with interest, no later than June 30, 2013.

To alleviate any budget impacts the borrowing may have on local government, the legislation also authorizes a securitization mechanism through a local government-created joint powers authority (JPA) to issue bonds against the state’s repayment obligation and use the proceeds to replace the diverted property taxes of those local agencies that participate in the JPA.

Those local agencies that can sustain the 8 percent shift this year have the option of not participating in the JPA and then be repaid by the state directly at an interest rate that will be set by the Department of Finance, subject to a cap of 6 percent.

However, it is questionable that the JPA will be able to sell those notes to investors at a time when the economy is weak and the state’s credit rating is barely hovering above junk bond status. Even if the JPA can attract investors, it is uncertain whether it can sell the full note amount of $2.25 billion.

The Legislature still needs to figure out a plan should the JPA securitization plan not result in what state leaders envisioned.



AB 15 includes a hardship provision for those local agencies that are in or in danger of bankruptcy or unable to provide core services to apply to the Department of Finance for a reduction or elimination of their property tax suspension. The plan puts a cap of 10 percent of the total suspension amount in any county for the amount that can be exempt from the suspension.

In addition, those hardship amounts will be reallocated to all the other local agencies in the county to make up the difference in property tax amount shifted to the state. In other words, districts may have to pay more than 8 percent of their property tax revenue if other local agencies in the county are granted a hardship exemption. Leaders are banking on the securitization mechanism working properly so that no local agency would have to apply for a hardship provision, as their property tax shift would be replaced by notes sold through the JPA.

The plan also includes an appropriation to local government that pays back the total property tax revenue borrowed at the end of three years, as required by the Constitution, and requires the repayment of local property taxes to be third in priority, right below education and bond debt. 


Given the current state of our treasury and assuming this trend continues, this appropriation is meaningless if there is no cash available to make the full repayment on time. The current language sets a June 30, 2013, repayment date. According to the California Special Districts Association, this date sets the state up for failure to pay back the property tax because of the cash payments made before that date for short term borrowing, education, bond payments and other expenses. For this reason, the repayment date should be moved up to May 1, 2013, a time when cash is plentiful in state coffers.

Diversion of Redevelopment Agency property tax revenues

Budget trailer bill AB 26 allows the state to divert up to $2.05 billion in redevelopment agency property tax revenues in 2009-10 and 2010-11. AB 26 requires redevelopment agencies to shift $1.7 billion in Fiscal Year 2009-10 and $350 million in Fiscal Year 2010-11 into a new fund to balance K‑12 schools that serve the redevelopment areas and the housing built by redevelopment agencies.

This shift may be made from reserves or current income, including tax increment, proceeds of land sale or bonds, interest or other earned income, or borrowing the 20 percent of the tax increment that is normally dedicated to the low and moderate income housing fund. A redevelopment agency may also have its parent agency pay in its stead. AB 26 allows agencies to extend the life of their redevelopment plan by one year.

The same amount of base school property tax is shifted to the county‑level Supplemental Revenue Augmentation Funds. From these funds, $850 million will be used to fund courts, prisons, and Medi‑Cal, hospital, and K‑12 school bond expenses that would otherwise be funded from the state General Fund. The other $850 million is used to fund K‑12 school costs offsetting Proposition 98 General Fund costs.

Leal on Yale Latino Alumni Assn. board

Francisco Leal of Leal-Trejo, PC, has just been appointed to the first board of the Yale Latino Alumni Association (YLAA).

According to the YLAA web site, the association hopes to reflect "the interests and needs of Latinos from different national origins and Yale schools" and "to facilitate a continued bond among all Yale Latinos."

Over the next two years, Leal and other members of the organization will work toward defining the exact goals of YLAA, serving alumni interests and bringing current students in closer proximity with Latino alumni.

In response to a question about what he is most excited about, Leal responded, "I am truly looking forward to the opportunity to discuss and address a variety of issues within the Yale Latino community, such as recruitment, faculty retention, and coursework.

"I also feel that as we increase our numbers as a Yale Latino community, we will be better able to advocate for Latino issues,” Leal said.

Leal will be kicking off YLAA sponsored events in Los Angeles by holding a gathering at his house in August for Yale alumni and students in the hopes of further developing the core mission of the YLAA among the L.A. Yale population.

Leal hosts fundraiser for candidate Lara

Francisco Leal of Leal-Trejo, PC, held a recent fundraiser at his house for Ricardo Lara, candidate for Democratic Assembly, 50th district.

Though Leal supports Ricardo wholeheartedly because of his stance on key issues regarding education, Lara is also an ideal candidate for his district because he has an extremely diversified background in a number of issues that are pertinent to areas ranging from Bellflower to Lynwood to Walnut Park.

Ricardo, left, has the experience and passion for these issues that will help him to succeed and put forth laws that are representative of the community he serves.

The fundraiser was on June 20, 2009.

Below are several of the titles that Lara holds or has held in the past

• Communications Director for Assembly Appropriations Chair Member Kevin de Léon, Chairman of the Assembly Appropriations Committee (current)
• District Director for Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez
• Chief of Staff to Majority Leader Marco Antonio Firebaugh
• Board of Director for the Parent Institute for Quality Education (PIQE)
• Board of Directors for Planned Parenthood Los Angeles Advocacy Project.

Learn more about Ricardo Lara and the issues that he supports.

Journal looks at race case won by Leal-Trejo

Verdict Search California has published an article about an employment case that questioned race issues in which the defense, Sandra J. Garcia and Charles David Trejo, all attorneys of the firm Leal-Trejo, PC, won.

In Hammond vs. Lynwood Unified School District, No. 2:07-cv-05039-DDP-CT, Hammond sued the defendants because she believed her demotion was the result of a discrimination based on her race. She claimed chest pains and emotional distress as a result of this situation.

The court ruled against the plaintiff.

This is an important case ruling against manipulations of race discrimination laws, which were enacted to address serious violations against those erroneously treated in the workforce.

Verdict Search California reported on the case May 4, 2009.

Latino alumni reunite at Yale University

(Yale University photo by Tom Fiorini) 

Latino alumni from all over the world gathered at Yale University on April 3-5 for the first Latino Alumni Reunion, which centered around the theme "Uniting Yale Latinos: From Nuestra Casa to Contributions Around the World."

As a dedicated member of the Yale community, Francisco Leal of Leal-Trejo, PC, believed this would be a wonderful opportunity to reconnect with old classmates and learn about the university’s interaction with current students.

While there, alumni attended informal sessions on topics ranging from "Overcoming Barriers for Latinos Reaching Higher Education" to "Managing Global Teams.”  

Still, the Honorable Eduardo Padro (Yale ’75) commented to the Yale Daily News about a theme that was omnipresent in every alumnus’ mind throughout these discussions: “This is a special event that brings back memories of how difficult it was for Latinos to feel comfortable at Yale.”

In order to understand the difficulties past students faced, staff members from La Casa Cultural, the Latino Cultural Center of Yale University, interviewed prominent members of the Yale Latino community in order to document the history of Latinos at Yale. 

Leal was one of the featured alumni. In his interview, he described how it was difficult as student from a poor neighborhood near Roosevelt High School in East Los Angeles to acclimate to the atmosphere at Yale University.  

Nevertheless, Leal noted that he has noticed significant improvements within the past 20 years: "For example, during my time here, we did not feel comfortable interacting with students of different classes and race.  Now, Latino students at Yale disregard this notion. They know that they are equal in intelligence to their peers and do not think of race as an inclusion factor." 

After all the alumni left, current students gathered in various places on campus to discuss the obstacles that past alumni had to overcome in order to achieve the sense of comfort most Yale Latinos now feel within the university.  

Ben Gonzalez (’09) stated, “Attending both the Latino and LGBT alumni reunions, I was repeatedly told about the ambivalent welcome home (to Yale). One alumna said she could feel her claw marks on the walls of Yale the institution and now saw the fruit of her labor: us -- somewhat happy, adjusted, and flourishing Latinos. I hope we can make her and the rest of the alumni proud for paving the way.”