vol. 40, no. 4
Primary tabs
If there is no ``R" in the upper right
hand corner of your label, it means
that as of April 30 you had not |
renewed for 1975 ... Please do it
today .. .and keep the ACLU News on
its way to you each month.
ac
~ Volume XXXX
lu
Op
news
May-June 1975, San Francisco
No. 4
SLA trial security challenged in state, federal courts
Six weeks ago, ACLU-NC Staff
~~ Counsel Joseph Remcho sent a letter to
Sacramento County Sheriff Duane
Lowe, protesting various security
measures being employed against
spectators at the Russel Little and
Joseph Remiro murder _ trial.
Specifically, Remcho objected to the
Sheriff's practice of fingerprinting,
photographing, questioning
running warrant checks on persons
wishing to attend the trial.
Sheriff Lowe's response was swift
and angry. At a press conference the
day after he received Remcho's letter,
Lowe claimed his security scheme was
entirely proper and went on to attack
the ACLU: "It is nothing new for the
American Civil Liberties Union, which
is a socially permissive-oriented
organization comprised of an im-
pudent corps of pseudo-constitutional
lawyers, to completely misrepresent the
facts during the organization's attack
and discredit. upon law enforcement."
(Spiro Agnew's speech-writer has
apparently surfaced again.) _
Lowe did little talking at the press
conference about the trial security but
he had much more to say about the
ACLU. At one point he intoned, "I
think it is high time the responsible
people of the United States express
their indignation and speak out against
these self-annointed messiahs who
espouse their legal honkus-pokus and
who believe that no one else in society
has enough common sense to read and
interpret the Constitution.
"I suspect that if the architects of
the Constitution could be with us today
the ACLU,
and -
_ Edwards
to witness the subversion of the
Constitution in the name of justice by
they would hang their
heads in shame and feel as empty and
futile as do I.... I don't give a damn
what the American Civil Liberties
Union has to say today, tomorrow, or
ever.'
Obviously, such a response, being
somewhat less than conciliatory, meant
that some legal action would be
necessary. Within a couple of days,
Remcho and volunteer attorneys Kip
and Gus Reichbach had
prepared a complaint on behalf of
several persons who wished to attend
the trial but were denied access after
refusing to submit to the fingerprinting
and other requirements.
Remcho and Reichbach appeared
before Little and Remiro trial judge
Elvin Sheehy to argue that the iden-
tification procedures be stopped. The
attorneys asserted that the extensive
weapons searches, which were not
_ being challenged in this suit, were
sufficient to insure the security of the
courtroom. The further security
measures, however, were both not
necessary but also that they serve to
intimidate citizens attempting to
exercise their constitutional right to
observe a public trial.
The ACLU brief added that for any
limitation of constitutional rights
imposed by the government, there
must be compelling state interest in the
limitation and the least restrictive
means of interfering with those rights
must be employed. In this case,
Remcho and Reichbach argued that
the weapons search was the least
both state and federal,
restrictive means and that any other
security measures were a violation of
the constitutional rights of defendants,
the spectators and any _ potential
spectators at the trial.
They noted that the fingerprinting
and photographing requirements
forced spectators to condition the right
to. attend a public trial on the for-
feiture of rights of privacy and freedom
from unreasonable searches and
seizures without probable cause.
After hearing the arguments, Judge
Sheehy discontinued the fingerprinting
but maintained the other identification
procedures. In addition, Sheriff Lowe
announced that he was not running
warrant checks on people attending the
trial.
Since that ruling by Judge Sheehy,
the case has moved in rapid fire
succession through six other courts,
without the
merits of the case being heard even
once. No court has yet commented on
the legal issues involved.
Reichbach, Edwards, Remcho. and
ACLU Legislative Representative Brent
Barnhart have prepared pleadings
upon pleadings and have made ap-
pearance after appearance without ever
receiving a hearing on the validity of
the ACLU arguments. Apparently the
courts have decided that the issue is
just too hot.
Following Judge Sheehy's decision,
the suit was filed in the U.S. District
Court in Sacramento. There, Judge
McBride refused to take jurisdiction
until the matter had been settled by
the state courts. While Judge McBride
was being asked to reconsider, the case
was being filed in the State District
Court of Appeal. That court denied the
petition for a temporary restraining
order against the Sheriff without a
hearing. Almost immediately, an
appeal was lodged with the California
Supreme Court.
Again without a hearing, the petition
was denied. Thus having run the
gamut of state courts, Reichbach,
Edwards and Remcho prepared to
return to Judge McBride in the U.S.
`District Court. McBride was on
vacation so the case went to Judge
Wilkins. Wilkins then announced that
he is a good friend of Judge Sheehy
and disqualified himself, thereby
refusing to hear the case. .
Judge Wilkins reassigned the case to
Judge Crocker in the U.S. District
Court in Fresno. Judge Crocker
promptly denied the petition also and
set the matter for a hearing on a
preliminary injunction for June 16th
back before Judge McBride in
Sacramento. So a hearing is finally set
but the Little and Remiro trial is ex-
pected to end before that, which means
that the case would probably be
dismissed for mootness.
Still not giving up, Reichbach filed
an emergency motion for a TRO before
the federal Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals just last week.
With all that legal manuevering, the
case still has not been heard and no
relief is in the offing. Everyone knows
that justice is slow, but in this case, it
has been downright evasive.
Homosexual's security clearance case appealed to U.S. Supreme Court
The case of Allan Rock, the electronics engineer
who has had his TOP SECRET security clearance
revoked by the Defense Department because he is a
homosexual, has finally gone to the U.S. Supreme
Court. Staff Counsel Joseph Remcho filed the appeal
last month.
The petition to the high court came after the Ninth -
Circuit Court of Appeals refused to overturn the
denial of a permanent injunction by federal district
court Judge Samuel Conti. Rock currently retains his
`security clearance however under a stay issued by
Supreme Court Justice William Brennan yas a
hearing before the full court.
While preparing for an earlier hearing in the
district court two months ago, the Defense Depart-
ment made an interesting admission to Remcho.
' Eyer since a hearing examiner ruled that Rock's
clearance should be revoked last year, the Defense
Department has maintained that it has no general
policy barring homosexuals from having security
clearances. -
Nevertheless, the Department had never granted a
clearance to a known homosexual, while maintaining
that each case was reviewed individually and it was
just an accident that no homosexual had ever been
cleared.
In March, however, Remcho received an answer to
an interrogatory he had submitted to David Henretta,
Jr., the Acting Director of the Industrial Security
Clearance Review office. In his answer, Henretta
stated that Richard Farr, the hearing examiner that
originally ruled against Rock, had been preparing to
be deposed in Rock's case when he ``apparently
discovered the memorandum in the records of the
Western Field Office."'
The memorandum was issued from the office of
the Assistant Secretary of Defense. Section VI read:
Homosexuals. As previously announced, proof of
recent homosexual activities establishes conclusively,
as a matter of present policy, that the applicant
cannot be granted access authorization.
`In some instances, the applicant acknowledges
the status, recognizes that it is publicly known, and
argues that since he cannot te blackmailed, he
presents no security risk. In this case, Department
Counsel will have little to do but emphasize the proof
that the applicant is a homosexual. The Field Board
will act in accordance with established policy as
stated in the preceding paragraph."
Henretta's statement hastened to add that shortly
after the memorandum was "discovered,'' Examiner
Farr "made a favorable determination as to the
security clearance eligibility of an applicant engaging
in on-going homosexual activity." This was the first
time Farr had ever ruled in favor of a homosexual
but Henretta offered it as proof that the Department
judged each case on the merits and really had no
policy against homosexuals.
So, after two years of administrative hearings and
litigation, the Department has finally admitted that
it has a long standing directive not to grant security
clearance to homosexuals. The Department has
denied the fact all along but finally had to confess
under court compulsion to answer Remcho's in-
terrogatories.
Even with this, Judge Conti and' the Ninth Circuit
refused to restore Rock's clearance. Now it is up to
the U.S. Supreme Court. And thanks to Justice
Brennan's order, Rock will maintain his clearance
and his job until the Court makes a decision.
aclu news
May-June '75
LEGAL
Women's rights cases won without court action
Usually, it is rare when the government concedes
to the ACLU on any case. Women's Rights Project
Attorney Ellen Lake however, is finding it difficult to
even get to court. Every time she threatens to sue
some agency for sex discrimination, the agency
officials agree that her claim is right and that they
will change their sexist practices or policies. Perhaps
this is an indication that the consciousness is
spreading.
One recent case involved Margaret Anderson who
sought to file a dissolution petition in Sonoma
_ County Superior Court using her birth name which -
she has used continuously for one and a half years.
The county clerk warned that she would have to file
an amended petition using her husband's surname
since the judges prefer, `for administrative con-
`venience,' to cope with only one name in dissolution
proceedings. An amicus brief was prepared by Lake (c)
but after the case was, _ publicized, Anderson was
. permitted to proceed in her birth name.
Another example is the case of two female cnident
at El Camino High school in South San Francisco
who complained that the dress code allows boys to
wear blue jeans but not girls. The assistant principal
justified the practice on the ground that a survey of
students, faculty, parents and employers showed the
parents and employers opposed to blue jeans for
girls. The students and faculty favored equal
_ treatment. The assistant principal said the rule was
made because the school did not want to antagonize
the future employers of the students. Negotiations
resulted in the schools' voluntary abandonment of
the ban on blue jeans for girls.
U.C. Criminology professor challenges
tenure denial
Trial was held in the Alameda
County Superior Court last month in'
already been recommended for tenure
by every appropriate faculty review
In Vallejo, Otis Watson, an elementary school
principal, wanted to enroll in an adult education
sewing class. The district deputy superintendant
"explained" that males would not be admitted
because of the absence of separate dressing~ rooms.
He also predicted that Watson would face much
hostility from the teacher and other students in the
class. After negotiations, partitions were set up in the
dressing rooms and Watson was permitted to enroll. -
Another case resolved without court action in-.
volved Barbara Gross who applied for a position with
the California State Police. Her application was -
rejected because she is only 5'4", and under rules -
established by the State Personnel Board, all ap-
plicants must be 5'7''. The State Police Division has .
never had a woman officer. After negotiations with
the State Police Chief, he successfully lobbied the
Personnel Board to drop the height requirement.
Additionally, after Lake questioned the nature of the
interviewing process by which applicants are ranked,
the ACLU was invited to supply names of persons
who might participate in the interviewing process.
Finally, Sandy Freitas, who was_ receiving
unemployment insurance benefits, was notified that
her benefits would be terminated because of her
refusal to take a `"`suitable work offer.'' The ``suitable
work offer" was a job in which, at the interview the
employer continually sexually propositioned her.
After negotiations, her benefits were restored.
Many other problems of this nature have been
resolved by the Women's Rights Project without any
litigation. At least one case that was actually filed in
court appears to be nearing a settlement since the
In 1972, sailors aboard the U.S.S.
U.S.S. Midway
attempted to circulate petitions on the
Hancock and the
government concedes the issue. Equal rights are not
here yet, but it seems the distance is getting a little
shorter.
Marin judge orders
equal treatment of
women in jail
Marin County Superior Court Judge David :
Menary, Jr. issued a preliminary injunction last week
_ which orders the county to provide a minimum
security facility for eligible female offenders by
August 15, 1975. In addition, Judge Menary com-
manded that no sentenced women be sent to the
regular county jail who would qualify for minimum
security.
Judge Menary's order also provides that female
inmates who do not qualify for minimum security
and must go to the jail are entitled to the same
privileges, such as exercise yard and telephone
opportunities, that are available to the male inmates.
The Marin County Counsel agreed to the
provisions of the court's order and the county is
already seeking an appropriate facility to serve as a
half-way house for women inmates. Under earlier
agreements in the case, no women have been sen-
tenced to county jail time since March 7, 1975.
The order, issued last week, comes in a case filed
by -Ellen Lake, attorney for the Women's Rights
Project of ACLU-NC, and Erica Black Grubb, staff _
counsel for Public Advocates, Inc.
Sailors seek right to petition
Robert F. Peckham. ACLU Staff
Counsel Joseph Remcho, volunteer
attorney David Cobin and National
Guild President ~- Doron
the case of U.C. Berkeley Criminology
Professor Anthony Piatt. He was
_fepresented at the trial by ACLU-NC
Staff Counsel Joseph Remcho.
Platt was scheduled to receive tenure
in 1971 when he was arrested at one of
the People's Park demonstrations in
Berkeley. The charges were dropped
against him and he eventually won a
settlement from the police for false
arrest. Nevertheless, this was enough
provocation to have then Chancellor
Roger Heyns remove Platt's name from
the tenure list which was to be ae
mitted to the Regents.
University officials agreed finally
that tenure denial. because of the false
arrest was improper. By then Albert
Bowker was the Chancellor at
Berkeley. Before resubmitting Platt's
name however, he announced that he
would review the case again. Platt had
Renew Today
members have renewed as of April 30.
The remaining one-third of you have
already received three renewal notices
from us. Every notice we send you
diverts money from civil liberties work
into the wasteful expense of printing
and postage.
We need you now. Please send in
_your 1975 renewal today. If you have
any questions, please call the ACLU-
NC Membership Department at (415)
433-2750.
Approximately two-thirds of our
committee, but Bowker said he would
conduct his own review. On the basis
of his review, he decided to reverse the
recommendation for tenure.
Bowker wrote that his chief reasons
for opposing Platt's tenure were that
he had on several occasions been
critical of the police, and that his
major book, The Child Savers, a study
of the juvenile justice system, read like
"the Communist manifesto."
Several faculty committees again -
reviewed the case in the light of the
Chancellor's actions. They all con-
cluded that Bowker's decision severely
threatened academic freedom and that
he used improper, political and extra-
academic procedures for withdrawing
Platt' $s nomination.
Following this setback, Bowker
appointed his own Ad Hoc Review
Committee which, not surprisingly,
found that Bowker acted properly
shortly before the trial started last
`month. Having exhausted all available
administrative remedies (at least twice),
Platt was left with asking the Superior
Court to order the University to grant
_him tenure.
At the trial, Bowker conceded that it
was improper for him to deny tenure
because of Platt's political views or his
criticism of the police. Instead, the
Chancellor claimed he was now against
tenure because Platt's scholarship was
poor. This despite the fact that faculty
pes in Platt's field - Criminology
- rated his work as excellent. Bowker
hawenee whose field is Statistics,
disagrees.
A decision from the courts is still
pending.
ships which were to be addressed to
Congresspersons. The Hancock
petition claimed that the ship was too
old to go to Vietnam and asked for a
Congressional investigation of the ship
and of the policy of sending the ship to
Vietnam after U.S. involvement had
supposedly ended there.
The Midway petition criticized the
government for sending the ship to be
home-ported in Japan and also asked
for a congressional investigation. In
both cases, the commanders of the Bay
Area based aircraft carriers refused to
permit the circulation of petitions,
saying. they would be bad for morale.
One seaman was disciplined and then
discharged by the Navy for circulating
the petition.
The ACLU Foundation filed suit in
the Federal District Court on behalf of
the sailors seeking a permanent in-
junction forcing the captains of the
ships to allow circulation of the
petitions.
Trial was held last month on the
case before federal district court judge
"Lawyers
Weinberg represented the seamen at
the trial.
Highlight of the testimony was that
of the two ship captains who
prohibited the petitions. Both are now
rear admirals. They each admitted that
under other circumstances, - they
probably would have allowed the
petitions. Specifically, it turned out
that the circumstances they objected to
were that the petitions were addressed
to Congresspersons.
Later, the U.S. Attorney defending
the Navy repeatedly attempted to argue
that the petitions were properly banned
since they were promulgated by an
anti-war group. His insistence that this
was relevant to the case prompted
Judge Peckham to query: "Don't you
know that the First Amendment is
sacred?"' The U.S. Atturney dropped
the issue.
A ruling is expected on the sailors'
motion for a permanent injunction in
the near future which would protect
their rights to circulate petitions
aboard ship.
9 issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in March-April, July-August,
and November-December
Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California
Richard DeLancie, Chairman of the Board, Irving R. Cohen, Acting Director
Mike Callahan, Editor and Public Information Director
593 Market Street, San Francisco, California 9410S - 433-2750
Membership $15 and up of which $2.50 is the annual subscription fee for aclu News.
LEGISLATIVE
aclu news
May-June '75 3
ACLU principles in conflict in several
proposed state laws
By BRENT BARNHART
Legislative Representative
The efforts which the ACLU makes
in the furtherance of civil. liberties,
whether by education, litigation or
_ legislation, are based on_ strong
principles which are refined to the |
point that we normally know with some
certainty where we stand as an
organization, and in what direction
staff and members should direct their
efforts.
However, a number of legislative
controversies before the California
Legislature this session provide the
setting for a collision of competing
principles, and principled enthusiasm
alone provides fuel without direction.
A subcommittee of ACLU-NC's
Legal Committee headed by Sandy
Rosen is presently engaged in a careful
analysis of Proposition 9 to present to
the Board recommendations regarding
what position our Affiliate should take
in regard to that landmark political
reform effort. There we have one very
importat interest to which we subscribe
- freedom of government information,
and an electorate sufficiently informed
to act meaningfully with respect to its
voting rights - possibly in conflict
with a series of other interests which
we have also regarded as paramount -
e.g., the chilling effect on First
Amendment rights caused by
disclosure requirements (as in NAACP
vs. Alabama), and the Right of Privacy,
which is now an essential part of the
California Constitution.
This past week `an analogous con-
troversy was joined in the Assembly
Government Operations committee,
regarding AB 23 sponsored by
Assemblyman Leon Ralph. The Ralph
bill attempts to open up records and
papers maintained by the Legislature
to the public, but a provision relating
to access to constituent correspondence
met stiff resistance. While represen-
tatives from the California Newspaper
Publishers and Common Cause argued
that such mail required public access,
Committee Chairman Bill Wilson (D)
of San Diego and other members of the
Committee insisted that they felt
bound as a matter of conscience to
maintain the confidentiality of such
correspondence. While on the one
hand such `confidentiality'? evokes
_ thoughts that the correspondence
being held out of the public view
may well include correspondence of
large business interests and fat cats
who influence on legislators should be
known to the public; on the other
hand, we should not lose sight of the
possible chilling effect that lifting
confidentiality might have on the
willingness of average citizens to -
petition their legislators with their
grievances.
Other examples abound in the
general area of public records, e.g., a
laudable piece of legislation submitted
by Assemblyman Dixon (AB 255) to
prohibit employers from compelling
their employees to disclose arrest
information (in line with our amicus
position before the California Supreme
Court in Loder v. Municipal Court),
has met determined opposition from
the California Newspaper Publishers.
They maintain that the effect can be a
1984-ish `"`memory hole'' situation,
with a harassed person later being
unable to prove that he or she was ever
arrested - law enforcement
authorities hiding behind the public's
interest in sealing or expunging such
records.
In each case it seems possible to
carve legislation with sufficient care so
as to observe each of the principles
which we espouse, but a note of
caution and a plea for thorough
analysis in. such situations seems
essential. I would welcome the
thoughts of the membership regarding
these, matters. The address of the
Affiliate's legislative office is: 1220
"H" Street, Suite 103, Sacramento, CA
95814.
Board names
David Fishlow
Exec. Director
The long and extensive search for an
Executive Director for ACLU-NC has
finally come to an end. At a special
Board meeting held May 22, the
Executive Director Search Committee
recommended that the position be
offered to David M. Fishlow and the
Board did so by acclamation.
Fishlow has accepted the offer and -
will begin working around August 1.
He is currently the Director of
Membership and Development for
National ACLU in New York. Prior to
taking that position, he was the Field
Director responsible for development
and organization of ACLU affiliates
throughout the country. He also served
as the ACLU dinpenehment Campaign
Coordinator.
Fishlow's first staff wasion with
ACLU began in 1973 when he became
the director of the Mountain States
Regional Office in Boulder, Colorado
where he helped strengthen the ACLU
in ten western states.
From 1969 to 1972, he was the editor
and publisher of YA MERO/, a
Spanish-language weekly newspaper in
the Rio Grande Valley, an area which
is the "home base'"' of some 100,000
migrant farm laborers. He was also
active in the Texas Civil Liberties
Union and Texas Rural Legal Aid.
In 1970, Fishlow worked as an
assistant to the press director on the
re-election campaign of Senator Ralph
W. Yarborough. Prior to that, he spent
two years on the staff of the United
Farm Workers. He was first a hiring
hall administrator in Hollister,
DAVID M. FISHLOW
California and then head of the
Union's publications department and
editor of its newspaper, E/ Malcriado.
Fishlow is fluent in Spanish. He
went to Claremont High School in
Claremont, California and attended
Pomona College and San Diego State
College.
Board members and staff alike are
excited about Fishlow's acceptance and
are looking forward to working with
him. He too is anxious to start and his
background will provide valuable
experience for the job he faces.
The Search Committee worked very
hard for many months on this matter
and deserve the thanks of all
ACLUer's. The committee members
were Zora Gross, Emily Skolnick,
Warren Saltzman, Jerry Berg and
Dorothy Patterson. Richard DeLancie, -
Howard Jewel, Joseph Remcho and
Nancy Russell were ex-officio mem-
bers.
Irving Cohen, who has been serving
as acting executive director since
February has decided to leave that
position on July 1. The Board has
named assistant director Mike
Callahan to fill in until Fishlow begins
his duties.
More than sixty people representing thirteen chapter boards: throughout
Northern California attended the fourth annual Board-Chapter Conference
last week in Modesto. Those who attended seemed to agree that the con-
ference was beneficial to affiliate and chapters alike and that there are
many signs of increased chapter strength and activity. The focus of the
conference was action and there was a good deal of optimism about the
prospects for the future. A journal of recommendations and workshop
reports is being prepared and will be provided to all chapters. Further
details on the various workshops and general sessions will appear in the
next issue of the ACLU News. Here, conferees are attending the final session
of the conference discussing what must be accomplished through the
chapter committee in the coming year. There was strong feeling that every
chapter should get involved in the chapter committee's work.
NOTA BENE
Homes for summer interns
Two of the law students who will be
spending the summer in San Francisco
working for A CLU as interns are from
out of state. Naturally, theyo will be
receiving only subsistence sdlaries or
work study money and they can't
afford to move all their belongings out
here.
While in this area, they need a place
to live. Members can help out if they
plan to be away for the summer and
would like to leave tneir homes to a
student.
If you would like to volunteer your
house for our interns, please call
Nancy Russell at the ACLU office,
781-2597.
Privacy Show
On Saturday, June 7, a multi-media
program on invasion of privacy and the
technology of control wili be presented
to the public. The showing will be at
the First Unitarian Church (1187
Franklin Street) from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m.
The exhibit was developed by the
ACLU of New Mexico and the Institute
for Regional Education. A_ special
showing and discussion session are
scheduled for 3:30 p.m.
The exhibit consists of a three-screen
slide show, film nd several sculptured
environments. Plan to attend!
e
Oakland Chapter Garage Sale
June 14th and 15th - 10:00 a.m. - 4:00.
p.m.
6036 LaSalle Ave.
Montclair, California
Anyone wishing to devote items
please call 547-1267 or 530-1221
(evenings). Delivery of items can be
made Saturday, June 14th at 9:30 a.m.
Specials: plants, pink ceramic
bathroom sink, Hoyt 40 gal. water
heater, whirlpool clothes washer.
Come to the Garage sale and then
browse at the Montclair Sidewalk Art
Show.
Turn in your friends
ACLU members are the most loyal,
dedicated voluntary contributors to any
organization in the country. Never-
theless, we still lose fifteen to twenty
percent of our members each year
because they move away, or they forget
to renew, or they just cannot afford it.
To continue growing and to meet the
civil liberties responsibilities of today,
`we need to replace those members with
new ones. We have found that the
single, most effective and least ex-
pensive way of doing that is by asking
your friends and acquaintances.
Last month you received a prospect
referral form from us. Please take a
moment to fill it in and return it to us
right now. Our greatest strength is our
membership. Please help.
D-
ee
aclu news
May-June '75
CHAPTERS
Sonoma
At its last meeting, the Chapter
Board heard a complaint from tenants
living in an apartment complex in
Rohnert Park. The tenants complained
that their apartments had been entered
by an employee of Storer Cable
Television with the knowledge and
consent of the apartment manager.
After compaining to the management
about the illegal entry, two tenants
were served with eviction notices.
Chapter chairperson Lynn Young
advised the tenants that `retaliatory
eviction" is illegal and could be
grounds for a lawsuit. The chapter
board will write letters to the owner of
the apartment complex and to Storer
Cable Television.
Bernie Sugarman read a letter from
Roy Mikalson, President, Santa Rosa
Junior College, in regards to the
college's policy on nepotism. In his
letter, President Mikalson stated "I
have conferred with the County
Counsel's office concerning our
~ nepotism policy and am recommending
to the Board that we modify this policy
to one which concerns nepotism within
a department or in the atea of one
close relative supervising another. I am
enclosing a. copy of the proposed
modification of the policy for your
information." The chapter board voted
to take a wait-and-see position on the
matter for the time being.
Dick Blair read a letter from Dr.
Mitchell Soso, Superintendent of
Schools, Santa Rosa City Schools,
concerning the `"`flag salute" problem
reported last month. In his letter, Dr.
Soso writes ``I have been well aware of
not only the opinion of the Attorney
General of the State of California but
earlier edicts from the United States
Supreme Court. I should also assume
that the principal of Cook Junior High
School would be aware of the material
on page 70 of Law in the School." Dr.
Soso's concluding statement was "*.. . I
do hope that this letter, along with
your letter channeled to Mr. Burgess
and his faculty will solve the problem."'
Blair contacted Mr.
principal, again about the problem of
compelling everyone to stand and
recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr.
Burgess stated that he had personally
instructed all the department heads to
inform their departments that, in the
future, students will not be compelled
to stand or recite the Pledge. Blair
advised that we take a wait-and-see
approach to find if they are complying.
The chapter board agreed. The chapter
board also voted to send a "thank you"'
letter to Dr. Mitchell Soso.
Oakland
The Oakland Chapter's new Board
of Directors have been nominated and
the slate will be voted on at the June
18th meeting.
Nominees for the 75-76 Oakland
Board are: Chairperson: Dennis Roth-
baar; Vice Chairperson; Louise Roth-
man-Riemer; Treasurer: Michael
Coppersmith; Secretary: Janice
Lapidez; Affiliate Representative:
Davis Riemer; members at large are:
aS and Chrys Dougherty, Bernard
Carpenter, Rose Bonhag, Mark
Glukstein, Catherine Noonan, Gladys
Levine, Arlette Poland and Diane
Bhjilarducci.
The Chapter will hold its annual
Burgess, fhe.
garage sale at 6036 La Salle Ave.,
Montclair the weekend of June 14th
and 15th. See box for more details.
Help! Attorneys! Oakland needs to
reactivate its Legal Panel. We need
lawyers to staff it and someone in
particular to head it up. Anyone in-
terested call 452-4726.
To make the Oakland Chapter
happen in a bigger and better way way
a part-time coordinator is being
considered. The position, although
mainly volunteer, will have some small
amount of compensation.
Three new committees are getting
underway in the Chapter - a com-
mittee on political repression, rights of
the mentally handicapped and court
observers.
The Committee on Political
Repression is being formed for
members concerned about the
systematic and widespread violations
by. federal intelligence and law en-
forcement agencies of the civil liberties
of individuals, particularly of those in
minority and _ political dissenting
groups. The committee will look into
civil liberties violations by the IRS, the
Alcohol, Tobacco and _ Firearms
(AT F), Bureau of the Treasury
Department, the Justice Pe parma;
the FBI, and the CIA.
The purpose of the committee will
be to promote legal action and public
awareness on behalf of the victims of
such unconstitutional government
activities. In addition, we hope to prod
the Congressional committees in-
vestigating the FBI and CIA to do a
thorough job and to produce
meaningful legislation aimed at
preventing such activities in the future.
People interested in working with
this committee should contact Chrys
Dougherty or Molly Dougherty at 893-
2454, and/or come to the committee's
organizational meeting on Tuesday,
June 10, 7:30 p.m., at the law office of
Harvey Kletz, 5510 College Ave., in
Oakland.
Anyone interested in the committees
should write the chapter, P.O. Box
1865 Oakland, 94604, or attend the
June 18th meeting, or call 547-1267.
A speaker on the Rights of the
Mentally Handicapped and Mental
Health will be featured June 18th at
7:30 p.m. at the Sumitomo Bank, 20th
at Franklin, in downtown Oakland.
Everyone is invited.
Yolo
The chapter held its annual meeting
earlier this month. State Senator John
Dunlap addressed the meeting,
speaking on "Civil Liberties Issues _
Facing the California Legislature."
Dunlap summarized the legislature's
record on civil liberties as "holding the
line'' on encroachments to liberties
rather than "moving ahead." He
discussed several bills now pending in
Sacramento which would affect civil
liberties.
The membership present at the
meeting elected Jonathan Lewis as
Chairperson for the coming year and
Fran DuBois as_ Vice-chairperson.
Newly elected Board members are
Susan Benjamin, Mike Gilson,
Marjories Le. Donne, Bob Lieger, Jon
Kardassakis, Tom Frankel, and Grant
Noda.
Incoming chairperson Jonathon
Lewis gave a short talk on the future
activities of the chapter. He noted that
one of the priorities for the coming
year would be establishment of a
Committee on Legal Affairs to review
and screen civil liberties cases. Projects
involving county government
monitoring, housing, farm labor
problems, and the-Bicentennial are
also planned.
Santa Glara
Murray Whitaker, chapter board
member and professor of sociology at
San Jose State University, presented
before the Juvenile Information System
Policy Committee, arguments in op-
position to the juvenile information
computer system being proposed for
Santa Clara County. Part of this plan
is the Behavior Severity Classification
System for predicting future criminal
behavior. The committee, headed by
the chief juvenile probation officer, has
in the past been reprimanded by the
County Board of Supervisors for
holding closed meetings.
Students Rights chairman Steve
Siner prepared a _ constitutional
analysis and a statement of ACLU
views on the proposed system, to be
delivered to the Board of Supervisors.
To their everlasting credit, the
supervisors rejected the "`computer''
plan. With the constant vigilance of
this chapter and of other community
organizations, the Bill of Rights may
indeed survive in Santa Clara County.
Representatives of the chapter's
Police Complaint committee met with -
Commission -
Human Pelations
members, the San Jose Ombudsman
and attorneys from the Public
Defender's office to discuss reported
harrassment of transexual people by
the San Jose Police. Complaints in-
clude nuisance arrests, provocation to
commit misdemeanors resulting in
`arrest and temporary detention, verbal
land physical abuse, shining of
spotlights on homes of transexuals,
dumping of purse contents on the
street and shouting at "`straights'"" who
are in the company of transexuals on
the streets of downtown San Jose. The
complaints were duly noted.
In line with establishing better
communications and working
relationships with people in local
government, a committee consisting of
Murray Whitaker, Lisa Kalvelage,
Madeline Norman, Mike Chatzky and
Sabre Gilmartin visited San Jose
Mayor Janet Grey Hayes on May S.
Police harrassment of Transexuals,
homosexuals and police treatment of
students were some of the topics under
discussion.
Board member, Attorney Bob
Baines, in a hearing before Judge
Ingrahm, won the right of a young
man with long hair to receive
unemployment insurance payments
when no other work is available. The
man will receive some back payments
due him, as well as current payments.
: e
Marin
The Marin Chapter held its annual
meeting on Sunday, May 18, in Mill
Valley. About forty members heard
Paul Halvonik, past Legal Director of
ACLUNC, speak on the activities of.
the new administration in Sacramento
in civil liberties. Halvonik is now
Executive Assistant to Governor
Brown. Incumbents Leon Ginsberg,
Ruth Lederman, and Gus Ohlson were
elected to two-year terms on the Marin
Chapter Board; incumbents Leonard
Karpmen, and Kimo Campbell to
three-year terms. New Board members,
all elected for three years, are Rob
Begley, Eve Citrin, Max Awner, Bill
Luft, Bernard Moss, and Dora Knell.
Lola Hanzel is the new Marin
representative to the ACLUNC Board.
Stockton
The annual fund-raising Pancake
Breakfast of the Stockton Chapter is
being planned for June 8th from 9 to 1
in the garden of Mr. and Mrs. James
Riddles, 1821 Princeton. A long-time
member of ACLU and a recently
elected board member, Frank
Palmares, was selected ``Senior Man
for 1975" by the Senior Citizens Action
Now (SCAN) Committee. Mr. Palmares
was proposed for the award by the
Stockton ACLU on the basis of his
years of work with local Filipino
organizations and the Democratic
party. In addition to continuing its
answering service, the Chapter is
hoping to expand its services to include
regular meetings in South and East
Stockton community centers in
coordination with local attorneys.
San Francisco
June is membership renewal month,
that is if you've not already renewed
your membership for 1975. Your
renewal assures us of your continued
and abiding interest in guarding our
personal liberty.
There is still more that you can do.
You can become involved :.. com-
mittees which could use your talent
and time are: Civil Liberties and the
Mayor's Campaign; Membership
Development; Finance; Legislative;
Goals and Priorities. WE NEED YOU.
Please call Esther Faingold at the.
Chapter office, 433-2750 Monday or
Wednesday and VOLUNTEER.
Four neighborhood meetings held
last month were well attended. The
ideas and suggestions from the
membership reflected the need for
more such meetings. We will have
them! Among the areas of concern
expressed were: police practices, or-
dinances proposed by the Board of
Supervisors which would place
stringent rules for fund raising
organizations; invasion of privacy.
Newly appointed Board member
Ernest Fleischman addressed a group
at the Lighthouse for t!.2 Blind; sat as
"judge'' at State University Meiklejohn
Civil Liberties Debate.
Appearing before the San Francisco
Police Commission's open hearing last -
month were Board members Ruth
Jacobs, Anson Moran and _ Tony
Rothschild. Jacobs told the body that
ACLU was concerned in particular
with proposed regulations for me
Intelligence Unit.
Following the City Anerney
decision that all Commissions conduct
open hearings, Supervisor Molinari.
introduced a charter amendment to the
Board of Supervisors which would
make it mandatory for all city
governmental commissions to conduct
open hearings in compliance with the
Brown Act. The Board of Directors of
the San Francisco Chapter supports
this amendment.