vol. 41, no. 4 (June)

aclu;

Investigation raises speech questions about Prop. 2

Volume XLI

The Scientists' Institute for Public

Information (SIPI) is a nationwide,

non-profit organization of scientists

and lay persons devoted to providing

citizens with ``objective scientific in-

formation'' on issues of public policy.

It is tax-exempt under Internal

`Revenue Service codes and cannot

engage in political activities.

Since 1968, one of the organization's

chief efforts has been public education

about nuclear power. With Proposition

15 on the June ballot, SIPI sought to

raise funds in California and made

Fairness/Equal Time demands on

California television and radio stations

to counteract what it views as misin-

formation broadcast by the No on 15

Campaign.

Last April, Margaret Mead, past

president of SIPI, sent a telegram to

supporters of the organization asking

for contributions for a statewide

education program to support the

public's right to full and accurate |

scientific information. In a letter to

T.V. and radio stations, the

organization said it "is concerned that

the members of the voting public are

fully informed of the issues surrounding

nuclear power development before they

_ are asked to vote.'' SIPI went on to

request the broadcasters to air public

service announcements produced by

SIPI which do not take a postition on

Nine Board directors named

Nine new directors were elected by

the ACLU-NC Board at their meeting

held on May 13. The slate of five men

and four women bring to the Board a

variety of expertise in such fields as

education, law, community affairs, and

state legislation.

The nine new directors will fill the

vacancies created by current

resignations and expired terms. Three

long-time ACLU-NC. Board members

will be leaving the Board in September,

having served the maximum six years

allowed by the By-laws. Jerome B. Falk,

Jr. has been an active ACLU-NC Board

member since his election in 1970 and

has been Chairperson of the Legal

Committee since 1972. Michael Harris

has served on a number of committees,

including most recently the Nuclear

Power Committee. During his six years

as a Board member, Richard Wert-

himer has served on numerous

committees, including the Legal

Committee. The active service of these

three Board members as well as their

participation at general meetings will

be sadly missed.

The newly elected directors at-large

are:

Anthony Amsterdam - ACLU-NC

Qe

LpoundOL%G

V2 AaTaUaE

is Pee a: Gl ct

Yayg00 S14

YSONIT9 NvOV NAV

pound0 ft

ne

June 1976, San praneoen

Proposition 15 but rather "seek to

insure a voting public informed on all

aspects of the controversy."

In May, the No on 15 Committee

filed a formal complaint against SIPI

with the state Fair Political Practices

Commission (FPPC) and asked the

Internal Revenue Service to revoke the

organization's tax exemption because

of political activities. In the FPPC

complaint, the No on 15 Campaign

charges SIPI with failure to register and

to report contributions and ex-

penditures allegedly solicited and made

"for the purpose of influencing or

attempting to influence the actions of

the voters for or against the passage of

any measure' as required by

Proposition 9, the Fair Political

Practices Act of 1974.

Under Proposition 9, organizations

must register, report and disclose to the

Secretary of State if it solicits con- -

tributions for the purpose stated above

and uses them for `"`expenditures which

expressly advocate the qualification,

passage or defeat of a clearly identified

ballot measure.'' Administrative

regulations require that such advocacy

contain 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_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_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 create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log `express' ' language of advocacy

such as `"`vote for," "elect," "defeat,"

and the like.

ACLU-NC will be representing SIPI

before the FPPC in any administrative

Board member 1971-1975. Professor of

Law at Stanford University. Chair-

person of the Police Practices Project.

One of the foremost constitutional

jurists and recipient of the Earl Warren

Civil Liberties Award, 1973.

James Brosnahan - San Francisco

attorney and President-elect of the Bar

Association. Member of the ACLU-NC

Foundation.

James Goodwin - Active ACLU

member since student days at U.C.

Assistant to the Vice President of

University and Student Relations. Legal

education and formerly a_ special

consultant to OEO. Also active in

NAACP.

Carol Nagey Jackin - Santa Clara

Valley Chapter Representative to the

ACLU-NC Board. Active participant in -

ACLU-NC Women's

Rights Com-

mittee. Research Associate at Stanford

_ University in Child Psychology as well

as author and lecturer.

Jonathan Lewis - Legislative

assistant to Senator Nick Petris.

Chairperson of the ACLU-NC Yolo

County Chapter and previously served

as a volunteer staff person for ACLU's

campaign to end the death penalty.

continued on page 4

`reported on

proceedings and any subsequent civil or

criminal actions.

cutrently investigating the charges and

the Commission will soon determine

whether to find "`probable cause" that a

violation has occurred. If so, the matter

is referred to administrative hearing or

the district attorney.

Penalties for non-compliance with

provisions of the Act range from

misdemeanor guilt to fines of $10,000

or 3 times the amount not reported

properly.

ACLU-NC Legal Director Charles

Marson points out that portions of

Proposition 9 are so vague as to raise

some doubt as to whether SIPI was

required to register. Since all of the.

organization's communications clearly

Chapter Conference termed success;

FPPC staff are:

TED 0/9

SS IW

GND HeROGBR G8

Ss

No. 4

state that it has no position on

Proposition 15, Marson argues that it

has a right to disseminate information

on this complex issue and the public

has a right to receive it.

An additional constitutional problem

is presented by the "chilling effect" on

speech the initiation of an investigation

involves. A procedure by which the

mere filing of a complaint kicks off an

investigation of any individual or group -

who speaks out on public issues has a

built in speech deterrent.

-ACLU-NC staff has been authorized

to research the facts and if such a

"chilling effect" is present, to file suit

challenging that portion of Proposition

9 by which the mere filing of a com-

plaint triggers an investigation. |

fiiteen chapters represented

Nearly eighty chapter leaders, staff,

and ACLU-NC board members. at-

tended the annual Chapter Conference

last month at Greenwood Lodge in

Soquel. Workshops and' general

sessions held throughout the weekend

focused on civil liberties issues and

_ organizational matters. In addition, the -

conference provided an opportunity for

chapter members from all over Nor--

thern California to meet and exchange

ideas with each other.

The weekend began with welcoming

and introductory remarks from Bernie

Kalvelage, the chairperson of the

Chapter Committee; Richard

DeLancie, ACLU-NC Board Chair-

person; and David Fishlow, the ACLU-

NC Executive Director.

On Saturday, the work began,

beginning with a report from Police

Practices Project Director Amitai

`Schwartz on his activities in the past

year. This was followed by a general

session on affiliate-chapter rejations

with the ACLU-NC executive com-

mittee.

Later, workshops were held on

chapter financing, problems in the jails,

leadership and membership develop-

ment, civil liberties community

programs, and chapter legal programs.

There was also a report by ACLU-NC

Legal Director Charles Marson on the

directions of the affiliate's legal efforts.

Howard Anawalt, a professor of

constitutional law at Santa Clara, was

the guest speaker that evening and he

spoke on the historical development of

some of our constitutional liberties and

where they stand today.

On Sunday, ACLU-NC Legislative

Representative Brent Barnhart

lobbying efforts in

Sacramento including how chapters can

. Director of `the

Morton Halperin discusses

national security and civil liberties

problems at Chapter Conference.

help and what the major issues for the

coming year will be.

Finally, Morton Halperin, the

National ACLU's

Project on Civil Liberties and National

Security, spoke 6n expansion of the

Freedom of Information Act, efforts in

Washington to achieve greater control

over intelligence agencies, as well as

progress on his own lawsuit against

Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger for - .

the illegal wiretapping of his telephone

when he worked for the Department of

Defense and the National Security

Council. |

All fifteen of ACLU-NC's chapters

were represented at the conference and

many of those attending were at their

first chapter conference. If the en-

thusiasm and ability to work exhibited

at the conference now spreads back to

the chapters, it should be a productive

year for the ACLU.

ey

8

2 _ June 1976

Vaclifiews

Margaret Campbell Crosby begins

this month as ACLU-NC's new staff

counsel. She is replacing Joseph

Remcho who is leaving the ACLU after

| serving as staff counsel since 1972.

Remcho is forming a private law

practice, Rosen, Remcho and Hen-

derson, here in San Francisco. In his

| four years of work at the ACLU he

proved himself a brilliant lawyer, a

dauntless worker and a joy to work

with. He will be sorely missed by all who

know him.

Margaret Crosby has spent the last

year as clerk for Chief Judge Robert F.

Peckham of the United States District.

Court in San Francisco. Here her ex-

perience has covered the writing of

opinions and memoranda for the judge

{ on a wide range of issues, developing a

special `expertise in school deseg-

regation litigation and prisoner civil

{ rights litigation.

Prior to her clerkship, she worked as.

an associate at Pettit, Evers and Martin

fin San Francisco where she. was

| Margaret Crosby to be Staff Counsel

engaged in all aspects of civil litigation.

A graduate of Bryn Mawr College in

political science, Crosby received her

J.D. degree in 1973 from Yale Law

School. While at Yale, she was

Associate Editor of Yale Review of Law

and Social Action. She also was a

founder of the Connecticut Oc-

cupational Health Program and was

active in Yale Legal Services, Juvenile

Justice Program, Yale Legislative Ser-

vices, Yale Law Women's Organization,

Women v. Connecticut and Yale

Constitutional Law Action Group.

- In addition to her extensive legal

writings, she has authored numerous

academic papers, including studies on

"High School Students' Rights to

Freedom of Expression," and "Jn re

Gault and Procedural Due Process

Rights of Juvenile Offenders."

There were over eighty applicants for

the position won by by Crosby and all of:

us at the ACLU are happy to welcome

her to the organization.

Northern California Coalition demonstrates against Senate Bill 1, the

.Nixon/Mitchell rewrite of the U.S. Criminal Code.

May Day march protests S. 1

More than 1200 people from all over

California gathered in Sacramento on

May 1, in a peaceful parade and rally to

express their total opposition to Senate

Bill One. :

The California Coalition to Stop

Senate Bill One, of which ACLU is a

member, sponsored the event and is

calling for the total defeat of the Bill.

They stress that recent legislative ex-

perience has shown that the Bill cannot

be amended into acceptability.

Speakers included: Frank Wilkinson,

National Committee Against Repressive

Legislation; Doron Weinberg, National

Lawyers' Guild; Joe Morrow, United

Professors of California; Willie Holder,

Prisoners Union; Yvonne Golden,

Black Teachers Caucus; Christina

Vasquez, Mission Childcare Con-

sortium; and Bill Tamayo, Union of

Democratic Filipinos.

Entertainment was provided by Mimi

Farina, Faith Petric and Dan Sudran. |

Meanwhile, several news items have

appeared in the. past month heralding

the death of S.1. Unfortunately, such

reports are slightly premature and

misleading.

Due to the0x00B0.work' of: the "ACLU.

nationally, the National Committee

Against Repressive Legislation, and

grass-roots actions like the May 1

parade and rally in Sacramento, the

chances for Senate passage of S. 1 this

year have been substantially reduced.

' Unable to achieve a majority on the

_ Senate Judiciary and advised that the

House will not pass anything akin to

S.1, Senators McClellan and Hruska

have ostensibly despaired of passage

through Congress this year, which has

been the source of the news stories -

claiming the bill is dead.

There are still indications however

that Senator Kennedy is working to

salvage the bill and achieve passage in

the Senate this year to create

momentum for quick passage of a

similar bill next year. Letters should

continue to Kennedy urging him to

drop S. 1. oe

In Sacramento, Assembly Joint

Resolution No. 75 has been introduced

by 44 Assemblymen and co-authored

by 21 Senators. AJR 75 would put the

California State Legislature on the

public record in opposition to S.1.

Write your state senator and assem-

blyman urging support of AJR 75.

LEGAL

ACLU appears for strikers

By Nathan Stoltzfus

ACLU-NC filed an amicus curiae

memorandum in San _ Francisco

Superior Court last April in the case of |

`the City and County of San Francisco v.

George Evankovich, et. al. on behalf of

striking city craftsworkers.

At the outset of the strike late in

March and in response to a petition

from the San Francisco City Attorney,

Superior Court Judge Henry Rolph

issued a Temporary Restraining Order

against the striking city workers, their

unions, the San Francisco Labor

Council, two thousand Does, ``and all

persons in active concert with them."

Provisions of the order enjoined those

persons from striking and calling,

inducing, or giving notice of a strike.

Judge Rolph also threatened contempt

for picketing in "support, promotion,

or advocacy of a strike."

The TRO further ordered the unions

and their members not to `hinder or

delay in any manner or by any means or

device, [city employment] in support, (c)

promotion, or advocacy of a strike."

Finally, the Court's restraint forbade

"inducing or encouraging'' city em-

ployees to strike or to picket.

In the ACLU brief, Legal Director

Charles Marson, Staff Counsel Joseph

Remcho, and law student intern David

`Hettig pointed out that in Jn Re Berry,

a California Supreme Court decision

concerning injunctions against labor

picketing and striking, an injunction

could not infringe upon First Amend-

ment rights regardless of whether the _

strike itself was illegal, particularly

where no record had been established to

demonstrate a threat of serious public

harm.

The ACLU Staff then urged the

Court not to continue or re-enter the

Temporary Restraining Order, and not

to convert it to a preliminary injunction

because the TRO violated the First

Amendment and impermissibly in-

fringed free expression rights. Fur-

thermore, said ACLU, `an injunction

against free expression, even if

otherwise permissible, cannot be issued

in total absence of any evidence or

findings to support it." ACLU con-

tended that the City of San Francisco,

in petitioning for an injunction, did not

present a record showing an imminent

threat of serious public harm which

would justify curtailment of free ex-

pression. or

The ACLU attorneys argued that the

TRO was void on its face because it was

"vague and overbroad prior restraint,

even if the strike is assumed to be

illegal." Although ACLU supported the

Union's contention that the strike was

not illegal and could not be lawfully

enjoined, the brief dealt mostly with the

constitutional violations of the TRO.

Peaceful picketing is protected

expression, argued ACLU, subject only

to restrictions drawn with "a narrow

specificity' and then only to prevent

substantial evils which the state has a

right to prevent. ACLU then noted that

the TRO was so sweeping and vague it

rendered numerous interpretations and

applications, and_ restricted con-

stitutionally protected free speech and

speech-related activities. It does not,

said ACLU, limit its ban on efforts

undertaken in support of a strike, but

also casts its dragnet over much in-

formational picketing and speech that

the Berry Court found protected.

Advocacy of (presumed) illegality

must pose a clear and present danger of

the illegality before it can be prevented

. such a danger must rise far above

public inconvenience, annoyance or

unrest ... " ACLU conceded that

picketing might be lawfully regulated,

`but stated that its content is protected

by the clear and present danger rule.

At a hearing on whether the TRO

should be converted to a preliminary

injunction, Superior Court Judge John

Benson acceded partially to ACLU's

arguments and trimmed the worst parts

from the TRO, before issuing the in-

junction. Judge Benson dropped the

entire fourth section of the order which

forbade ``Coercing, compelling, in-

ducing or encouraging city employees to

strike or picket," although he let stand

the first section which enjoined

"striking, or calling or inducing' a

strike. Judge Benson also deleted such

vague and sweeping phrases as "`work

stoppage in the nature of a strike" and

"in any manner or by any means."'

Despite the preliminary injunction

issued by the court, city workers

continued: their strike. The City then

obtained an order to show cause for

holding union leaders in contempt for

ignoring the preliminary injunction.

Judge Clayton Horn, after a successful

labor attempt to disqualify Judge

Benson, presided over the contempt

hearings. A decision by Judge Horn is

expected shortly on the contempt

findings.

Last month in a related action,

ACLU filed a similar amicus, curiae

brief in Marin County Superior Court

_in the case of Golden Gate Bridge,

Highway and Transportation District v.

Amalgamated transit union. At the

hearing for a preliminary injunction,

Superior Court Judge George Wilson

dissolved the Temporary Restraining

Order and refused to issue a

- preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs have

since moved that Judge Wilson

reconsider his denial of a preliminary

injunction. Judge Wilson allowed a

second hearing for a preliminary in-

junction, and the case is now under

submission.

aclu news

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, David M. Fishlow, Executive Director

Mike Callahan, Editor and Assistant Executive Director

814 Mission Street, San Francisco, California 94103 - 777-4545

Membership $15 and up of which $2.50 is the annual subscription fee for the News.

LEGISLATIVE

Establishment of religion draws ACLU Saas

An attempt by certain religious

groups to expand five-fold the existing

number of public school released time

hours available for religious instruction,

was defeated in the Senate Education

Committee on Wednesday, June 2.

The bill, AB 3184, sponsored by

Assemblyman Alister McAllister, (D.,

San Jose), had made surprisingly easy

progress through the Assembly. A

- possible reason for the progress was

that the potential opposition - in-

cluding that of the ACLU - was

caught off-guard because the bill

seemed to propose an apparently in-

consequential change in the current

law.

Education Code _ Section 1086

currently provides that up to four days

of a school month may be allocated -

at local school district option - to

released time for private religious

education. Parents who opt for such

instruction for their children submit

written approval to the public school

district for the specific

teaching they wish their children to

have, and such instruction is then held

off public school grounds. Children

whose parents do not elect to par-

ticipate in such programs, remain in

school for the remainder of the school

day, assigned to such school work as

their teachers deem appropriate.

The McAllister plan called for

supplanting the current allowed four

days of instruction with 20 hours per

month. To the unschooled eye, the

change seemed to be inconsequential.

But, under current practice, ``four

days'' is interpreted to mean only four

days during which time no more than

one to two hours may be allocated for

released time purposes. Effectively

then, AB 3184 posed an expansion in

the amount of released time from four

to eight hours, to as many as 20 hours

per school month. Given the five day

school week, essentially an hour per day

of school time would be devoted to

religious education, changing what is.

now supplemental education into what

can only be regarded as training which

is dangerously close to a substitute for

secular school training.

The ACLU has been traditionally

opposed to all released time proposals,

but to date, such plans as that currently

part of statutory law in California have

been deemed to pass constitutional

muster in both the U.S. Supreme Court

and the Supreme Court of California.

AB 3184, however, proposed such an

expansion in the currently allowed

program, that the constitutional

controversy was restored to vigorous

life.

ACLU constitutional opposition

consists of three basic elements: .

(1) that such a program violates the

First Amendment establishment clause

(and Article IX, Section 8 of the

California Constitution) since it con-

stitutes an exercise of state power giving

affirmative, exclusive, material aids to

religious groups (since administration

of such programs is left to the

schools);

(2) that the establishment clause is

further violated because such programs

sectarian.

%

`require an exercise of state power

(specifically the compulsory school

attendance laws) to compel par-

ticipation by individuals in a program

for the inculcation of religious belief;

and

(3) that such program violate the

First Amendment's guarantee of equal

protection of the laws because students

who do not participate in established

sectarian programs are compelled to

remain in school, though they might

arguably wish to pursue equally

- valuable personal, cultural or moral

" Nejedly (R., Walnut Creek),

pursuits during the same time. For

example, they might wish to pursue

cultural or language instruction, music

or dance classes, nature programs, yoga

or meditation.

In the legislative staff's view, the

most telling aspect of the un-

constitutionality of released time

programs lies in their use of the

compulsory school laws to encourage

participation in sectarian instruction.

On its face, allowing children out of

school for elected off-campus religious

instruction seems reasonable enough.

However, the proponents of released

time refused to accept ``early dismissal"'

proposals that the ACLU would find

acceptable. What the proponents fear is

that if the children have the opportunity

to choose whether to go to religious

instruction, or whether to play football,

to to music or dance lessons, or walk in

the woods few would elect religious

instruction. :

AB 3184 was

and the Church of the Latter Day Saints

(Mormon). Opponents, in addition to

representatives of the ACLU's of

Northern and Southern California,

included the very effective and vigorous

opposition of the Jewish Public Affairs

Committee, as well as the California

Federation of Teachers,

Teachers Associations, and such school

districts as Long Beach and San Diego.

The final vote was 3-7-1. Senators

Rodda, Stiern, Stull, Dunlap, Dills,

Alquist and Grunsky voting against the

five-fold released time expansion;

Senators Gregorio, Jerry Smith and

Richardson voting for it, and Senator

Peter Behr abstaining. The only sour

note from ACLU NC's perspective lay

in the fact that such reliable and

sensitive Northern California legislators

as Gregorio and Smith supported the

released time concept - underscoring

once again that ACLU staff and

members have a vital job in getting the

civil libertarian message across. Civil

Liberties is easily shelved in favor of

plans and schemes that appear rational,

when there isn't due reflection on their

ultimate effect on essential political

freedoms, such as essential separation

of church and state.

SENTENCING

S.B. 42, introduced by Senator John

is still

under consideration by the Assembly

Criminal Justice Committee. The

measure would abolish the present

indeterminate sentencing structure (i.e.,

S-years to life) along with the Adult (c)

Authority's ultimate control over time

supported by

representatives of the Catholic Church

California -

served by California prisoners in favor

of a determinate sentence imposed by a

judge given certain statutory criteria.

S.B. 42 successfully gained passage in

the Senate last year, but failed to get

Criminal Justice Committee approval.

While it now appears that there is

probably some agreement between

contending groups over the necessity of

abolishing the indeterminate sentence,

differences remain over what structure

should replace it.

In recent months, Governor Brown's

office has stepped in to serve as a go-

between in the negotiations. The

Governor himself has indicated that he (c)

too favors abolition of the current

structure based on a concept of

_rehabilitation and prefers a deter-

minate sentencing structure based on

the punishment concept much as is

proposed in S.B. 42.

Because of the effect such a change

would have on the rights of prisoners

and the entire prison system, S.B. 42

remains a major concern of the ACLU.

CONSERVATORSHIPS

At the Chapter Legislative Workshop

held last February, the delegates were

asked to write their legislators and

support AB 1417 by Frank Lanterman

(R. - Pasadena). :

AB 1417 seeks to create a fairer

method for declaring persons in-

competent to handle their own affairs

June 1976 -

aclu.news

and imposing on them _ probate

guardianship or conservatorship by

,court appointment. The measure has

been passed by the Assembly, but has

been blocked in the Senate Judiciary

~" Committee.

The chief opposition there has been

the State Bar Association which has

adopted the position of its probate

section - the lawyers who make

handsome fees from handling con-

servatorships. The Bar's proposal, SB

1923 sponsored by Senator Alfred Song (c)

(D. - Monterey Park), offers far fewer

due process protections and is officially

opposed by the ACLU.

An example of the abuses that occur

under the current law is the fact that it

allows a declaration that someone lacks

the capacity to handle their own affairs

due to "feebleness because of old age."

Anxious heirs intent on not waiting for

their elderly relative to die, can seek to

be named conservators of the person's

estate. If they get a letter from a

physician stating that the presence in

court of the affected person would be

detrimental to his or her health, the

court can remove the affected person's

legal rights and appoint a conservator

without the person even knowing.

AB 1417 would provide for advance

notice to the affected person and an '

absolute right to be present at the

probate hearing. ACLU members are

asked to write their senators and

assemblymen urging them to support

AB 1417 and oppose SB.1923. -.

Civil Libernes :

-hy not observe it Be

rom the choicest vantage?

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, but that

surely needn't mean eternal dullness. Quite the con-

trary. The Civil Liberties Review is convinced that civil

libertarians are a witty as well as passionate lot, as

- eager to savor lively and perceptive writing as to

grapple with the convolutions of civil liberties law and

politics. So-The Civil Liberties Review is dedicated

to demonstrating that the literature of civil liberties

can be stimulating, engrossing and rewarding reading.

JUDGE FOR YOURSELF

Give The Civil Liberties Review the supreme test; sub-

mit it to your own critical examination. We believe

you'll find that CLR is both a vital forum for reporting

and debating key civil liberties issues and one of the

most delightfully literate periodicals you can find.

and

goes a

long way

Although The Civil Liberties Ae.

view comes to you six times a year

in thick, perfect-bound issues,

strikingly illustrated and hand-

somely printed, the cost remains

modest-less than 3cent per page of

fine reading.

e Haig Bosmajian discusses how

language oppresses minorities

e Meda Chesney-Lind on sexist juvenile

justice

e Carol Hymowitz on women's free

speech rights in the 19th century

e Roger Baldwin recalls the early ACLU

years, 1920-1940

e Frank Kameny on employment rights for

homosexuals in the federal government

Roundups:

e Trudy Hayden on privacy issues in

employment

e Aryeh Neier surveys current protest

tactics by disenfranchised groups

e Samuel Walker discusses the history of

police-community relations

ve conventions

e John Roemer shows how citizens

groups can combat mindless govern-

ment data systems

e Bruce Ennis analyzes what comes next

in securing rights for mental patients

e Calvin Pryluck on documentary film-

makers and the right to privacy

e The Trial of Martin Luther King, Jr.: an

in-depth account of King's conviction

for leading the 1963 Birmingham march

`in defiance of a state court order.

By Alan Westin and Barry Mahoney

after Watergate

third century

AND, IN THE MONTHS AHEAD, YOU'LL READ THESE STIMULATING ARTICLES IN CLR!

ee ESE ES |

Plus Book Reviews:

e Rudolfo Alvarez reviews current books

on Chicanos and civil liberties

e Denise Wacker reviews Susan Brown-

miller's book on rape

e David Warner reviews books on civil

liberties and health care

e Over 50 experts -including George

Reedy, Ted Sorenson, John Roche,

Victor Navasky, Catherine Cater, Henry

Graff, Roger Baldwin, Henry Abraham,

Vern Countryman, Theodore Lowi, Paul

Murphy -rate the civil liberties record

of the last seven U.S. presidents

e How civil liberties issues fare atthe

Democratic and Republican

(c) What's the civil liberties record of

America's 25 largest cities?

e Public opinion and civil liberties: a CLR

analysis of recent studies about public

attitudes toward key civil liberties issues

e Children's attitudes toward liberty and -

authority; a report on new research

about how children see these issues

e A Bicentennial symposium on where

civil liberties are headed in America's

Conversations

with: JEROME WEISNER

HERMAN KAHN

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, JR.

FATHER THEODORE HESBURGH

LILLIAN HELLMAN

only $12.50 A YEAR

to enjoy Th e

Cuil Liberties

Review

and help support your local civil liberties

group. For a limited time, ACLU members

may subscribe for only $12.50 (regular

price $17.50); the local group will retain

e200 of that amount for handling the

_ order.

Clip this box and send with your name

and address and check for $12.50 to:

American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

814 Mission Street

San Francisco, CA 94103

June 1976

aclu news .

CHAPTERS

Berkeley -Albany-

Kensington

This has been a busy couple of

months for the Berkeley/

Albany/Kensington Chapter.

On May 15 we had the drawing for our

restaurant raffle. The following people

won dinners for two at the following

restaurants: Nella Van de Burgt,

Narsais; Bob Purdy, Il Pavone; Ellen

Speech aired

Nancy McDermid, Vice-Chariperson -of

the Board of the ACLU of Northern

California, was the featured speaker at

Fresno's Civil Liberties Award Dinner.

The award was

"Fresno Bee Four" on May 10, 1976 at

the Fresno Hilton. Professor McDermid

spoke on the First Amendment after

200 years.

The speech will be eroadiaee by KPFA

(94 FM) in Berkeley on July 1 at 8:30

P.M. The program will also be carried

by listener sponsored radio station

KFCF (88.1 FM) for listeners in the San

Joaquin Valley.

presented to the-

Meyer, A La Carte; Ken Hecht, Beggars

Banquet; Fay and Marvin Stender,

Warsawa; W. Jones, The Swallow;

Todd Withy, Yenching; L. Hart, Indian

Kashmir; Marco Birnbaum, Omei's;

Byzella Boods, Marguerita Mexican

Restaurant; Mark Billings, Bateau

Irve; L. Cook, Once Upon A Stove;

Dorothy Jones, Bay Wolf. We raised

almost $400 on the restaurant raffle.

We also had a plant sale which raised

an additional $65. We want to thank all

who bought tickets or plants.

On May 27 we had an open meeting

at which we had a panel discussion on

_ Affirmative Action: Pro and Con. The

moderator was Jack Pemberton, a

professor of law at the University of San

Francisco and our panelists were:

Henry Hewett, Legal Aid Society of

Alameda County; Isabel Pritchard,

Political Science Professor, attorney

and Affirmation Action Specialist; and

Bruce Nelson, attorney with the law

firm of Pillsbury, Madison and Sutro.

After the panelists spoke we had a lively

discussion in which many of the

members of the audience participated.

Judging is currently being conducted

for the high school essay contest.

Winners will be announced in the next

newsletter.

Board of Directors

continued from page I

Doris Holmes Lowe - Academic,

Career and Personal Counselor in the

Peralta School District. Active in the

YMCA and _ instrumental in

establishing a Black Studies program

and an effective tutorial. service at:

Merritt College.

Caryl Mezey - Chairperson of the

San Francisco City Human Rights

Commission. Past President of the

`Madison and Roosevelt PTAs. Past

President of the League of Women

Voters in San Francisco.

Davis Riemer - Oakland Cha pis

Representative to the ACLU-NC Board.

Member of the Executive Committee

and ACLU-NC Treasurer since 1974.

Active organizer of the 1975 Bill of

Rights Day celebration.

r Emily Skolnick - Former ACLU-NC

Board member, serving from 1957 to

1963 and again from 1965 to 1971.

Served on ACLU's Executive Director

Search Committee, 1975. Community

activities include League of Women

Voters of San Mateo, Mid Peninsula

Council for Civie Unity, and the San

Mateo Advisory Committee to the State

FEPC.

Six incumbent Directors were re-

elected at the May 13 meeting to serve

additional terms. They include: Alvin

Baum, Bernhard Bergesen, Richard

DeLancie, Virginia Fabian, Drucilla

a and Leonard Sperry.

At its meeting of June 3 the Board

elected Joseph Grodin to fill the term

created by the recent resignation of

Norvel Smith. Grodin, a professor of

Law at Hastings, also taught Con-

stitutional Law at the University of

Oregon Law School as a _ visiting

professor. He is an ACLU-NC volunteer

attorney and has been a member of the

ACLU-NC Legal Committee for several

years. He is an active member of the

community formerly serving as foreman

of the Alameda County Grand Jury and -

President of the

Congress.

Joseph Grodin along with the other

nine newly-elected directors are sure to

bring new insights, commitment and

service to the Board of Directors of

ACLU-NC.

American Jewish

Dear Editor:

The members of the

complete report of the actions of the

organization's Board of Directors.

Many members, I believe, will be in-

terested in the Board's vote in its April

| meeting on a question of civil liberties

policy.

As a person long involved with civil

liberties, it appears to me basic to our

strength as an organization that we

grant fundamental due process rights in

our own meetings as well as insist that

| the government follow these rights. I

therefore introduced a motion, based

upon an acutal occurence at a prior

meeting, that whenever a non-board

member attorney for one side of a

pending law suit is invited to appear

ACLU of

Northern California do not receive a

-NC participation in that law suit that an

making civil liberties decisions on an

impartial basis even though they hear

from an advocate from only one side.

believe that the members of the ACLU

NC should be made aware of it.

`Equal time' at Board meetings

and present his or her case for ACLU

invitation be extended to counsel for the

opposing side allowing equal time.

Much to my surprise, the motion was

defeated with only two or three af-

firmative votes. The points made

against the motion were that this might

require us to hear from a prosecutor or

an attorney for the FBI and that Board

members were perfectly capable of

This vote disappointed me and I

Sincerely yours,

Marshall W. Krause

The Campus Civil Liberties Union

which is associated with the

Berkeley/Albany/Kensington Chapter

has been negotiating with the

University of California in order to

enforce the provisions of the Privacy

Act of 1974. Specifically the Campus

Chapter objects to the application for

undergraduate and graduate financial

aid which requires that applicants for

aid must provide a Social Security

number before such application can be

processed. The University fails and

refuses to give Privacy Act warnings

that such information cannot be

required in all cases. Negotiations will

continue through the summer. If the

University fails to comply with the

Privacy Act the Campus Chapter will

consider litigation.

The next meeting of the

Berkeley/Albany/Kensington Chapter

will be June 26 at 8:00 at the home of

Michael DeVito (879 Indian Rock,

Berkeley). All ACLU members are

invited to attend the meeting.

Mt. Diablo

You can reach the Mt.

Chapter by phoning 939-ACLU.

The Chapter's annual meeting and

potluck picnic will be held at the home

of Zack and Sari Stadt, 3274 Gloria

Terrace, Lafayette on Sunday, June 13

from 2-6 p.m.

Swimming, beer, wine, pop and

popcorn will be available. At 4:00 p.m.,

guest speaker Eugene Swan, Director of

the Legal Services Foundation, will

speak on `"`Equal Rights for the Poor in

Contra Costa County."'

All Chapter members are urged to

attend.

Fresno

The Chapter's final event of this term

will be held Monday, June 14 at the

Wild Blue Yonder, 1145 North Fulton

(near Olive), Fresno. There will be a

general meeting for the election of

officers and entertainment and

Diablo

goodtime for all will be provided by

Kenny Hall and Friends. The admission.

price is $2.00 and the doors open at

8:00 p.m. All are invited and we urge

you to come. It's a good way to start the

summer. If you have any questions, or

for further information, call Howard

Watkins at 486-7366.

Marin

The video taped program on the

ACLU's role in establishing equal

facilities for women prisoners in Marin

County Jail has been completed. The

program was produced by two College

of Marin students, Frank Scott and

Patty Garcia.

Conceived by the Marin County

ACLU Chapter, the program probes the -

successful lawsuit brought by the

- ACLU Women's Rights Project against

Marin County. Complainant Charlene

Scott, Marin County Counsel Doug

Maloney and ACLU Assistant Director,

Michael Callahan, discuss the case

during the show.

It will be aired on Marin County

Video - Channel 3 - in July. A

preview is planned at the June 21

Chapter Board meeting at Fidelity

Savings and. Loan in Mill Valley.

Members are invited. The preview can

be confirmed with Francis Miller - 0x00B0

454-3862.

Redwoods

The annual meeting was held on May

17 and the guest speaker was ACLU-

NC Executive Director David Fishlow.

He gave an overview of the organization

"that was both enjoyable and _in-

formative for the small but appreciative

group.

Chapter Board members Judith

Edson and Kathleen Preston also

reported on the discussions and

workshops they attended as. the

chapter's delegates to the Chapter

Conference in Soquel. They gained -

many valuable insights and were im-

pressed by the participants at the

conference and the work being done Dy

others in the organization.

Members of the Chapter Board were

elected from the slate presented by the

Nominating Committee. The new

Board members are: Steve Durham,

Instructor in Sociology and Political

Science, COR; Peter Fabrick,

Criminology Major, HSU; Irene Riely;

John Willey, Associate Director of the

Center for Community Development;

Abby Abinanati, attorney, California:

Indian Legal Services; Ira Blatt, at-

torney, Blatt and Gompertz, Arcata;

Angela `De La Torre, instructor of

Ethnic Studies, HSU; Leon Wagner,

Professor of Music, HSU; and Claire

Courtney.

Newly elected Board members will

join current Board members: John

Householder, Professor of

Mathematics, HSU; Kathleen Preston,

Professor of Psychology, HSU; Judith

Edson, attorney, Eureka; Lili Sommer,

student, HSU; and Tom Parsons,

Director of the Center for Community

Development.

The Board is optimistic about the

coming year but needs the assistance of

Chapter members to carry through its -

plans. More activity is planned to give |

the chapter greater visibility and a

better posture for solving civil liberties

problems in the community. (c)

Chapter members are invited to

attend the next meeting of the Board on

June 15 at the Humboldt Bay

Municipal Water District Building, 728

- 7th Street, Eureka, at 7:30 P.M.

Election of Board officers will be held at -

the meeting. Notices will be sent to all

Board members.

Oakland

The drawing for the winners of the

Oakland Chapter's Restaurant Raffle

will be held on July 4, 1976. Tickets are

$1 each. This event is a major fund-

raiser for the chapter so everyone is

urged to pitch in. Besides, you might

win a free dinner.

Winners will be notified by mail.

There is still plenty of time to be in-

cluded in the drawing. Send your

money and ticket stubs to Oakland

Chapter, P.O. Box 1865, Oakland, |

California 94694.

The monthly meeting of the Chapter

will be on July 21 at the Sumitomo

Bank in downtown Oakland (1 block

from Capwells). The guest speaker has

not yet been determined. All chapter

members are invited to attend.

The June 4 semi-annual potluck

dinner was well attended and many new

members indicated willingness to par-

ticipate in the chapter's activities.

Preparations are already on for a repeat

in October.