vol. 47, no. 1

Inside: Report from Sacramento

Volume XLVII

January-February 1982

| Campaigners Hit by `Holiday Bans

Attempts by shopping centers

throughout northern California to im-

pose an arbitrary "holiday ban" on all

petition gathering and leafletting were

thwarted by swift legal action by

ACLU-NC attorneys. Two eleventh-

hour lawsuits, one in Contra Costa and

one in Sacramento, and negotiations

with shopping center managers in De-

cember guaranteed that groups work-

ing on four different state initiative

campaigns as well as other political

activists were able to use the busy shop-

ping malls to bring their issues to the

public.

Despite the victory over `holiday

bans', however, harassment of cam-

paigners continues. According to

ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan Schlos-

ser, who led the legal challenge to the

shopping center bans, "We are literally~-

deluged with calls from political groups

and community organizations who are

being confronted by unconstitutional

regulations limiting or totally prevent-

ing them from being at the shopping

malls."

Schlosser noted that complaints have

come from nine different counties, in-

cluding Sacramento, Contra Costa,

Shasta, Santa Clara and others.

-He explained, "Despite the California

_Supreme Court's 1979 landmark ruling

in Robins vy. Pruneyard. Shopping Cen-

ter that individuals may distribute leaf-

lets and solicit signatures at shopping

malls without infringing on the owners'

rights, many shopping centers still try to

prohibit or limit expressive activities on

their property through burdensome and

stringent regulations.

"This pattern of shopping centers all

over the state is definitely preventing

Californians from enjoying the rights

granted in the Pruneyard decision,'

Schlosser said.

The ACLU-NC is now developing a

legal strategy to deal with the recurring

problem, he added.

Contra Costa County El Salvador leafletters fought restrictions on their activi-

ties at Hilltop Mall and Ei Cerrito Plaza.

The first group to be confronted with

the "holiday ban" was the West Contra

Costa Coalition Against U.S. Interven-

tion in El Salvador. The Coalition had

been leafletting at El Cerrito Plaza

shopping center since March. But when

they sought permission to be at the mall

on December 19, they were barred by a

total ban on political campaigners from

Thanksgiving through January 2.

El Salvador leafletters

Howard Sodja, chairperson of the

Coalition, said, "By imposing a black-

out on our activities in December by

means of this `holiday ban', the Plaza

was preventing the Coalition from dis-

seminating, and Plaza shoppers from

receiving, information which is ex-

tremely important about El Salvador-

in violation of our constitutional rights.

"For one thing," Sodja explained,

"we expected a greater number of shop-

pers to beat the Plaza during December

because of the holidays, and so we

As provided by the ACLU-NC

by-laws, revised in 1980, the ACLU-

NC membership is entitled to elect its

1982-83 Board directly. The nominat-

ing Committee is already seeking

suggestions from the membership to

fill at-large positions on the Board.

ACLU members may participate

in the nominating process in two

ways:

1. They may send suggestions for

the Nominating Committee's consid-

eration before April 1, 1982.

(Address your suggestions to

Nominating Committee, ACLU-NC,

Board Elections

can be reached.)

1663 Mission Street, S.F. 94103, CA.

Include your suggested nominee's

qualifications and how the nominee

2. They may submit a petition with

the signatures of 15 current ACLU

members. Petitions for nominations,

which should also include qualifica-

tions must be submitted to the Board

of Directors by June 4, 1982 (20 days

after the May Board meeting.)

(Current ACLU members are

those who have renewed their mem-

bership during the last 12 months.

Only current members are eligible to

continued on p. 7-

anticipated reaching more people than

usual.

``An equally important reason why

our December leafletting was particu-

larly significant centered on recent

events in E] Salvador and Washington.

Despite well-documented reports of

atrocities and repressive measures com-

mitted by the El Salvadoran army and

security forces, the U.S. is continuing to

pour millions of dollars of military aid

into that country," he said.

"At the same time," Sodja continued,

"The Reagan administration is propos-

The ACLU Foundation of Northern

' California has exceeded its 1981 fund-

raising goals, announced Nancy

Pemberton, ACLU-NC Board De-

velopment Chairperson. "At year end,"

Pemberton said, "gifts and pledges for

the 1981 Major Gifts and Bill of Rights

Day campaigns totaled several thou-

sand more than the budgeted $220,000."

-ACLU Foundation dollars go exclu-

sively to support the ACLU's extensive

legal program in northern California.

"Our fundraising accomplishment

this year was extraordinary," com-

mented Pemberton. "We had to better

than double the $88,000 raised in 1980

- and we did.

"Looking back to what happened to

civil liberties in 1981, we have to be even

stronger in 1982. Because we succeeded

in meeting our budget, even though we

had to increase our fundraising enor-

mously, we are now stronger than ever.

Obviously, our members and support-

ing drastic budget cuts in human ser-

vices designed to help the needy in this

country. It is critical that voters are

informed and can voice their opposition

to reverse these spending priorities now,

while Congress is making final decisions

on the budget.

"Our new leaflet, JOBS not War,

JUSTICE for El Salvador, is intended

to reach people during this crucial bud-

get process," Sodja added.

On December 7, Schlosser was suc-

cessful in obtaining a Temporary

Restraining Order in Contra Costa

Superior Court which allowed the

group to distribute its literature at El

Cerrito Plaza despite the mall's holiday

season prohibition.

In addition to the holiday season ban,

Schlosser also challenged other burden-

some regulations being imposed at El

Cerrito Plaza. These include a "no

solicitation" rule which prevents leaflet-

ters from even displaying a donation can

at their table, a requirement of a $50

cleaning deposit, and a prohibition

against any literature sales. A hearing

on those issues was held on January 7 in

front of Contra Costa Superior Court

Judge Robert Cooney.

The judge took the case under sub-

mission and a decision is expected

within the next few weeks.

Statewide Initiatives :

Particularly hard hit by the holiday

ban are those persons collecting signa-

tures for statewide initiatives. "We have

continued on p. 2

Fundraising Tops 81 Goal

ers fully realize the threat to civil liber-

-ties posed by the current political

atmosphere," Pemberton added.

1981 was the first year for the ACLU

Foundation's Major Gifts Campaign,

which succeeded in raising $157,000.

The ninth annual Bill of Rights Day

Campaign contributed $68,000 more.

Pemberton noted, "The Major Gifts

Campaign involved a number of Board

members and former Board members

teaming up to ask for donations from

our most generous supporters. It was an

incredible personal effort on the part of

many people - but the most incredible

effort came from Fran Strauss.

"As Associate Chair for the Develop-

ment Committee, Fran made the Major

continued on p. 3

aclu news

jan-feb 1982

2

ACLU Defends Justice's Speech Rights

Amidst a statewide controversy sur-

rounding the propriety of California

Supreme Court Justice Stanley Mosk's

proposal toa Senate committee to elim-

inate affirmative action. programs,

ACLU-NC Executive Director wrote a

letter to the Commission of Judicial

Performance recommending that ~

Mosk's action not be subject to investi-

gation.

In October, Justice Mosk wrote to

Senator John Schmitz, then Chair of

the Senate Constitutional Amendments

Committee, advocating an amendment

to the state Constitution stating "No

privileges or immunities and no benefit

or detriment may be granted or with-

held .. . .on the basis of race, sex, color,

religion, or national origin... ." by any

public or publicly-funded institution in

the state.

The proposed amendment would vir-

tually eliminate any state affirmative

action programs in n education and em-

ployment.

At Committee hearings on the

amendment in Sacramento and San

Francisco, ACLU-NC representatives .

vigorously opposed the amendment and

made comprehensive and forceful arguments

in favor of affirmative action

(ACLU News, Nov-Dec, 1981).

However, because of Mosk's position

as a Supreme Court justice, Assembly-

woman Maxine Waters, supported by

many women's and minority organiza-

tions, requested that the Commission

on Judicial Performance "immediately

begin an investigationof........ Mosk

for violations of the Code of Judicial

Conduct."

Waters also wrote to the ACLU-NC

asking that the Board support the re-

quest to the Commission for an investi-

gation of Mosk.

Because of Waters' request,

ACLU-NC Board of Directors debated

the issue at its November meeting. The

discussion addressed a number of seem-

ingly conflicting principles: First

Amendment rights, equal protection,

separation of powers and the indepen-

dence of the judiciary.

Reflecting the Board discussion and

resolution to oppose an investigation of

Justice Mosk, Ehrlich wrote to the Com-

mission on Judicial Performance on

November 25. She explained that the

Board felt an investigation would be

"unwarranted and inappropriate."

"This is not the first time the ACLU-

NC has moved to protect the First

Amendment rights of persons express-

ing views with which we disagree," Ehr-

lich wrote. "The ACLU-NC strongly

and unequivocally opposes Justice

Mosk's position on affirmative action.

We filed briefs with the state Supreme

Court in recent years. On each occasion

we opposed Justice Mosks's position

and advanced the interpretation ulti-

mately adopted by the Court. Nonethe-

less, we believe that Justice Mosk has

the right to express his opinions directly

to the Legislature."

The letter continued, "In the absence

of allegations that Justice Mosk used

his office for personal gain, or engaged

in conduct which compromised the

court, an investigation could put all

judges on notice that what they say to

the Legislature is sufficient basis for an

examination of the judge's fitness for

office. Therefore, we believe that an in-

vestigation by the Commission on the

basis of facts presently publicly known

will have a chilling effect on the exercise

of First Amendment freedoms.

"The fact that a formal investigation

into the fitness of a Justice of the Supreme

Court may be based solely on

public statements, is wholly inappropriate

in a society which values the right to

free expression. Furthermore, we are

most concerned that such an investiga-

tion into protected First Amendment

activity could set the Commission on a

dangerous course as a censor," Ehrlich

wrote.

Ehrlich urged the Commission to "re-

spect the paramount principles of free

expression and interpret the Canons of

Judicial Ethics in a manner which is

consistent with the First Amendment."

The Commission advised the ACLU

that the matter is now under their con-

sideration.

Letters

I've just read in the latest ACLU

News (November-December 1981) on

the threat to affirmative action posed by

Senator Schmitz's committee.

If the committee holds another hear-

ing, regularly or irregularly scheduled, I

would be pleased to testify with respect

to the positive effects of affirmative ac-

tion on the Department of Forestry's

programs. When I was appointed Direc-

tor in April 1979, the Department; with

more than 3,000 employees, had the

lowest representation of women and

ethnic minorities of any state depart-

ment. Shortly thereafter the Personnel

Board imposed a sanctions order, which

required the severest steps to pursue af-

firmative action that had been imposed

on any department.

The results have been enormously

successful. But the most important ef-

fects, in my opinion, have been to bring

new perspectives to the Department's

programs and help to prepare the or-

ganization to survive and carry out its

missions even more effectively.

I consider affirmative action progress

to be one of my major accomplishments

as Director of the Department and |

would be pleased not only to defend the

program but to argue for its positive ef-

fects beyond the area of employing the

underrepresented.

David E. Pesonen

Director, Department of Forestry

The importance of my ACLU mem-

bership was reinforced after watching-

of all things-the television last night.

The first program was a CBS docu-

drama entitled "Skokie", and it dealt

with the now famous case in Illinois.

Our role in this emotional conflict. was

portrayed fairly and with objectivity.

The second piece was done by Mike

Wallace on the life and tragic death of

actress Jean Seberg (and the FBI's role

in it.) 2

While our struggle to protect the First

Amendment may not always be pleas-

ant or in fashion, its importance can ~

never be denied.

Kenneth Burt

Sacramento

David Hyman

David R. Hyman, a full-time vol-

unteer at the ACLU-NC office since

1974, died on November 29 in San

Francisco. A retired pharmacist,

Hyman was a leader in organizing

the pharmacists' union in the early

1940's. His commitment to the

ACLU and the labor movement was

matched only by his great love of

music and art.

Executive Director Dorothy Ehr-

lich said of Hyman, "David was a

warm, kind, dedicated and yes, iras-

cible force for civil liberties. We re-

member with deep appreciation his

assistance in doggedly maintaining

the ACLU-NC's membership rec-

ords during the six years he worked

with us."

Memorial services will be held on

Friday, January 29 at 3:30 PM at the

Friends Meeting House, 2160 Lake

Street, San Francisco.

Holiday Bans Continued from p. 1

to collect 550,000 signatures by March

25," explained Katherine Knight of

Californians Against Waste, the group

sponsoring the `Can and Bottle' bill to

set minimum deposits on beverage con-

tainers. Therefore, time is of the

essence.'

If the busy holiday shopping period

were eliminated from their petition gath-

ering campaign, Knight said, it would

be very detrimental to their efforts.

Knight's complaint was echoed by

other groups gathering initiative signa-

tures, including the Nuclear Weapons

Freeze campaign, a tax reform initia-

tive, and a water resources proposal

supported by all major environmental

groups.

When Californians Against Waste

were faced with a blanket holiday ban at

Sunrise Mall in Sacramento, Schlosser

and ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys

Martin Fassler, Mark Merin and Kath-

Jeen Williams prepared a lawsuit against

the shopping center.

With the threat of a lawsuit, the Sun-

rise Mall management backed down

and allowed the group to gather signa-

tures at the mall.

However, the Sacramento attorneys

did file suit in Sacramento County

Superior Court on behalf of Califor-

nians Against Waste against Birdcage

Walk shopping center. There, regula-

tions only allowed the petitioners to be

at the shopping mall from 10AM to

6PM on Saturdays and Sundays-thus

making the shopping center off-limits

during the busy weekday evening hours. -

As in the Contra Costa case, other

burdensome regulations at Birdcage

Walk were also challenged in the suit.

On December 14, Judge Horace

Ceccettini of Sacramento County Supe-

rior Court issued a Temporary Restrain-

ing Order eliminating the restrictive

hours, and allowing the group to solicit

donations and move away from their

table to talk with shoppers.

Immense legal battle

Schlosser explained, "Though we

have won victories in Contra Costa and

Sacramento, we still face an immense

legal battle. The shopping centers use a

myriad of regulations to limit expressive

activity and so we must challenge each

prohibition at each shopping sees for

each individual group.

"The shopping center industry vigor-

ously opposed the California Supreme

Court decision in the Pruneyard case,"

he said. "Having lost in the courts, they

are continuing their unwillingness to

permit free speech access by adopting

complicated burdensome regulations

which clearly violate the letter and spirit

of the Court's decision."

As an example, he cited a Santa Clara

shopping center which requires cam-

paigners to purchase a $1 million insur-

-ance policy before being allowed on the

property. Other malls require refer-

ences, $250 cleaning deposits, and pro-

fessionally made signs.

"These tactics present a serious ob-

stacle for most petitioning groups, who -

do not have resources to hire a lawyer to

challenge even obviously invalid re-

quirements," Schlosser said.

"The ACLU is determined to do its

utmost to insure that the victory that

was won in the courts is made a reality

for Californians seeking to excercise

their rights," he added.

New Artist

Original artwork in this and previous

issues of the ACLU News has been done

by graphic designer Karl Anderson, a

volunteer with the ACLU.

Elaine Elinson, Editor

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

Marcia Gallo,

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 S50 cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publication, Civil Liberties.

Chapter Page 2

aclu news

jan-feb 1982

"We have today in the White House

an administration which is openly hos-

tile to civil liberties. An authoritarian

mentality, reminiscent of ten years ago,

with even greater fervor with attacks on

free speech, abortion rights, affirmative

action, and safety for criminal defen-

dants. It is not demagogic to say that it

is the Bill of Rights which hangs in the

balance," warned U.S. Representative

Ronald V. Dellums in his keynote ad-

dress at the ACLU-NC annual Bill of

Rights Day Celebration in San Fran-_

cisco on December 13.

Davis Riemer, the new chair of the

ACLU-NC, presided over the event at

the Sheraton Palace Hotel. The ninth

annual Earl Warren Civil Liberties

Award was presented to attorney Benja-

min Dreyfus and posthumously to civil

liberties activist Fay Stender. The new

Lola Hanzel Advocacy Award was pre-

sented to veteran ACLU volunteer

Margery Chiosso.

In his forceful and eloquent attack on

the policies of the Reagan administra-

tion, Dellums focused especially on the

danger posed by the "unleashing of the

intelligence agencies."

"Though we may perceive external

chaos," Dellums told the crowd of 800,

"there is an internal consistency to the

Reagan program that is calculated and

dangerous. This program will leave in

its wake thousands of broken dreams

and broken bodies.

"The response from the American

people must be activism and protest.

Reagan's response [to that] will surely

come from the intelligence agencies."

Dellums noted that in less than a year

of the Reagan administration, we have

witnessed an Executive Order allowing

the CIA to operate against Americans

within the U.S., proposals to eliminate

Freedom of Information Act access to

FBI and CIA files, and the Intelligence

Identities bill which makes it a crime to

identify agents even if that information

is obtained from unclassified sources.

He called for progressive people to

take the leadership in challenging these

reactionary policies and warned not to

put faith in Congress, which at this

point is "an inept, ineffectual, impotent

institution which rolled over and played

dead for the President."

Fundraising Continued from p. 1

Gifts campaign work. She used all that

she had learned in eight years of Bill of

Rights Day organizing to spur us on.

"On the Bill of Rights side, Linda

Weiner deserves special recognition as

head of the Solicitation Committee.

What really made the difference this

year was the strong participation by

chapter boards and chapter volunteers.

We needed a whole new workforce for

Bill of Rights Day and we more than

got it," Pemberton added.

She also pointed to the "superb efforts"

by staff members. "Executive Di-

rector Dorothy Ehrlich set an example

for everyone in the Major Gifts Cam-

paign. Associate Director Michael Mil-

ler had overall responsibility for our

fundraising and he did an excellent job,

as the results prove.

"In addition," Pemberton said, "Field

Representative Marcia Gallo and De-

velopment Assistant Dick Grosboll

made a big difference with their fine `be-

hind-the-scenes' work for the Bill of

Rights Day."

Keynote speaker Congressman Ronald

V. Dellums

"Our government," he added, "is sup-

posed to be a system of checks and bal-

ances. But now there are very few

checks and no balances. Congress is in-

capable of protecting your civil liber-

ties, so if you want your rights, you

better stand up and do it yourselves,"

Dellums warned, "Otherwise you will

awaken one morning right in the middle

of a police state."

ACLU Executive Director Dorothy

Ehrlich also warned of "the most offi-

cially hostile environment we have ever

encountered" in her review of the work

of the ACLU-NC Foundation over the

last year and the prospects for the

future. She noted the upsurge in libel

suits against newspapers and political

campaigners to quell political opposi-

tion and attempts by shopping centers

to prohibit expressive activities as ex-

amples of the assault on the First

Amendment.

"We have learned that the Bill of

Rights is not self-enforcing and that it is

our role to emphatically respond to

each of these challenges - that is pre-

cisely what the ACLU Foundation has

been doing these last 12 months and

what we will continue to do."

tion and remarkable good humour

during her long and, for us, enriching

tenure as an ACLU volunteer."

Ehrlich said that by awarding Chi-

osso, the ACLU 1s also "recognizing our

other complaint desk volunteers, those

at the ACLU-NC office, and those in

the Chapters, many of whom Margie

has effectively trained."

Dreyfus, Stender Honored; Dellums Speaks at Rights Day

ties which spanned the decades from his

opposition to the Smith Act during the

McCarthy era, defense of Blacks' rights

in the South in the '60s to his current

efforts against the attempts by Attorney

General Deukmejian to "undermine the

independence of the judiciary."

On accepting the award, Dreyfus

spoke of the work of Chief Justice Earl

Benjamin Dreyfus accepted the Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award from former ACLU-NC chair Drucilla Ramey.

Attorney Bernie Bergesen presented

the Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award

to Fay Stender posthoumously. A col-

league of Stender's on the ACLU-NC

Board of Directors in the 70s, Bergesen -

said that "though her dedication to civil

liberties took many forms - including

her commitment to the rights of prison-

ers - perhaps her most valuable contri-

bution was as an instigator of change in

the ways in which the ACLU would

proceed:

Bergesen said that Stender, a woman

who "had a willingness to rock the

boat," was instrumental in opening up

participation in the ACLU and for.

focussing ACLU attention on rights of

women, minorities and gays.

Former Berkeley City Council mem-

ber Ying Lee Kelly accepted the award

on behalf of Stender's family and

Bernie Bergesen (l.) presented the posthumous award to Fay Stender. The award

was accepted by Ying Lee Kelly (r.)

Ehrlich also presented the first Lola

Hanzel Advocacy Award (see box) to

ACLU complaint desk counselor

Margey Chiosso. Chiosso, who has

been helping advice seekers at the

ACLU two days a week for eleven years,

was the unanimous selection of the

Board "not only for her extraordinary |

length of service, but also for her extra-

ordinary depth of compassion, dedica-

friends "with a tremendous amount of

joy and of course, a sense of sadness and

loss." As an immigrant to the U.S.,

Kelly said, it was always exciting for her

to learn about constitutional rights

from her longtime friend Fay Stender.

Drucilla Ramey, immediate past

chair of the ACLU, presented the Earl

Warren Award to Benjamin Dreyfus.

She cited Dreyfus's work in civil liber-

Warren, and particularly his court's es-

tablishment of the ""one man, one vote"

ruling. Dreyfus noted that the current

administration's attempt to turn over

federal standards in the name of "state's

rights" is a dangerous undermining of

that decision, and one that we must

fight.

The Bill of Rights Day Celebration is

the culmination of the annual fundraising

drive of the ACLU-NC. This year,

generous donations from members and

supporters to Bill of Rights Day and the

Major Donors program have already

raised over $220,000.

The funds raised, which are a signifi-

cant increase over previous years, will

support the continuing legal program of

the ACLU-NC Foundation. As Ehrlich

told the Bill of Rights Day celebrants,

"You are the people who have insisted

upon this advocacy-you have, through

your persistence and your support, en-

abled our legal program to exist. You

have insisted that there be a voice."

Lola Hanzel Award

In 1981, the ACLU-NC Board of

Directors established the Lola Han-

zel Advocacy Award in order to rec-

ognize and thank volunteers who

have provided strength, dedication

and leadership to the ACLU-NC by

their exemplary efforts. The award is

to be presented each year at the Bill

of Rights Day Celebration to an

-individual who has made an extra-

ordinary contribution to the or-

ganization in a voluntary capacity.

The Board resolution establishing

the award states, "Before her death in

September, 1980, Lola Hanzel served

as a volunteer to the ACLU-NC for

more than a decade, giving of her

spirit and devotion in a way that

inspired others. Her memory

reminds us of all the heartfelt appre-

ciation we hold for volunteers who

continue to make immeasurable con-

tributions to the ACLU-NC."

aclu news

jan-feb 1982

Epidemic in Sacramento

by Beth Meador

ACLU-NC Legislative Advocate

Legislators in Sacramento, like others

throughout the country, have been

bitten by insectus reactionitus. Many

Californians might think that the Medfly

infestation was the worst plague to hit

the state this year, but the insectus

reactionitus infestation may have even

more far-reaching and devastating effects.

The symptoms of the disease transmitted by this pest are often subtle, however

there are recognizable signs:

inability to take a position on an issue without consulting the Field poll;

disregarding the Field poll when Jerry Falwell disagrees with it;

cutting human services;

ignoring the effects of lack of such services on the crime problem;

building more prisons to combat crime;

repressing citizens' rights in order to lower the crime rate;

unleashing police power in order to battle crime.

Of course, this list is not all-inclusive. For example, waffling on issues is not

cited. You probably know most of the other symptoms.

In 1981, insectus reactionitus injected our legislators with a heavy dose of

reaction to the increased crime rate. Now, there is no doubt that rising criminal

activity is a serious societal problem. Reactionitus, however, does not lead

legislators to give the problem serious thought. Instead, they read the polls, the

sensational headlines, and listen to victims-who are often influenced by ven-

geance-and then put forward easy answers. That the proposed solutions have

never worked cannot penetrate the reactionitus infected brain. Overheated rhetoric

makes a good campaign speech. And, if you tell a frightened populace

that you're going to pass a law to put an armed robberaway for 20 years, it

sounds appealing. Never mind the fact that there may be 50 more armed robbers

being bred by poverty, unemployment, and inadequate education. The legis-

lators will simply build more prisons.

Of course, in order to fight crime, the police must have more power. Never

mind a citizen's right to be free from unwarranted search and seizure. Legislators

propose to muffle our courts and "untie" police officers' hands. Unless we find a

cure for reactionitus, the rubber hose may be resurrected. The legislators have

even decided to let grocery store clerks into the indiscriminate search and seizure

business. There seems to be a prevailing notion that "honest" citizens won't mind

such intrusions.

The synopsis below contains a brief description of some of the major crime

bills submitted this year. This is only the tip of the iceburg, however insectus

reactionitus was busy this year. More than 600 of the bills introduced in the

California Legislature purported to deal with the crime problem.

On other fronts, the reactionitus disease has led many legislators to join the

"new right" (read "old wrong") in attacking women's freedom of reproductive

choice; to attempt to water down Fair Employment Practices; and to end affirmative action.

These same legislators are also fighting bills that would make

tenants more secure and prohibit discrimination in rental of housing to families

with children.

What is the cure for the insectus reactionitus infection? Large doses of civic

activism by persons who understand and believe in our Constitution and basic

human rights. Reactionitus succumbs to reason. It is up to us to raise our voices

and vaccinate our legislators with reason. Because we can eradicate reactionitus

- if not the Medfly.

Crime

SCA 7 (Presley) - Exclusionary Rule/

Government seizure of evidence.

This bill would amend the California

Constitution to provide that evidence

could be excluded in a criminal action

unless required by decision of the U:S.

Supreme Court or by statute. It effec-

tively abdicates independent state pro-

tections against improper seizure of

evidence and government access to per-

sonal information such as bank accounts

and medical records. It also has a

severe effect on the laws affecting news-

paper searches, electronic surveillance

and strip searches during traffic stops.

Action: Passed Senate; awaiting action

in Assembly Criminal

Justice Committee.

ACLU: Opposed

SCA 10 (Presley)-Preventive detention

The proposed amendment would add

considerations of so-called "public

safety"

grounds for granting bail pending trial,

and would empower the court to deny

bail altogether. It effectively negates the

presumption of innocence, and could be

particularly deadly in bail determina-

tions following mass arrests during a

strike or demonstration. (Assembly al-

ternative in ACA 14)

Passed Senate; awaiting action

in Assembly Criminal Justice Committee

Action:

ACLU: Opposed

AB 1678 (Young) - Shoplifting searches

The bill would give store owners and

their employees authority to search

without liability a shopper's "belong-

ings", such as purses or packages. It ex-

pands current merchant privilege which

already empowers grocery clerks and

store security guards to question cus-

tomers about a suspected theft and de-

tain them until a police officer arrives.

Action: Signed by Governor.

ACLU: Opposed

to the present constitutional |

ACLU.NC

SB 54 (Roberti) - Diminished Capacity

As initially written, the bill attempted

to eliminate the use of psychiatric evi-

dence in criminal trials by abolishing

the defense of diminished capacity. It

also removed the state's obligation to

prove that a person accused of a serious

felony possessed the requisite state

of mind to commit the crime.

In last minute negotiations at which

both defense and prosecution lawyers

stated their opposition to the bill as

written, amendments made significant

changes. As rewritten, (1) psychiatrists

will be forbidden from testifying

whether a defendant had the capacity to

form the requisite intent, but will be al-

lowed to testify whether the defendant

actually formed the intent to commit

the crime; and (2) the defenses of dimin-

ished capacity, diminished responsibil-

ity and re impulse are abolished.

SB 54 does not abolish the plea of

"not guilty by reason of insanity", and

does not attempt to reinstate the Mc-

Naughton Rule.

Action: Signed by Governor.

ACLU: Opposed.

AB 731 (Floyd) - Victim restitution

The bill would empower the court, in

a criminal action, to require restitution

to the victim in lieu of all or part of a

sentence to imprisonment, provided

specific criteria are met. The bill would

also require that the victim of the crime

be advised of the availability of res-

titution.

Passed Assembly; failed passage

in Senate Judiciary Committee.

ACLU: Supported

AB 1789 (Tucker) - Juvenile status

offenders

Current law forbids keeping juvenile

status offenders-i.e., runaways or tru-

ants-in locked facilities, except where

there are existing warrants or notices

out for the juvenile. In that case, juve-

niles may be kept a maximum of 48

hours in a locked facility to allow, for

example, the child's parents to come

and get them. This bill would abolish

that provision.

Action: Awaiting action in Assembly

Criminal Justice Committee.

"ACLU: Opposed

AB 351 (D. Stirling) - Involuntary

mental commitments

The bill amends the current involun-

tary commitment law to expand the

maximum commitment period, for per-

Legislative Report

aclu news" 5

"jan-feb 1982

sons found to be dangerous, from 90

days to one year. Criteria for commit-

ment also changes from proving that the

subject presents: "an imminent threat of

physical harm to others" to proving "a

demonstrated danger of substantial

physical harm to others."

Awaiting action in Assembly

Ways and Means Committee.

ACLU: Opposed

Action:

Reproductive Rights

SB 110 (Alquist) - State Budget/ Anti-

abortion control language

This year's Budget Act saw two sep-

arate efforts to prevent state funding of

abortions through the Medi-Cal

system. The McAlister language is es-

sentially a restatement of the same

restrictions which were declared uncon-

stitutional in the 1981 landmark California

Supreme Court ruling in CDRR

v. Myers. (The ACLU challenged the re-

strictions in the courts and in November

won a favorable decision from the

Court of Appeal maintaining Medi-Cal

abortion funding.)

The Schmitz Amendment forbade

any state official (such as the Controller

or the Director of Health Services) from

obeying a court order contrary to legis-

lative intent. It was selectively vetoed by

the Governor, and anti-abortion legis-

lators conceded that they hadn't the

votes to override the veto.

Action:

Budget passed Senate and Assembly; signed by Governor

(with selective vetoes); Senate

intervened in ACLU's court

action challenging the Medi-

Cal abortion fund cuts, but

failed in its attempt to undo

the previous court decision.

ACLU: Opposed

SCA 29 (Schmitz) - Human Life

Amendment

The proposed amendment to the state

constitution would provide that the

"right to life" is vested from the moment

of fertilization without regard to age,

health, or conditions of dependency.

Awaiting action in Senate

Judiciary and Senate Consti-

tutional Amendments Committees.

Action:

ACLU: Opposed

ACA 40 (McAlister) - Legislative Ap-

propriations

The bill attempts to reverse CDRR v.

Myers, which held that the Legislature

may not prevent the use of Medi-Cal

funds to pay for abortions where the

same funds are used to encourage child

birth. However, it would eliminate the

entire independent authority of courts

to review the manner in which the Leg-

islature appropriates money, regardless

of lawfulness or constitutionality.

Budget passed Senate and As- ~

Action:

Judiciary Committee.

ACLU: Opposed

SB 1231 (Ellis) - Private insurance

policies/abortion

The bill would forbid abortion bene-

fits under health insurance policies ex-

cept as an additional optional rider.

This means that female employees

receiving company health care benefits

would have to specifically stipulate their

desire to have additional abortion coverage.

Failed on Senate floor; re-

consideration granted, now

placed on inactive file.

Action:

ACLU: Opposed

SB 732 (Montoya) - Informed Consent/Abortion

The bill imposes an "informed

consent" requirement as a prerequisite

to performing an abortion. This written

consent amounts to a checklist of dissuasion

The performance of an abortion

is prohibited until 24 hours after con-

sent is given.

Action: Passed Senate; awaiting

action in Assembly Judiciary;

will be considered in January.

Montoya is expected to

amend the bill, making it less

restrictive, however, the 24

hour waiting period would

remain intact.

ACLU: Opposed

SB 946 (Davis) - Abortion disclosure

The bill would require that specific

information regarding each abortion

performed in California be provided to

the Department of Health Services by

the health professional in charge. Mandated

information would include the

age, marital status, race or ethnicity of

the pregnant woman, and her obstetri-

cal history, including previous abortions

and live births. Information on the

length and weight of the aborted "child"

and "signs of life" would also be re-

quired.

Action: Passed Senate; failed passage

in Assembly Judiciary Committee.

ACLU: Opposed

SB 154 (Schmitz) - Parent Notification/Abortion-

As initially written, the bill would |

have required that an abortion be per-

formed on a minor only upon consent

by both parents, or if granted by a supe-

rior court upon a determination that the

minor was sufficiently "mature and in-

formed". When it became clear he could

not get the necessary two-thirds vote on

the floor, the bill was amended by the

author to require parental notification

rather than consent.

Action: Passed Senate; Failed passage

in Assembly Judiciary

Committee.

ACLU: Opposed

Awaiting action in Assembly

Equal Protection

SCA 39 (Schmitz) - Eliminates all affirmative

action programs

The bill would provide that no busi-

ness, public or private, could provide

any benefits, detriments, privileges or

immunities, based on race, sex, creed,

color or national origin.

Assigned to Senate Constitu-

tional Amendments Commit-

tees; hearings held in

Constitutional Amendments

Committee in October, 1981,

for testimony only.

Action:

ACLU: Opposed

SB 516 (M. Garcia) - Fair Employment and Housing

This is a Chamber of Commerce mea-

sure which would reconstitute the mem-

bership of the FEH Commission and

significantly impair its ability to investi-

gate and act against job discrimination.

It would, for example, reduce the time

in which an aggrieved person must file a

discrimination complaint from 1 year to

90 days, and abolish the authority of the

Commission and the courts to award

compensatory or punitive damages.

Action: Failed passage on Senate

floor, 19-13 on June 11; re-

consideration granted; placed

on inactive file by author.

ACLU: Opposed

AB 129 (Lockyer) - Comparable worth

The bill would establish a state policy

for setting the salaries of state employ-

ees in job classifications which are cur-

rently composed of at least 70%

females. State Personnel Board would

be required to take into consideration

the comparability of the value of the

work when establishing and adjusting

salary ranges for those classes. "Com-

parability" would be measured by the

composite of: skill, effort, responsibil-

ity, and working conditions.

The bill was amended to require a

study preparatory to setting policy.

Passed Assembly; refused

hearing in Senate Finance

Committee; however, Sen-

ator Carpenter amended his

SB 459 to include AB 129. SB

459 passed and was signed by

the Governor.

Action:

ACLU: Supported

First Amendment

SB 267 (Watson) - Terrorist groups

This bill empowers the Attorney Gen-

eral, District Attorneys and private in-

dividuals to seek injunction against a

group that is about to meet, on the basis

of a prediction that advocacy and action

Action:

AB 2131 (Lehmen) -

- will take place resulting in death or seri-

ous bodily injury.

Passed Senate; Amended in

Assembly Criminal Justice

Committee and re-referred to

Assembly Judiciary Commit-

tee where it awaits action.

ACLU: Opposed

SB 1084 (Petris) - Loyalty Oaths

Loyalty oaths for public school per-

sonnel, which were held unconstitu-

tional in the mid-60's, are still in the

Education Code. Some school districts

continue to require employees to swear

that they are not members of the Com-

munist Party. SB 1084 repeals those

provisions.

Failed in Senate Education

Committee. However, the sec-

tions 7000-7007 which we

sought to repeal with SB 1084

were repealed in AB 1726

(Vasconcellos). AB 1726

passed the Legislature and

was signed by Governor.

Action:

ACLU: Supported

Also...

Disqualification

of Peace and Freedom Party.

The bill would effectively remove the

Peace and Freedom Party from the bal-

lot. Even though Peace and Freedom

candidates have maintained a more

than adequate percentage of the popu-

lar vote at each election, the party

would be removed from the ballot by

raising the minimum per cent of total

party registrants. Minimum voter regis-

tration requirement is raised just high

enough to eliminate the Peace and Free-

dom Party but not the Libertarian

Party or the American Independent

Party.

Action: Passed Assembly; tabled by

Senate Elections and Reap-

- portionment Committee.

ACLU: Opposed

AB 610 (Berman) - Patient access to

medical records

Under current law patients have no

right to demand access to medical infor-

mation about themselves kept by physi-

cians and hospitals. Such information

may be acquired in the course of litiga--

tion, and a patient's attorney may de-

mand the information by letter. This bill

would require physicians to either pro-

vide all information about a patient

upon demand, or to sit down with the

patient, ascertain what specific infor-

mation the patient wants to know, and

to provide a written summary of the in-

formation requested.

Passed Assembly; Passed Sen-

ate with amendments noted;

concurrence in Senate amend-

ments pending in Assembly.

Action:

ACLU: Supported

aclu news

jan-feb 1982

Hassell Joins Staff

Fonsa Hassell first learned about the

ACLU when she was working in com-

munity agencies in Watts in the sixties.

"The ACLU was very well respected for

the work it was doing there," she ex-

plains, "in fact, to me, the ACLU was

almost like a legend."

So when Hassell was offered the post

of Administrative Assistant at the

ACLU of Northern California, she hap-

pily accepted the job - even though it

meant interrupting her paralegal studies

at San Francisco City College. "I just

couldn't pass up the chance," she says,

"and people at the school understood."

Hassell brings a wealth of experience

and talent to the demanding staff posi-

tion. She received her early secretarial

training in high school in her native To-

ledo, Ohio, and was the first black

student to be named "Business woman

of the year."

In the late sixties and early seventies

she worked in secretarial and adminis-

trative posts in the Westminster Neigh-

borhood Association and the Los

Angeles Brotherhood Crusade in Watts.

Fonsa Hassell

"It was a very exciting time - a time of

great social change. There was so much

happening in Watts and so many people

to learn from."

It was there, Hassell explains, that

she enhanced her secretarial training

with other skills - from fundraising to

organizing volunteers and office man-

agement. For the Brotherhood

Crusade, she supervised the program

administration of a one million dollar

Model Cities contract for six cultural

agencies of the Watts community, in-

US POSTAL SERVICE |

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND CIRCULATION

(Required by 39.US.C 3685)

monthly a $.59

1663 Mission St., Ste. 465, San Francisco, CA 94193

`EDITOR (Name ond Complete Mailing Address)

Elaine Elinson, ACLU," 1663 Mission St., Ste. 46, San Francisco, CA 94193

MANAGING EDITOR (Name ond Complete Mailing Address)

Same as above

7. OWNER (If owned by a corporation, its name and address must be stated and also immediately thereunder the name and addresses of stock-

must be giowners owing or holding 1 percent or more of total amount of stock. If not owned by a corporation,

the names and addresses of the individual owners must be given.

If owned by a partnership or other unincorporated firm, its name and address, as well as that of each individual, must be given

If the publication is published by a nonprofit organization, its name and address must be stated.) (Item must be completed)

FULL NAME COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS

SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF EDITOR, PUBLISHER, BUSINESS MANAGER OR OWNER

I certify that the statements made by

me above are correct and complete

cluding the noted Watts Towers Arts

Center.

When her son Mark was born, Has-

sell balanced her career with her desire

to stay at home with her child by setting

upin business for herself.

At first she formed a secretarial service,

doing research, editing and typing

of UCLA graduate students' papers and

dissertions. "That's where I really

learned to meet deadlines," Hassell

says. "Once I got an important student

paper that had to be in the next day. We

got it in on time - and I'm happy to say

the student graduated!"

Later, she converted her garage and

set up Hassell House Houseplants, an

exterior and interior design service for

plants. "I've created plant displays for

restaurants, medical offices and homes

all over Los Angeles," she laughs.

Hassell moved to the Bay Area in

1979 and worked at several secretarial

jobs before she decided to-pursue her

interest in law by starting the paralegal

course. "But," she told the ACLU News,

"I'm sure I'll learn as much or more

about law here at the ACLU."

As Administrative Assistant, Hassell

serves as secretary to Executive Direc-

tor Dorothy Ehrlich, coordinates the

speakers bureau, supervises office vol-

unteers, and provides staff support to

the Board of Directors. She replaces

Marcia Gallo, who filled the post for 2 1/2

years before becoming ACLU's Field

Representative and Louise Billotte who

held the temporary position while the

post was being filled.

Hassell told the ACLU News, "I came

with a lot of apprehension, because if

the ACLU did not live up to the 'legend',

I would have been crushed." But after

two months, despite the heavy work-

load, Hassell says she is not disap-

pointed. "I think the ACLU staff and

volunteers are incredible. I've worked in

many outfits - both commercial and

non-profit - and I have rarely seen so

many talented people work so harmoni-

ously together.

"And what is more," she added, "people

have been so supportive in taking me

in that I. feel like I've been here for

twenty years!"

Support

the

ACLU

The defense of civil liberties is a

never-ending task. No one genera-

tion can secure liberty to all persons

for all times. But each generation

owes the next all the assistance it can

give.

A bequest to the ACLU in your

will is the finest possible way to

express your concern that constitu-

tional rights be protected for future |

generations.

Bequests to the ACLU Founda-

tion of Northern California are tax- |

exempt and are very simple to add to

an already existing will.

For information on how to make a

bequest to the ACLU Foundation of

`Northern California, call or write

Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Direc-

tor, ACLU Foundation, 1663 Mission

St., San Francisco, 94103.

Clinic Privacy Defended

by Mason Drukman

The ACLU-NC successfully defended

Planned Parenthood of Contra Costa

when anti-choice groups sought access

to confidential information about the

clinic's patients and contributors. The

events leading up to the decision in favor

of the ACLU on November 19 involved

what might be called a double invasion

of Planned Parenthood's operation.

In May pickets from two groups, one

called Catholics United for Life, the

other identified as Womaninity, gained

entry to the Walnut Creek Planned

Parenthood clinic under false pretense

and then refused to leave. One picket

allegedly struck several clinic em-

ployees. Eight pickets were later arres-

ted and charged with trespass. One was ~

also charged with three counts of battery

That was the first invasion.

The second involved incursions into

Planned Parenthood's right to privacy.

In September the lawyer for those arres-

ted, claiming he needed material for

their defense, served a subpoena on

Planned Parenthood demanding books,

records and documents showing: the

legal owner of Planned Parenthood's

property; names, addresses, phone

numbers of and treatment given to clinic

patients over the period May Il to May

21; Planned Parenthood's services of-

fered or rendered during that same

period; and sources of funds and income

during that period.

Planned Parenthood agreed to pro-

vide answers only regarding the owner-

ship and services of the clinic and the

names only of those patients present at

their offices who might have witnessed

the incident. When the defendants'

attorney insisted on enforcing the entire

subpoena, ACLU-NC entered the case

(People v. Gomez) filing a motion on

November 9 to quash the subpoena.

ACLU cooperating attorney Ellen

Lake argued that the defendants had

-shown no compelling interest in obtain-

ing the names of patients and donors |

and to reveal them would violate protec-

ted federal and state constitutional

rights. "Because," she said, "all of

Planned Parenthood's medical and

counseling services treat its patients'

sexual activities, its patient records are

- by definition - protected by the

constitutional right of privacy."

Lake asked the court for a protective

order enjoining defendants from releas-

ing any patients' names, addresses or

- phone numbers, except of those that

may have been witnesses to the invasion,

and from using any such information

except in connection with their trial.

"Such an order,"'she contended, "will

shield the patients from the humiliation

and harassment that might accompany

the public disclosure of their

identities ....

Heather Saunders Estes, Executive

Director of Planned Parenthood of

Contra Costa, explained that such hu-

miliation and harassment had been

visited upon Planned Parenthood pa-

tients and their families in other com-

munities when their names had been

revealed.

As to Planned Parenthood's contrib-

utors, Lake argued that - again, given

the absence of a compelling interest to

the contrary - the right of associational

privacy protected these names as well,

and that the glare of publicity would

severely injure the organization and

those connected with it.

"Individuals," she said, "will be sub-

ject to telephone or mail harassment,

threats of violence, disruption of family

Or personal relationships or adverse

publicity .... Furthermore, future do-

nors will be less willing to give money if

they know that any anti-abortion group

can secure their names simply by staging __

an invasion of the clinic and then sub-

poenaing the organization's financial

records during the resulting criminal

prosecution."

Sitting in the Walnut Creek-Danville

Judicial District of the Contra Costa

County Municipal Court, Judge Joseph

Longacre ruled in favor of the ACLU,

quashing the objectionable sections of

the subpoena and issuing the requested

protective order. Jane Husman,

Planned Parenthood's Director of Sur-

gical Services, reported that the clinic

was pleased with Judge Longacre's

decision. She added that though picket-

ing outside the clinic intensified for

some time after the arrests it had grad-

ually petered out. While there has been

no picketing in recent weeks, Husman

felt it could resume when the defendants

come to trial in early February.

Apple Pie Day continued from p. 8

Karen Winner didn't let being

unable to get to Sacramento keep her

from being part of the fun: she staffed

an information table and gathered sig-

natures on petitions in San Francisco's

Embarcadero Plaza over the lunch

hour for two Wednesdays before Apple

Pie Day.

The culmination of this whirl of ac-

tivity was a larger and more active

ACLU presence in the capitol on Janu-

ary 21, as well as an overwhelmingly

successful petition drive. "We've far ex-

ceeded our original goal of gathering

2,500 signatures," said Task Force chair

Anne Jennings. Task Force members

Bernice Biggs, John Spratt, Mike

Wong, and ACLU's Legislative Assis-

tant Sally Smith each turned in hun-

dreds of signatures. Rosemary Matson

and the Monterey Reproductive Rights

Coalition not only gathered almost

1,000 signatures in their area, but found

time to design and produce the first-ever

Apple Pie Day T-shirt, a red-white-and-

blue special celebrating choice.

"Throughout our organizing effort,

we've emphasized the importance of

personal recruitment," said Jennings.

"The number of ACLU members in-

volved in Apple Pie Day 1982 - from

- gathering signatures to attending the

events at the capitol, as members of

county-wide coalitions, as chapters, and

as individuals - is not only proof that

the personal approach works, but

shows what an organized ACLU force

can do."

aclu.news.

jan-feb 1982

Jailers Rapped Over Censorship

In December, prison officials at the

California Medical Facility (CMF) at

Vacaville were ordered to stop harass-

ment of the prisoner-run newspaper and

its inmate editor by a Solano County

Superior Court judge after ACLU at-

torneys complained to the court about

their illegal interference with the news-

paper.

On April 1, 1981 after prison authori-

ties had censored, destroyed issues of,

and eventually shut down the prisoner-

run Vacaville Star, the ACLU obtained

an order from Solano County Judge

William Jensen that the paper should be

re-opened and the editor, Victor Diaz,

be allowed to operate the paper in ac-

cordance with basic First Amendment

rights (Diaz v. Watts).

Though Diaz was allowed to edit the

paper following the April court order,

he complained that in late September

and early October prison officers were

once again impeding the production of

the Star. Diaz informed the ACLU that

in addition to censorship, which had

been raised in the earlier complaint, the

prison authorities were also interfering

with the Star's subscription list. "For

example, Diaz said, "prison

authorities deleted from a list of persons

receiving the Star the Prisoners' Union

(a co-plaintiff in this action), one of my

attorneys, and others

interested in matters the Szar reports."

In addition, Diaz noted that the delay

in approval of articles from the prison

superintendent meant that articles

could not be printed in the appropriate

issue or that issues of the paper were

delayed.

On the grounds that advertising was

not allowed in the paper, the prison offi-

cials had not allowed Diaz to run

notices of groups seeking original art-

work or creative writing from prisoners.

On December 20, ACLU-NC cooper-

ating attorney Peter Goodman charged

in Solano County Superior Court that

the prison officials were violating the

April court order and were therefore in

contempt of court.

Judge Jensen agreed with most of the

ACLU arguments and ordered that the

state should permit publication of ar-

ticles critical of the prison administra-

tion or other elements of the prison

community that were not clearly viola-

tive of some content-neutral regulation.

The judge stated the proper response by

prison officials to critical articles was

not to censor them, but to use the paper

to respond to and refute unfair or un-

true charges. He also ruled that the

prison authorities must approve or

disapprove articles within seven days,

and that unpaid advertising offering

inmates the possibility of selling

artwork, etc. must be allowed in the

paper.

Regarding the subscriptions, the

judge ruled that the state could not pre-

vent anyone from subscribing to the

paper (although the state was under no

obligation to send free subscriptions),

that authorities must mail a notice to

anyone dropped from the free subscrip-

tion list advising them how to subscribe,

and that the inmate editor must be given

copies of the subscription regulations.

Other matters of censorship were put

on hold pending the outcome of Bailey

v. Loggins, an earlier prison newspaper

censorship case which is currently pend-

ing before the California Supreme

Court.

High Court Rules on Sign Ban

ACLU's challenge to a San Mateo

law forbidding all unauthorized signs

on public property has been rejected by

the U.S. Supreme Court. On November |

30, the high court upheld the consti-

tutionality of the ordinance which

forbids the posting of any signs on pub-

lic property, putting "concern for traffic

safety and aesthetics" over First

Amendment rights.

In 1977, San Mateo City Council

candidate Eugene Sussli and his

opponent John Condon filed suit in San

Mateo Superior Court after city per-

sonnel removed their campaign signs.

Sussli challenged the ordinance as an

abridgement of his free speech rights.

The ban on sign posting, he claimed, ad-

versely affected not only his campaign

but also the ability of San Mateo voters

to be informed about the election.

When the superior court upheld the

law, the ACLU entered the case (Sussli

v. San Mateo) on appeal.

The appellate court decision stated

that the resolution to the problem in

San Mateo "requires a balancing process

... between the compelling interest

of the public in maintaining some

semblance of visual harmony in the

areas where they live.... " and the con-

travention of First Amendment rights.

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney Neil

O'Donnell argued, however, that it was

particularly important for the public to

be informed during a political cam-

paign. In addition to violating the Con-

stitution, O'Donnell said, "San Mateo

city officials are doing a disservice to

candidates and voters alike by prohibit-

ing the free dissemination of election

information."

The ACLU-NC appealed the decision

to the U.S. Supreme Court. In Decem-

ber, however, the high court refused to

take the case, thereby upholding the

Court of Appeal's decision that the ordi-

nance was constitutional.

Police Libel Suits Hit Gay Paper

by Lisa Hogan

The ACLU won the first round of its

defense of the Bay Area Reporter, a San

Francisco newspaper serving the gay

community, against a $2,000,000 libel

suit by police officers.

On December 11, San Francisco: Su-

perior Court Judge Ira Brown, in re-

sponse to the ACLU defense, granted

an order stating there was no basis to

proceed with the libel action. However,

Brown also granted leave for the police

officers to amend their suit (Pera V.

BAR) by January 15.

In a separate but related action, the

ACLU took on the defense of a second

libel suit, Falzon v. Schell, in which a

police officer is suing a guest columnist

for the Bay Area Reporter (BAR) for

libel.

"The issue of using libel suits to silence

public criticism of police conduct is at

the core of both these suits," said ACLU-

NC staff counsel Amitai Schwartz. "It is

difficult to imagine a political topic that

is more vital toa democracy than debate

about police conduct and police bru-

tality," he added.

Public Meeting

Pera v. BAR is based on an article

written by BAR reporter John Karr en-

titled, "SFPD Brutality Aired, Toklas

Club Envisions Review Board to Curb

Rising Police Violence Against Gays."

Karr was reporting a meeting of the

Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club where

persons testified about alleged police

brutality against San Francisco's gay

community.

The two officers mentioned in Karr's

article filed the multi-million-dollar libel

suit in San Francisco Superior

Court against the newspaper, its pub-

lisher Bob Ross, editor Jul Lorch and

Karr.

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney

Robert Lewis argued that all the defen-

dants are protected by the First Amend-

ment. "A correctly reported opinion in

an open meeting is not libel," he added.

Murder Investigation

On January 11, the ACLU launched

the legal defense of Randy Schell who is

being sued for libel by San Francisco

Police Inspector Frank Falzon.

Schell is a Client Advocate Specialist

with Community United Against Vio-

lence (CUAV), an organization which ~

addresses the needs of gays who are vic- -

tims of violence. He was the roommate

of Thomas Hadley, a gay man who was

shot through the head on August 14,

1980 in Buena Vista Park.

On July 30, 1981, Schell wrote a letter

entitled "Following a Gay Murder,"

which appeared in the BA R's guest col-

umn about the still unsolved murder of

Hadley. Schell criticized Inspector Fal-

zon's handling of the case, noting that

no arrests had been made and the assail-

ants remain at large. Schell wrote, "I am

appalled that the murder of a twenty-

three-year-old Gay male is treated with

such little regard."

Falzon responded with a $1,250,000

libel suit against Schell. Falzon's attor-

ney, James P. Collins, claimed that his

client was injured "in his occupation be-

cause it reflects negatively on his ability

as a homicide inspector."

On January 10, ACLU attorney

Schwartz filed a demurrer in defense of

Randy Schell.

Photo by Rink

Randy Schell sued for libel by a police officer.

According to Schwartz, "Schell's

statements about Inspector Falzon are

protected by the. First Amendment.

Opinions are not libelous. This law-

suit," he continued,

is part of a larger pattern of San Francisco police suing

their critics, and attempting to use the

legal process to chill free expression."

A hearing in the Schell case has been

requested for February 2 in San Fran-

cisco Superior Court.

Lisa Hogan is a volunteer with the

ACLU News.

Elections Continued from p. 1

submit nominations, sign petitions of

nomination and vote.

ACLU members will elect Board

members from the slate of candidates.

nominated by petition and by the

`Nominating Committee. The ballot

will appear in the June issue of the

ACLU News.

The following by-laws govern the

ACLU-NC Board of Directors nomi-

nating process:

ARTICLE VII, SECTION 3: The

final report of the Nominating Com-

- mittee to nominate members-at-large -

to the Board shall be presented at the

May Board meeting. Members of the

Board may propose additional nom-

inations. If no additional nomina-

tions are proposed by Board

members, the Board, by majority of

those present and voting, shall adopt

the Nominating Committee's report.

If additional nominations are pro-

posed, the Board shall, by written

ballot, elect a'slate of nominees with

each member being entitled to cast a

number of votes equal to the vacan-

cies to be filled; the Board shall be

those persons, equal in number to the

vacancies to be filled, who have re-

ceived the greatest number of votes.

The list of nominees to be placed

before the membership of the Union

for election shall be those persons

nominated by the Board as herein

provided, together with those per-

sons nominated by petition as hereaf-

ter provided in Section 4.

SECTION 4: Any fifteen or more

members of the Union in good stand-

ing may themselves submit a nomina-

tion to be included among those

voted upon by the general member-

ship by submitting a written petition

to the Board not later than twenty

days after the adoption by the Board

of the slate of Board nominees. No

member of the Union may sign more

than one such petition and each such

nomination shall be accompanied by

a summary of qualifications and the

written consent of the nominee.

8 aclu news

jan-feb 1982

Apple Pies and Activism for Abortion Rights

Question: What does a half-baked

state senator who's trying to cook up a

controversy have to do with apple pie?

Answer: Both recently focused public

attention on the importance of legisla-

tive action in maintaining the right to

choose a safe and legal abortion.

On December 22, Senator John

Schmitz issued a press release on Sen-

-ate Constitutional Amendments Com-

mittee stationery - announcing that

"Senator Schmitz and his Committee

Survive the `Attack of the Bulldykes'."

This was his response to the strong sup-

port for reproductive rights at four

hearings on the California verson of the

so-called "human life" amendment

(SCA 29), held in Fresno, Calexico, Los

Angeles, and San Diego in December.

Schmitz's press release characterized

witnesses and members of the audience

at the hearing as "pre-organized infesta-

tions of imported lesbians from anti-

male and pro-abortion queer groups in

San Francisco and other centers of dec-

adence" and said that the Los Angeles

hearing room was filled with a "sea of

hard, Jewish, and (arguably) female

faces."

Many ACLU-NC Pro-Choice Task

Force members participated inthe SCA

29 hearings. At the Fresno hearings,

ACLU members Howard Watkins and

Mary Louise Frampton both testified

about the proposed amendment's threat

to the rights of privacy and religious

freedom.

The ACLU was joined by civil rights

organizations, religious leaders,

women's groups, and legislators in de-

nouncing Schmitz's statements. Fol-

lowing a public reprimand by Senate

leader David Roberti, Schmitz was re-

moved from the chairmanship of two

Senate committees as well as his seat on

the California Commission on the

Status of Women.

He also, although inadvertently, pro-

vided publicity for the thousands of

Californians actively working to main-

tain reproductive rights. The impor-

tance of these rights - and the strong

support for legislators who resist pres-

"sures to restrict them - was demon-

strated on January 2] in Sacramento -

Apple Pie Day 1982.

This was the third year that pro-

choice supporters gathered in Sacra-

mento to commemorate the U. S.

Supreme Court's 1973 decision legaliz-

ing abortion. This year's event, attended

by hundreds of pro-choice Californians,

began with special pie presentations to

such, choice legislators as Governor

Jerry Brown, Assembly Speaker Willie

Brown, Jr., Tom Bates, Marz Garcia,

Elihu Harris, Nicholas Petris, Mike

Roos, Diane Watson, and Maxine Waters

In recognition of their actions in

support of reproductive freedom, these

legislators - and 39 others - were

awarded fresh apple pies, because

"Choice is As American As Apple Pie."

B-A-K

BOARD MEETING: (Fourth

Thursday each month.) Thursday,

February 25; 8:00 p.m. Contact Joe

Dorst, 415/654-4163.

~ EARL WARREN

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday, Feb-

ruary 17; 7:30 p.m. Sumimoto Bank,

20th and Franklin, Oakland. Contact

Barbara Littwin, 415/452-4726.

GAY RIGHTS

BOARD MEETING: (Usually the

second Tuesday of each month.) Call

Steve Block, 415/772-6114 for con-

firmation; meetings are held at the

ACLU-NC. office, 1663 Mission

Street, San Francisco.

BOARD MEETING: (Third Mon-

day each month.) Monday, February

15; 8:00 p.m. Fidelity Savings,

Throckmorton Street, Mill Valley.

Contact Bill Luft, 415/453-6546.

MID-PEN

BOARD MEETING: (Fourth

Thursday each month.) Thursday,

speaker. All Saints Episcopal

Church, 555 Waverley Street, Palo

Alto. Contact Harry Anisgard,

415)/ 856-9186.

February .25; 8:00 p.m. Guest ~

MONTEREY |

BOARD MEETING: Fourth Tues-

day each month.) Tuesday, February

23:. 1300x00B0 pm. Montercy Public

Library. Contact Richard Criley,

408/624-7562.

MT. DIABLO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday, Febru-

ary 18; contact 415/939-ACLU.

NORTH PEN

BOARD MEETING: (Third Mon-

day each month.) Monday, February (c)

15; 8:00 p.m. Allstate Savings and

Loan, South Grant and Concar Drive,

San Mateo. Contact Richard Keyes,

415/367-8800.

SACRAMENTO

BOARD MEETING: (Third

Wednesday each month.) Wednes-

day, February 17; 7:30 p.m. New

County Administration Building,

7th and I Streets, Hearing Room |,

Sacramento. Contact Cliff

Anderson, 916/451-5025.

SAN FRANCISCO

BOARD MEETING: (Last Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, February 23;

6:30. p.m. Contact Richard Wein-

stein, 415/771-8932; meetings held at

ACLU-NC office, 1663 Mission

Street, San Francisco.

Chapter Calendar

The 28 legislators who have refused

to protect individual reproductive

rights over the past year were reminded

with apple cores that "Choice is At the

Core of the Democratic System." Legis-

lators were also presented with petitions

signed by their constituents urging op-

position to any legislation that "out-

laws, restricts, delays, complicates, or

otherwise interferes with people's pri-

vate decisions regarding unintended

pregnancies."

To make sure that no one missed the

point, each group visiting legislators

was accompanied by "Telling Sing-A-

Grams" which proclaimed the pro-

choice message in song.

"The enthusiasm and leadership

shown by ACLU members throughout

northern California was a large part of

the success of Apple Pie Day 1982," said

Margot Garey, an ACLU Apple Pie

Day coordinator and Pro-Choice Task

Force member. "We've been working

towards Apple Pie Day since our Octo-

ber Pt. Bonita conference, and our efforts

for a successful showing were real-

ized."

Garey, who is one of a strong group of

ACLU activists who devoted many

hours to the success of Apple Pie Day,

noted that five times as many people

were recruited to attend the January 21

activities this year-as were involved in

years past. Special leadership and re-

cruitment roles were played by many

Task Force members. Rose Bonhag and

Liz Zeck set up tables at Berkeley shop-

ping centers in January to gather signa-

tures for the pro-choice petitions. Mary

Hackenbracht in San Francisco in-

formed people about Apple Pie Day

through speaking engagements and ex-

tensive telephone contacts. Nora Bar-

tine from the Mid-Peninsula area,

joined Dorothy Jerden in the North Pe-

ninsula in sending a special mailing to

ACLU members in their chapters about

Apple Pie Day and a follow-up event

planned for January 22.

In Sacramento, Pat MacDonald or-

ganized telephone campaigns to recruit

Apple Pie Day activists, and coordi-

nated signature gathering by Sacra-

mento ACLU members. Julius Young

in Yolo County was instrumental in

planning a January 15 rally in Davis

which featured ACLU staff attorney

Margaret Crosby. The rally preceded a

weekend of Apple Pie Day recruitment

and petition signing. Despite mudslides

and rainstorms, the ACLU chapter in

Santa Cruz joined Planned Parenthood

in sponsoring a forum, featuring (c)

Crosby the Monday before Apple Pie

Day.

Beverly Bortin headed a delegation

of eight Mt. Diablo Chapter members

to the capitol.

Continued on Pg. 6.

SANTA CLARA

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, February

2-Tuesday, March 2; 7:30 p.m. Com-

munity Bank Building, San Jose.

Contact Vic Ulmer, 408/379-4431.

CONGRATULATIONS to DOM

SALLITTO, who celebrated his 80th

birthday on January 11. Dom has

been an active ACLU member for the

- past 45 years, and serves on the Santa

Clara Valley Chapter Board.

SANTA CRUZ

BOARD MEETING: (Second

Wednesday each month.) Wednes-

day, February 10-Wednesday,

March 10; 8:00 p.m. Louden Nelson

Center, Santa Cruz. Contact Bob

Tarin, 408/429-9880.

SONOMA

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

- day each month.) Thursday, Febru-

ary [8 7300x00B0) m. Center for

Employment Training, 3753 Santa

Rosa Avenue, Santa Rosa. Contact

Andrea Learned, 707/544-0876.

ESSAY CONTEST for. all high

school students in Sonoma County:

begins February 15, with submission -

deadline March 30. 500 to 800 words

on "The First Amendment: Student

Rights and Responsibilities." Sug-

gested topics: book censorship, teach-

ing of evolution vs. creationism,

prayer in schools, controversial

speakers on high school grounds,

freedom of the press and school news-

papers. Judges include Justice

Joseph A. Rattigan of the State Dis-

trict Court of Appeal, Sonoma

County Superior Court Judge Rex

Sater, and University of San Fran-

cisco law professor Jack Pemberton,

former national director of ACLU. A

total of $500 in prizes will be awarded

the winners at a special banquet. Con-

tact Jacques Levy, 707/542-0609 for

"more information.

STOCKTON

ANNUAL MEETING: Special guest

speaker; contact Larry Pippin,

209/477-7698, for date and time.

YOLO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday, Febru-

ary 18; 7:30 p.m. Contact Julius

Young, 916/758-5666.

RIGHT TO

DISSENT

SUBCOMMITTEE

The next meeting of the Right to

Dissent Subcommittee, chaired by J.

R. Rubin, will be held on Wednesday,

March 3 at the ACLU-NC office,

1663 Mission Street in San

Francisco. Contact Marcia Gallo,

415/621-2494, for more information.