vol. 30, no. 4

American

Civil Liberties

Union

Volume XXX

ACLU Test Case

SAN FRANCISC, APRIL, 1965

rallenge

Punishment

icoholic

_ May an alcoholic be punished as a criminal? The prac-

tical answer to this question is "yes" as proven in our

courts where, throughout the state, thousands of alcoholics

are charged every week with the offense of being drunk in

a public place. Most of these persons plead guilty and are

given a small fine, a suspended

sentence and a warning not to

do it again. For repeaters or per-

sons who have given the police

some trouble, a 30 or 60 or 90

day jail sentence is likely. There

is also available a civil commit-

ment for a period up to a year

where the alcoholic is sent to a

county jail "farm" and treated

the same as if he had been con-

victed of a crime.

Alcoholism A Disease

Medical evidence is overwhelm-

ing that alcoholism is a disease

and can no more be cured by

jail than can epilepsy or tuber-

culosis. It is time then that we

stop treating alcoholics (or at

least. those alcoholics who par-

ticipate in no further criminal

act such as drunk driving) as

criminals. This is the objective

of the ACLU's defense of Thomas

Francis Budd, a 55 year old resi-

dent of Oakland, who was ar-

rested on November 23, 1964 and

charged with being drunk in a

public place and in such a condi-

tion that he was unable to care

for his own safety or the safety

of others. These facts create a

criminal offense under Penal

Code sec. 647(f). Budd is being

defended in his Oakland Munic-

ipal Court trial, which is sched-

uled to start on March 29, by a

trio of volunteer attorneys con-

sisting of George Duke, James

Schnake and Richard Rader, and

ACLU staff counsel Marshall W.

Krause. The defense will be that

- section 647(pound) is unconstitutional.

Fifty Drunkenness Arrests

The defense will show that

Budd has had about 50 arrests

for drunkenness dating from the

time he was 21 years old. For

many of these arrests he has

served jail time, on occasion as

_much as six months. Despite a

sincere desire to stop drinking,

and despite an intelligent grasp

of the damage drinking has done

to him, Budd is unable to stop.

He is not a steady drinker, but

cannot resist periodic drinking

to the point where he completely

blacks out and cannot remember

what has happened to him when

he wakes up in a jail cell or, if

he is lucky, in his own bed.

Medical Experts

The defense is fortunate to

have the services of two emi-

nently qualified medical experts

serving as volunteers in this

case. They are Dr. Bernard Dia-

mond, a psychiatrist. who also

teaches courses in the schools of

eriminology and law at the Uni-

_versity of California, and Dr.

David Rubsamen, who is also a

lawyer and was the director of.

the San Francisco Adult Guid-

ance Center and has taught and

lectured extensively in the field

of alcoholism. These experts will

testify as to the involuntary

nature of alcoholism and the in-

ability of a jail sentence to cure

the disease. -

Plan of Attack

The main line of legal attack

SN

will follow the U.S. Supreme

Court decision in Robinson v.

California which held that it was

cruel and unusual punishment in

violation of the Eighth Amend-

ment to punish as a criminal a

person who was merely addicted

to the use of narcotics. It is

doubtful that the case can be

won in the lower courts, but the

decision on appeal may result in

a landmark change in California

law.

Supreme Court

Construes -

`Objector' Law

Last month the United States

Supreme Court decided three

eases which raised the issue of

whether the limitation of exemp-

tion from military service to per-

sons who. by reason "of. religious

training and belief" are op-

. posed to the bearing of arms

was unconstitutional as an es-

tablishment of religion and

discrimination against differ-

ing forms of religion. The statute

granting the exemption defined

religious training and belief as:

"An individual's belief in the re-

lation to a Supreme Being in-

volving duties superior to those

arising from any human relation,

but does not include essentially

political, sociological or philo-

sophical views, or a merely per-

sonal code."

Three Young Men

Three young men who had

been denied conscientious objec-

tor status but nevertheless re-

fused to report for induction

were tried and convicted in Fed-

eral courts. Two of these men,

Seeger and Jakobson, had their

convictions reversed by the Sec-

ond Circuit Court of Appeals

which held that it was unconsti-

tutional to limit exemptions to

those who believed in a Supreme

Being. The third young man,

Peter, had his conviction affirm-

ed_by the Court of Appeals for

the Ninth Circuit. Seeger's claim

to being a conscientious objector

was based on his: devotion to

goodness and virtue for their

own sake and a religious faith in

a purely ethical creed. Jakobson

did not identify with any particu-

lar religious creed but did be-

lieve in "an ultimate cause or

creator of all existence." His be-

lief was characterized by his

draft board as a mere personal

moral code. Peter had similar,

nontheistic beliefs.

`Supreme Being'

The Supreme Court pointed

out that Congress in defining re-

ligious training and belief did

not use the word "God" but used

the words "Supreme Being,"

thus indicating, according to the

Court, a legislative intent to re-

tain the substance of the previ-

ous law on conscientious objec-

tion which was not limited to

those who believed in a tradition-

-Continued on Page 3

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1965.batch ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_1999.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log

Number 4

LetP oy we ong

Gets Old Age

enefiis

After two years of delay and

struggle with the Social Security

Administration, the ACLU an-

nounced Ist month that Let Poy

Wong, "the man without a coun-

try" has now been awarded his

old age benefits retroactive to

November of 1963. Wong was

represented by the ACLU when

the Immigration Service attempt-

ed to exciude him from the coun-

try without a hearing even

though he had lived here for 40

years,

In a habeas corpus action be-

fore Federal Judge Zirpoli, the

ACLU was able to bring him off

the ship where he was imprison-

ed and obtain a hearing for him.

It later developed that Mr. Wong

was not a citizen of the United

States and rather than wait

around for a protracted deporta-

tion case during which he could

not earn a living, Mr. Wong de-

cided voluntarily to go to Hong

Kong. :

When application for old age

benefits was made the Social

Security Administration refused

to accept Wong's word or the of-

ficial records of the Immigration

Service that he was born in Sep-

tember of 1900. The Social Secu-

rity Administration claimed that

he was born in 1907 or 1908.

Finally the birth day of Septem-

ber 3, 1901 was accepted and

Wong will get monthly benefits

for the rest of his life in addi-

tion-to a retroactive lump.sum.

. The chances are good that the California Supreme Court

will be able to rule in the late summer of this year whether

Proposition 14, adopted by the voters at the last election, is

valid under the 14th Amendment tothe United States Con-

stitution. However, since a Federal constitutional question is

clearly presented, the final word

on whether the proposition,

which nullified anti-racial dis-

crimination measures in the sale

or rental of housing in Califor-

nia, is binding will have to come

from the United States Supreme

Court. Several of the cases now

pending in California were

brought under the sponsorship of

the American Civil Liberties Un-

ion of Northern and Southern"

California, others were brought

under the sponsorship of the

NAACP, and still others are

private suits. -

Two San Francisco Cases

In San Francisco two cases in-

Mrs. Virginia

Eitreim Dies

Mrs. Virginia Kitreim, a mem-

ber of the Mid-Peninsula Chapter

Board of Directors for the last

two years, was killed in an auto-

mobile accident on March 12. As

a wife and mother of four, a

heavy contributor to ACLU work

and possessed of endless humor

and charm, her loss is deeply felt

by her family and many friends.

The Chapter has established a

Virginia Hitreim Memorial Fund

and contributions may be sent to

Chairman David Sonnabend, 135

Rinconada Ave., Palo Alto or to

Harold Gross, 1561 Hollingsworth

-Dr., Mountain View, ;

ACLU Legislative |

Conference April 10

Crucial civil liberties questions from reapportionment

and the Selma crisis to civil disobedience will be discussed

at the ACLU Legislative Conference to be held in Berkeley

- on April 10th at the Hotel Claremont (Ashby and Domingo

avenues). The conference is being held under the auspices

of six ACLUNC chapters, and

Berkeley-Albany, Mid - Peninsula

and Mt. Diablo prepared the con-

ference agenda. Registration will

start at 9:30 a.m. with the con-

ference beginning at 10:00 a.m.

Morning Session

During the morning session, -

the Conference will hear from

Richard Werthimer, Chairman,

No. Calif. ACLU Legislative

Committee; Marvin Schacter,

Chairman, So. Calif. ACLU Leg-

islative Committee; and Coleman

Blease, Legislative Representa-

tive, No. and So. Calif. ACLU.

These men will discuss the legis-

lative process as it relates to the

ACLU,

One of the highlights of the

Conference will occur at noon

when John Pemberton, National

`Director of the ACLU, will speak -

on the topic, "Legislative Action

- A Challenge to the ACLU."

Mr. Pemberton is flying to Berke-

ley from New York specially to

attend the Conference and to de-

liver his address.

Four Workshops

After the luncheon, a series of

four workshops will be presented

dealing with particular civil lib-

erties issues. The workshops are

as follows: 1) Legislative Action

and the 14th Amendment (civil

rights, police action, demonstra-

tions); 2) Legislative Action and

the 4th and 6th Amendments

(search and seizure, rights of de-

fendants); 3) Legislative Action

and the ist Amendment (free

speech, loyalty oaths, academic

freedom, rights of public employ-

ees and students); 4) Legislative

Action and the 8th Amendment

(punishment and treatment, wel-

fare). ac .

Leadership

Those participating in the

workshops include ACLU Staff

Counsel Marshall Krause, San

Francisco Supervisor Terry Fran-

cois, Assemblymen Willie Brown,

John Knox, Nicholas Petris, Wil-

liam Stanton and others.

The day's session will be com-

pleted by a social hour honoring

John Pemberton and those speak-

ing at the workshops.

Over 10,000 invitations have

been mailed out for this impor-

tant Conference and a large at-

tendance is expected. Mail your

reservation today to Berkeley-

Albany Chapter, ACLU, 2890

Telegraph Ave., Berkeley.

Registration Fees

A nominal registration fee

($3.00 - Students $2.00) is to be

paid. at the door and includes the

Pemberton Luncheon. To insure

a seat at the luncheon, your res-

ervation must be received by

April 5th. Z

' Opinion

volving damage actions against

landlords for alleged discrimina-

tion in the rental of apartments

were heard before a_ special

panel. of three municipal court

judges. The plaintiff in one of

these cases, Grogan vs. Meyer,

was represented by ACLU staff

counsel Marshall W. Krause, and

the plaintiff in the other case was

represented by attorneys Arnold

Greenberg and Ephriam Mar-

golin. The defendants in each of

these cases had moved to have

- the actions dismissed on the

ground that the passage of Prop-

osition 14 took away the plain-

tiff's right to sue even though

the discriminatory acts took

place before the passage of Prop-

osition 14. The attorneys for the

plaintiffs argued that the suits

should not be dismissed since

Proposition 14 was unconstitu-

tional as conflicting with the

14th Amendment to the United

States Constitution guaranteeing

persons that no state shall de-

prive them of the equal protec-

tion of the laws.

Affidavits Filed

Counsel for the plaintiffs une

dertook to prove by the submis-

sion of evidentiary affidavits that

the custom and practice of: res-

idential racial discrimination is

prevalent in the State of Califor-

nia and that the purpose of

Proposition 14 was to encourage

the maintenance of this pattern

of segregation in residential

areas. :

It was argued that Proposition

14 was not a neutral enactment,

but in fact encouraged residents

of the State of California to con-

tinue the existing practice of

racial discrimination in housing.

It was also argued that the State

has the duty to cure a recognized

social problem by the exercise of

its police power, and that hous-

ing discrimination was one of the

most flagrant social problems in

this State.

Memorandum Opinion

On March ist the Municipal

Court (composed of Judges

Drewes, Lazarus. and Mana)

handed down its Memorandum

in the cases which

stated: "The Court is convinced

that the question presented by

this motion to strike ...is one

of the most important questions

submitted to our courts in re-

cent years*** There are times,

and this is one, when the ques-

tion involved has an importance

to the community at large which

overrides the importance to the

particular individuals. The Court

feels that the best interest of all

would be served by an expedi-

tious determination of the ques-

tion by a court of last resort at

the earliest possible moment.***

-Continued on Page 2

Belmont-Redwood City-San Carlos

Area Meeting, May 14

A local committee organized by Messrs. Charles

Ewing, John Eige and Leo Nelson is planning a meeting

for the benefit of new and prospective members in Bel-

mont, Redwood City and San Carlos. Ernest Besig, Ex-

ecutive Director of ACLUNC will speak on "Your Pri-

vacy and the Bill of Rights." The meeting will begin at

7:30 in the evening and will take place in the auditorium

of the John F. Kennedy School, Goodwin and Connec-

ticut Avenue on Friday, May 14. :

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

| ERNEST BESIG . . . Editor

503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California, EXbrook 2-4692

Subscription Rates -- Two Dollars a Year

Twenty Cents Per Copy

Ralph B. Atkinson -

Dr. Alfred Azevedo

`Leo Borregard

Rey. Richard Byfield

Prof. James R. Caldwell

Richard DeLancie

Rabbi Alvin f. Fine

Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross

Albert Haas, Jr.

Howard A. Jewel

Rey. F. Danford Lion

Pref. Seaton W. Manning

John R. May

`Honorary Treasurer:

Joseph S. Thompson

Honorary Board Member:

Sara Bard Field

Mrs, Gladys Brown

Mrs. Paul Couture

John J. Eagan

Joseph Eichler

Morse Erskine

Dr. H. H. Fisher

hArs. Margaret C. Hayes

Prof. Ernest Hilgard

`Mrs. Paul Holmer

hArs. Mary Hutchinson

Richard Johnston

Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

CHAIRMAN: Howard A. Friedman

VICE-CHAIRMEN: Helen Salz

Rey. Harry B. Scholefield

SECRETARY-TREASURER: John M. Fowle

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig

Committee of Sponsors

Prof. John Henry Merryman

Prof. Charles Muscatine

Prof. Herbert Packer

Clarence E. Rust

John Brisbin Rutherford

Mrs. Martin Steiner

Gregory S. Stout

Stephen Thiermann

Richard E. Tuttle

Donald Vial

Richard J. Werthimer

GENERAL COUNSEL

Wayne M. Collins

Roger Kent

Mrs. Ruth Kingman

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

Nerman Lezin

Prof. John Henry Men yaaa

Rey. Robert W. Moon

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Prof Hubert Phillips

Prof. Wilson Record

Dr. Norman Reider

Prof. Wallace Steqner

bArs. Theodosia Stewart

Rt. Rev. Sumner Walters

`

"Communist Political Propaganda'

Hei

Iberg Case Forces

Changes in P.O. Screening

Leif Heilberg's challenge to the constitutionality of the

screening of foreign mail to determine which of it is `"com-

munist political propaganda" will be heard by the United

States Supreme Court on April 26. The program was de-

elared unconstitutional and its enforcement enjoined by a

three -judge Federal District

Court. in San Francisco, where

Heilberg was represented by

ACLU attorneys. However, the

- program `continues in operation

because the government has pros-

ecuted an appeal.

Memo Filed

Early in March the Solicitor

General filed a memorandum

with the Supreme Court stating

that as a result of the decision

in the Heilberg case, certain

changes were being made in the

administration of the program.

These are that Postmaster Gen-

eral John A. Gronouski has is-

sued a directive to all foreign

prepaganda units that on or be-

fore March 15, 1965, all cards

now retained by the Post Office,

indicating that persons to whom

alleged "communist political

propaganda" is addressed desire

to receive such mail, shall be

destroyed. Before March 15th the

practice was for the Post Office

te keep these cards and thus

maintain a list of those persons

who had indicated that they de-

sired to receive "communist po-

litical propaganda." Unless an

addressee returned the card, he

could not receive the mail under

the statutory program.

HUAC Got Lists

Heilberg, and many other per-

sons, had complained that the

existence of this list posed a dan-

ger te them since names on Ssimi-

Jar Hsts had in the past been

turned over to the House Com-

mittee on Un-American Activi-

ties and other governmental

agencies-and could be used to

harm those persons. This was the

major reason why the District

Court in the Heilberg case found

that the law was unconstitutional.

Retain Negative Cards

The Postmaster General has

ACLU NEWS

APRIL, 1965

Pade 2

-aganda."

also indicated that after March

15th no cards shall be retained

except those which state that the

recipient does not wish to re-

ceive "communist political prop-

In the future, cards

stating that the addressees do

wish to receive foreign mail will

be immediately destroyed. This

presents an extremely difficult

problem of administration of the

statute since much of the mate-

rial classified as "communist po-

litical propaganda" consists . of

daily or weekly periodicals as to

which, under the new program,

the recipient will have to file a

new card for each piece stating

that he wishes to receive it.

Delay Inevitable

In responding to this mem-

orandum, `Heilbergs attorneys

pointed out to the Court that the

statute still requires that foreign

mail be delayed in delivery so

that it can be read and screened

to determine whether it contains

propaganda. This may take any-

where from a day to a month. It

was also pointed out that the op-

eration of the law itself deters

the exercise of free speech be-

cause many persons will believe

it unpatriotic to read what the

government has told them is bad

for them, and other persons will

still be concerned because the

fact that they are receiving "com-

munist political propaganda"

may be used against them. This

is no unreal fear even under the

new procedures because the new

procedures only apply to post

office personnel, whereas em-

ployees of the Customs Service

have equal access to the mail

Said te be "communist political

propaganda." It is Customs em-

ployees- who,

turned over this information to

investigating committees.

in the past, have -

Proposition 14

Under Legal

Challenge

Continued from Page 1-

For the reasons hereinabove set

forth, the Court does hereby

grant the motion of the defend-

ants to strike the plaintiff's

amended complaint. The Court

recommends to the plaintiffs that

this matter be appealed to the

Appellate Department of the

Superior Court and at that time

plaintiffs requests that the Ap-

pellate Department certify the

legal question to the District

Court of Appeal ... for the set-

tlement of an important question

of law.*** While the court has

granted the motion to strike for

the reasons set forth, the Court

does wish to state that it enter-

tains serious doubts as to the

constitutionality of the new Ar-

_ ticle I, Seetion 26 of the Cali-

fornia Constitution in the light

of the equal protection of the

laws provision of the 14th

Amendment to the United States

Constitution and the plain lan-

guage of the 13th Amendment to

that Constitution and the legis-

lation enacted by Congress (42

U.S.C., 1842) pursuant thereto

abolishing slavery and its inci-

dents."

Certification Refused By D.C.A.

Promptly on the filing of this

opinion and its accompanying

judgment, the plaintiffs filed

notices of appeal to the Appel-

late Department and moved that

Department to certify the con-

stitutional question to the Dis-

trict Court of Appeals. On March

17th the Appellate Department

unanimously certified the ques-

tion to the District Court of Ap-

peal. However, proceedings in

these cases came to an abrupt

halt when. the District Court of

Appeal on March 19, 1965 exer-

cised its discretion to deny the

certification and sent the cases

back to the Appellate Depart-

ment. Unless the District Court

of Appeal changes its mind, the

San Francisco cases probably

will never get to the Supreme

Court in time for them to be

part of that Court's decision on

the validity of Proposition 14.

The District Court of Appeal

gave no reason for refusing to

accept certification.

Los Angeles Ruling

Indications are.that other cases

which started in the Superior

Court and thus have an: easier

time getting to the Supreme

Court will provide the basis for

the Proposition 14 decision. In

a recent Superior Court case in

Los Angeles, Superior Court

Judge Martin Katz ruled that

Proposition 14 was constitutional

. insofar as it allowed the owner

of an apartment house to be free

of the Unruh Civil Rights Act

which prevented discrimination

in the rental of apartments. How-

ever, Judge Katz ruled that. the

Court would not lend its aid to

evict a person from his apart-

ment on the sole ground that the

person was a Negro. The Court

ruled that participation of the

judiciary in an eviction based

solely on the race of a tenant

would be State action depriving

persons of the equal protection

of the laws. This case will

promptly be appealed to the

Supreme Court.

Other Rulings

In a case in Santa Ana the

Superior Court upheld com-

pletely the validity of Proposi-

tion 14. A Sacramento Superior

Court refused to decide the ques-

- tion of the validity of Proposi-

tion 14 and that decision also will

be brought to the California Su-

preme Court. :

When it is decided which cases

are to be heard by the Supreme

Court, the American Civil Liber-

ties Union of Northern Califor-

nia will file an amicus curiae

brief in keeping with the deci-

sion of the Board of Directors

that Proposition 14 is unconsti-

tutional as in violation of the

14th Amendment of the United

States Constitution. The ACLU

1965 Legislature

Reapportionm nt

issue In

scramento

By COLEMAN BLEASE

ACLU Legislative Advocate

One issue-reapportionment of the state eerate ie

come to dominate the 1965 session of the legislature. It has

occupied most of the time and energy of the state senators

and their staffs, and has beclouded the political climate. It

has stirred a campaign to amend the United States Constitu-

tion that has reached into every

state in the Union and the halls

of Congress.

July Deadline in Calif.

This issue began when the

United States Supreme Court de-

cided in the Reapportionment

cases, that both houses of a state

legislature be apportioned sub-

stantially on the basis of popula-

tion. The California state Sen-

ate, a majority of which is elect-

ed by ten percent of the state's

population, obviously fell] within

the Supreme Court's mandate. A'

federal district court in Los An-

geles ordered the Legislature to

reapportion its Senate by July

ist of this year.

Reselution Adopted

The Senate acted unanimously

in the first few days of the ses-

sion by passing two resolutions

aimed at forcing the Congress

to call a convention, under the

provisions of Article V of the

Constitution, for the purpose of

proposing an amendment freeing

one house from the population

standard. The two _ resolutions

were at first delayed by the

Speaker of the Assembly, then

quickly called and heard in the

Assembly Elections Committee.

The ACLU opposed both resolu-

tions and supported the prin-

ciple of one man, one vote. A

quickly organized opposition re-

sulted in the shelving of one of

the resolutions (calling for a

convention) and the passage of

the other, amended to simply

memorialize the Congress for a

constitutional amendment.

Furious Campaign

The Senators then began a

furious campaign aimed at con-

vincing the Congress that a con-

stitutional amendment should be

adopted. A group of lobbyists

representing special interests put

up money to hire the public re-

lations firm of Whitaker and

Baxter. And senators were sent

winging throughout the country,

on money from the Senate con- .

tingent funds, to convince other

states and the Congress to back

an amendment. The campaign

bore quick fruit. Reports from

the Washington office of the AC-

LU and elsewhere indicate that

proponents of an amendment are

near the two-thirds vote needed

in each house for passage of an

amendment.

Dirksen Auiendiment

The current focus of the cam-

paign is Senate Joint Reso-

lution No. 2, otherwise known

as the Dirksen Amendment.

Hearings on the Dirksen Amend-

ment and other proposals are

now being conducted before the

Senate Subcommittee on Consti-

tutional Rights. The Dirksen

measure, perhaps in amended

form, is expected to be reported

to the full Senate Judiciary Com-

mittee by the first of April.

The Dirksen Amendment

marks a startling contrast to the

President's bill on voting rights,

which was sparked by the tragic

events in Selma, Alabama. The

President's bill would provide a

system for invoking federal

registrars in Southern states

will also argue that Proposition

14 cannot legally prevent the

State Legislature from meeting

its responsibilities in the area of

housing discrimination.

As a

which substantially bar Negroes (c)

from voting. T h e. Dirksen

Amendment, as it is now writ-

ten, would provide a means by

which the South could escape the

full impact of Negro voting.

Invitation to Gerrymander

The Dirksen Amendment pur-

ports to vest the "right and

power to determine the compo-

sition . . . and the apportion-

ment" of both houses of a state

legislature in the people of the

state. This provision could be

read as a denial of federal power

or review over state legislative

apportionment. It would be an

open invitation to Southern

States to use the racial gerry-

mander to frustrate the purpose

of the President's bill on voting

rights.

The Dirksen Amendment also

makes reference to a standard of

apportionment which would al-

low an apportionment of one

house of a bicameral legislature

on "the basis of factors other

than population." This provision

is identical to that proposed and

supported by the California legis-

lature, with the proviso that the

apportionment plan be ratified

by a vote of all the people in an

election free of racial discrimina-

tion. As Senator Tydings asked

before the Senate Subcommittee

considering the Dirksen Amend-

ment, "Would factors like rain-

fall, wealth, race and religion be

permissible?"

ACLU Testimony

Although the Dirksen Amend-

ment could be amended to in-

clude the most elaborate pro-

tections thus far advanced, the

fact remains that any apportion-

ment that departs from the popu-

lation standard will result po-

litically in the devaluation of the

ethnie vote. This point was made

in testimony by Professor Robert

B. McKay, Associate Dean of

New York University School of

Law, in presenting testimony by

the National ACLU in opposition

to an amendment subverting the

one man, one vote principle. He

said:

"Two principal areas of ACLU

interest, protection of the right

-of franchise and elimination of

discrimination, converge in the

context of reapportionment. Mi-

nority groups tend to concentrate

in the more populous areas. ...

result the ACLU is

especially sensitive to discrimi-

nation against the urban voter be-

cause of the resulting partial dis-

enfranchisement of minority

groups."

Devaluating Minority Vete

The devaluation of the minor-

ity vote would occur in Califor-

nia with special force. Minority

groups are clustered almost en-

tirely in large metropolitan

areas. It is, thus, no political ae-

cident that the California Assem- |

bly has four Negro members

while the Senate has none. And

' it is no political accident that

civil rights measures have had

their. greatest difficulty in the

state Senate.

Unless opposition te the Dirk-

sen Amendment and all other

efforts to overturn the principle

of one man, one vote is quickly

organized, we may witness the

simultaneous enfranchisement of

-Continued on Page 4

Bill or Attainder

Brief in

CLU Files

Brown Case

The American Civil Liberties Union appealed to the

Supreme Court on March 25 to strike down a controversial

law that bars members of the Communist Party from serv-

ing as officers of a labor union.

The ease involves Archie Brown, who served as a mem-

ber of the 35-man Executive

Board of Local 10 of the Inter-

national Longshoremen's and

Warehousemen's Union in San

Francisco. Brown, 43, and an

avowed waterfront Communist,

was sentenced in 1962 to a six-

month jail term for violating the

Labor Management Reporting

and Disclosure Act of 1959, more

commonly known as the Lan-

drum-Griffin Act. It provides a

maximum penalty of one year

imprisonment, a $10,000 fine or

both.

Brown's conviction was over-

turned by the U. S. Court of Ap-

peals in San Francisco on the

grounds that the act `must be

held to conflict with the First

and Fifth Amendments of the U.

S. Constitution." The U. S. Jus-

tice Department took the case to

the Supreme Court.

Bill of Attainder

In a friend-of-the-court. brief,

the ACLU and its affiliate, the

ACLU of Northern California,

argued that the penalty against

Brown should be nullified on the

grounds that `the statute seeks

to partition off from a small mi-

nority the full guarantee of free-

dom of speech and association,

the suarantee that liberty will

not be taken without due process

of law, and seeks to put mem-

bers of the group under the

sweep of a bill of attainder."

The brief. held that the law is

based on a doctrine announced

in .a 1950 Supreme Court case,

American Communications Asso-

-ciation v. Douds, long since un-

dermined in other cases, which

established a principle barring -

all Communists from all union

offices or positions on evidence

that some Communists have used

union office to promote political

strikes.

Douds Doctrine Attacked

"Tt subjects respondent to pen-

alties which can be justified

only if he is a man whose pro-

pensity for indulging im political

strikes, ov his intention to do so,

makes him a person whose offi-

eership in a labor union would

be too dangerous to be tolerated

. heither this premise nor the

blanket assertion from which it

was derived, has been proved in

any proceeding to which he was

a party... Fortunately, since

1950 the Douds principle that

Communist Party members may

be treated as fungibles has been

departed in case after case ...

the process of reasoning legiti-

mated in Douds threatens the

gravest dangers, not only to First

Amendment guarantees, but to

American standards of justice

... yet it continues to be very in-

fluential and is likely to remain

so until Douds is overruled," the

ACLU argued.

Legislative Findings

The brief contended that

Brown was punished without a

judicial trial and that the law

"is a bill of attainder on its face

and as applied in this case ...

respondent's trial did not take

place in the Court but on the

floor of Congress. The legislative

branch has the power to pro-

hibit persons loyal to another

government from serving as un-

ion officers, and it has the power

to prohibit persons who advo-

eate or conspire to advocate po-

litical strikes from serving as

union officers; but when Con-

gress makes it indisputable that

each and every member of the

`sow bug...

Communist Party will disloyally

advocate political strikes and

thus may not be union officers,

that is a legislative finding of

guilt. That is the punishment;

that is the attaint without trial,

without judicially screened evi-

dence."

The ACLU warned that if the

law were constitutional, "it

would be consistent to hold that

Communist Party members ean

be punished for speaking at un-

ion meetings for fear that they

will incite political strikes."

The brief was prepared by

Marshall W. Krause and Laurent

B, Frantz, attorneys for the

ACLU of Northern California,

and Melvin L. Wulf, ACLU legal

director.

Chancellor

Bans `Spider'

As Unsuitable

Spider Magazine was banned

from the University of California

campus in Berkeley last month

because of its use of four-letter

words. Chancellor Martin Meyer-

son's action seemed to violate

the pronouncement of the Aca-

demic Senate that the content of

speech should not be regulated

on the campus,

Inappropriate

Subsequently, the Chancellor

took the position that freedom of

speech was not the issue. "It is

`a matter of the appropriate time,

place and manner of expression,

on a university campus that is

the issue. These publications

may, perhaps, be sold in book-

stores which offer for sale many

books, magazines, and pamphlets.

It does not follow that these pub-

lieations are suitable for public

sale or distribution in a plaza of

our University. In the same way,

some language that may be ap-

propriate in some private set-

tings is not by that token suit-

able for public expression in.a

plaza on our campus."

Published Off-Campus

The publication is apparently

owned by .a non-student, Steve

DeCanio and is published in Oak-

land. There are both student and

non-student contributors. It sells

for 25cent and sales of the last is-

sue should result in'a neat profit

for the publisher.

Net a Black Widow

Hadley Roff of the San Fran-

cisco News-Call- Bulletin de-

scribes Spider magazine as

"pretty much garden variety.

Like most spiders, it's mistaken

for a black widow. Actually, how-

ever, it's about as sinister as a

. Each edition offers

a loose collection of essays, po-

ems and reviews. Occasionally a

four letter word is used with that

breathless naughtiness children

enjoy. The old-line campus hu-

mor magizines - Pelican at UC

and Chaparral at Stanford - are

usually better written and, for

that matter, quite frequently are

dirtier."

Not Legally Obscene

The ACLU examined the issue

of Spider that was creating all

the fuss and ecouldn't find any

substantial basis for anyone say-

ing it was legally obscene. Ala-

meda county District Attorney

sent of the nominee."

Your Board Nominations, Please!

With respect to the annual election of the Board of Directors of the ACLUNC, the

By-Laws provide that, "Every year, the April issue of the A.C.L.U. NEWS shall carry

an invitation to the Union's membership to suggest names to the nominating commit-

tee, and such names must reach the Union office not later than April 30 in. order

to receive. consideration. The nominating committee shall consider such suggestions

but shall not make any nominations until after April 30." The Board has a maximum

membership of 30 members who are eligible to serve two consecutive full three-year

terms, after which they become ineligible for one year. The terms of the 30 board

members are staggered so that ten terms expire each year..

There are presently two vacancies on the Board, one in the Class of 1966 arising

from the resignation of Prof. Arthur Bierman of San Francisco State College, who is

now in Europe on sabbatical leave. The other vacancy arises from the death of Dr.

Alexander Meiklejohn and is in the Class of 1967.

Since last December, attorney Howard Jewel of Oakland has filled a term expiring

October 31, 1965. He is now eligible for election to a full term of three years.

Also eligible for re-election are former Board chairman Rabbi Alvin I. Fine, Mrs.

Zora Cheever Gress of San Francisco, Prof. Seaton W. Manning of San Francisco, and

attorney Richard J. Werthimer of San Francisco. The foregoing board members have

each served complete three-year terms. |

The remaining five members of the Class of 1965 whose terms expire October 31,

are all ineligible for re-election. They are Chairman Howard A. Friedman, San Fran-

cisco, architect; Vice-Chairman Harry B. Scholefield, minister of the First Unitarian

Church of San Francisco; Treasurer John M. Fowle of Los Altos Hills, consulting engi-

neer; the Rey. F. Danford Lion, minister of the Palo Alto Unitarian Church; and Mrs.

Martin Steiner, San Francisco attorney.

' The By-Laws also provide that, ``In addition to the foregoing method of proposing

names to the Nominating Committee, members may make nominations directly to the

Board of Directors in the following manner: Not later than August 1 of each year,

nominations may be submitted by the membership directly to the Board of Directors,

provided each nomination be supported by the signatures of 15 or more members in

good standing to be sccompanicd by a summary of qualifications and the written con-

Please send your suggestions for Board members to the ACLU, 503 Market Street,

San Francisco 5, California, giving as. much biographical information about your can-

didate as possible, In making your suggestions, please bear in mind that Board members

must be ready to defend the civil liberties of ALL persons without distinction; that they

are expected to attend noon meetings in San Francisco the second Thursday of each

month except August, besides serving on committees, and, of course, they must be

members of the ACLUNC.

The nominating committee, to be appointed by Chairman Howard A. Friedman on

April 8, will be composed of two Board and three non-Board members.

Selective Executions

Based on Race

The Florida affiliate of the

American Civil Liberties Union

has just completed a remarkable

study of the race of persons ex-

ecuted for rape in 19 southern

and border states between 1930

and 1963. During this period 449

men were executed for rape. Of

these, 45 were white, 402 were

Negro and two were Indians.

Florida Statisties

In the State of Florida be-

tween January 1, 1940 and De-

cember 31, 1964, 54 men were

sentenced to death following con-

viction for the crime of rape. Six

of these men were white the

balance were Negro. Of the six

white men four were eonvicted

of rape involving a child and two

of rape involving a white adult.

Of these six whites sentenced to

death in Florida, only one was

~ executed, the others had their

sentences commuted. Of the 48

Negroes sentenced to death for -

the crime of rape in Florida 29

have already died; 12 are await-

ing execution in the Florida

State penitentiary. Four Negroes

had their sentences reversed by

the Supreme Court of Florida

and only two Negroes have had

their death sentences commuted.

Selective Application

These statistics would seem to

prove beyond doubt that the

death penalty has been selec-

tively applied in Florida to show

a discrimination based on race

which would be unconstitutional

under the 14th Amendment. How-

Frank Coakley agreed that the

Magazine was "not in violation

of the State law on obscenity."

The U.C. ban on the particular

issue of Spider continues until

March 31. The next issue of

Spider is due on April 1.

Regulating Content

While the University may cer-

tainly regulate the sale of com-

mercial matter on the campus,

requiring that it be sold through

its book store,

Senate pronouncement against

regulating the content of speech

is to be meaningful, certainly no

publication should be banned be-

cause it is "not suitable."

if the Academic

ever, the Florida Supreme Court

has characterized these statistics

as inconclusive. Now the ACLU

study has made a painstaking in-

vestigation of every conviction

for the erime of rape in the State

of Florida. The study shows that

Negroes account for 54% of the

convictions and 96% of the ex-

ecutions. No white man has ever

been sentenced to death for the

rape of a Negro woman. 442% of

Negro men convicted of rape of

Negroes have been sentenced to

death; 54% of Negro men con-

victed of rape of white females

have been sentenced to death.

Conclusions of Study

The Florida study concludes:

"Had the legislature adopted a

statute that the death penalty is

to be imposed only on Negroes

convicted of the rape of white

women, its unconstitutionality

would be clear. The truth is that

without the benefit of statute the

same result is being reached

through the combined discretion

of juries and the pardon board.

The sad conclusion is inescap-

able - the death penalty is de-

liberately utilized by the State of

Florida as a device to punish in-

terracial sexual attacks by Ne-

groes."

Supreme Court

Construes |

`Objector' Law

Continued from Page 1-

al God. The new test for those

who wish to claim a_ conscien-

tious objector status is whether

there is a "sincere and meaning-

ful belief which occupies in the

life of its possessor a place par-

allel to that filled by the ertho-

dox belief in God of one who

clearly qualifies." It thus appears

that anyone who has pacifist

views and can support these

views by showing that he sin-

cerely believes in them and puts

them on the same plane as a per-

son who holds an orthodox be-

lief in God places his belief, can

claim a conscientious objector

status,

`well as prophylactics,

Prophylactics

Seized By S.F.

Customs Service

The Customs Service in San

Francisco has seized as contra-

band a package of prophylacties

on the ground that under Sec.

|

305 of the Tariff Act of 1930 they ~~"

are "obscene or immoral" and,

therefore, subject to forfeiture

and destruction. ;

When the ACLU sought an ex-

planation of the seizure from the

Customs Service it was informed

that "Since articles of this nature

may be used as contraceptives as

the in-

tended use would be the control-

ling factor in determining wheth-

er or not they are prohibited un-

der section 305.

Fancy Containers

"Fixamination of the package's

contents," the letter went on to

Say,

packed in extraordinarily faney

containers and were multicoler-

ed, in contra-distinction to the

usual packages of uncolored

types which we beiieve are gen-

erally imported for sale in drug

stores as `prophylactics'.

"In addition, the literature

contained in this parcel stated

they were effective for use fer

birth control... ." The letter con-

cluded by declaring that the ar-

ticles will be released to the ad-

dressee, if he can "satisfy this

office that these articles.are in-_

tended for use as prophylactics."

Due Process Issue

For many years the ACLU

maintained that state and federal

laws which interfered with the

dissemination of birth control in-

formation impaired the freedom

of speech and information pro-

tected by the First Amendment.

Subsequently, the national ACLU.

yoard re-evaluated its policy and

concluded in addition that any

- prohibition against the prescrip-

tion, sale or use of birth control

articles was a serious abridg-

ment of the due process clauses

of the Fifth and Fourteenth

Amendments.

The matter will be considered

by the ACLUNC branch board

at its April 8 meeting.

ACLU NEWS

APRIL, 1965

"reveals that they were all.

Page 3

"That Word" At U.C.

Following is the complete statement delivered by Prof.

Mark Schorer of the U.C. English Department on March 5,

1965 at a student rally which discussed the flaunting of 4-

letter words on the campus:

I was once a witness for Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer

in a Boston court. It happened

that, during the war, I served

in a civilian capacity with the

Coast Guard, most of my duties

being in the Boston Harbor. In

the court hearing, the judge

asked me if "the word beginning

with F," as we somewhat labor-

iously referred to the word that

has so exercised some of you in

the past few days, was common-

ly used by the men I knew. I

replied that it was not commonly

used by my colleagues in Har-

-vard University but that, in its

adverbial form, it seemed to be

the most frequently used word

in the vocabulary of my Coast

Guard companions, and that it

had about as much force as the

adverb very in such statements

as "I am very hungry" or "I am

very tired." All right. You are

not Coast Guardsmen. You are

students in the University of Cal-

ifornia.

Lawrence's Novel

As many of you know, I am

not unfamiliar with D. H. Law-

rence's novel, Lady Chatterley's

Lover, or, for that matter, the

complete works of D, H. Law-

rence, a writer for whom I have

the highest regard. I have argued

in print that the language that

Lawrence felt obligated to use in

Lady Chatterley's Lover was inte-

gral to a conscious aesthetic and

even moral intention. Critics of

much more formidable reputation

than I have argued the contrary. I

am thinking, for example, of F.

R. Leavis, a Lawrence enthusiast

too but one who believes that

Lawrence's attempt in Lady

Chatterley's Lover and his use of

the language that seemed to Law-

rence essential to that attempt

Was a serious mistake from

either an aesthetic or a moral

point of view. Be that as it may,

I regret a little that Lawrence's

novel has been brought into the

present social context on this

campus, The general protest, the

attempt to force into public use

_a word that plenty of us use in

private but do not generally use

in public, does seem to me mis-

taken. I would even go so far as

to say that it is silly. Insofar as

it is to be associated with the

atmosphere engendered by the

FSM, it can only do a disservice

to what is serious and to be ap-

plauded in that effort. This lat-

est protest seems to me to fit in-

to what has been called `the

panty-raid sex, and beer" divi-

sion.

The Klein Incident

As for Michael Klein's reading

aloud from Lady Chatterley's

Lover yesterday - if the young

man was trying to make a legal

point, namely, that this language

as it was used by D. H. Lawrence

had been declared uncensorable

by the courts, he should have

taken at least two further facts

into consideration. One is that

the language must be considered

in its total context, not out of it.

The other is that if this language .

appears in a- book, one can

choose to read it or not to read

it. This seems to me quite dif-

ferent. from having that lan-

guage or a single word from

that language thrust upon one's

attention in a public place. I do

think that the whole business is

ACLU NEWS

APRIL, 1965

Page 4

unworthy of serious students and

that it is going to make it more

difficult for the faculty to pro-

tect what are your serious inter-

ests than would otherwise be the

case.

Legal Problems

The whole matter does not

really exist even on the cloudy

edges of legal problems of cen-

sorship and obscenity. Those

problems are enormously com-

plicated and very delicate. Legal

language in the United States is

not yet sufficiently well defined

to meet those problems clearly.

As we have seen in the past

two years, one court will con-

demn a Tropic of Cancer as ob-- -

scene and another, basing its de-

cision on the very same language,

will declare it not obscene. The

law does not clearly recognize

the fact-although the famous

decision of Judge Woolsey in the

Ulysses case certainly implies it

-t hat erotic elements

through history have a central

part in literature and _ other

forms of art. That some people,

without being degenerates, can

be erotically stimulated by works

of art has never, to my knowl-

edge, been acknowledged either.

The relation between reading

and conduct, if there is any, has

never really been studied. There

is much else that remains to be

clearly stated in the law.

Reading and Social Conduct

Yet I insist that there is a dif-

ference between reading and so-

cial conduct. One is a matter of

private edification or indulgence;

the other can easily become a

public nuisance. There is a cru-

cial difference between choos-

ing to read what may be distaste-

ful to others and imposing what

is distasteful on others.

Arrests Unfortunate

As for yesterday's arrests -

these were in a way unfortunate.

That laws of this state were be-

ing violated is not in question.

They were. That the arrests in

any way violated civil rights is

not in question either. They did

not. Yet the arrests do seem to

me to have called attention to

what is really nonsense, and, as

a result, made much more of the

matter than it deserves. Our at-

tention has been distracted from

what is your only really serious

concern-your right to the very

best education that we are

capable of developing in this

University. I wish, therefore,

that the harmless bit of exhibi-

tionism (and I do not know what

else to call it), that initiated

yesterday's turmoil had been ig-

nored. As a friend of mine said,

"It's as if you arrested those her-

mits who go around with signs

- saying `Tomorrow the world will

end.'"? The world will not end

over the present issue, but your

most serious interests may be

impaired by it. I beg you not to

let that happen.

"Point of Order"

The Management of the Surf

Theatre changed its scheduling

of "Point of Order" (the -excel-

lent film about the Army-Mc-

Carthy hearings) and it will now

be exhibited from April 2-8. The

Surf Theatre is located at 4510

Irving St., San Francisco.

all -

Prohibition on

Pay-TV to Be

Challenged

The national board of the

American Civil Liberties Union

gave its full endorsement last

month to the system of pay tele-

vision as a means of increasing

diversity on the air.

Revising a 1955 position which

conditionally supported pay - TV

as an experiment provided that

safeguards were attached, the

Union's Board of Directors said:

"Licenses to broadcast should -

be judged in terms of the public

interest, convenience and neces-

sity. And since the ACLU be-

lieves diversity is an essential

element in this field, we resolve

that one way of promoting such

diversity is to remove all re-

strictions on pay-TV other than

those falling within the frame-

work of existing laws governing

radio-TV communication."

Support California Case

Emphasizing the need for new

forms of communication to be

given an opportunity to develop,

the civil liberties group said it

would support efforts in Califor-

nia to void a recent state-wide

referendum in which the voters

outlawed pay television. The

ACLU Board said it would back

the move announced by its affili-

ate, the ACLU of Southern Cali-

fornia, to enjoin enforcement of

Proposition 15, on the grounds

that the outlawing of pay-TV

abridges rights protested by the

First Amendment - "the right

of the public to listen to TV pro-

grams of their choice' - and

the Fifth Amendment's due proc-

ess guarantees Internation-

al Telemeter Corporation, a sub-

sidiary of Paramount Pictures

Corporation, has also brought suit

in the Superior Court or Sacra-

mento against the state of Cali-

fornia. The suit challenges the

constitutionality of Proposition

15 as abridging freedom of

speech and expression under

both the federal and state con-

stitution. ACLUNC will inter-

vene in that suit.

1955 Position

The Union's 1955 position,

while stating that pay-TV might

increase diversity, expressed con-

cern that pay-TV plans then an-

nounced might weaken the First

Amendment interest in increas-

ing information and opinion on

the air offered these safeguards:

"1) that there be no sponsors of

pay-TV programs; 2) that pay-TV

should not be allowed in any city

unless there are at least two

other free channels broadcasting;

3) the experiment-should be lim-

ited in time, whatever period is

agreed upon; and 4 pay-TV pro-

grammers must give ample guar-

antees that the program content

will add something not now avail-

able, if asked by the FCC."

Reasons for Change

The new ACLU policy strikes

out these conditions. The first

two were eliminated on the

ground they do not foster civil

liberties and indeed might limit

the right of competition among

different franchises and thus re-

duce diversity. The third was

deleted because it referred to an

experimental time period where-

as pay-TV is no longer in the

experimental stage. The fourth

condition was dropped as dis-

criminatory because no other

television system must give such

special guarantees. In this con-

nection the ACLU pointed out

that pay-TV programming should

be evaluated in the same manner

as free television, in that a sta-

tion's over-all performance should.

be reviewed by the Federal Com-

munications Commission to de-

termine if it was serving the pub-

lic interest, convenience and ne-

cessity.

Reapportionment Big

Issue in Legislature

Continued from Page 2-

the Negro and the debasement of

his vote.

An analysis of the Dirksen

Amendment can be obtained by

writing the Sacramento office of

the ACLU, 920 Forum Building,

Sacramento, California.

Obscenity Issues

Even apart from reapportion-

ment, the Sacramento ACLU of-

fice is heavily involved with doz-

ens of bills of actual or potential

civil liberties import. Two free

speech areas-obscenity and the

`rights of students-have been

the target of dozens of repres-

sive measures. April 20th has

been set as the hearing date be-

fore the Assembly Criminal Pro-

cedure Committee for seven bills

which would significantly alter

the free speech protections in

the California law of obscenity.

The City of Los Angeles is

backing a measure (AB 87) au-

thored by Assemblyman Howard

Thelin (R.,. Glendale) which

would, broadly speaking, make it

a crime to knowingly or _ negli-

gently distribute "morally cor-

ruptive" matter to persons under

the age of eighteen. Parents and

librarians are made exempt from

the law. An even more far-reach-

ing measure (AB 8) was intro-

duced by Assemblyman Richard ~

Donovan (R., San Diego). It

would not only criminally pun-

ish any person who "wilfully"

distributed "indecent matter' to

a person under the age of

eighteen but any person `who

permits a minor... to enter and

remain in any place under (his)

control in which such matter is

on display .. ." The mere pos-

sibility of such matter by a per-

son. under eighteen mend be

made a crime.

Protection for Art Removed

Most of the other measures

(AB 207, 1278, 1312, 1313) would

remove or alter the protection for

art and literature given in the

existing obscenity law by delet-

ing the requirement that ob-

scene matter be "utterly with-

out redeeming social impor-

tance." The last measure set for

hearing (AB 1277, also by The-

lin) would establish a special

civil proceeding for determining

the "obscenity" of a given work.

It would completely circumvent

the procedural safeguards of the

criminal process by, for example,

allowing a jury determination of

obscenity by a three-fourths vote

and by making such a finding

conclusive in any future prose-

cution of the same work. in the

county of determination. A de-

tailed analysis of these bills can

be obtained by writing to the-

Sacramento office.

Sit-in Demonstrations

The free speech controversy at

the University of California has

spawned a plethora of bills aimed

at curbing sit-in demonstrations.

Sen. Schrade (R. San Diego) has

introduced measures calling for:

the expulsion of students convict-

ed as a result of the free-speegh

activities (SCR 7), discharge `of

faculty members who "partici-

pated in the ... activities" (SCR

faculty and students by the legis-

lature (SCA 1), and discharge

and expulsion of participating

faculty and students (SCA 2).

Perhaps the most inventive -re-

striction is the one proposed by

Assemblyman George Willson

(D. Los Angeles). He would, via

AB 252, make it a crime for any

"person ,.. (to) loiter about any

school, including one in which

adult pupils are in attendance

... Not even students are ex-

empted..

Civil Rights Legislation

The reapportionment contro-

versy and the passage of Propo-

sition 14 have cast a negative

spell over civil rights legislation.

Although the Governor, in his

opening message to the legisla-

ture, pledged his "administra-

tion's continued and unrelenting

effort to expand and protect

(equal) rights," little constuc-

tive civil rights legislation has

been proposed or introduced.

One of the few significant bills

to date is AB 4 (John Burton, D.,

San Francisco), which requires

the suspension or revocation of

certain state licensees, including

real estate licensees, for a wilful

violation of the Unruh Civil

Rights Act. It is accorded little

chance of passage. Perhaps this

session marks a turning point in

the history of civil rights. The

diminution of efforts to strength-

en fair housing and fair employ-

ment legislation may simply

mark the shift in the battle for

civil rights to the field of voting.

Only the passage of an amend-

ment overturning the principle

of one man, one vote, will curb

that battle.

Sacramento

Legislative

Office

An ACLU legislative office,

representing both the Northern

and Southern California branches

of the ACLU, is located in the

Forum Bldg., Room 920, 1107

9th St., Sacramento, Calif. Office

hours are 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. Visi-

tors are welcome.

`This is the first time in many

years that the ACLUNC has en-

gaged in any State legislative

program, and the present joint:

venture with the Southern Cali-

fornia branch is on a limited and

experimental basis. Attorney.

Richard J. Werthimer heads the

Northern California branch Leg-

islative Committee. Staff serv-

ices are provided by the Assist-

ant Director, Burnett Britton.

Incidentally, copies of bills

mentioned in this issue of the

NEWS may be obtained by writ-

ing to the Legislative Bill Room,

State Capitol, Sacramento, Calif..

The first right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible

AMERICAN CIVIL

JOIN "TODAY

LIBERTIES UNION

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron Membership

Sustaining Membership ....

Business and Professional Membership . De ee es

Family Membership ......

Associate Membership = ...2.. 63. ee

Annual Membership

Student Membership

oe 6 ee 8 eo (c)

oe e ee Ce Hoe Oe

pel P ee ee 8100

50

25

14

10

ACLU News Subscription Sea tid es Sas 200

NAME.

ADDRESS.....

TELEPHONE NUMBER...

F

ee eee eeeeeeoeFeeeeeH7e7F9R 2H FOF BO e

eeoee ee eoeeeeeereHeeeeerevreeeoeeeeeerese (c) eee.

ee AMT. ENCLOSED.

503 Market tres

S

eoveceee

eoeeeoeeeeeeeree eee eee

eoeeecooee