vol. 35, no. 1
Primary tabs
American
- Civil Liberties
Union
Volume XXXV
SAN FRANCISCO, JANUARY, 1970. . .
Celebrities and Champagne
(Phone 433-2750.)
Gala Evening To Save
CLU Legislative Program
In an effort to raise funds to continue the legislative ac-
tivity in Sacramento and place it on a secure financial footing,
the ACLU of Northern California plans a gala evening, includ-
ing a gourmet buffet and champagne, to be held on January
26, 1970, at the elegant Le Vivoir Restaurant, at the Casa Ma-
drona Hotel in Sausalito. The affair will begin at 7:00 P.M.
There is sufficient parking in the lot on Bridgeway, with ac-
cess to the restaurant by the stairs immediately opposite.
The contribution to ACLUNC will be $100 a couple, tax
deductible, of course. Although a number of movie stars, writ-
ers, legislators, and other notables have promised to be in
attendance, we hesitate to list their names now, before con-
firming the complete list of celebrities. Many other ACLU af-
filiates have been successful with this sort of affair, and hope-
fully this evening will not only provide funds for our legis-
lative program but be one to remember. For tickets, please
contact the ACLU office, 503 Market St.,
San Francisco.
Invasion of Privacy
ACLU Attacks
State Welfare
ComputerSystem
In the spring of 1968, the State Department of Social
Welfare inaugurated a system for the storage of data in a
computer. It required its social workers to code forms on
each client's name, social] security number, and clinical his-
tory - including such sensitive items as past 0x00B0 psychiatric
diagnosis, family surroundings,
likelihood of future welfare
needs, alcohol and drug prob-
lems.
Invasion of Privacy
Many social workers objected
to this, claiming that the inclu-
sion of the client's name and
social security number linked
with a medical diagnosis was not
only unnecessary but also facili-
tated access to this very private
data by outside agencies and in-
Susanne Savio
Granted
Credential
Mario Savio's wife Susanne ap-
plied for a teaching credential
undtr a double handicap. One
was her husband's reputation;
the other was the fact that she
was twice convicted of misde-
meanors.
Mrs. Savio's first conviction
was for her peaceful participa-
tion in the first Sproul] Hall sit-
in in 1964, The second was a dis-
turbing the peace conviction aris-
ing out of an incident at Santa
Rita in 1967 when Mrs. Savio
was visiting her imprisoned hus-
band. A guard-later disciplined
for brutality during the People's
Park crisis-arbitrarily cut short
Mrs. Savio's visit and arrested
her during the ensuing argu-
ment. Not confident of a fair
trial in the local courts, she
pleaded nolo contendere (no con-
test). 8
The Committee of Credentials
first delayed her application for
nine months, then notified her
that the Board of Education had
tentatively denied her applica-
tion. After a hearing in Decem-
ber at which Mrs. Savio was rep-
resented by ACLUNC Assistant
Staff Counsel Charles Marson,
who claimed that Mrs. Savio's
arrest record was irrelevant to
her fitness to teach and an im-
permissable ground for denial
of a credential, the Committee
voted to grant her application.
dividuals, such as police and pri-
vate interests. Moreover, the De-
partment repeatedly refused to
- state who would be authorized to
use the data, and insisted that
the social workers rely on their
superiors' good intentions.
Two Workers Suspended
This satisfied very few, and as
the dispute dragged on, Mrs.
Josephine Belmont and Mrs.
Glenda Pawsey, both psychiatric
social workers in the San Fran-
cisco office, refused to fill out
the required forms on the
the grounds that to do so would
be a violation of professional
_ethics and an intrusion into the
constitutional rights of privacy
of their clients. Each was sus-
pended for a week without pay.
Clients' Rights Violated
ACLUNC agreed to represent
the two in appealing their sus-
pension, on the ground that the
storage of confidential data in a
computer data system without
rigorous limitation on both au-
thorized and unauthorized access
is a violation of the welfare cli-
ents' constitutional right to pri-
vacy, and that disobedience of
an order to cooperate in such a
violation cannot be grounds for
punishing a public employee. At.
a hearing before a hearing offi-
cer of the State Personnel Board
in September, ACLUNC Assis-
tant Staff Counsel Charles Mar-
son advanced that proposition of
law and made a formal offer to
prove the inadequacies of the
Department's computer system.
The Attorney General, in order
to test the legal theory, objected
to the evidence as irrelevant.
Proceedings are now suspended
while the hearing officer re-
ceives argument on and decides
the admissability of the evi-
dence.
Department Retreats
In the meantime, the Depart-
ment of Social Welfare has, in
the face of constant criticism
from its employees, retreated
from its earlier position and ten-
tatively announced that jt will
No. 1
Conviction Of
Draft Card
Burner Upheld |
The Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit has affirmed the
conviction of Jack Peet for re-
fusing induction and for burn-
ing his Notice of Classification.
Peet was represented at trial
and on appeal by ACLUNC,
What Is a "Certificate?"
Attacking the conviction for
burning his Notice of Classifi-
cation, ACLUNC argued that a
Notice of Classification is not a
"certificate" within the mean-
ing of the statute prohibiting
the destruction of Registration
Certificates or other Selective
Service certificates, and if it is,
the law is an unconstitutional
abridgment of freedom of
speech. The court's opinion
simply held that the Notice was
a certificate, and that prohibit-
ing its destruction is permissi-
ble. The Court also held that
several delays of the case by the
prosecution did not amount to a
denial of a speedy trial because
no prejudice appeared to re-
sult, .
Induction Declined
Then, since Peet was _ sen-
tenced concurrently on the two
counts, the court held that it
did not have to decide the cor-
rectness of the conviction for re-
fusing induction. ACLUNC had
argued that since Peet was
ejected from the physical exam-
ination for refusal to surrender
some leaflets opposing the war
and then inducted as a delin-
quent because he "failed to co-
operate" at the physical, the in-
duction not oniy suffered the
due process defects of a puni-
tive induction but was a direct
violation of the First Amendment.
U.S. Supreme Court
ACLU Seeks
Strike Down F:
Anti-Riot La
The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern Cali-
fornia, together with the National ACLU, contending that
there is a constitutional right to be an "outside agitator",
has filed a brief urging the United States Supreme Court,
to hold the 1968 federal anti-riot law unconstitutional.
Chicago Seven Law
The law, under which the Chi-
cago Seven (the Chicago Eight
minus Black Panther Chairman
Bobby Seale) are currently be-
ing tried, is being challenged by
Larry Carter, Fred Crawford and
Steve Shead, Bay Area Panthers,
who have been held in contempt
of court for refusing to give tes-
timony allegedly relevant to en-
forcement of the anti-riot law to
the Federal Grand Jury sitting
in San Francisco. Federal Dis-
trict Judge Oliver Carter held
the law constitutional.
Ruling Refused
The United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
upheld the contempt citations
but declined to pass on the con-
stitutionality of the law,. ruling
that witnesses before a grand
jury, as distinguished from crim-
inal defendants, cannot challenge
the constitutionality of an Act of
Congress.
ACLU Contentions
The ACLUNC-ACLU brief
contends that the federal anti-
riot law "promises to be the sin-
gle most potent weapon in the
arsenal reserved against those
who dissent," and that the anti-
riot law, which prohibits the use
of interstate facilities with the
"intent to incite to riot' is so
broad that it would include with-
in its sweep a situation in which
"the Secretary of State crosses
Shoultz and Hamilton
U. S. Supreme Court Denies
Review In Two Cases
The United States Supreme Court has declined to exercise
its jurisdiction in two ACLUNC cases.
The cases are Shoultz v. Laird and Hamilton, et al, v.
Municipal Court for the Berkeley-Albany Judicial District.
The Shoultz case involved a security clearance holder
who refused to answer questions
at an "interview" held; before a
Department of Defense investi-
gator. The regulation under
which the interview occurred
provided for no due process
guarantees, such as notification
of charges or the right to con-
front accusers, but did provide
that the failure, on any grounds
to answer questions could result
in the revocation of the security
clearance.
Due Process Issue
Shoultz declined to answer the
questions on the ground that the
regulation violated due process
of law and his security clearance
was revoked but reinstated when
Federal District Judge Robert
Peckham found that the proce-
dure was unauthorized by Con-
gress. The United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
reversed Judge Peckham and the
Supreme Court of the United
States, Justices Black and Doug-
change its data processing sys-
tem to satisfy most of the objec-
tions, including deleting clients'
names and social security num-
bers.
Test Case
The problem of "computer pri-
vacy," as it is known, has never
been the subject of court de-
cisions, and this case may be the
first ever to raise the issue in
a constitutional context. The
case will doubtless be finally
decided by the higher courts,
las dissenting, has refused to re-
view that decision.
Hamilton Case
The Hamilton case challenged
the constitutionality of a "gag
rule" issued by Berkeley Munici-
pal Court Judge George Brunn
which prohibited defendants in a
criminal action (arising from a
University sit-in) from making
any public statements about
their case or issues likely to
arise in the trial of their case.
The California Court of Appeal,
in a 2 to 1 decision, upheld the
constitutionality of the gag rule.
First the Supreme Court of Cali-
fornia, Justice Peters dissenting,
and now the United States Su-
preme Court have refused to re-
view that decision. It is not
known at this time whether any
U.S. Supreme Court Justices ex-
pressed a desire to review the
case. =
Silence Through Charges
The issue posed by the Hamil-
ton case, according to staff coun-
sel Paul Halvonik, is one which
the United States Supreme Court
will eventually have to consider.
The Hamilton case was one of
two cases raising the issue be-
fore the court this term. (The
court declined to review the oth-
er case on the same day as its
decision in Hamilton). As things
now stand the government may
silence someone by the simple
expedient of bringing criminal
charges against him.
a state line to keep a speaking
engagement to defend our policy
in Vietnam, knowing that a
group intended to conduct a ri-
otous demonstration if he ap-
peared." Conceding that the Sec-
retary of State is in no real dan-
ger of arrest, the ACLU asks the
question, "But what of the civil
rights leader who goes into a
community knowing that pas-
sions are inflamed and who yet
speaks in the face of a hostile
mob? If the mob resorts to vio-
lence against him, cannot it be
said that he `instigated a riot?'"
Protected Activities
The brief insists that the
Panthers can challenge the con-
stitutionality of the law because
they have a constitutional right
to refuse to answer questions
about their First Amendment
protected activities.
ACLUNC-ACLU filed its brief
in support of a petition present-
ed to the United States Supreme
Court by the Panthers' attorney,
Allan Brotsky of San Francisco.
Fund-Raiser
Luxury San
Francisco
Bay Cruise
The drawing of the two win-
ning tickets for the Bay Cruise
aboard the luxury 90 foot
schooner "Makrele' wil] take
place at the meeting of the
Branch Board of Directors, noon,
Thursday, January 8, at the Ur-
ban Center, St. Mark's Lutheran
Church, 1101 O'Farrell Street,
San Francisco.
Cruise Date
The cruise on the "Makrele" a
Diesel-powered Baltic schooner
will take place either the week-
end of January 24 or January 31,
depending on the weather.
Winners will be guests of the
owners of the `"Makrele,"' Mr.
and Mrs. Paul Ammen and will
decide with them where to sail
and where to dock for the night.
The Ammeng will act as crew
and provide all meals and bever-
ages,
Tickets Stil] Available
Tickets, at $10 each-and tax
deductible, are still available
and may be requested from the
Office at 503 Market Street, San
Francisco. Stubs must be in the
Office no later than 10 a.m.
Thursday, January 8. At noon
that day there will be two draw-
ings. The holder of the win-
ning ticket from the first draw-
ing will (1) obtain two accom-
modations on the "Makrele" and
(2) be entitled to invite another
couple. The holder of the win-
ning ticket in the second draw-
ing will get the two remaining
accommodations.
Purpose of Cruise
The reason for the Ammens'
generosity is their concern for
ACLUNC's current financial
crisis and fear that it will have
to toss overboard some staple
items in its program in order
to stay afloat. Similarly con-
cerned ACLUers may wish to
take pleasant advantage of the
opportunity to help-but they
will have to hurry!
_Three Judge Fed. Court
Test Ban On.
Leafletting On
H.S. Campuses
A three-judge federal court, composed of District Court
Judges Robert Peckham and Alfonso Zirpoli and a judge
from the United States Court of Appeals, has been convened
to hear a challenge to the constitutionality of California Edu-
cation Code sections 9012 and 9013.
Sec, 9012 provides that:
"No publication of a sec-
tarian, partisan, or denomi-
national character, shal] be
distributed, displayed, or
used for sectarian, partisan,
or denominational purposes
on school premises, but such
publications may be used in
school library collections
and for legitimate instruc-
tional purposes."
Propaganda Outlined
Sec. 9013 prohibits the distri-
bution on school premises of any
publication the purpose of which
is to "spread propaganda." It
further prohibits the distribu-
tion on school premises of any
' publication "or article of any
character, the purpose of which ~
is to foster membership in or
Subscription to the funds of any
organization not directly under
the control of the school authori-
ties" unless the organization is
"nonpartisan" and the governing
board of the schoo] district has
approved the distribution.
--~ Campbell High School
The suit was filed last spring
by Everett Rowe, a San Jose at-
torney, on behalf of his son who
had been denied permission by
the Campbell High School Dis-
trict to distribute an "unofficial"
newspaper dealing with school
activities. While the suit is pend-
ing the newspaper is being dis-
tributed pursuant to a restrain-
ing order issued by Judge Peck-
-ham,
ACLUNC staff counse] Paul
Halvonik is participating in the
suit as a friend-of-the-court in ~
support of Rowe. Pre-trial mat-
ters were disposed of last month
and Judge Peckham has an-
nounced that the three-judge
court hearing will likely occur
in January,
Precedents
In attacking sections 9012 and
9013 ACLUNC will rely heavily
on the United States Supreme
Court's decision of last February
in Tinker v. Des Moines High
School District and Judge Peck-
ham's decision in Olff v. East
Side Union High School District.
In Tinker, an Iowa ACLU case,
the Supreme Court held uncon-
stitutional a school regulation
prohibiting the wearing of
anti-war black armbands on a
high school campus, In doing so
the Court said:
In our system, state-operated
schools may not be enclaves
of totalitarianism, School of-
ficials do not possess abso-
lute authority over their stu-
dents. Students in schoo] as
well as out of school are
"persons" under our Consti-
tution, They are possessed
of fundamental rights which
the State must respect, just
as they themselves must re-
spect their obligations to the
State. In our system, stu-
dents may not be regarded
as closed-circuit recipients
of only that which the State
chooses to communicate.
They may not be confined
to the expression of those
sentiments that are officially
approved, In the absence of
a specific showing of consti-
tutionally valid reasons to
regulate their speech, stu-
dents are entitled to free-
dom of expression of their.
views.
Long Hair Case
In Olff, an ACLUNC case,
Judge Peckham held unconstitu-
tional 4 high school regulation
prohibiting long hair on male
students. In that case Judge
Peckham said:
The state in the case at bar
has no such rational ground
for dictating hair style to a
pupil in a general high
school as to support an of-
ficia] order interfering with
his liberty to express in his
own way his preference as
to whatever hair style com-
ports with his personality
and his search for his own
identity.
Vague Regulations
Federal Court Won't
Reinstate Dan Siegel
Federal District Judge William T. Sweigert has declined
to revise his decision refusing injunctive relief to Dan
Siegel, a Boalt Hall law school student who was elected
president of the Associated Students of the University of
California last spring, and who was prohibited from assum-
ing his duties this year be-
cause of University discipline
prohibiting him from participat-
ing in student activities. The dis-
cipline was meted out because of
Siegel's remark, "go down there
and take the (People's) Park,"
made to a rally held at the Uni-
versity on May 15, 1969. The Uni-
versity felt that Siegel had "in-
cited a riot" but punished Siegel
not under a narrowly drawn in-
-citement regulation but under
rules prohibiting such things as
"conduct which adversely effects
the student's suitability as a
member of the academic commu-
nity."
Regulations Attacked
Siegel brought suit in the Fed-
eral District Court challenging
the constitutionality of the Uni-
versity action and contending
that the regulations under which
ACLU NEWS
JANUARY, 1970
Page 2
he was disciplined were too
broad and vague to serve as stan-
dards for punishing an alleged
"incitement."
In October Judge Sweigert, in
a decision denying relief to Sie-
gel, found that his speech was
not First Amendment protected
because it was a "verbal act."
Siegels attorney, Doris Walker
of Oakland, asked Judge Swei-
gert to reconsider his decision
and staff counsel Paul Halvonik
filed a legal memorandum and.
appeared before Judge Sweigert
as a friend-of-the-court in sup-
port of that motion.
Further Appeal
After keeping the matter un-
der submission for a month,
Judge Sweigert has concluded
that his original decision was
correct and, accordingly, has de-
nied Siegel relief. Siegel will
appeal Judge Sweigert's ruling
to the United States Court of
Appeals, ACLUNC will continue
its amicus curiae support.
ACLU Attacks
Insanity Test in
Federal Court
An appeal has been filed in
the Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit on behalf of Bur-
ton Marks, who was convicted
last spring of burning his draft
card. Marks, who suffers from
hypertension and wanted to be
drafted but had twice failed the
physical exam, burned his card
in the offices of his local board
after taking LSD. He was not in-
ducted, and after more than nine-
teen months of mysterious delay,
he was finally indicted.
Law Institute Test
The brief filed on Marks' be-
half, written jointly by Paul Hal-
vonik and Charles Marson, ar-
gues that the Court should dis- -
card the ancient "right-wrong"'
test of criminal responsibility as
an inappropriate, inadequate,
and unjust criterion of criminal
insanity, and substitute a test
adopted in several circuits and
supported by the American Law
Institute, which incorporates
modern psychiatric knowledge
and emphasis volition as well as
cognition-that is, whether a de-
fendant was capable of acting
legally even if he knew his act
was wrong. The test is whether,
at the time of the act, (the de-
fendant) "as a result of mental
disease or defect," lacks substan-
tial capacity either to appreciate
the criminality of his: conduct or
to conform his conduct to the
requirements of law." Such a test
would benefit Marks, who, ac-
cording to psychiatric testimony |
at the trial, knew his act was
wrong but could not prevent
himself from doing it.
Speedy Trial Denied
In addition, the brief argues
that Marks was denied a speedy
trial by the unexplained delay of
nineteen months before his in-
dictment. This plea was denied
in the District Court on the
ground that the defendant could
not show how he was prejudiced
by the delay. The brief argues
that the requirement of preju-
dice should be discarded because
it is almost impossible for a de-
fendant to show how he is preju-
diced, because a true claim of
prejudice would also be a denial
of due process, thereby making
the Sixth Amendment's: speedy
trial guarantee redundant, and
because the courts should use
the speedy trial clause as a tool
to stop unjustified prosecution
delay. Argument will be heard
in the spring.
@
New Interview
@
For Long-Haired
: =
Job Applicant
Last month, John F, Fisher,
the Executive Director of the
State Personnel Board, agreed to
grant a new interview to an ap-
plicant for the position of clerk
who claimed he had been found
unacceptable for State employ-
ment because he refused to cut
his long hair and shave off his
beard.
The disqualification of Gary
Glauberman, a San Francisco
resident, was made by a panel
headed by Edward Less, a rep-
resentative of the Personnel
Board. The ACLU discussed the
matter with Mr, Less and con-
firmed Glauberman's complaint.
The official record, however, dis-
closed that Glauberman had
been disqualified under a regu-
lation requiring neatness and
good grooming,
The ACLU suggested to Mr.
Fisher that the panel had acted
arbitrarily in equating neatness
and good grooming with the ab-
sence of long hair and a beard.
The ACLU was assured that ap-
propriate action would be taken
to secure a proper intepereta-
tion of the particular regulation
in its San Francisco office,
Four ACLU Cases
Report On
State Supreme
Court Action
The California Supreme Court has granted review in a
case in which ACLUNC is seeking a trial transcript, at
county expense, for two indigent criminal defendants. The
defendants are Joy Magezis and Barry Biderman who were
found gulty of "loitering about a school' for their perform-
ance of a play (entitled "Lulu
the Red and the Three Pigs')
hear a San Francisco high
school. After the conviction their
attorney, staff counse] Paul Hal-
vonik, made a motion for a trial
transcript at county expense, ex-
plaining that a transcript of the
trial was necessary to detect the
defendants' rights on appeal and
that, if they were not indigent,
he-would purchase a transcript
at their expense. The Municipal
Court, however, refused to grant
the motion. The Superior Court
and the California Court of Ap-
peal refused to overrule that de-
cision.
In another ACLUNC case, the
habeas corpus petition of Theo-
dore Cox, the State Supreme
Court has issued an order to
show cause which means that the
court will likely consider the
case. Cox is challenging a San
Rafael "anti-hippie" ordinance
which prohibits any person from
remaining upon business prem-
ises after being notified by the
person in charge thereof to re-
move himself,
Marin Municipal Court Judge
Arthur H. Goldstein, Jr., found
the ordinance unconstitutional
and sustained ACLUNC volun-
teer attorney Stanley Friedman's
demurrer to a complaint charg-
ing Cox with failure to leave
business premises. The appellate
department of the Marin Supe-
rior Court, .however, overruled
Judge Goldstein. ACLUNC then
sought pre-trial] habeas corpus
relief for Cox first in the Cali-
fornia Court of Appeal and,
when that was unsuccessful, in
the Supreme Court of California.
In another recent action, the
State Supreme Court has refused
to consider two cases in which
ACLUNC is involved. In one
case, that of Cleophas Brown of
Richmond, the California Court
of Appeal refused to vacate a
misdemeanor conviction for re-
sisting arrest even though the
California Attorney General con-
ceded that the Municipal Court
Judge should have instructed the
jury that Brown had a right to
defend himself from excessive
force employed by police offi-
cers. The Court of Appeal held
that a failure to give proper jury
instructions could not be re-
viewed on habeas corpus.
Defendant's Case _
In the other case, Ruiz v. Su-
perior Court, ACLUNC, as a
-friend-of-the-court in support of
Jerry Levitin, Ruiz's attorney,
had asked the Court of Appeal
to strike down in its entirety a
Superior Court order requiring
a defendant to "make available
for. inspection and copying to
the District Attorney" the names
of any witnesses other than the
defendant. The Court of Appeal -
did hold the order unconstitu-
tional but on the ground that it
called for the names of witness-
es other than those the defend-
ant intended to call. Levitin
asked the Supreme Court. to re-
view the case and hold that the
Fifth Amendment bars the pros-
ecution from discovering. any
witness names. from the defend-
ant. Although the Supreme
Court of California declined to
consider the case, a United
States District Court Judge in
Southern California has recently
held that a defendant need not
divulge any of his case to the
prosecution.
Alfred J. Azevedo
Albert M. Bendich
Leo Borregard
Price M. Cobbs, M.D.
Prof. John Edwards
Jerome B. Falk, Jr.
Prof. Mare Franklin
Robert Greensfelder
Rey. Aron S. Gilmartin
Evelio Grillo
Honorary Treasurer:
Joseph S. Thompson
Honorary Board Member:
Sara Bard Field
Mrs. Gladys Brown
Mrs. Paul Couture
Mrs. Margaret C. Hayes
Prof. Carlo Lastrucci
John J. Eagan
Joseph Eichler
Dr. H. H. Fisher
Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union
of Northern California
CHAIRMAN: Howard H. Jewel
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Prof. Van D. Kennedy:
Helen Salz
SEC'Y- TREAS.: Howard A. Friedman
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig
Francis Heisler
Neil F. Horton
Daniel N. Loeb
Ephraim Margolin
Dr. John N. Marquis
John R. May
Richard L. Mayers
Martin Mills, M.D.
Richard Patsey
Mrs. Esther Pike
GENERAL COUNSEL: Wayne M. Collins
STAFF COUNSEL: Paul N. Halvonik
ASS`T STAFF COUNSEL and LEGIS. REP.: Charles C. Marson.
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: Mrs. Pamela S. Ford
CHAPTER DIRECTOR: Carol R. Weintraub
Committee of Sponsors
Mrs. Paul Holmer
Mrs. Mary Hutchinson Prof. Wallace Stegner
Prof. Wilson Record
Prof. Ernest Hilgard Dr. Norman Reider
Eugene N. Rosenberg.
Mrs. Muriel Roy |
John Brisbin Rutherford
~ Prof. John Searle ;
Warren H. Saltzman
Mrs. Alec Skolnick
Stanley D. Stevens
Jerry fucker
Justin Vanderlaan
Don Vial
Joe J. Yasaki
Dr. Marvin J. Naman-
Mrs. Theodosia Stewart
Rt. Rev. Sumner Walters
Richard Johnston
Roger Kent
Mrs. Ruth Kingman
Prof. Theodore Kreps
`Seaton W. Manning
Rey. Robert W. Moon
Clarence E. Rust
Prof. Hubert Phillips
Norman Lezin
EA ETN SEI GTR
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, California 94105, 433-2750
Subcription Rates - Two Dollars and Fifty Cents a ee
Twenty-Five Cents Per Copy
GEORGE W. PARKER
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT
San Francisco, California
Board of Directors
American Civil Liberties Union
of Northern California
San Francisco, California
| have examined the Balance Sheet
of the American Civil Liberties Union
of Northern California as of October 31, 1969, and the related Statement of
Receipts and Expenditures for the year then ended. My examination was made
in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, and accordingly
included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures
as | considered necessary in the circumstances. :
Although the accounts are maintained principally on a cash basis, and
modified with respect to unearned dues
income and provisions for biennial and
biennial recurring expenses, the differences between the modified cash basis
and the accrual basis are relatively immaterial.
In my opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly -
the financial position of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern
California at October 31, 1969, and the results of its operations for the year
then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles applied
on a basis consistent with that of the preceding year.
/s/ GEORGE W. PARKER
November 10, 1969
Balance Sheet
ASSETS
Cash
Wells Fargo Bank
Commercial account 2 2555. = $ 1,728
Savings account 83a) 3 a ee ges 3,910
Time. certificatesof deposit... = 5,000
$ 10,638
. San Francisco Federal Savings and Loan Assoc. _. 10,000
= Security Savings and Loan Association... 10,000
-American Savings and Loan Association... 10,244
Golden West Savings and Loan Association... 15,000
Twin Pines Savings and Loan Association............... 10,000
Betty Gash Rundi. 8035 = 10
. 65,892
Investments
Marketable securities, at cost (Note 1)... 14,185
U. S. Treasury Bonds, at cost (Note 2)... 4,500 18,685
Total: Assetsiten se ea $ 84,577
LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH
Employee's payroll taxes withheld... $ 1,331
Obligated funds (Note 3).......... Sede om eae 12,004
Deferred income-
Dues for the year ended Oct. 31, 1970... 3,500
Net-worth - ae ,
- Unappropriated balance October 31, 1968 $ 68,168
~--Provision for triennial report 4,500
Provision for biennial conference... 400
Excess of expenditures over receipts, year :
ended October 3f, 1969. (5,326) 67,742
Total Liabilities and Net Worth... ; $ 84,577
ACLUNC Suffers Deficit
During Last Fiscal Year
_ The audited financial report which appears on this page
shows that the ACLUNC suffered a deficit of $5,326. in its
Operating Fund during the last fiscal year and a $70 loss in
its earmarked or reserve funds.
As a matter of fact, the Operating Fund deficit was more
- than $10,000 because while the
' budget provided $6,000 for legal
cases, the $8,000 in expenses
were all charged to ear-marked
funds, including $5,258 to the
General Legal Defense Fund.
The Obligated Funds suffered
only a $70 deficit because more
- than $5,000 was received for
abortion and draft cases. Also,
$525 was received for the Ghetto
Project which may have to be
returned if the project does not
get off the ground.
Net Worth Reduced
By reason of the Operating
Fund deficit, the Net Worth has
Mt. Diablo
Annual Meeting
January 18
The Mt. Diablo Chapter of
ACLUNC will hold its annual
meeting and election of board
members on Sunday, January
18, 1970 at 7:00 P.M. in the
Social Hall of the Hillcrest
Congregational Church, 404
Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill.
William O'Malley, Contra
Costa county District Attorney
will discuss the role of the
District Attorney in law en-
forcement and. maintenance
of civil liberties.
been reduced to $67,742. Last
year, interest and dividends on
our Reserve Funds amounted to
$4,519 which was used as operat.
ing income.
The revised budget for the
new fiscal year is now $139,-
985.49, which includes the legis-
lative program. The $5,000 legis-
lative program was bailed out
by a contribution of $2,500 from
Mrs. Helen Salz, pledges of $550
secured by Francis Heisler in
Monterey county, not to speak of
many other smaller contribu-
tions and an increase of general
membership contributions of
more than 10% during the first
two months of the fiscal year or
about $5,500. At the January
board meeting, in view of the
ear-marked contributions, the
legislative program will most cer-
tainly be restored to the budget.
New Deficit Looms
A $10,500 increase in contri-
butions isn't going to solve the
branch financial problems. With
such an increase in income, there
will still be a deficit of $14,000
for the fiscal year. While at this
writing more than 4,100 mem-
bers have sent in' their contri-
butions the ACLU must still hear
from 3,700 members. Hopefully
their contributions, will also rec-
ognize the ACLU's growing fi-
nancial needs and the Fiftieth
Anniversary of the organization.
: October 31, 1969
Statement of Receipts.
and Expenditures
Year ended October 31
Receipts
Membership. 2 5
Special funds appeal ................. $
Less portion directed to
obligated funds: 22
Special gifts
Casha a ee
Market value of securities rec'd.
Memorial gifts... 3.5)
Interest income ...........
Dividend income =.= = 23
Operation Correction ...................
Publication sales, notary fees,
and-= miscellaneous :.. 2 7
Total Income...
Expenditures
- Salaries
Printing, stationery, office expense
Rentee =) 22 a See SU
As GLU News = 3 Ss
Postages 4. 2, ese ee
Mailing service ......
Telephone: S62 s ssn es
Taxes and insurance
Travel and transportation
Provision for triennial report ..........
Retirement and pension plan ..........
Employee hospitalization _................ 2
Audit
Legislative program 2...
Furniture and equipment ...............
Publications# 22 3) Seta sey
Annual. meeting 22293. sone
Biennial conference 20...
Miscellaneous
Total Expenses 2.0.0.2...
Excess of expenditures over receipts...
1968 1969
$ 94,976 $ 99,847
7,309 $ 9,417
3,081 4,228 1,573 7,844
12,814 1,855
1,694 14,508 0 1,855
807 228
3,647 3,694
505 825
131 232
608 768
119,410 115,293
75,292 76,166
5,050 6,298
7,408 7,572
4,632 4,129
6,895 6,597
3,538 3,685
2,867 2,522 |
3,799 4,039
881 870
1,800 1,500 -
2,028 1,199
431 534
645 785
3,187 3,338
178 93
478 569
105 82
48 400
232 241
119,494 120,619
$ 84 $ 5,326
Notes fe Financial Statements
YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1989 : ;
|. Market value of securities owned by the American Civil Liberties Union of
Northern California at October 31, 1969 was as follows: :
Number of
Shares
136 Eundamenital Investors, Ince. = $ 1,404
316 Winfield Growth Industries Fund Inc. ............... 1,953
28 Real Estate Investment Trust of America eee 609
53 Fidelitys Fund, -Incmae = a ea ee 947
23 Portland General Electric Co... 466
il GrockerGitizens Bank =.) = eg 411
5 BMS ec ethos fo i ee 1,802
20 San Jose WatersWorks:=. 25 se ge a: 590
209 American Metal--Glimax,2Inc. =... 6,766
$ 14,948
2. Three $500 U. S. Treasury Bonds are posted as bail in the United States
District Court, San Francisco.
3. Transactions in obligated funds, year ended October 31, 1969:
Palo Alto School
Board Changes
Restrictive Regs.
In October ACLUNC filed a
~ suit on behalf of the Bay Area
High School Students Union, an
organization of Palo Alto High
School students, who wished to
distribute literature about Viet-
nam Moratoriums on high school
campuses. Only officially rec-
ognized student organizations
were permitted to pass out liter-
ature and invite speakers to Palo
Alto High Schools and the Bay
Area Students Union had been
denied official recognition be-
cause of a school district policy
which provided: "Student organ-
izations shall not be permitted to
engage in political advocacy or
activities of a partisan political
nature."
ACLUNC volunteer attorney
John Thorne of San Jose con-
tended that the regulation was a
violation of the First Amendment
right of students. The case was
taken under submission by Fed-
eral District Judge Robert Peck-
ham but will probably now be
abandoned because the Palo Alto
Unified School District has re-
voked its old policy and enacted
a new one which only prohibits
official recognition to `"organiza-
tions that attempt to incite vio-
lence, truancy or other illegal
actions. or that disseminate or
assist in disseminating literature
of a libelous or obscene nature."
Paul Halvonik
Appears On TV
Abortion Show
On January 11, 1970, at 12:00
p.m., KGO-TV's new "Revise or
Consent" series will deal with
the proposition: "Resolved, Cali-
fornia's anti-abortion law should
be repealed." Each side of the
proposition is given a half-hour
to present its case by means of
a lawyer presenting expert testi-
mony.
Affirmative
The affirmative side. of the
abortion repeal question will be
presented by ACLUNC staff
counsel Paul Halvonik; his ex-
pert witnesses are Pat Maginnis
of the Society for Humane Abor-
tion and Dr. Sadja Goldsmith. of
Planned Parenthood.
Negative
The case in favor of retaining
the anti-abortion law will be pre-
sented by San Francisco attor-
ney James: MacDonald. His wit-
nesses are Mary Ann Colwell,
mother of seven and peace acti-
vist, and Dr. Michael McGlynn,
San Francisco obstetrician.
Receipts
Beginning Special Expendi- - Trans- Ending
5 Balance Appeal Other tures fers Balance
General defense fund -- = = $ 10,586 $ 560 $ 95 $ 5,258 $ 888 $ 6871
Teacher's loyalty oath case = == 5 5 24I 24
Juvenile; court) 265 265
EiSU AL Co 2 ee 103 103
People vs. Gurner and Maginnis _... 580 580
People vs. Dixon ("The Beard"')...... 65 42 ll 96
People vs. Budd2 20 A ay (_ 23) 4 (19)
Mindel vs. Civil Service = = 2 Il 181 292
Abortion and Vascetomy issue ............... 421 4,205 (1,000) 3,626
Death penalty cases 0.0.00. 120 23 28 115
Peaceable assembly cases ............... 47 219 437 ( -171)
Hamilton vs. Superior Court .......... 600) 1,092 ( 1,692)
Meyers vs. Board of Education == (2 121) etl -
Drattcases = 270 404 846 790 730
Mutiny. -case 2 = _ 84 17 101
Amick: and Stolte == _ . 56 724 439 341
Ghetto project: _ 525 525
6.412 $ 8,055 - $ 12,004
Total: Obligated Funds == = $ 12,074 $ 1,573 $
Bus Terminal
Pamphleteers
Acquitted
Ann Breen and David Simpson
have been acquitted of the
charge of trespassing in the San
Francisco Greyhound Bus Termi-
nal. The arrest occurred last Au-
gust when the two anti-war pam-
phleteers refused to leave the
Greyhound terminal when re-
quested to do so by company of-
ficials. They explained to the of-
ficials that the Supreme Court of
California had ruled that transit
terminals could; not be foreclosed
to the exercise of the First
Amendment rights but `neither
the officials nor the police offi-
cers, who took Breen and Simp-
son into custody, seemed inter-
ested in the law,
It was a different story in
the Municipal Court. The case
was submitted to San Francisco
Municipal Court Judge Harry
Low on the basis of the police
officer's own report of the ar-
rest: Judge Low found the de-
fendants not guilty almost as
soon as he had read the report
ACLU NEWS
JANUARY, 1970
Page 3
erties Union.
Police Complaints:
A Handbook
Just issued by the National ACLU is a new, 22 page, book-
let, Police Complaints: A Handbook by Paul G. Chevigny. Che-
vigny, currently on the legal staff of the New Yok Civil Liber-
ties Union is the author of the widely publicized book Police
Power: Police Abuses in New York City which was published
last year by Pantheon Books and was the product of a 1966-67
Police Practices Project conducted by the New York Civil Lib-
Content
This booklet is primarily intended for police complaint
centers and provides essential information in brief form. It
deals with the complaint, criminal defense, affirmative reme-
dies and contains general recommendations for community
action. It also includes two sample complaint forms.
How to Order
ACLUNC is now taking orders for the booklet. In ordering,
please specify "Police Complaint Handbook" and enclose mon-
ey sufficient to cover the price of 50 cents per copy and 6
cents postage for each copy. Address orders to: ACLUNC, 503
Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
WIPING OUT YOUR
JUVENILE RECORD
I. INTRODUCTION:
"SEALING" A JUVENILE RECORD
Many young men and women who have had a brush
with the law before their 18th birthday can, under Cali-
fornia law,
"seal'' their juvenile record. If you qualify, the
law. specifically permits you, under oath, including all
military forms, to say:
1) "I have never been a
ward of the Juvenile
court."
2) "I was never on proba- |
tion as a juvenile."
3) "I have never had a juve-
nile record."
4) "I was never arrested, or
taken into custody, as a
juvenile."
If you qualify, this is very
valuable for:
@ Job applications;
@ Joining one of the mili-
tary services; |
@ Applying for university,
college, or technical train-
ing;
@ Getting car insurance at a
lower cost (in some in-
stances);
@ Qualifying for many ca-
reers which require char-
acter investigations (law,
medicine, real estate,
etc.); and
@ Many other things, includ-
ing the feeling that you
are "clear with the law."
II. WHO IS ELIGIBLE?
Any person in California is
eligible to petition to have his
juvenile record sealed if:
(a) It has been at least five
years or longer since he has
been a "ward" of the Juvenile
Court, been on probation, been
summoned to appear before a
probation officer, been re-
leased from a juvenile hall or
state institution, or otherwise
come under Juvenile Court
jurisdiction (it can be less
than five years if he is 21
years of age or older-in fact,
just as soon as he turns 21);
-and
(b) During the.required pe-
riod, the applicant has not
been convicted of a felony or
any serious misdemeanor (the
legal term for this is `mis-
demeanor involving moral
turpitude"); and
(c) The applicant demon-
strates to the satisfaction of
the Juvenile Court that `re-
habilitation has taken place."
Stripped of the legalisms,
this is not difficult nor does
it cost you anything.
If you haven't gotten into
' trouble for the required peri-
od, the chances are excellent
that the Juvenile Court will
grant your petition. Some
Judges are very cooperative.
After the Juvenile Judge
grants your petition, the only
way anyone can ever look at
your juvenile records is with
your express permission and,
even then, a Court Order must
first be obtained.
ACLU NEWS
JANUARY, 1970
Page 4
III. HOW DO YOU DO IT?
If you think you qualify,
you can:
(R) Contact a private attorney
(ask his fee first)
@ Contact the probation of-
ficer in charge of the
sealing program at Youth
Guidance Center or your
local Juvenile Court
building
@ Contact the Legal Aid Ju-
venile Panel
@ Contact an office of the
Neighborhood Legal Serv- -
ices, or the Legal Services
Foundation in the area |
you live in
You file a petition, which
your lawyer or the appropri-
ate probation officer will help
you fill out, with the Juvenile
Court. There are no court
costs for the petitioner.
In many cases someone with
a minor juvenile record (for
example: truancy at age 13:
petitioner, 19, is now working
and has had no trouble for
six years) does not need an
attorney. In all cases, how-
ever, you are entitled to be
represented by a lawyer. If
the petitioner has been in-
volved in a more serious of-
fense, or has had a number
of juvenile arrests, it is best
if he is represented by an at-
torney,
IV. AFTER YOUR. PETITION,
WHAT HAPPENS?
The Juvenile Court must
notify the District Attorney
and the Probation Depart-
ment (unless the Probation
Department is petitioning on
your behalf), The District At-
torney or Chief Probation Of-
ficer, or any of their deputies,
are permitted to offer testi-
mony at the hearing. How-
ever, the judge has the power
to seal the record, even if the
District Attorney argues
against sealing.
In San Francisco hearings
are held monthly before the
Juvenile Court Judge at the
Youth Guidance Center, 375
Woodside Avenue. Hearings
are not open to the public.
In areas of Northern Cal-
ifornia other than San Fran-
cisco, the hearing will be
held by a judge at the local
juvenile courtroom.
If the judges decides that
your record should be sealed,
he issues a California Superi-
or Court Order directing all
agencies to do this. This or-
der is then sent to any agen-
cy which might have a copy
of your juvenile record (for
example, the local police de-
partment and sheriff, Cali-
ifornia Bureau of Criminal
Investigation and Identifica-
Barb Vendor
Appeals Refusal
To Return Papers
John Richardson, a street ven-
dor selling the Berkeley Barb,
was arrested in September at
Sixth and Market Streets, San
Francisco, on a variety ot
charges, including obscenity.
(The issue portrayed, on _ its
cover, a drawing of President
Nixon being saluted by a house-
wife, a general, and a crewcut
child, An American flag is pic-
tured as flying from the top of
the President's penis, the size of
which is unlikely. An article ac-
companied the cartooon.) ACL-
UNC undertook his representa-
tion and, after a demurrer was
overruled, moved for the return
of the Barbs, confiscated from
Richardson and for their sup-
pression as evidence.
At the hearing the arresting
officer admitted that he had not
attempted to buy a copy of the
paper as evidence, or to get a
warrant-he had simply confis-
cated all the papers. ACLUNC
Assistant Staff Counsel Charles
Marson, pointing to decisions by
the United States and California
Supreme Courts, argued that ma-
terial protected by the First
Amendment, even if charged as
obscene, cannot be confiscated
without a warrant and a prior
judicial determination of obscen-
ity. Recognizing this to be gen-
erally true, Muncipal Court
Judge Leo R. Friedman never-
theless denied the motion, ac-
cepting the District Attorney's
argument that an exception
should be made for the vendors
of underground newspapers,
since they are known to be `"`tran.
sient" and might "disappear."
The ruling is being appealed
prior to trial.
tion, California Youth Au-
thority, Department of Mo-
tor Vehicles, Board of Edu-
cation, and any other agency
which would have informa-
tion concerning your juvenile
problems).
The judge's order. directs
that these records be placed
in a separate, sealed enve-
lope, which no one can see
without a Court Order. This
can be granted only if the
person whose records have
been sealed asks the Court
to open them, And the
judge's order is itself sealed.
If a juvenile record has
been forwarded to the Fed-
eral Bureau of Investigation,
the public agency which sent
it is ordered to notify the
FBI and to request sealing by
the FBI. Current FBI policy,
according to the Juvenile
Court's probation department,
is to mail the entire record
back to the police agency
which sent it to the FBI..That
agency, naturally, will then
place the. FBI file in the
sealed envelope, along with
its own records,
V. IF SOMEONE FINDS OUT.
DESPITE THE SEALING?
If for any reason there is
a slip-up and anyone-the (c)
military, a potential employ-
er, or anyone else-learns
that you did have a juvenile
problem, the Court asks that
you notify it immediately, not
only to clear up your own
case but to help the Court to
prevent others in the future
from having their sealed rec-
ords leaked. The Court has
the power to begin an investi-
gation of the leak, If the
facts warrant, officials who
released your record after the
Court orders it sealed could
be jailed for contempt of
court. You may also contact
your own attorney or any
local office of Legal Assist-
ance Foundation, who will as-
sist you in clearing up the vi-
olation of your rights,
VI.HOW DO YOU ANSWER A
QUESTION AS TO WHETH-
ER YOUR JUVENILE REC.
ORD HAS BEEN SEALED?
Occasionally you may be
: Maginnis and Gurner
Crusaders Case
In State Court
Of Appeal
The case of Patricia Maginnis and Rowena Gurner was
heard, and taken under submission, by the California Court
of Appeal last month. The two militant crusaders for abor-
tion law reform were arrested in February of 1967 in Red-
wood City for conducting classes in abortion techniques and
distributing literature about
abortions.
Free Speech Issue
The law under which they
were arrested, section 601 of the
State Business and Professions
~Code, which makes it a felony to
write or publish any material
concerning ways to produce
abortions, was attacked in the
San Mateo Municipal Court by
former ACLUNC staff counsel
Marshall Krause who contended
it violated the freedom of speech
guarantees of the United States
Constitution. Municipal Court
Judge Roy W. Seagraves agreed
with the ACLU and held the law
unconstitutional. The Superior
Court of San Mateo County, how-
ever, overruled Judge Seagraves
and found the defendants guilty
of violating the law. It is an ap-
peal from that conviction which
the Court of Appeal As consid-
ering.
State's Argument
In the argument to the Court,
the State Attorney General con-
tended that California may con-
stitutionally forbid "the indis-
criminate dissemination of
knowledge about how to perform
abortions and use abortifaci-
ents," and that section 601 may
~be read to permit the dissemina-
tion of abortion. information only
to such persons as "medical stu-
dents and physicians."
ACLU Contentions
Paul Halvonik, ACLUNC staff
counsel, on the other hand, has
argued that the statute by its
asked orally or in writing
whether your juvenile record
has been sealed. Such a ques-
tion is an `obviously unfair
attempt to defeat this impor-
tant protection given you by
the law and, in the opinion of
Juvenile Court legal] special-
ists, you may definitely an-
swer such a question with a
clear "no". Do not hesistate
in your answer or you may
give your questioner an op-
portunity to pressure you into
agreeing to reveal your sealed
record, which is not only
harmful to you, but against
the law's policy of rehabilita-
tion,
The ACLU has plans to re-
write and distribute the fore-
going material to persons
with limited education and
experience, In its present
form, the information will be
distributed to lawyers and
others.
words prohibits distribution of
abortion information even among
physicians. Halvonik also main-
tains that Attorney General's
reading of the statute is uncon-
stitutional because "it assumes
that there is a bit of arcane
knowledge that can constitution-
ally be restricted to a particular
group. Although there are consti-
tutions that countenance the no-
tion of keeping a special body of
knowledge from the `masses,' the
United States' is not one of
them."
Test Case
The first California law forbid-
ding dissemination was adopted
in 1874 and was substantially the
same as section 601. The Magin-
nis and Gurner case is the first
challenge of the law in an appel-
late court.
Legislative
Activity To
Be Renewed
Having narrowly survived a
fall. season of financial uncer-
tainty, the ACLUNC Legislative
Program is beginning again,
thanks to the generosity and
hard work of chapters and sev- |
era] private donors. A new Sac-
ramento office is open at 1220
H Street, telephone (916) 442-
1036. A secretary will be on
duty in the mornings,
Political Tests
ACLUNC Legislative Repre-
sentative Charles Marson pre-
dicts that, barring any major
campus uprisings, the Legisla-
ture will leave students alone
this year and concentrate on
teachers. The Angela Davis case
is expected to provoke a flurry
of bills proposing new loyalty
oaths and political tests. The
Legislature has been consider-
ing abandoning the system of
tenure, and recent campus con-
troversies will undoubtedy en-
courage this move. _
Other Issues
The unsuccessful attempt: Jast
year by law enforcement: ;agen-
cies to authorize wiretapping. and
electronic eavesdropping will be
renewed; the controversy over
marijuana penalties will continue,
another attempt will be made
to expand the Governor's mar-
tial law powers; and the parole
and probation procedures will be
studied closely, although sub-
stantial improvement may not
result. Issues will be reported on
as they arise, and questions and
suggestions are always welcome.
The first right of a citizen
Is the right
To be responsible
JOIN TODAY
eee 151
SU
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Patron Membership ........
Sustaining Membership
NAME
oe e oe
CC ee
cece ecw eee
TELEPHONE NWMBER ...........
503 Market Street
okt re aie Pee | $100
Business and Berets Membership 2... :5. 4.5.55.
Family Membership ........
Annual Membership .......
Student Membership ...... cs
ACLU News Subscription ...
peruse 15
a 10
ee og
ee $2.50
eco eere esr ee eee ee est oer eerr eee
Ce
ee. AMT. ENCLOSED..........
San Francisco, 94105