vol. 48, no. 6

Volume XLVIII

Medi-Cal Abortion Fund Cuts Halt

`Within three hours of ACLU-NC staff

attorney Margaret Crosby filing a peti-

tion challenging the Legislature's most

recent cuts in Medi-Cal funding for

abortion, the state Court of Appeal

issued an order prohibiting the state

from implementing the cuts. The July 27

court order also barred the Department

of Health Services from mailing out

notices to hundreds of thousands of

Medi-Cal recipients telling them that the

funds were no longer available. The

Department had planned to mail the

notices that afternoon, at a cost of

$400,000.

The suit, Committee to Defend Re-

productive Rights v. Rank, is the sixth

consecutive suit that the ACLU-NC has

filed on behalf of a coalition of civil

rights groups, women's rights associa-

tions, health care providers and tax-

payers since the Legislature first cut off

Medi-Cal funding for abortion in 1978.

Despite court rulings in the previous

cases which determined that the cuts

were unconsitutional, the Legisiature has

persisted in attempting to cut off the

funding.

At a press conference held to an-

nounce the filing of the suit Crosby said,

`Once again, California legislators have

defied the courts, violated their oaths of

office and consciously inserted unconsti-

tutional restrictions on Medi-Cal funding

aclu ne we

lobes ee ct 1983

e Photo courtesy of the Recorder'

Staff attorney Margaret Crosby ge announced the filing of the sixth consecutive

ACLU lawsuit to prevent Medi-Cal funding cuts for abortion at a press conference

on July 27.. Planned Parenthood' s Mary Luke (1) 1S of the disastrous ivaipact of -

the cuts on teenagers.

of abortion into the annual Budget Act.

"In its intransigent determination to

violate the reproductive rights of poor

women in this state, the Legislature has

enacted a slightly modified bill: first,

they have imposed the most stringent set

of restrictions ever, eliminating from the

state health care system coverage for

abortions necessary to prevent severe

and long-lasting physical health damage.

""Second,'' Crosby added, ``the Legis-

lature has purported to shift the source

of abortion funding to a new budget

item - a Special fund specifically for

Curfew on Evening Campaigning Lifted

Contra Costa ordinance pro-

A hibiting door-to-door solicitation

between sunset and sunrise was

declared unconstitutional by the Court

of Appeal on July 27 as the result of an

ACLU-NC challenge.

In a unanimous ruling, the court

agreed with ACLU arguments that the

ban interferes with the First Amendment

rights both of those who have a message

to spread and those residents who wish

to receive communications from political

or charitable groups.

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney Lee

Ann Huntington explained that the rul-

ing means that evening hours - which

according to testimony given in the case

are the most fruitful for door-to-door

canvassing - will now be open for acti-

vist Organizations in Contra Costa and

other counties who wish to oe their

message.

The controversial ordinance, which

was adopted in 1978, initially banned

soliciting between the hours of 7 p.m.

and 8 a.m. During the course of the

litigation, the county amended the ordin-

ance to restrict such activity between

""sunset and sunrise."'

The ban was challenged by Alterna-

tives for California Women (ACW), a

non-profit group which raises money for .

2 Ney

nN wd tay

i} fut

battered women and children through

door-to-door solicitation. After the Con-

tra Costa Superior Court ruled in 1979

that the statute was constitutional, the

ACLU-NC agreed to represent ACW on

appeal.

An organizer for ACW testified at the

trial that the evening hours were the most

effective way to reach their audience.

_"*`Many potential beneficiaries of our ser-

vices are bound to their homes by force

or fear and have no significant alterna-

tive means of: receiving such informa-

tion,"' the ACW testimony asserted.

"Prior to the curfew,'' an ACW

organizer explained, ``our canvassers

were very effective in finding residents at

home, particularly in the evening after

dinner hours between 7 and 9 p.m."'

With the restricted hours, however,

`it was not practical to go door-to-door

at all,' the group explained.

Although the county claimed that the

ordinance was necessary to protect its

residents' privacy rights and discourage

burglaries, the Court of Appeal. dis-

agreed.

The ruling was based on two premises:

that the ordinance unreasonably dis-

criminated between ``solicitation'' and

other forms of canvassing and, more

basically, that the county could find less

intrusive ways to deal with its legitimate

concerns about privacy and safety than.

banning door-to-door activity during the

evening hours.

``The ordinance abridges the group's

First Amendment rights without protect-'

ing the residents' privacy from intrusion

continued on p. 3 -

abortion services - appare

that this will frustrate

authority to remedy unc

violations caused by the aborur

tions.'

However, Crosby explained, these cent are

cosmetic distinctions that in no way

undermine the court's authority to

safeguard the constitutional re-

quirements of equal protection and

privacy. The lawsuit charges that the

1983 Budget Act restrictions, just as

those of the past five years, violate the

California Constitution's guarantees of

privacy and equal protections, and that

yen

%

- the court has the unquestioned authority

to protect these fundamental rights.

Urgency

After lengthy debates in the Legisla-

ture, the final Budget Act was only

signed on July 21, long after the official

deadline. The urgency in filing the

lawsuit was necessitated by the fact that

the new restrictions were mandated to go

into effect on August 16, and that

notices would have to be sent out in-

forming Medi-Cal patients of the cuts at

least two weeks prior to that date.

Despite repeated inquiries by the

ACLU, the Department of Health Ser-

vices would not reveal whether or when

the notices were to be sent. Crosby only

learned the day before the filing that the

notices were to be sent out on July 27.

`**Health Services Director Peter Rank

was well aware that the ACLU was going

to file a lawsuit requesting an immediate

stay of the funding cut-off and of the

notification,'" Crosby said. "`I learned

on July 26 from Asher Rubin, the Depu-

ty Attorney General who is representing

the Department of Health Services that

the Department planned to commence

mailing the notices the following after-

noon. He told me that the cost of the

mailing would be $400,000 and that the

continued on p. 5

' elected to the ACLU-NC Board of

- Will Leong

Board Elections

The following candidates were

Directors. The new Board members

will begin their term in September and

will serve for three years. (Incumbents

are marked with an asterisk.)

Barbara Brenner

Mary Lou Breslin

Nancy Davis* _

Stanley J. Friedman*

Marshall W. Krause

Jim Morales

Steven C. Owyang*

Frances Strauss*

Thomas Waddell

te

ie

be

ie

i

i

%

ie

J

+

i

4

`

4

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1968.batch ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1969.batch ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1970.batch ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1971.batch ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1972.batch ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1973.batch ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1974.batch ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1975.batch ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1976.batch ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1977.batch ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1978.batch ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1979.batch ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1980.batch ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1981.batch ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1982.batch ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1983.batch 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 copy-create-manuscript-batch.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log

4

4

4

{

a

{

%

aug-sept 1983

aclu news

OCC Opens Amidst Controversy over Funds, Rules

established: by an amendment to

the San Francisco City Chapter

approved by voters last fall, will begin

operations by the end of August. But the

T he Office of Citizen Complaints,

OCC, set up after many years of con-_

troversy about the inadequacy of the

police Internal Affairs Bureau in investi-

gating complaints from the public about

police misconduct, is still snarled with

difficulty.

Funding questions

In May, ACLU-NC staff attorney

Amitai Schwartz filed a lawsuit to force

the San Francisco Police Commission to

consider a larger budget for the newly

established OCC (see ACLU News, May

1983.) The budget that has been

allocated, Schwartz explained, is not suf-

licient for the OCC to carry out

necessary investigations.

There has been a tentative settlement

on one aspect of the lawsuit over the

OCC budget. ``We claimed that they had

miscalculated the base year figures

governing maximum funding permitted

by the Charter,'' said Schwartz. `"`We

have recently reached a tentative settle-

ment which will result in raising the

_budget permitted by the Charter to a cer-

- tain extent.

"There is another unsettled question,

however,'' he added, ``and that is the

question of whether salaries for support

personnel are included in the budget ceil-

ing imposed by the Charter amendment.

We contend that they should not be in- ~

cluded - as that will severely reduce the

amount of money available to conduct

investigations.'' Schwartz said that that

issue would be heard by the Superior

Court in September.

Access to files

An ACLU-sponsored measure to

allow the civilian investigators to disclose

post-investigative findings to civilian

complainants was rejected 41 to 32 in the

state Assembly in June.

The bill was sponsored by Assembly-

woman Maxine Waters who, according

to, Schwartz, ``showed tremendous

courage and tenacity in carrying this bill

- which was extremely unpopular with

the San Francisco Police Officers

Association and other police lobby

groups - to the floor.''

After the June defeat, the bill was

granted reconsideration, which meant

that the bill could be reintroduced for

ACLU-NC at the Biennial

Eight delegates and five staff ineinbers represented the ACLU-NC at the national

Biennial Conference held in Washington, D.C. in June. Affiliate board members

Alice Beasley, Richard Criley, Anne Jennings, Andrea Learned, Nancy Pemberton,

Davis Riemer and Robert Teets joined national Board Representative Eva Paterson

as voting delegates; staff members Dorothy Ehrlich, Marcia Gallo, Elaine Elinson,

Michael Miller and Alan Schlosser also attended.

Paterson chaired a workshop on ``Race Discrimination - Strategies for Action on

Established ACLU Policies' which developed two binding resolutions on affirmative

action within the ACLU Board and staffs which were later adopted by the full con-

ference. Gallo and Miller participated in panels on lobbying and fundraising respec-

tively and Ehrlich served as a respondent to national Executive Director Ira Glasser' s

"State of the Union'' message to the 400 conference participants.

_ In addition to presentations and workshops on Poverty and Civil Liberties, Con-

stitutional Government in the Nuclear Age, The First Amendment and the Com-

munications Revolution, and other issues, delegates also traveled to Capitol Hill to

lobby Congress members on current legislative measures - ranging from immigra-

tion to abortion rights. ACLU-NC members met with 15 of the 18 northern Califor-

nia Representatives and staff from the offices of Senators Cranston and Wilson.

Members of the ACLU-NC Biennial team pictured above are (1. to r.) Gallo,

Learned, Beasley, Ehrlich, Teets, Paterson, Elinson and Jerry Berman, staff counsel

with the ACLU National Legislative office.

another vote by the full Assembly. How-

ever, the bill's co-sponsor, San Francisco

Assemblyman Art Agnos who took over

floor management of the measure,

decided ``for political considerations"'

not to reraise the bill.

`""We see this only as a temporary set-

back,'' said Schwartz, who is one of the

architects of the Office of Civilian Com-

plaints. `"We have been facing this kind

of thing for the past seven years.

"Tf the police files are closed __ it will

be difficult for complainants to argue at

the OCC hearings that the investigations

were incomplete, biased or inaccurate.

Complainants will not have access to the

files to know if it is worthwhile having a

hearing. And even it a hearing is held,

they won't have enough information to

Iam the rector of an Episcopal church

in San Francisco. I applaud the efforts of

Leslie Bennett to keep prayer out of the

graduation ceremony at Granada High

School in Livermore. While I am a firm

believer in Christianity and the place of

prayer in religious life, I agree that it

should be kept out of the public school

system. I think it is outrageous to expect

people who do not believe in a particular

kind of prayer or prayer at all to partici-

pate in ceremonies where prayers are

held.

I admire the students' courage in

standing up for what they see their rights

to be and appreciate the fact that they

are willing to risk public. criticism and

ridicule. I have long been a supporter of

the ACLU and am delighted that the

ACLU took up this cause.

Congratulations to Leslie Bennett and

the other Livermore students for their

contribution to American civil liberties

and the cause of religious freedom in the

`United States.

Robert W. Cromey

San Francisco

Senior Leslie Ann Bennett of Granada

High School should be applauded for

her courage. Young people like her are

the hope of the future.

Michael Roos

San Francisco

As a civil libertarian, I have to raise

my voice of dissent regarding the parole

of William Archie Fain (ACLU News,

May 1983.)

The charge the Governor usurped

judicial powers is a good argument;

however, I believe that the Marin County

Superior Court erred in its decision. I

_ feel it would be a tragic mistake to parole

Fain in view of the fact that he was con-

Letters

know what to ask,"' he said.

New investigators

The newly appointed director of the

OCC, Orinda attorney Eugene M. Swan,

began work in June. The OCC has now

completed the hiring of 9 investigators,

all of whom `will be on board by

September 1,"' according to a spokesper-

son from the Police Commission. Com-

plaints which were formerly handled by

the Internal Affairs Bureau will now be

handled by the OCC investigators.

The hiring process for the new in-

vestigators included an oral Civil Service

exam for which former ACLU-NC _

Chairperson Drucilla Ramey was an ex-

aminer.

victed of rape and murder.

In my opinion it is in the best-interests

of us all to keep him behind bars to pro-

tect society. To be sure he should be

given the same constitutional protec- -

tions as any other prisoner, i.e. humane

treatment.

I realize I am probably in the minority

with respect to this issue among the

ACLU membership. If all ACLU

members were in unanimous agreement

about every issue, then the ACLU's

forum for exchange of ideas would be

diminished.

Gregory L. Christiansin

Sacramento

On behalf of the members of the

Pacific Grove Property Rights Commit-

tee and the several thousand voters of

Pacific Grove who supported Initiative

Measure ``B'', I wish to express my

sincere appreciation for the cooperation

received from Mr. Richard Criley, the

Monterey ACLU Chapter, and the

Board of Directors of the ACLU-NC for

taking up the defense of our organiza-

tion when notified that it was being sued

on the grounds of impropriety of

Measure ``B'"' and the successful - dis-

missal of the suit by the court.

We wish to particularly express our

gratitude to Ms. Michelle Welsh, co-

chairperson of the chapter's legal com-

mittee, who was successful in having the

Property Rights Committee removed as

a defendant in the case, but remaining

part of the suit as friend of the court.

Ms. Welsh was -very considerate in

doing everything she could to keep us in-

formed as to the legal process. We shall

always remember how the ACLU re-

sponded without hesitation to our ``call

for assistance."'

Joseph P. Monaghan

Pacific Grove

AG

aclu news

8 issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in January-February, June-July,

_ August-September and November-December

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California-

Davis Riemer, Chairperson Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director 12)

Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page if

ACLU NEWS (USPS 018-040)

1663 Mission St., 4th floor, San Francisco, California 94103. (415) 621-2488

`Membership $20 and up, of which SO cents is for a subscription to the aclu news

and SO cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publication, Civil Liberties.

Elaine Elinson, Editor

aug-sept 1983

aclu news

Court Slams Boys Club Door to Girls

s a result of a June decision by

A the state Court of Appeal re-

versing a 1979 superior court rul-

ing that the Santa Cruz Boys Club must

admit girls to membership, the ACLU-

NC filed a petition for hearing in the

California Supreme Court on August 4.

The ACLU petition was supported by

a letter from more than half.a dozen

' prominent civil rights organizations and

by a friend of the court brief from the

Civil Rights Enforcement Section of the

state Attorney General's Office.

The ACLU suit, Jsbister v. Santa Cruz |

Boys Club, was originally filed in June

1979 on behalf of three girls who were

denied admittance to the Club and two

boys who belong to the Club but claim

that the membership policy deprived

them of their right to a nondiscrimmina-

tory environment.

In November 1979, the Santa Cruz

Superior Court agreed with the ACLU

and ruled that the Boys Club must admit

girls on an equal basis with boys. The

court ruled that the Unruh Civil Rights

Act forbidding discrimination on the

basis of ``sex, race, color, religion,

ancestry or national origin... in all

business establishements of every kind

~ whatsoever'? prohibited the Boys Club

from barring girls from membership.

The recent Court of Appeal ruling

stated that the determinative issue is

``whether under the evidence the Boys'

Club can be a `business establishment'

within the meaning of the Coe ou

Rights Act."'

In their opinion, the court distin-

guished between establishments ``which

have a businesslike purpose and which

perform customary business functions'"'

to which the statute applies and the Boys

Club, to which it does not. `It does not

apply generally to noncommercial en-

tities such as charitable, volunteer and

community service agencies, fraternal

societies, clubs and organizations that

serve particular religious, ethnic or

cultural groups,"' the opinion stated.

On that basis, the court ruled that

`*the present record contains no evidence

that appellant Boys' Club is a `business

establishment' subject to the restrictions

of the Unruh Act,'"' and reversed the

lower court judgment.

According to ACLU-NC cooperating

attorney Susan Popik, ``This opinion is a

_regression that totally disregards the in-

tention of the Legislature to prohibit dis-

ACLU. arguments. ``Community ser-

vices regardless of their source of income

are to be provided in accordance with the

legislative mandate of equal treatment of

all,' Poche wrote.

Do women still have to compete for equal rights under the law in California -

despite legislation which has been on the books for almost a quarter century?

crimination through the Unruh Act.

`*The legislative history of the Unruh

Act,'' Popik explained, ``clearly shows

that the Legislature intended to broaden -

the scope of the predecessor Public Ac-

comodations statute - not narrow it.

Popik explained that the Boys Club,

which is a place of public accomodation

operated by' a community service

organization, is certainly within the cate-

gory of ``all business establishments of

every kind whatsoever'? whose conduct

is covered by the Proscriptions of the

Unruh Act.

In a dissenting opinion, Court of Ap-

peal Justice Marc Poche agreed with the

Curfew Lifted cvmmiin.

by persons who are not `"`peddlers' or

`solicitors,' '' wrote Justice Joseph Rat-

tigan.

``The ordinance discriminates on the

basis of the content of a speaker's

message to the extent that a person who

literally solicits from residents is regu-

lated, but one who only seeks a receptive

listener is not,'' the court stated.

In addition, the opinion stated, `"The

County's interests can be advanced by

less restrictive means which do not entail

diminution of First Amendment

rights . . . In light of the less restrictive

alternative available to the County, the

challenged ordinance is unconstitutional

because it is not drawn as narrowly as

possible to avoid infringing First

Amendment rights,'' Rattigan wrote.

Other groups

Huntington, who is with the San Fran-

cisco law firm of Morgenstein, Ladd and

Jubilerer, said that the ruling will have

major implications for activist groups

_ who go door-to-door in counties other

than Contra Costa as well. ``The Court

struck down the ordinance because it was

not carefully tailored to meet the justi-

fications put forward by the county -

_ safety and privacy - and because it in-

terfered with residents' right to receive

information.

`Because the court stated that there

were Other means available to the county

for enforcing those interests, such as

criminal statutes and laws against

trespassing, we believe that the court's

ruling will prevent restrictions by that

county or other counties on evening

solicitation,'? Huntington explained.

"`As_ representatives of the ACW

testified, the hours between 7 and 9 in

the evening are those in which it is most

`effective to bring their message to the

public. Under the court ruling those

hours will now be open for groups in

other counties who wish to go door-to-

door to spread their message,"' she said.

``The Unruh Civil Rights

Act... protects users of facilities,

goods and services in this state against

arbitrary discrimination from `all

business establishments whatsoever.' A

more inclusive reach is difficult to im-

agine,'' stated Poche in his dissent.

The suit is being handled by cooperat-

ing attorneys Popik and Diane Thomp-

son of the San Francisco law firm of

Rogers, Joseph, O'Donnell and Quinn,

cooperating attorney Susan Paulus and

ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan

Schlosser.

"It is significant,'' Popik said, ``that

the Civil Rights Enforcement Section of

the Attorney General's Office has

entered an amicus brief with the court

that strongly supports our arguments. As

those charged with enforcing the Unruh

Act, they ask that the Court of Appeal

decision be set aside as contrary to Cali-

fornia's firmly established doctrine that

places of public accomodation are re-

quired to offer their services and facilities

to all on an equal basis."'

Minority Rights Groups

-In a letter to the California Supreme

Court in support of the petition for hear-

ing, a number of organizations commit-

ted to the rights of racial and ethnic

minorities asked the court to reverse the

Court of Appeal judgment.

The letter, signed by the Association

of Northern California Black Women

Lawyers, Black Women Organized for

Action, Asian-American Bar Associa-

tion, Charles Houston Bar Association, (c)

Chinese for Affirmative Action, La Raza

Lawyers of California, and MALDEF,

states, `"We are unanimous in our desire

to see the decision reversed. Because the

decision allows non-profit, volunteer,

fraternal, sectarian, charitable or cul-

tural organizations to discriminate

against individuals on the basis of sex,

race, color, religion ancestry or national

origin, it will have disastrous conse-

quences for all those who felt the Unruh

Civil Rights Act protected them from

discrimination.

``Organizations such as_ hospitals,

legal aid societies, and educational in-

stitutions not covered by other anti-dis-

criminatory statutes are free to discrim-

inate, thus removing California from its

position or leadership in the struggle for

human rights and dignity,'' the groups

said.

"To affirm the opinion of the Court

of Appeal will set back the cause of

equality under the law at least 24 years.

In these days of continued assaults on

the rights of women and people of color,

we cannot afford to send out a signal

that California is not desirous of fully

protecting the rights of its citizens to

equal protection under the law."'

Your Civil Liberties

Ignore them

and they'll go away!

Join the ACLU

0x00B0

ap 6 GS GP OE SG SS Gs ee a Ge

() Individual$20 ( )

( ) This is agift membership from

Name

Joint $30

and an additional contribution of $----

Address

City

Return to ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St., S.F. 94103

Me xo ce com ems ome

Zip

aug-sept 1983

aclu news

ACLU in National Mobilization

Stop the on Mazzoli Bill

In preparation for a final push against

the passage of the Simpson-Mazzoli bill

in Congress, the ACLU and other

organizations concerned about the civil

liberties dangers in this immigration

reform measure are planning a National

Mobilization to culminate in a Lobby

Week in Washington, D.C. in

September.

According to Julie Steiner, Field Co-

ordinator for the National Legislative

Office, `Despite the fact that the bill

passed the Senate several months ago,

and has been through all the major

policy committees in the House there will

be no further action until after the

members come back from their recess on

September 12.

"(his 18 a very important

breakthrough for those who have been

working hard on stopping this legislation

because it could be a signal that the bill is

in rockier waters than ever before. In no

small part this is because of the pressure

placed on leadership and committee

members of the Congress from people all

around the country concerned about the

bill. This leaves us with a perfect route to

try to make those waters even rockier,

and perhaps, put the bill to rest once and

for all,'' Steiner said.

"The August recess provides us with a

perfect organizing time to pull off a very

significant lobbying effort,'' said Marcia

Gallo, ACLU-NC Field Representative.

Andrea Learned of the ACLU-NC

Immigration Working Group explained

that ACLU members around the country

will be meeting with Representatives who

will be in their districts during the recess.

`*This recess activity is critical since many

members of Congress will be using this

time to get a sense of what their consti-

tuents are feeling about this complex and

difficult issue,'' she said.

The ACLU-NC has already made

Simpson-Mazzoli a major organizing

target. Working with the Bay Area Com-

mittee Against Simpson Mazzoli-

(BACASM), a coalition of immigrant

rights organizations, community groups,

and other civil rights and public interest

law firms, the ACLU-NC has _par-

ticipated in a massive petition drive

against the bill, press conferences, and

Mapai yy)

aA UAL

rae Oey lili

eee

Tec eee ny

ba

po He ai eM t

: A , 3 Faye ae ake ean oo

yal eae ANG)

ae Dre oa

5 Hy i} vy

ie eee ae iy

i

.

Photo courtesy of BACASM

forums in the legal and minority com-

munities.

During the month of August, the

ACLU will be launching a Mailgram

Authorization Campaign to obtain per-

mission to send Public Opinion Messages

(inexpensive, but effective telegrams)

from as many ACLU members and

others: ``This is the most productive way

to ensure that Members of Congress are

swamped by constituent input during the

Lobby Week,'' explained Steiner. ``We

want to get at least 50 mailgrams into

each congressional office during that

crucial period."'

A sample Public Opinion Message

would read, ``Please oppose the Mazzoli

Immigration Bill, HR0x00B01510. It will cause

employment discrimination resulting

from the employer sanctions

provisions."'

The National Mobilization, which is

being organized by the ACLU, LULAC

(League of United Latin American

Citizens), MALDEF, Church World

Service, and the American Immigration

Lawyers Association, will also include a

letter writing campaign and a publicity

effort aimed at getting editorials and op-

ed pieces opposing the bill in local and

national newspapers.

The Lobby Week in Washington is

planned for September 20-22, though

final scheduling will be subject to

legislative schedules.

`*Although it may not be possible for

many of our members to travel to Wash-

ington for the face-to-face lobbying that

will go on during the final floor con-

sideration of the bill, the effort that we

can make here in northern California

with meetings during the August recess,

letters to Congress, local media work

and the Mailgram Authorization Cam-

paign can have a major effect in letting

our Representatives know that we

strongly oppose this bill,'' said Gallo.

The local work will be coordinated by

the Immigration Working Group of the

ACLU-NC Field Committee. For infor-

mation packets, sample mailgrams and

letters, mailgram authorization forms

and questions contact: Marcia Gallo,

Field Representative ACLU-NC, 1663

Mission St., S.F. 94103 or call (415)

The Simpson/Mazzoli Bill - a barrier to immigrant rights 621-2494,

eS ee ea ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee Re eee ee ee ee

-

a

a

a

i

a

i

a

i

i

i

a

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

E

f

i

a

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

a

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

a

i

i

a

i

i

t

i

i

i

i

i

a

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

i

a

e

i

gressperson in my name and in my behalf as part of the National

Mobilization on the Simpson/Mazzoli Immigration Bill.

The subject of the telegram is to be restricted to opposition to the

Simpson/Mazzoli Bill based on the dangers this measure poses to civil

liberties. The ACLU-NC is authorized to make arguments which are

thoughtful, courteous and non-partisan.

| understand that the cost of one Public Opinion Message is $4.45 and

that this will be billed to my telephone.

(1 | wish to be notified that a P.O.M. has been sent in my name and

would like a copy of the contents sent to me.

Simpson/Mazzoli National Mobilization

Public Opinion Message

Authorization Form

TO: American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

_ | hereby authorize you to send a Public Opinion Message to my Con-

Signature

Print Name in Phone Book

Home Address

NC, 1663 Mission St., S.F. 94103.

Dale U.S. Representative

Please send the entire form to Immigration Working Group, clo ACLU-

4 aug-sept 1983

aclu news

Jailed Woman Juror Cleared of Contempt

by Evvie Rasmussen

A woman juror held in contempt in

Monterey County Municipal Court for

refusing to answer discriminatory ques-

tions was vindicated last month when the

state Court of Appeal overturned the

contempt verdict. She was represented

by the ACLU-NC. |

Carolyn Bobb, an attorney practicing

bankruptcy law in Santa Cruz County,

was cited for contempt as a prospective

juror by a Monterey County Municipal

Court judge when she refused to answer

questions about her marital status and

her husband's occupation. Comparable

questions were not asked of the men

awaiting selection as jurors.

Though the contempt order was up-

held by the Superior Court, a majority of

the three-judge appellate court panel

found the questioning violated the equal

protection guarantees of the California

Constitution. The judges agreed with the

ACLU that the case was analagous to the

case of Hamilton v. Alabama, in which

the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the right

of a black woman to refuse to answer

questions when addressed by her first

name. Justice William O. Douglas called

this form of address ``a relic of slavery."'

Writing for the majority in the Bobb

case, Justice John Miller found the situa- _

tion faced by Carolyn Bobb ``identical to

the one faced by Mary Hamilton some

20 years earlier."'

**Just as Mary Hamilton was justified

in disobeying the court's order to re-

spond to discriminatory questioning," -

Miller wrote, ``so was appellant justified

in her refusal to comply with equally

discriminatory questioning."'

Bobb, who because of the nature of

her law practice has not been in a court-

room in five years, said she was

"shocked to find men and women were

given different lists of questions.''

"I didn't want to make a scene, but

when it came time for me to answer, I

knew I couldn't participate,'' she said.

When asked if she was married and her

husband's occupation, she explained

that she could not answer as long as the

questions were only asked of the women

and not the men. The judge then cited

her for contempt of court.

ry

Ri

RON Te

Laat SE)

cy cr

Ye

Ri

rsdn

Bobb, who was five months pregnant,

was taken to the holding facility where

she was given a pat-down search and her

purse checked for drugs.

After about 15 minutes she was re-

leased on her own recognizance and

precy

ordered to return for sentencing that

afternoon. She was sentenced to one day

in jail.

"This case is unprecedented as a sex

discrimination case, because there is no

direct economic impact,'' said ACLU-

Medi-Cal Abortion Fund cninedjonp:

cost of a corrective mailing would be an

additional $400,000.

"It is unconscionable that the Depart-

ment would spend hundreds of

thousands of dollars to advise Medi-Cal

beneficiaries of abortion funding restric-

tions which had been ruled unconstitu-

tional for five years,'' Crosby added.

The quick court action prevented the

notices from being mailed - and the

funds from being stopped. The order,

signed by Presiding Justice Anthony J.

Kline, will stand until the court takes fur-

ther action.

Grave health damage

The 1983 restrictions would cut out

90% of funding for all women who seek

Medi-Cal abortions. If they were to go

into effect, every day more than 250 in-

digent teenage girls and women would be

denied safe and legal surgery for

termination of an unwanted pregnancy,

the ACLU petition charges.

"The state's own statistics forecast

that these impoverished Californians will

suffer grave and irreversible health

damage, mental anguish, disruption of

_ careers and educational opportunities,

divisiveness among family members and

even death,'' said Alice Wolfson, coor-

dinator of the Committee to Defend

Reproductive Rights speaking at the

ACLU press conference.

``Even notification of the proposed

limitations on Medi-Cal subsidies for

abortion would inflict mental and

perhaps physical suffering on_ this

vulnerable section of our population."'

Mary Luke, Director of San Fran-

cisco/Alameda Planned Parenthood

agreed. ``One third of the women who

seek Medi-Cal abortions are teenagers,"'

she said. ``The cuts in abortion funding,

coupled with the Governor's 25% cuts in

family planning services could have

drastic and long-lasting effects on these

young women who would have great dif-

ficulty in terminating an unwanted preg-

nancy - or even knowing where to turn

for advice.''

Tiny fraction

The Budget Act totally eliminates

abortion Funding from the general

Medi-Cal appropriation (the Health

Care Deposit Fund.) The Act directs the

state Controller to set up a separate -

special fund of $13,317,000 from which ~

all funding for Medi-Cal abortions must

be obtained. But restrictions imposed on

the special fund eliminate Medi-Cal

coverage for all but a tiny fraction of

abortions, retaining state financing only

for the following categories: 1) abortions

necessary to preserve the life of a preg-

nant woman; 2) abortions sought to

terminate pregnancies resulting from

rape or incest which has been reported to

government authorities; 3) abortions

sought by unmarried teenage girls whose

parents are notified of the abortion five

days in advance; and 4) abortions sought

following a diagnosis of severe con-

genital abnormality. -

"The only significant difference be-

tween the 1983 set of limitations and

those found unconstitutional in five

prior years,'' said Crosby, ``is that this

year's legislation is the most restrictive

ever enacted."' :

The elimination of Medi-Cal funding

for abortion from the 1983 Budget Act

was first proposed by Governor George

Deukmejian, an avowed opponent of a

woman's right to choose abortion. Dur-

ing the budget process, the creation of a

special fund for abortion services was

spearheaded by Assemblyman Bill

Leonard with major opposition coming

from Assemblywoman Maxine Waters.

The defendants in the lawsuit are

Peter Rank, Director of the state Depart-

ment of Health Services, Controller Ken-

neth Cory, and state Treasurer Jesse

Unruh.

The petitioners are: Committee to De-

fend Reproductive Rights, California

Coalition for the Medical Rights of

Women, Bay Area Welfare Rights

Organization, Comision Feminil Mex-

icana, Asian Womens Health Center,

Dr. Sadja Greenwood, Dr.

payer Christine Motley.

NC cooperating attorney Katherine

Stoner who argued the case before the:

Court of Appeal.

"The attack was on her dignity as a

person,'' Stoner said. ``The underlying

assumption is that women have no in- -

dependent legal status and don't have the

ability to think for themselves. It harks

back to the idea that a woman loses her

identity when she marries. This attitude

has only changed in the last hundred

years.""

"This case comes at a time when equal

protection principles are becoming

harder to defend,'' said ACLU staff at-

torney Margaret Crosby. ``Discrimina-

tion has become more subtle. But here is

a striking example of out-and-out

acknowledged discrimination. The judge

could have simply asked both male and

female jurors about their spouses' occu-

pations. The singling out of women

jurors for this question stigmatizes

women by the implication that they are

malleable and subject to their husband's

opinion.

``When we were first called about the

case we thought it was almost unbeliev-

able,' Crosby continued. ``But since

we've run stories about it in the ACLU

News, we've heard from other jurors

who've had similar experiences. We had

no idea it was such a_ widespread

practice."'

The Monterey County judge, ordering

the contempt citation was Municipal

continued on p. 8

Alan:

Margolis, Dr. Bernard Gore, and tax-,

Highlights of ACLU

Abortion Funding |

Litigation

This is the sixth consecutive year

that the ACLU-NC has filed a lawsuit -

challenging the Legislature's budget

cuts of Medi-Cal abortion funding:

e In 1978 the state Legislature, fol-

lowing the U.S. Congress' enactment

of the Hyde Amendment cutting off

federal abortion funding, first slashed

Medi-Cal funding for abortion.

e A series of court orders in the

ACLU litigation (Committee to De-

fend Reproductive Rights v. Myers)

meant that the funding was never

terminated. But the Legislature con-

tinued to enact budget cuts in 1979

and every subsequent year.

e On March 12, 1981, the Califor-

nia Supreme Court ruled in CDRR v.

Myers that the budget restrictions |

violated the privacy and equal protec-

tion guarantees of the California

Constitution. In an opinion authored

by the late Justice Mathew Tobriner,

- the court stated, `"Once the state furn-

ishes medical care to poor women in

general it cannot withdraw part of

that care solely because a woman ex-

ercises her constitutional right to have

an abortion."'

e In defiance of the Supreme Court

ruling, the Legislature implemented

budget cuts in 1981 and 1982. These

were also struck down as unconstitu-

tional.

e Medi-Cal abortion funding has

been continuously maintained since

1978 solely because of court orders

issued in ACLU litigation.

aug-sept 1983

aclu news

Sacramento Report

Workers Rights Bills Make Some Gains

by Marjorie Swartz

ACLU Legislative Advocate

A number of bills favoring workers'

rights have done better in this legislative

session than ever before. The ACLU has

strongly supported a number of

measures which protect the privacy,

equal protection and First Amendment

rights of employees.

Non-discrimination

For the first time, major progress has

been made by AB 1 (Agnos) which pro-

hibits employment discrimination on the

basis of sexual orientation. The bill,

which has been championed by the San

Francisco Assemblyman for four years,

has moved much further than all pre-

vious attempts, passing the Assembly

floor and Senate Judiciary Committee

amidst applause and cheers.-AB | will be

heard in Senate Finance in late August,

then hopefully will move to the Senate

floor and the Govenor's desk.

Whistle-blowers

-Assemblywoman Maxine Waters' bill

to protect employees who blow the whis-

tle on their bosses is also moving well this

year. The bill, AB 273, was originally

proposed by the Workers Rights Com-

mittee of the ACLU of Southern

California. The Committee's proposal

grew out of an ACLU-SC case repre-

senting seven black employees of Crown

Zellerbach who were fired after writing

an open letter criticizing the company for

race discrimination. AB 273. passed the

Senate Industrial Relations Committee

on July 15.

Other bills which are progressing i

clude AB 960 (Davis) which expands the

rights of local public agency employees

to gain access to their own personnel

files; AB 1682 and 1683 which strengthen

the penalties and rights relating to en-

forcement of wage and condition laws;

and AB 1684 (Molina) which requires

Labor Commission communications to -

be printed in multilingual forms. ACR

37 (Tanner) would establish a State Task

Force to study the issue of employment

discrimination and comparable worth

for California's female workers. The

measure now awaits hearing in the

Senate Rules Committee after passing

out of the Assembly in mid-July.

Privacy

A number of other bills are advancing,

but because of strong opposition have

been amended to weaken some of the

original protections. For instance, SB

524 (Rosenthal) originally prohibited

monitoring or recording employee com-

munications by the employer with excep-

tions for training, evaluation and detec-

tion of fraud. The amendments allow

employers to monitor employee conver-

sations only if all employees are in-

formed that monitoring is taking place.

An individual employee must be notified

that his or her communications will be

subject to monitoring fora specified

period. Additional protections would

limit the use of information obtained as

a result of monitored communications.

As amended, SB 524 passed the

Assembly Labor Committee and is

awaiting hearing in Ways and Means.

AB 621 (Klehs), a bill to prevent

employers from requiring applicants to

submit to certain honesty examinations,

has also run into some difficulty. These

tests, while purporting to measure hones-

ty and veracity, in reality often include

questions unrelated to this purpose, but

which require detailed information

regarding an applicant's personal, finan-

cial, medical, social and attitudinal

history. The Senate Industrial Relations

Committee refused to pass the bill until

an exception was inserted which allows

employers to use tests if they are

standardized American Psychological

Association exams.

An omnibus employment discrimina-

tion bill (AB 274-Waters) which includes

provisions that prohibit discrimination

_ based on physical or other handicaps and

provides safeguards for pregnant

employees has also run into trouble. Its

provisions protecting the rights of preg-

nant women are broader than federal

law, and have provoked some opposition

in the Senate Industrial Relations Com-

mittee. This portion may be narrowed in

order for the bill to pass out of that com-

mittee.

A number of other bills are stalled for

Save the Date

1983 Bill of Rights Day

Celebration

Sunday, December 4

Sheraton Palace Hotel, San Francisco

o

Martha Tabor

this half of the 1983-1984 session. AB

1579 (Tanner) requiring comparable pay

for work of comparable worth was held

in the Agsembly Labor and Employment

Committee; further hearings will be

scheduled later this year. Two bills

relating to striking employees, AB 1118

(Floyd) making it illegal to hire strike-

breakers and AB 1139 (Floyd) pro-

hibiting anyone from carrying a weapon

in or about a picket line, have not yet

passed their first policy committee.

Clamping down

In addition to these bills expanding

workers rights, are a number of

measures aimed at clamping down on

employees which the ACLU is monitor-

ing closely. AB 1291 (Young) would

create a new misdemeanor offense of

making a false statement on an employ-

ment application. AB 1292 (Young)

would permit an employer to prevent a

former employee from obtaining new

employment by furnishing information

about alleged thefts by the employee

regardless of whether the theft was pro-

ven. Both bills are awaiting their first

hearing in the Assembly Labor and

Employment Committee.

Another measure, SB 1237 (Russell)

would overrule federal and state case law

by prohibiting the award of punitive

damages against an employer who has

engaged in unlawful employment prac-

tices. This bill is awaiting hearing in the

Senate Judiciary Committee.

The Legislature will reconvene on

August 15 for one month. All bills which

are to go into effect by January 1, 1984

must be on the Governor's desk by the

end of that session.

REPORT ON HUMAN

RIGHTS IN EL SALVADOR

Committee and the American

Civil Liberties Union (Vintage:

New York, 1982) 352 pages,

$3.95, paperback. ISBN 394-

71141-6.

for each additional publication.

Name

Compiled by Americas Watch -

Postage and Handling: Add $1.00 for first publication ordered and =

Make checks for publications out to The Center for National Security

Studies. Ail orders must be prepaid.

TO ORDER PUBLICATIONS FILL OUT AND ENCLOSE WITH CHECK.

OR MONEY ORDER. SEND TO: The Center for Nationai Security

Studies, Dept. P-1, 122 Maryiand Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20002.

To what extent are fundamental

human rights violated in E]

Salvador?

This urgently important book -

acomprehensive. thoroughly

documented and utterly devas-

tating account of the govern-

ment of El Salvador's campaign

of terror against its own people -

answers that question once and

for all. Its sources of informa-

t1on are numerous and various:

witnesses: representatives of

international organizations: the

"press of many nations: victims

and relatives of victims.

The facts presented in this

shocking book can be neither

ignored nor explained away.

The actions ot the Salvadoran

government are cause tor moral

Outrage.

Address

City, State, Zip

aug-sept 1983

aclu news

Swartz Awarded

ACLU Legislative Advocate Mar-

jorie Swartz is the recipient of the sec-

ond annual Good Person Flak Cat-

cher Award given by California Com-

mon Cause. The award is to `"`honor

some of the always hard-working,

sometimes successful and almost

always underpaid leaders of the

California public interest community

-those who have done a very out-

standing job fighting for public in-

terest causes."'

Swartz, who joined the ACLU staff

in April, has been in the forefront of

the battles against Governor Deukme-

jian's workfare programs, budget

cuts,and|law-and-ordermeasures that

erode the criminal justice system. Pre-

viously, Swartz was the Sacramento

lobbyist for the state Public

Defenders Office.

Swartz will be given the award at a

dinner in her honor in Sacramento on

August 23.

MEMBERSHIP DRIVE

HELP NEEDED

This fall the ACLU-NC plans to re-

cruit over 1200 new members to help

support the growing fight for civil

liberties in California and across the

country.

The Membership Department

needs volunteers on a daily basis to

help process this fall's new member-

ship applications and insure that all

new members are added to the rolls in

a timely fashion.

If you want to help build a stronger

ACLU, are good at detail work, and

have five or more daytime hours a

week, contact Fonsa Hassell, ACLU-

NC Volunteer Coordinator, at

415/621-2493.

A Will

to Support

the ACLU

According to his attorney, Laney Col-

lege math professor Lloyd Seaver was a

``very nice, warm, and generous

person.'' Seaver died in February, 1982.

His estate was settled in July, this year,

and his generosity resulted in a $240,000

bequest to the ACLU Foundation of

Northern California.

A life long resident of Oakland and -

Berkeley, Seaver was an ACLU member

and paid generous annual dues. His be-

quest insures that the civil liberties work

he supported in his life will be carried on

after his death.

Seaver had named the ACLU the

residual beneficiary for his estate. This

means that after leaving specific sums to

friends and relatives totaling $50,000,

Seaver provided that the remainder of

his estate would go to the ACLU.

The bulk of the Seaver estate will be

placed in a restricted ``Special Gifts''

fund established by the ACLU-NC

Board of Directors in 1979. Only interest

from the fund is used on an annual basis

for operating expenses, without special

permission from the Board of Directors.

According to ACLU-NC Associate

Director Michael Miller, bequests are

becoming an increasingly important

source of support for the ACLU. Civil

libertarians may leave a bequest to the

ACLU Foundation of Northern Cali-

fornia with a simple amendment to their

will. For more information on making

bequests, individuals may contact

Michael Miller at the ACLU or ask their

own attorney for advice.

Law Student Interns

Three law student interns bolstered the

work of the ACLU-NC Legal Depart-

ment this summer and got a taste of civil

liberties law in action.

Barbara Koh, a third year law student

at Stanford received the Sara Bard Field

Internship. Koh worked on the success-

ful challenge to the religious prayer at the

Granada High School graduation, and

on the ``Operation Jobs'' lawsuit charg-

ing the INS with violation of employees'

rights. She would like to pursue civil

rights law, particularly anti-discrimina-

tion work.

Jeff Ross, the recipient of the Ralph

Atkinson Internship, is a third year law

~ student at Boalt Hall. He worked with

staff attorney Amitai Schwartz on

several police practices lawsuits, in- |

cluding the preparation for the trial in

the police raid on the Libertarian Book-

store and the appeal in Ramey v. Mur-

phy. After graduation Ross would like.to

pursue public interest law.

Anne Stausboll, the holder of the Edi-

son Uno Internship, is a third year law

student at UC Davis. She worked on two

abortion rights cases (CDRR v. Rank -

see article p. I) and the challenge to the

proposed 20-week limit on abortions

formulated by Governor Deukmejian in

his previous office of state Attorney

General. After her experience at the

ACLU-NC, Stausboll has decided that

she wants to be a `"`civil liberties

organizer."'

Rosales Awarded

Elvia Rosales, who held the Sara Bard

Field Internship at the ACLU-NC in the

summer of 1982 and also interned in the

Legal Department during the 1982 fall

semester, has been selected for the na-

tional ACLU's Karpatkin Fellowship.

Rosales was chosen out of hundreds

of law school graduates from around the

country by a panel of prominent civil

libertarians, including national ACLU

Executive Director Ira Glasser and Na-

tional Legal Director Burt Neuborne.

As the Karpatkin Fellow, Rosales will

be based in the Legal Department of the

national ACLU office in New York

working on a whole spectrum of civil

liberties litigation.

ACLU-NC_ Executive Director

Dorothy Ehrlich said, ``We are extreme-

ly proud that Elvia was selected for this

prestigious position. She is a highly

qualified young attorney who I am sure

will add a great deal to the national of-

fice with her intelligence and her spirit -

just as she did here."'

Rosales is the first Chicana and the

first applicant from northern California

to win the Fellowship, which was

established to honor former ACLU

General Counsel Marvin Karpatkin who

died in 1975.

+f _ ACLU-NC

ae = 1983

= Conference

Stas Oct. 8

Sunday Oct. 9

La Honda Camp,

Pescadero

55 miles south of San Francisco; access to coastal beaches,

parks, trails; pool; covered music shell, and more.

Speakers

Fran Lebowitz

e Author and Humorist

John Shattuck

e Director ACLU D.C. Office

Saul Landau

e Filmmaker, Institute for Policy Studies

John Bean

Program

e Impact of Reaganomics on Civil Liberties

e The Politics of Dissent

e Selective Service and Selective Prosecution

e The Effects of the "War on Crime"

-e@ "Enemies of Choice" a

e Immigration Reform and Immigrant Rights

$50 per person for housing, four meals, all

conference materials

For more information and registration, call Marcia

Gallo, Field Representative: 415/621-2493, no i

than September 2.

Sponsored by the ACLU-NC Field Committee

aug-sept 1983

aclu news

Sexist Language

In a strongly-worded resolution the

ACLU-NC Field Committee established

the ``goal of working to eliminate the use

of sexist language in our meetings, con-

ferences, publications, communications

and daily conduct.''

Field Committee Chair Dick Criley ex-

plained that the resolution arose from a

petition circulated at the 1982 ACLU-

NC Annual Conference. ``The petition

protested the use of sexist language by

conference participants,'' he explained,

"`in particular the repeated use of male-

exclusive terms like `chairman,' `con-

gressman,' and the generic use of the

term `he. "

In his concluding remarks at the con-

ference, ACLU-NC Chairperson Davis

Orel -laler ig

MID-PENINSULA |

B.A.R.K.

ATTENTION, BERKELEY, AL-

BANY, RICHMOND, KENSING-

TON MEMBERS: Your ideas and

energy are needed! Please attend the

next B-A-R-K chapter meeting to

discuss program plans and future ac-

tivities: Thursday, September 22.

Contact Joe Dorst, 415/654-4163, for ~

meeting time and place.

~EARL WARREN

ANNUAL MEETING/POTLUCK:

Saturday, September 24, 6:00 p.m.

Topic: ``Police Practices,'' with John

Scott, attorney in the successful

``wrongful death'? case against the

Richmond police, and other guest

speakers. Contact Barbara Littwin,

415/452-4726 (days).

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday,

September 21, 7:30 p.m. Sumitomo

Bank, Oakland.

FRESNO

BOARD MEETING: (Usually third

Wednesday each month.) Contact

Scott Williams, 209/441-1611, for in-

formation about July and August

meetings.

GAY RIGHTS

ANNUAL MEETING/SUMMER

PARTY: Sunday, August 28,

3:00-6:00 p.m. Special guest, Judge

Herbert Donaldson, on ``Whither

Minority Rights? A View From The

Bench."' Election of new Board

members will be part of a brief

business meeting preceding the pro-

gram, at 4:00 p.m. Contact Bill Inger-

soll, 415/348-8342.

MARIN

BOARD MEETING: (Third Monday

each month.) Monday, September 19;

Monday, October 17. 8:00 p.m.,

Fidelity Savings, Throckmorton

Street, Mill Valley. Contact Alan

Cilman, 415/864-8882.

Riemer promised that the question

would be referred to the Field Commit-

tee for resolution.

The Field Committee's statement

asserts, ``The winning of the ACLU's

stated goals of sexual equality cannot be

separated from the struggle to change at-

titudes, raise levels of understanding and

free ourselves from the ideological fetters

of sexism. . :

_ "The elimination of sexist language is

`clearly a part of this process.'' :

The Committee resolved that the state-

ment should be reported in chapter, af-

filiate and national ACLU publications

and that it be incorporated into the pro-

grams for the annual conference and

`chapter work.

BOARD MEETING: (Usually last

Thursday each month.) Thursday,

September 29, 8:00 p.m. in Palo Alto.

Contact Harry Anisgard,

415/856-9186.

MONTEREY

ANNUAL

DINNER: Saturday, October 15 at

the Santa Catalina School in

Monterey. Social hour, 1:15; dinner

at 2:00 p.m. $15 per person. The 1983

`Ralph Atkinson Civil Liberties

Award'' will be presented to

Representative Leon Panetta. Contact

Richard Criley, 408/6224-7562.

BOARD MEETING/PUBLIC

FORUM:

month, alternating between forums

-and meetings.) Tuesday, September

27, Estrada Adobe, Monterey. Con-

tact Richard Criley, number above.

MT. DIABLO

ANNUAL MEETING/POTLUCK

DINNER: Sunday, September 11;

5:00 p.m. Special guest speaker:

Daphne Macklin. Contact Beverly

Bortin, 415/934-1927.

NORTH PEN

BOARD MEETING: (Second Mon-

day each month.) Monday,

September 12; Monday, October 10.

8:00 p.m. Contact Richard Keyes,

415/367-8800 (days).

FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW: Saturday, October 22, Col-

lege of San Mateo. A special seminar

on your rights to leaflet, petition, can-

vass, and campaign. Contact Richard

Keyes, number above, or Marcia

Gallo, ACLU-NC, 415/621-2494.

VOLUNTEERS NEEDED for the

chapter's booth at the ``Women's

Day Fair'' at the San Mateo County

Fairgrounds, Saturday and Sunday,

_ September 10 and 11. Contact

Richard Keyes, number above.

MEETING/AWARD |

(Fourth Tuesday each.

Woman 2 J uror conned JSrom p. 5

i

ot

y 2

SACRAMENTO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday,

September 21; October 19. 7:30 p.m.,

New County Administration

Building, 8th and I Streets, Sacra-

mento.

916/457-4088 (evenings).

NOMINATIONS are sought for

members of the Board of Directors of

the Sacramento Valley Chapter. Send

name of nominee, with nominee's

consent, and a 25-SO word statement

to Sacramento Valley Chapter,

ACLU, P.O. Box 160423, Sacra-

mento 95816 as soon as possible.

SAN FRANCISCO

BOARD MEETING: (Fourth Tues-

day each month.) Tuesday,

September 27, 6:00 p.m. ACLU of-

fice, San Francisco. Contact Chandler

Visher, 415/391-0222 (days).

SANTA CLARA

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, September 6;

October 4. Contact Vic Ulmer,

408/379-4431 (evenings).

SANTA CRUZ

BOARD MEETING: (Second

Wednesday each month.) Wednes-

day, September 14; Wednesday, Oc-

tober 12. 8:00 p.m., Louden Nelson

Center, Santa Cruz. Contact Bob

Taren, 408/429-9880.

SONOMA

BOARD MEETING: (Third: Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday,

September 15, 7:30 p.m. Center for

Employment Training, 3755 Santa

Rosa Avenue, Santa Rosa. Contact

Andrea Learned, 707/544-6911 -

(days). 2

ANNUAL PICNIC: Saturday, Sep-

tember 10, 1:00 to 4:00 p.m.,

Westerbeke Ranch, Sonoma. Guest

speaker to be announced. Members

will receive invitations in the mail, ~

with map.

Contact Mary Gill, .

Court Judge Raymond Simmons ap-

pointed by then Governor Ronald

Reagan in 1974. The order was upheld.

by Monterey County Superior Court

Judge Edmund Leach.

The three-judge appellate court was

split, with Presiding Justice J. Anthony

Kline concurring with the majority opin-

ion written by Justice Miller. Justice

Allison Rouse dissented, asserting that

the questions asked Bobb were innocu-

ous and did not represent an issue of

constitutional dimension.

Attorneys for Monterey County ap-_

pealed the decision to the state Supreme

Court in July. But on August 11, the

high court refused to hear the case, leav-

ing the favorable Court of Appeal judg-

ment intact.

STOCKTON

POLITICAL PROPAGANDA

FILMS: Come see the three films that

caused the controversy - `"`If You

Love This Planet,' ``Acid from

Heaven,'' and ``Acid Rain: Requiem

or Recovery.'' September 21 and 22,

University of the Pacific, Stockton.

Free admission. Contact Bart Harloe,

209/946-2431 (days).

BOARD MEETING: Note new

Meeting day: second Thursday each

month. Thursday, September 8; Oc-

tober 13. Contact Bart Harloe,

number above.

YOLO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday,

September 15. Contact Harry. Roth,

916/753-0996 for meeting time and

place.

PRO-CHOICE

TASK FORCE

Wednesday, September 7 - 6:00

p.m., ACLU Office, 1663 Mission,

San Francisco. Contact Marcia Gallo,

415/621-2494 no later than Tuesday,

September 6.

RIGHT TO

DISSENT

SUBCOMMITTEE

Wednesday, September 7 - 7:30

p.m. ACLU Office, address and con-

tact information above.

IMMIGRATION

WORKING

GROUP

MEETING: Monday, September 12,

6:00 p.m. at the ACLU-NC office,

1663 Mission, San Francisco. Contact

Andrea Learned, 707/544-6911, or

Marcia Gallo, ACLU-NC,

415/621-2494.