vol. 49, no. 7

Volume XLIX

lu news

October 1984

No. 7

ME

NAACP and ACLU marchers challenged the Richmond ordinance that almost :

prevented them from holding their demonstration - and won.

The Richmond parade ordinance

which was used to deny the NAACP and

the ACLU from holding a march against

police violence was ruled unconstitu-

_ tional by the federal Court of Appeals on

September 28. :

In October 1982 the local chapters o

the NAACP and the ACLU-NC called a

march to protest the racist practices of

the police department against Rich-

mond's black community. The im-

C.L. Dellums to be Awarded

mediate impetus for the march was the

death of Willie Lee Drumgoole while in

police custody on September 28, and the

announcement by the City that it would

not investigate the incident. Drumgoole

was the fifth black man to die in the

hands of the Richmond police in 3 years.

The NAACP and the ACLU applied

for a parade permit to hold a march

through downtown Richmond and a ral-

ly at Civic Center. The permit was denied

Labor, Civil Rights Leader

C.L. Dellums, a labor organizer and

civil rights activist for over fifty years,

will be honored with the Earl Warren (c)

Civil Liberties Award at the ACLU-NC

twelfth annual Bill of Rights Day

Celebration. This year's Celebration also

marks the fiftieth anniversary of the af-

filiate.

The Celebration, which will be held on

December 9 at the Sheraton Palace Hotel

in San Francisco, is the culmination of

the ACLU-NC's annual fundraising

campaigns. The Bill of Rights Day and

Major Gifts campaigns support virtually

the entire legal program of the ACLU-

NC Foundation. Each year, over 800

supporters make a one-time special tax-

deductible contribution and are

recognized in the Commemorative

Booklet issued the day of the Celebra-

tion. The combined fundraising goal this

year is $385,000.

Dick Grosboll, chair of the Bill of (c)

Rights Day fundraising campaign, said,

``We want to expand our Bill of Rights

fundraising this year through increased

chapter member involvement, personal

contact with members through more

telephone nights and by putting the `fun'

into fundraising.

`"`Not' surprisingly, when you think of

who our members are, we find that on

the phone nights both ACLU volunteers

making the calls and our supporters

receiving the calls enjoy their brief

discussions about ACLU issues and

events,'' Grosboll added.

Grosboll was selected as the Bill of

Rights Day chair because of his long in-

volvement with ACLU activities. He

served as a law intern in 1980 and later

became the development assistant with

special responsibilities for the Bill of

Rights Day campaign. Grosboll, who

now works as an attorney in Oakland,

continues to be an active member of the

Pro-Choice Task Force and the Im-

migration Working Group.

The Board of Directors selected C.L.

Dellums as the award recipient for the

50th anniversary celebration because he

has spent his lifetime fighting for racial

equality as a leader in the civil rights and

labor movements.

Each year, for the past twelve years,

the Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award

has been presented to a person or per-

sons who have distinguished themselves

as champions in the battle to preserve

continued on p. 4

ichmond March Rule Struck Down

(by the Richmond Police Deparment)

because the marchers did not comply

with the 20-day advance notice rule re-

quired by the ordinance. Although the

ordinance allows for a waiver by the City

Council, the council members were out

of town and would not have met again

until two days after the march was

scheduled.

Only a court order, obtained through

an emergency ACLU challenge to the

permit denial, issued by the U.S. Court

of Appeals on the night before the plan-

ned event, allowed the march to take

place. Four hundred people marched,

and 100 Richmond police officers were

on duty; there were no incidents or ar-

rests.

The constitutionality of the ordinance, |

however, remained in question. In

August 1983, U.S. District Court Judge

William Ingram upheld the ordinance,

and ACLU-NC staff counsel Amitai

Schwartz immediately appealed.

The September appellate court ruling,

reversing Judge Ingram's decision,

agrees with ACLU arguments that the

ordinance violates the First Amendment

in two fundamental ways: it improperly

restricts speech by barring marchers who

cannot comply with an overly long ad-

vance notice requirement and it im-

properly grants unlimited discretion to a

FOUNDATION

) ver

OF NOR ERERN CALIFORNIA

censor by giving the City Council the ar-

bitrary power to grant waivers, thereby

allowing certain groups to bypass the

standard rule. a

The Court noted, ``It is self-evident

that the NAACP's particular desire to

hold public demonstrations against

allegedly racist policies is not shared in

similar measure by the community at

large. ..'' and that ``the NAACP has an

active and continuing interest in the local

racial problems which give rise to such

incidents [as the death of blacks in police

custody.]"'

There can be ``no serious doubt"' that

the NAACP can reasonably expect to be

subject-to the ordinance again, the court

stated. Therefore, despite the fact that

this particular march took place two

years ago, the NAACP/ACLU cchal-

lenge is still viable.

The Court noted that the 20-day re-

quirement in Richmond far exceeds the

advance notice requirements in other

cities which average about 36 hours;

there is no basis in logic for cities to de-

mand notice so far in advance of

marches, the ruling stated. .

`"A spontaneous parade expressing a

viewpoint on a topical issue will almost

inevitably attract more participants and

more press attention, and generate more

continued on p. 5

(3. = eee SS ee ee ee oe ee ee oe

: Bill of Rights Day Celebration

: | Ticket Order Form |

: Please send me tickets at $10.00 each.

al am enclosing a check for $ 3

; Name

i Address

sity . Zip - Phone

u

=

gPlease make checks payable to the ACLU-NC Foundation and mail to the,

gBill of Rights Day, 1663 Mission St., S.F., CA 94103. Please enclose ag

gstamped, self-addressed envelope.

aclunews __

october 1984

2

The following essay was presented by

ACLU-NC Vice-Chair Richard Criley at

the August Conference in Asilomar. His

own history of dissent and suppression is

_ well documented in thousands of (almost

blank) pages he obtained under the

chair of the ACLU-NC Field Committee

and one of the founders and first

chairperson of the Right to Dissent Sub-

committee.

sent, when taken together, reveal the fabric of a system of

T three strands of Reagan Administration policies in its war on dis-

management and control of public opinion which is the essential

foundation for a police state. The interaction of these three elements |

- the ideological rationale for repression, censorship of information,

and the reinstitution of government surveillance and suppression of

_ dissent - multiplies the impact of the separate parts and threatens the

very structure of democratic society.

The ideological justification for the

cold war on our domestic freedoms

began at the end of World War II with

the opening of the nuclear era, in the

form we commonly term McCarthyism.

Today, while feeding the old, familiar |

obsessions of anti-communism/national

security, Reaganism has developed the

new "`threat of international terrorism."'

After a flood of rhetoric denouncing

alleged terrorism emanating from the

Soviet bloc and its allies, the Administra-

tion last April introduced its ``anti-

_ terrorism' bill (S 2626 / HR 5613).

- The bill did not oppose all terrorism,

however, since it legitimated U.S.

government sponsored terrorism by ex-

cluding properly authorized activities by

the CIA and other U.S. agencies. It add-

ed nothing to the coverage of terrorist

acts, which are already criminal under

existing statutes. Instead, it proposed

criminalizing political activities of ``act-

ing in concert with'' or supplying sup-

port to "`terrorist'' groups and govern-

ments. The designation of a ``terrorist''

group or government would be made by

the Secretary of State, whose findings

would be immune from court challenge.

Thus, such non-violent acts as sending

school supplies to Nicaragua or de-

nouncing U.S. policy in El Salvador

could be punishable by ten years in

prison.

Censorship

and Disinformation

The American people have been sub-

jected to an unending flood of govern-

ment disinformation interpreting world

events according to the gospel of

Reaganism. Every problem - from the

attempted assassination of the Pope, to

the insurgencies in Central America, to

the nuclear disarmament movements in

Europe and at home - is ascribed to the

_ machinations of the ``evil empire."'

Such disinformation does not do so

well in coexistence with a free and

vigorous press. To be fully effective, it

requires an information vacuum. That is

why access to government documents

through the Freedom of Information

Act can puncture the falsifications of of-

ficial propaganda. The Reagan Ad-

ministration has declared war on

freedom of information. When Ad-

ministration amendments to dismember

the FOIA were defeated by the

Democratic controlled House of

Representatives, they were pushed

through via executive order.

The most devastating blow was Ex-

ecutive Order 12356 on Classification

which eliminated the need to balance

secrecy with the public's right to know.

With a stroke, this measure encouraged

maximum use of classification, stopped

- automatic declassification, and authoriz-

ed reclassification of material already

released to the public. The impact on the

' FOIA was catastrophic, and left infor- |

mation requesters with little more than

blank pages.

To prevent embarrassing leaks and

whistle-blowing National Security Direc-

tive 84 ordered all government em-

ployees with high security clearances to

submit to lifetime gag agreements, re-

quiring prior clearance on all utterances

relating to past government experience.

Acceptance of lie detectors was made a

condition of employment. When con-

gressional protests forced temporary

withdrawal of the Directive, the Ad-

ministration quietly pursued a campaign

for acceptance of ``voluntary'' censor-

ship. 164,000 federal employees have

signed such gag agreements.

The ban on all reporters seeking to

cover the Grenada invasion was an

outstanding example of the effectiveness

of the combination of censorship and

disinformation. From the critical first

week of the invasion, the public's only

sources of news on Grenada were Pen-

tagon releases and the President's

statements. The result was a triumph for

the Reagan Administration: public opi-

nion polls showed overwhelming support

for the ``rescue operation."'

Information from abroad has been

subjected to a series of roadblocks -

denial of visas to foreign visitors like

Hortensia Allende, Nicaraguan leaders,

peace advocates and scholars; the official

labeling of some foreign films as

`political propaganda,'' like Helen

Caldicott's Academy Award winning ``If

You Love This Planet;'' the ban on U.S.

travel to Cuba; the prohibitions on inter-

national scholarly exchange on scientific

information.

Spying and Suppression

With the dismantling of post-

Watergate reforms of the CIA and FBI,

the first step toward restoring the

government's secret police operation to

conduct pervasive spying on First

Amendment activities and neutralize

dissenters has been taken.

The CIA is now authorized to conduct

undefined covert actions in the U.S., to

infiltrate domestic organizations ``believ-

ed to be acting in behalf of foreign

powers,' and to spy on U.S. citizens

abroad. The 1976 Levi Guidelines which

prohibited the FBI from using informers

and other intrusive spying techniques

unless. there was reason to believe that il-_

legal conduct was occurring, have been

replaced by the Smith Guidelines, which

lack a meaningful criminal standard. At

its discretion, the FBI may infiltrate

political organizations and even secretly

influence their actions.

Past experience has demonstrated that

it is vain to expect law enforcement agen-

cles which operate in deep secrecy to ef-

fectively police their own violations of

the law and the Constitution. Public

oversight through the FOIA is no longer

effective. The federal courts are showing

increasing reluctance to protect First

`Amendment freedoms against executive

agency abuses.

i be

Bi

Reagan Administration's Danger to Dissent

_ Freedom of Information Act. Criley is

Thus, although the ``anti-terrorism''

bill is unlikely to pass this Congress, the

three-pronged operation to control and

manipulate public opinion is already in

process. Its impact is manifest and helps -

to explain Reagan's lead in public opi-

nion polls.

If. Reagan is eae it is not

paranoid to predict the likely emergence

of a nativist form of ``friendly facism,"'

with the fundamentalist bible of Jerry

Falwell and red-white-and-blue of the

superpatriots as its emblems.

Citizens'

Tribunal on

Central America

Sunday, October 14. 1106 P.M.

First Unitarian Church,

Franklin and Geary,

San Francisco

A tribunal of legal experts, including

retired California Supreme Court Justice

Frank Newman, California Court of

Appeal Presiding Justice Clinton White,

and Stanford University international

law professor Thomas C. Heller, will -

conduct a public probe into possible

_ violations of U.S. and international law

resulting from U.S. government policies

in Central America.

Following a grand jury format, the

sessions. will include testimony on the

views of the Reagan Administration, the

opinions of international legal experts

and eyewitness accounts from _politi-

cians, trade unionists, religious workers,

medical professionals, journalists and

researchers. Former CIA agent John

Stockwell and Nicaraguan Embassy of-

ficial Francisco Campbell are among

those scheduled to give testimony. The

Tribunal is patterned after landmark war

crime inquiries, like the Nuremberg

Tribunal, that have scrutinized the con-

duct of nations throughout the 20th cen-

tury.

The San Francisco Tribunal is one of a

dozen such inquiries being held

throughout the U.S. in October. The

local Tribunal was initiated by the Na-

tional Lawyers Guild and is sponsored

by a wide range of legal, civic and

religious organizations including the

ACLU-NC, the National Conference of

Black Lawyers, and the Social Justice

Commission of the Archdiocese of San

Francisco.

The Tribunal is free and open to the

public. For more information call Hope

McDonnell at 415/285-8040.

Elaine Elinson, Editor

aclu news

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 ie

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

Chapter Page if

aclu news

october 1984

Lesbian Sues Air Force

On October 1, the ACLU-NC and the

Lesbian Rights Project filed a lawsuit in

federal court on behalf of an officer in

the California Air National Guard who

was involuntarily discharged simply

because she wrote.a letter to her com-

manding officer stating that she was a -

lesbian.

According to ACLU- NC staff at-

torney Donna Hitchens, the lawsuit

charges that lieutenant Julise Johnson's

_ First Amendment rights of freedom of

speech and association have been .

violated by the U.S. military. In addi-

tion, since members of the California Air

National Guard are employees of the

state of California, the Air Force has

overstepped its bounds by ordering

Johnson discharged. California law pro-

hibits the termination of government

employees solely on the basis of their

sexual orientation.

Julise Johnson has served as a lieute-

nant in the California Air National

Guard (ANG) since 1981. Prior to her

commission in the ANG, she served as

-an officer in the U.S. Air Force. In both -

capacities Johnson has received excellent

performance ratings.

~ Johnson's enlistment contract with the

ANG was to run through June 1985; as

an officer with the ANG she also had

recognition as an officer in the Air Force

Reserve.

Johnson informed the National Guard

of her sexual orientation because she

believed it was necessary as a matter of

- personal integrity. She was aware of the

regulations requiring the discharge. of

homosexuals and was also aware of the

fact that people suspected of being

_homosexual are often subjected to exten-

sive investigations and interrogations.

Unwilling to live and work with the

fear of being suspected or discovered,

and not wanting to pretend that she was

heterosexual in order to avoid suspicion,

Johnson believed that the situation re-

quired her to be direct and honest with

her commander.

A week after Johnson wrote her letter,

she was informed by the Deputy Com-

manding General of the ANG, Major

General R.E. Hebrank, that an ad-

ministrative discharge for unfitness was

being initiated on the basis of the regula-

tions against homosexuality. :

Following a hearing before an Air

Force board in December 1983, Johnson

was discharged from the Cal ANG and

the Air Force. The discharge order was

signed by the Secretary of the Air Force,

Verne Orr.

The basis of the discharge rested solely

on Johnson's own assertion that she con-

siders herself a lesbian and not on any

finding that she had engaged in

- homosexual activity or illegal conduct of

any kind.

Ironically, throughout the pro-

ceedings, which lasted for more than a

year, Johnson continued to serve as an

officer in the ANG and to receive ex-

. cellent performance evaluations.

According to Hitchens, ``This is the

fourth case that we know of that

challenges the military's policy of

discharging people solely on the basis of

their identification as a lesbian or

homosexual - as opposed to their con-

duct.

`"Moreover, this is the first case in the

country that challenges the right of the

federal government to determine who

can be a member of the state militia,''

Hitchens added.

- The ACLU is asking that Johnson be

reinstated in the California Air National - -

Guard and the Air Force Reserve and for

a judgment that the involuntary

discharge on the basis of her assertion of

a homosexual identity violated

Johnson's constitutional rights to free

speech, freedom of association, due pro-

cess and privacy.

According to Lesbian Rights Project

attorney Roberta Achtenberg, .

`"Although this in an individual action, a

favorable outcome will potentially

benefit thousands of women and men

who serve in the National Guards

throughout the country."'

The defendants include Secretary of

the Air Force Verne Orr, Chief of the

National Guard Bureau Emmett Walker,

Governor George Deukmejian, and

Willard Shank, Adjunct General of the

California Air National Guard.

Horsewoman Fights to Join

Mounted Patrol

Sonya Sokolow, an experienced and

accomplished horsewoman from Wood-

side, has sought since 1975 to become a

member of the Mounted Patrol of San

Mateo County. She has been thwarted at

every turn by the Mounted Patrol and

the Sheriff's Department, the county

agency which oversees and screens ap-

plicants for the Patrol. Sokolow has

been rejected as a member of the

Mounted Patrol ey because she is a

woman.

On August 28, the ACLU-NC filed a

lawsuit in San Mateo County Superior

Court on Sokolow's po charging the

County, the Sheriff's Department and

the Mounted Patrol with sex discrimina-

tion in violation of the state and federal

_ constitutions.

"`We are seeking a declaration from

the court that the policy and practice of

excluding women from membership in

the Mounted Patrol of San Mateo Coun-

ty violates the equal protection

guarantees of the California Constitu-

tion and the Fourteenth Amendment of

the federal Constitution,' explained |

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney Lee

Ann Huntington of the San Francisco

continued on p. 8

20-Week Abortion Rule Challenged -

Charging that the state's 1967

Therapeutic Abortion Act prohibiting

post-20-week abortions is unconstitu-

tional, the ACLU-NC has asked the

Sacramento Superior Court to bar en-

forcement of that law. 0x00B0

The ACLU motion for summary

judgment was filed in September by

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney

Deborah Rhode of Stanford Law School

and staff attorney Margaret Crosby. The

lawsuit, Margolis vy. Van De Kamp was

originally filed (as Margolis v. Deukme-

Jian) in July, 1982.

The lawsuit focuses on an opinion on

the Act issued by then Attorney General

George Deukmejian which states that the

20-week time limit on abortions should

be enforced by local prosecutors unless

they conclude that the fetus was not

viable or that the life or health of the

pregnant woman justified the abortion.

This interpretation,

disavowed by John Van De Kamp when

he succeeded to the Attorney General

post, violates several U.S. and California

Supreme Court decisions, according to

the ACLU suit. -

which was not:

The U.S. Supreme Court landmark

Roe v. Wade decision of 1973 determin-

ed that women have a constitutional

right to an abortion until the moment of

fetal viability, Rhode explained, and that

even past that point of viability, the state

may not deny an abortion to a woman

whose life or health would be jeopardiz-

ed by carrying the pregnancy to term.

`Fetal viability requires a difficult,

subjective medical assessment,''? Rhode

added. ``To allow juries to second-guess

a doctor's determination of viability in

the emotionally charged area of abortion

will inhibit doctors from performing late

abortions."'

Crosby added, ``The Attorney

General lacks authority to redraft un-

constitutional legislation. His role is to

enforce the laws to to write them. The

legislature must enact a constitutional

statute regulating late abortions. In the

11 years following Roe v. Wade, it has:

failed to pass such a law.

The motion for summary judgment

notes that the Act may not be salvaged

_by judicial or administrative rewriting.

"Not only does the Attorney General

ae

lack authority to redraft unconstitutional

legislation,'' said Crosby, ``but the

statute, which has essentially been

redrafted by the Attorney General, is un-

_ constitutionally vague and will create a

chilling effect on physicians' willingness

to perform constitutionally-protected

late abortions."'

New Guidelines

Moreover, the Department of Health (c)

Services, following the issuance of the

_ Attorney General's opinion in 1982,

issued a new policy directive which was

both inconsistent with the analysis of its

own legal department. and consistent

with the Attorney General's newly-

fashioned time limit on abortions.

Previously, the Department of Health

Services guidelines for the medical pro-

fession concluded that since the Act

violated federal constitutional standards

and since the Legislature never modified

the statute, there existed no valid and en-

forceable statutory time limit on abor-

tions performed in the state.

The Department's guidelines now

state that Medi-Cal coverage of abor-

tions past the twentieth week of fetal

gestation will not be approved unless the

`attending physician certifies that the

fetus is not viable or that carrying the

pregnancy to term would jeopardize the

pregnant woman's life or health.

`These guidelines are a product of

and are as invalid as the Attorney

General's opinion on the Act'' claimed

Crosby. ``Just as the Attorney General is -

-barred from narrowing the scope of legal

abortion by use of criminal sanctions, so

also is the Department of Health Services

barred from reducing the scope of Medi-

Cal coverage of abortion in California."'

The suit was filed on behalf of Alan

Margolis and Irvin M. Cushner, two

`physicians who have performed and are

willing to perform, post-twenty week

abortions and two taxpayers, Bernice

Biggs and Jill Jaffe, who object to the

use of public funds in the enforcement of

the unconstitutional Act. Together, they

seek to protect the rights of California

`women who may be denied late-term

abortions because of the unconstitu-

tional twenty-week limitation of the Act.

-aclu news

4 october 1984

Bill of Rights Day

continued from p. 1

and expand civil liberties. ``As part of

our 50th Anniversary, it is particularly

fitting that we honor a northern Califor-

nian with nationl stature who shares our

long history,'' said ACLU-NC Chairper-

son Nancy Pemberton.

C.L. Dellums was born in Coriscana,

Texas and moved to Oakland in 1923

where he has lived ever since. In the

hostile labor climate of the 1920's, he

worked with A. Philip Randolph to

organize the Brotherhood of Sleeping

Car Porters, the first international union

to be founded and led by blacks. In

1929, he was elected Vice-President of

the Brotherhood; when Randolph retired

in 1968, Dellums was unanimously

chosen as his successor.

Dellums and the Brotherhood led a

major crusade against racial discrimina-

tion in the trade union movement. When

the Brotherhood joined the American

Federation of Labor in 1919, it aimed to

have all written ``color clauses'? removed (c)

from trade union constitutions. The

Brotherhood felt that the fight for the

removal of color clauses had to take

place on a national level - and their

debates drew considerable (and often,

unwanted) media attention at the na-

tional AFL conventions.

Under Dellums' leadership, the

Brotherhood would draw up a resolution

and name the unions which still had col-

or clauses. Though these unions would

ask not to be named, Brotherhood

members would publicly name them and

loudly debate the issue until they remov-

ed the race clauses. They kept up this -

fight until all color clauses were removed

from all AFL union constitutions.

As Dellums states in his oral history,

``We believed then and still believe that

the Negro will never really be a first-class

citizen until he is into the mainstream

and all its tributaries of American life.

Organized labor is certainly one of the

mainstreams of American life. That was

the reason we went in. We belonged in

Pacifica Group Wins:

Defamation charges against an en-

vironmental group in Pacifica which had

campaigned for a local growth initiative

opposed by the city Planning Commis-

sion were judged to be without basis by

the state Court of Appeal. The ACLU

defended the organization, Friends of

Pacifica, when it was sued by members

of the Planning Commission for slander

based on a statement made by the

organization's chair and reported in a

local newspaper.

The July 24 appellate court ruling

upheld a May 1982 decision by the San

Mateo Superior Court dismissing the

$125,000 slander suit. The unanimous

appellate court decision noted that the

statement in question was one of opi-

nion, rather than fact, and was therefore

not defamatory as a matter of law.

`We are extremely pleased with the

court's decision,'? said ACLU-NC

cooperating attorney Katherine Crocker -

of the San Francisco law firm of Heller,

Ehrman, White and McAuliffe. ``The

lawsuit attempted to punish members of

Friends of Pacifica for voicing an opi-

nion about an environmental measure

that meant a great deal to them.

``This is a victory against a defamation

action which would have had the impact

of chilling political expression. It is

Labor and civil rights leader C.L. Dellums.

the mainstream of the labor movement

and the mission was to drive official

discrimination out.

"`We didn't stop the fight until the col-

or clause was removed from _ every

especially important for the Friends of

Pacifica as the unjustified slander allega-

tions had a potentially chilling effect on

members of the group and those who

may wish to join,'' Crocker added.

The controversy began in 1981 when

there was considerable debate among the -

public in Pacifica regarding the course of

residential development in that city. On

opposing sides of the controversy were

the Pacifica City Council and its Plann-

ing Commission and the Friends of

Pacifica. The Friends prepared and

distributed pamphlets attacking a pro-

posed new zoning ordinance as en-

- vironmentally insensitive and the result

of poor planning. Friends sponsored a

municipal initiative to limit residential

construction in Pacifica for ten years.

In August 1981, a member of the -

Pacifica City Council challenged Friends

of Pacifica chair Donald Warden to a

_ debate on the effect of the proposed in-

itiative. In an interview with a newspaper

reporter, Warden accepted the challenge

and stated, ``I think someone is being

bought on the Planning Commission,

otherwise, how could you explain a 3-3

vote at one meeting on a issue and then,

at the very next meeting, a 6-1 vote?''

His statement was printed in the Pacifica

Tribune on August 12, 1981.

union's constitution or ritual. So of-

ficially there was no discrimination left

in the union movement. But obviously

there was discrimination left because it is

run by American white people,''

Slander Suit Stopped

The six members of the Planning

Commission brought suit against

Warden and the organization for

$125,000 in general and _ punitive

damages for the statement.

When the superior court agreed with

ACLU arguments that Warden's

statements were expressions of opinion

and thus protected under law, the Plann-

ing Commission appealed.

In upholding the lower court decision,

the Court of Appeal noted that ``an

`essential element of defamation is that

the publication in question must contain

a false statement of fact.'' Citing an

earlier ruling, the court stated, ``Under

the First Amendment there is no such

thing as a false idea. However pernicious

an opinion may seem, we depend for its

correction not on the conscience of

judges and juries but on the competition

of other ideas."'

This victory is the latest in a series of

ACLU-NC challenges to the use of

defamation laws to chill political expres-

sion. ``We have witnessed a number of

incidents where community groups or

newspapers with limited resources have

been sued for slander or libel where an

_award for the damages sought would

have jeopardized their very existence,"'

said ACLU-NC staff attorney Amitai

Dellums adds.

Dellums has also been an_ active

member of the NAACP since 1927.

When 18 Western states were formed in-

to an NAACP region in 1948, Dellums

was unanimously chosen as the first

regional chairperson, a position he held

until 1967. His efforts to build member-

ship and support for the organization

were fueled by his strong convictions of

the importance of the NAACP: "The

NAACP is the one organization whose

only dedication is complete, total equali-

ty,' he said.

During World War II, Dellums was a

leader in the ``March on Washington,"'

which resulted in President Roosevelt's

creation of a wartime fair employment

commission. After the war, Dellums led

a decade-long effort to pass fair employ-

ment legislation in California and lob-

bied then-Governor Earl Warren to sup-

port it.

When the legislation was finally pass-

ed in 1959, Governor Pat Brown ap-

pointed Dellums to the first Fair

Employment Practice Commission. In

1965, he was appointed chair of the

Commission. He has been a member of

the Commission (now the Fair Employ-

ment and Housing Commission) ever

since, the only Commissioner to have

been reappointed by both Governors

Reagan and Jerry Brown. This year

marks his 25th year on the Commission.

Dellums, who is the uncle of Con--

gressman Ronald V. Dellums, is now 84

years old. He is known as a barnburning

speechmaker and a treasurehouse of

history about the struggle for civil rights

in California and the nation.

The Bill of Rights Day Celebration

will be held at the Sheraton Palace Hotel

in San Francisco on Sunday, December

9; program at 5 p.m. (reception from 4-5

p.m.). Tickets for the event are $10.00

and are available from the ACLU-NC

office. Send in the form or call 415/

621-2488.

Schwartz. Among the ACLU victories

were the reversal of a libel judgment

against a small, family-run newspaper in

San Leandro which editorialized against

the police, and the defense of a gay com-

munity newspaper in San Francisco

which was sued by two police officers for

reporting on a meeting at which a

number of people spoke about police

abuse of gays.

Federal Workers

Have

Constitutional

Rights Too!

We help you excercise

those rights.

Support the ACLU

through your local

Combined Federal

Campaign

_ Simply write in "ACLU

Foundation" on your CFC

form. :

The Foundation is an

authorized recipient. of CFC

donations.

aclu news

october 1984

SSS og! ta

Pemberton Elected Board Chair.

Long-time ACLU activist Nancy

Pemberton was elected the Chairperson

of the ACLU-NC Board of Directors at |

the September Board meeting. Pember-

ton takes over the gavel from Davis

Riemer who resigned the position after a

three year term.

Pemberton, a third year law student at

U.C. Berkeley's Boalt Hall, has served

on the ACLU-NC Board. since 1979.

Through her participation and leader-

ship of both policy-making and standing

Board committees, Pemberton has

helped to define ACLU-NC policy and

strengthen the organization. She served

as the co-chair of the Equality Commit- -

tee and has been a member of the Jail

and Prison Construction and Pregnancy

Disability committees.

Three years ago, as chair of the

Development Committee, Pemberton

led the launching of the first Major

Donor Campaign. This now annual

Campaign, which relies primarily on the

volunteer efforts of Board members,

provides a major proportion of the

ZULIJULYA [NDI

New Board Chairperson Nancy Pemberton (right) conferring with Treasurer

_ Lisa Honig.

budget for the legal work of the ACLU-

NC Foundation.

""One of my main goals is to continue

Ring Up for the Bill of Rights

on't you participate in our 1984 Bill of Rights Campaign to raise funds

for the ACLU's legal program and public education efforts? Join us as |

a Telephone Volunteer at one or more of the Phone Nights in October and

November (schedule below). Please complete the coupon and return to the

ACLU, 1663 Mission Street, fourth floor, San Francisco, California

94103. Attention: Dick Grosboll, 1984 BRC Chair.

BRC 1984 Telephone Night oS

October

San Francisco

San Francisco

San Francisco

San Francisco and S. Clara

. Sacramento and Oakland

Contra Costa and Sonoma

San Francisco

November

San Francisco and Oakland

San Francisco and S. Mateo

Oakland and S. Clara -

San Francisco

- SanFrancisco and S. Mateo

Fresno and Oakland

All phone nights begin at

Tuesday, October 16

Wednesday, October 17

Thursday, October 18

Tuesday, October 23

Wednesday, October 24

Thursday, October 25

Tuesday, October 30

Thursday, November 1

Thursday, November 8 (Dissent

Committee)

Tuesday, November 13

Wednesday, November 14

(Pro-Choice Task Force)

Thursday, November 15

(Immigration Working Group)

Tuesday, November 20

6 p.m. and end at

A telephone day is also scheduled for Wednesday, November 21.

*Please be advised this schedule is subject to change; if there are changes

we will contact you. Thank you.

9 p.m.

I FORO I OI IOI OI I TOO KI It

Yes, you can count on me to participate as a Bill of;

Rights Campaign telephone volunteer. :

3 i

Name :

Address a

Telephone (s) Days Evenings :

Location Date i

Location Date ;

Location : Date :

the work that Davis has done in

strengthening the commitment of Board

members to their organizational respon-

sibilities,'' Pemberton said.

The daughter of former national

ACLU Executive Director Jack Pember-

ton, Pemberton grew up in the ACLU.

She has been active in this affiliate since

her undergraduate days at San Francisco

State. `"One of the reasons I want to

serve as a leader in the ACLU is to ex-

pand the concept of civil liberties to new

arenas,'' Pemberton said, ``for example,

the relationship of poverty to people's

access to civil liberties."'

Pemberton added that she is ``moved

and honored'' to have been elected as

Chairperson. ``Davis provided a tough

act to follow,'' she said, ``and I hope to ~

be able to live up to the expectations of

the Board and the membership.''

Outgoing Chairperson Riemer was

honored at the 1984 Conference and at

the September Board meeting for his

outstanding leadership of the affiliate

during his three year term. A Board

resolution stated, ``The Board does

hereby recognize, commemorate, and

celebrate the unequalled three-year term

of Davis Riemer, Chairperson, and be it

resolved that you are hereby admonished

that your abandoning the Chair does not

absolve you from many special respon-

sibilities, and that this Board fully ex-

pects to be the ongoing beneficiary of

your wisdom, counsel and talents."'

Riemer said he was deeply touched by

the Board resolution and that ``the past

three years have been one of the most

significant and pleasurable challenges of

my life.

"`T plan to keep working hard for the

_ ACLU,"'' Riemer added.

"Working hard'' for Riemer includes

continuing a broad range of respon- -

sibilities. He will continue to chair the

Long Range Planning Committee and to

participate in the Development and

Budget/Management Committees. The

Pension and Investment subcommittees -

will continue to benefit from Riemer's

expertise as well.

Riemer's guidance to the organiza-

tional viability of the affiliate will con-

tinue to be felt as the policies determined

by the Personnel Committee and the

working group which studied the af-

filiate legal program with an emphasis on

chapter participation are implemented.

In addition to Pemberton, the Board

elected the following officers: Vice-

Chairpersons: Barbara Brenner (Chair,

~ Development Committee),

Criley,(Chair, Field Committee), Stanley

- Strauss, and Linda Weiner.

Richard

Freidman, (Chair, Legislative Commit-

tee), Steven Mayer, Chair, Legal Com-

mittee); Secretary- `Treasurer: Lisa

Honig; Executive Committee: Bernice

Biggs, Patsy Fulcher, Sylvan Heumann,

Andrea Learned, Jim Morales, Fran

Brenner Heads

Campaign

ACLU-NC Vice- President Barbara

Brenner will head up the 1984 Fall Major

Gifts Campaign from her new position

as Development Committee Chair.

Although Brenner joined the Board only

last year she has quickly distinguished

herself in fundraising.

The Major Gifts Campaign is the

largest single source of income for the

legal program of the ACLU Foundation

of Northern California with a legal

docket of 100 cases a year.

Brenner takes over from Bernice Biggs

who remains on the Board and on the

Development Committee. Under Biggs'

two years of leadership the Development

Committee was firmly established and

total income goals from the Major Gifts

and Bill of Rights Campaign grew

almost 60 percent.

Brenner and the Development Com-

mittee have taken on a 1984 Major Gifts

- Campaign goal of $280,000. Major Gifts

are solicited by ACLU-NC_ board

members and other volunteers. At press

time, the Canes has raised almost

$100,000.

Other Development Committee

members are Biggs, Fran Strauss,- former

board chair Davis Reimer, new board

chair Nancy Pemberton, and two non-

board members, Dr. Milton Estes and

Tracy Brown. Each Development Com-

mittee member heads a team of

solicitors.

Brenner is an attorney with the San

Francisco firm of Remcho, Johansen and

Purcell. A Boalt Hall graduate, she (c)

clerked for the ACLU of Southern

California and interned at the ACLU of

~ Northern California.

Richmond

continued from p. I

emotion, than the `same' parade 20 days

later,' the ruling stated. ``The later

parade can never be the same. Where

spontaneity is part of the message,

dessemination delayed is dissemination

denied."'

In addressing the City Council's

waiver privilege, the Court noted that

"unfettered discretion to license speech.

cannot be left to administrative bodies.

Such discretion grants officials the power

to-discriminate and raises the spectre of

selective enforcement on the basis of the

content of speech:"''

Concluding that in each respect the

Richmond parade ordinance is un-

constitutional, the Court struck it down

on its face and awarded attorneys fees to

_ the ACLU.

`*The result is great,'' said Schwartz,

`not only by vindicating rights in Rich-

mond, but also because the court's deci-

sion will affect First Amendment rights

to hold protest marches throughout the

western United States.''

aclu news

6 october 1984

The arrest of ACLU-NC attorney

John Crew on September 6 as he was

monitoring police street sweeps in

downtown San Francisco came only a

few hours after the ACLU publicly

called on San Francisco Police Chief

Cornelius Murphy to halt the sweeps and

asked state Attorney General John Van

De Kamp to investigate the police round-

ups.

When he was arrested, Crew was tak- -

ing notes about the arrests he saw in an

effort to further document reports which

appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle

about police ``sweeps'' and ``rousts'' of

street people at Civic Center and Hallidie

Plaza.

He had been observing the police stop-

ping people and asking them for iden-

tification for about 20 minutes when the

police noticed him. They asked if he was

a reporter and he told them no. Then

they asked Crew for identification and

he refused to give them any. __

At that point, Crew was pat searched,

handcuffed and taken to the Hall of

Justice for booking.

Crew said he told the ones officers

that a U.S. Supreme Court decision two

Since the publication of the story

"Privacy Fight for Childcare Homes'? in

the May issue of the ACLU News, a

number of readers have written express-

ing their concern and opposition to the

ACLU position advocating the barring

of state officials from entering family

day care homes without a warrant. As

`we do not have room to print all of the

letters here, we have chosen to print one

from Carolyn Garberg, a Berkeley social

worker, and the reply from staff at-

torney Margaret Crosby to capture the

main points of the debate on this impor-

tant issue. Ed.

Carolyn Garberg writes:

I am writing to express my strong op-

position to the ACLU position on

privacy for child care homes.

How can privacy as it is defined in the

Fourth Amendment possibly apply to a

situation where someone is in business

for profit? As a child coordinator of a

non-profit agency with funds for low-

income children, I am having great dif-

ficulty in seeing why separate laws that

protect children are applied depending

on whether the business is inside or out-

side the home. If you are using your

house for business, it must become sub-

ject to the same laws. Otherwise, people

in the child care business for profit will

make a mockery of what has been set out

as regulations which protect children.

State inspectors can enter my centers

without a warrant and I support that

right. The ineffectiveness of the current

system in detecting problems is untrained

inspectors, too few inspectors, and some

regulations that do not help protect the

child. (c)

Why not spend money on this rather

_ than the private providers ``freedom''

not to be subject to unannounced state

visits?

As an advocate of child care, I and

others ,worked hard this year to again

defeat a bill that-would exempt church

~ consent Or a warrant.

years ago prohibited them from arresting

people on the street for refusing to iden-

tify themselves. `"They decided to book

me for obstruction of justice, ee Crew

said.

Crew's observing at Hallidie Plaza

was part of an effort by the ACLU to

halt the police department's practice of

unlawfully sweeping the streets of per-

sons they consider undesireable.

-

Late in September, Crew was notified

by the District Attorney's office that the

charges against him had been dropped.

In a letter to the Police Chief, ACLU-

NC staff attorney Amitai Schwartz con-

demned the Civic Center and Hallidie

Plaza police sweeps as "police state tac-

tics that have no place in a democracy,

let alone a sophisticated city like San

~ Francisco.

The letter noted that the actions of the

Police Department constitute a ``deliber-

ate and intentional effort'' to ignore the

state and federal constitutions in the

belief that the persons victimized by the

street sweeps are too poor or powerless

to do anything about the abuse of their

rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has held

for almost 20 years that such police tac-

tics are illegal.

Schwartz requested the Police Chief to

immediately cease the sweeps and rousts

and to send the ACLU all documenta-

tion pertaining to special law enforce-

ment efforts to ``clean up'' the areas

around Civic Center and Hallidie Plaza.

The ACLU also called on the At-

torney General to investigate the police

activity ``in order that the constitutional

rights of all persons may be secure."'

On September 24, the Attorney

General wrote to Schwartz that ``if these

Letters

schools and child care centers from li-

censing regulations because of the poten-

tial use of corporal punishment (stated in

the bill), staff-child ratios that were

outrageously low, no safety, health or

fire regulations, etc. You are creating the

same danger in family day care homes.

I see the ACLU becoming fanatical

about a word called ``freedom.'' That

when taken to the extreme interpretation

as in this case, opens up conditions that

in fact make a situation more dangerous.

Where is the freedom of the children and

their rights to being assured of very basic -

services. And how can we, as child pro-

viders, who have struggled for years for . .

standards of performance not see your

stance as a set back for quality of care

and accountability.

You cannot have licensing standards

without having unwarranted inspections.

Margaret Crosby replies:

You may be surprised to learn that all

businesses are protected by the Fourth

Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court

has ruled, for example, that inspectors

for the Occupational Safety and Health

Administration may not enter onto com-

mercial premises without the owner's

The Fourth

Amendment was written by people who

were Outraged by the British practice of

searching the colonists' business proper-

ty for compliance with the King's

revenue laws.

There is a small exception to the

business-warrant requirement for certain

occupations which are deemed to be

ultrahazardous. Only avery small

number of truly unique businesses fit this

category (for example, mining). In the

day care case, the state attempts to argue

that caring for children is an ultrahaz-

ardous activity. This is obviously not

true, and stigmatizes parents who need

_ to place their children in family day care

homes, by implying that working parents

are exposing their children to unique

hazards by placing them in family day

care.

The experience with surprise war-.

rantless inspections in California shows

that the issue is not a simple trade off

between privacy and children's safety, as

you imply in your letter. In the past, the

privacy of both the children and the

caregiver has been sacrificed, while the

safety of the children has not been

assured.

In a two-year period after the judge

issued her ruling requiring inspectors to

obtain warrants for searches of family

day care homes, the state's authority to

care for the safety. of children has not

been frustrated. The vast majority of

people administering residential day care

facilities have given consent to govern-

ment agents to inspect their homes. A

sample of approximately half of day care

inspections from June 1, 1981 to

November 1, 1983, revealed that only 23

family day care providers refused to con-

sent to inspection. Of these, seven ceased

or never began providing family day

care. Five allowed subsequent inspec-

tions (four without restriction as to the

areas of the home inspected). Nine were

scheduled for further visits. Further-

more, the department has sought war-

rants for only two homes out of a total (c)

of almost 7000 inspections conducted

since the court's order.

The Fourth Amendment's guarantee

of privacy and security in the home is not

_atechnicality or an abstract concept. The

warrant assures that a neutral govern-

ment officer authorize an inspection and

limits its scope. It is tremendously im-

portant to children and adults - as we

recognize in refusing to allow unna-

nounced warrantless inspections of

private homes where children reside,

even though children are at risk of abuse

from their parents.

tempted to change the sponsors

ACLU Lawyer Arrested in S.F. Street Sweeps

allegations [of illegal rousting and sweep-

ing actions against loiterers] are factually

founded, we share the concern which

prompted your letter to us.'' Van De

Kamp stated that San Francisco District

Attorney Arlo Smith is investigating the

allegations.

The ACLU-NC has a long history of

challenging police practices of sweeping

the streets of so-called undesireables. In

1980, the ACLU lawsuit Ramey v. Gain

~ succeeded in challenging a San Francisco

ordinance which gave police officers

broad powers to detain persons who

`would not otherwise be punished by legal -

means. A year after the old obstruction

of sidewalks law was struck down, the

police again began to illegally sweep the

streets using a section of the state Penal

Code. In a second ACLU lawsuit,-

Ramey y. Murphy, filed ~in 1982,

Schwartz produced evidence at a trial in-

dicating that 94% of the people arrested

under the Penal Code Section 647c have

their charges dropped at their first ap-

pearance in court and that less than one

in 200 persons is actually convicted of

obstruction. After a San Francisco judge

refused to enjoin the practice of arresting

persons without intent to prosecute, the

ACLU appealed the decision. The ap-

peal is pending.

Immigration Reform

I am concerned about the way the

ACLU is opposing the Simpson-Mazzoli

bill. It's true the House and Senate ver-

sions have problems with the current

language, problems that could jeopar-

dize civil liberties of large groups of peo-

ple. However, the present immigration

policy also jeopardizes civil ae of

many of the same groups.

I'd like to see the ACLU all to

clarify the language of the Simpson-

Mazzoli bill rather than destroy the bill

outright. Zero Population Growth is

fighting for the bill, fighting to support

clear language that would protect both

legal residents and U.S. citizens and

bring as many illegals as possible to a

state of legal residence.

How about ACLU and ZPG forces

combining to bring about good immigra-

tion reform that is necessary for a sound

population policy? We maybe too late

for a compromise bill (unless there's a

lame duck session). However, I would

appreciate published comments for con-

structive action in the future from other

ACLU members.

Ruth K. Nash

Larkspur

The ACLU has consistently tried to

alter the language and provisions of the

Simpson-Mazzoli bill ever since the

legislation was introduced three years

ago. In particular, the ACLU has at-

measures around employer sanctions,

judicial review, amnesty and national

ID. cards. Because alterations that

would protect civil liberties were found

unacceptable to the bill's proponents, the

ACLU has had to firmly oppose the bill

as it stands.

In lobbying to change and oppose the -

- bill, the ACLU has worked with a wide

uanely of like-minded groups, including

continued on n p. e

aclu news w=

october 1984 7

Prop. 41 Would Cut Benefits, Rights

by Marjorie Swartz

ACLU Legislative Advocate

The ACLU-NC opposition to Pro-

position 41, the November ballot in-

itiative that proposes slashing public

assistance programs - including AFDC,

Medi-Cal, Foster Care and Family Plan-

ning - by 50% is based on the

measure's disastrous impact on civil

liberties.

_ Prop. 41 states that public assistance

expenditures in California may not ex-

ceed 110% of the average of per capita

expenditures in the 49 other states unless

increased by a *% vote of the Legislature.

This formula means that all states will be

weighted equally by total population,

regardless of the number of assistance

recipients; it also does not account for

variations in the cost of living among

states. The effect of applying the Pro-

position 41 formula is that state benefits

will be cut by approximately half.

_ Most experts feel that the cuts will

have to be made in the following ways:

Elderly and Disabled

Medical Care

Medical care to the elderly and dis-

abled will be cut. Currently recipients

_ must spend their own income up to a cer-

tain fixed amount before medical

benefits become available. Under Prop.

41, this ``share'' will go up to $292 per

month. In other words, an elderly or

disabled person will have to live on less

than $300 per month in order to be eligi-

ble for medical benefits.

In addition, prescription drugs, den-

tistry, eyeglasses, foot therapy and hear-

ing aids will no longer be provided by

Medi-Cal and a number of optional state

services will be eliminated.

Women and Children

Most AFDC (Aid to Families with

Dependent Children) are single women

- and children. Prop: 41 would result in a

50% reduction in grants to those

families. Currently, the monthly grant

for a family of 2 is $448. Under Prop. 41

it would drop to $266. Women in the

early stages of pregnancy would lose all

funds.

Prop. 41 could also result in a 50%

reduction in foster care programs. This

would be accomplished either by cutting

grants to foster parents or by making |

Letters ae from p. 6

the Mexican American Legal Defense

and Education Fund, the League of

United Latin American Citizens, the

Congressional Black Caucus, and others. .

The fact that Zero Population Growth

still supports the Simpson-Mazzoli Bill,

with all its provisions which ride rough-

Shod over the civil rights and liberties of

immigrant and minority communities,

indicates that the ACLU and ZPG are

less like-minded on immigration reform

than Ms. Nash would propose. ED.

Courageous Advocacy

Please thank the members of your

splendid organization for presenting to

me your Award for Distinguished

Legislative Service. It is a beautiful, ar-

tistic plaque and it proudly adorns the

wall of my new congressional office in

half of the abused and neglected children

ineligible for aid.

Family Planning

and Administration

It is anticipated that family planning

funds would be cut by as much as 70%.

The above cuts in state programs also

include cuts in administrative overhead

and would probably mean layoffs for

public sector employees. The state reduc-

tion will also result in a loss of federal

matching funds.

Opposition Campaign

The ACLU-NC Board of Directors

noted. that a measure that would

drastically reduce the economic status of

a large number of Californians threatens

their civil liberties directly. In addition,

the phenomenon of treating similarly

situated groups of indigent people -

(mothers with dependent children and

the elderly) differently, raises serious

equal protection concerns, not least

because of the disparate racial composi-

tion of these two groups. Finally, depriv-

ing more than one million Californians

of approximately half of their already in-

adequate ration of economic security

and medical care has profound implica-

tions for the larger society. ``No one who

cares about the future of the Bill of

Rights can fail to be alarmed at the crea-

tion of a growing permanent underclass

which has no way to participate in the

economic and social benefits most of us

take for granted,' said Board member

Steven Mayer.

By opposing Prop. 41, the ACLU-NC

joins a large number of labor, welfare

rights, professional, civil rights and

minority community organizations in-

cluding the ACLU of Southern Califor-

nia, United Farm Workers, SEIU,

NOW-PAC, California Hospital

Association, and California Medical

Association.

A "No on 41'' campaign has been

organized to educate voters about the

devastating impact this legislation would

have on seniors, the disabled, children

and single mothers and to register those

voters most heavily hit by cuts. .

To help defeat Prop. 41, ACLU

members are encouraged to contact cam-

paign headquarters at 2936 McClure,

Oakland 94609 or phone 415/864-4044.

San Jose.

ACLU of Northern California has

always played a key role in the never-

ending assault on our constitutional

rights. Your sturdy efforts have created a

climate in Northern California that

allowed your elected representatives to

be vocal on civil liberties issues and to

vote their consciences without fear of

adverse voter response. We are all

grateful for your creation of this oasis of

freedom.

Sincerely,

Don Edwards

Member of Congress

ACLU-NC BALLOT CARD

The ACLU-NC Board of directors urges all ACLU members to VOTE NO

on the following propositions which will appear on the November 6 i

Proposition 38 - English Only Voting Materials

bf NO This measure would require the Governor to write federal of-

ficials urging that federal law be amended so that voting materials be

printed only in English.

The ACLU opposes Prop. 38 as a-device to restrict voting rights and

undermine the intent of the federal Voting Rights Act, which mandates bi-

lingual materials for language minorities. The absence of second language _

ballot and election materials disenfranchises voters who are unable to read

and understand English proficiently.

| Proposition 39 - Reapportionment

x NO This constitutional amendment would take reapportionment out

of the hands of the Legislature and vest it in anew state commission com-

| posed of retired appellate court justices chosen by lot.

The ACLU opposes this measure which would assign the responsibility

of reapportionment of state Senate, Assembly, a Congressional districts

from elected representatives to a commission drawn by lot from the pool of

retired justices, as it undermines the important civil right of promotion of

" representation of minority groups. The present pool of retired justices

would not allow such a balance: the average age is 75; there is only one

woman, two blacks, one Asian and no Hispanics.

The proposal also threatens to further politicize the judiciary by making

appointments with an eye to a candidate's eventual eligibility on the com-

mission.

Finally, the selection process is contrary to representative government

and the democratic process. In addition to selection by lot of 8 voting com-

mission members, in the case of an impasse, the chair, elected by a majori-

ty, would drop one member by lot until a majority plan is agreed upon.

Proposition 41 - Public Aid and Medical Assistance

x NO This measure would require major reductions (about 50%) in

welfare aid to families and to Medi-Cal, the program that finances health

care for the poor.

The ACLU opposes this measure as it threatens the civil liberties of a

large number of Californians by reducing their economic status drastically.

The impact of depriving more than a million Californians of their already

inadequate ration of economic security and medical care also has a major

impact on the larger society. By eliminating funds for particular programs

- such as Medi-Cal and family planning - that the ACLU has fought hard

to protect on the grounds of equal protection, this measure would under-

mine equal protection guarantees. (See sidebar for more details on Proposi-

tion 41.)

Fight for AB 1

Document Discrimination

By establishing the AB 1 Documenta- _knows of others who have encountered

tion Project, Assemblyman Art Agnos is

continuing his efforts to enact legislation

outlawing employment against lesbians

and gay men in California, despite

Governor Deukmejian's veto of AB 1

earlier this year.

Though the bill was passed by narrow

margins in both houses of the state

Legislature, the Governor vetoed it on

the grounds that there was insufficient

evidence of the problem of employment

discrimination based on sexual orienta-

tion and the need for the remedy propos-

ed by Agnos' AB 1.

In an effort to counteract the Gover-

nor's claims by documenting instances of

anti-gay employment discrimination,

Agnos has established the AB 1

Documentation project and is

disseminating forms for collecting infor-

-mation about such discrimination.

The ACLU Gay Rights Chapter, long

involved in the efforts to enact AB 1, has -

helped to distribute hundreds of the

documentation forms entitled ``Report

of Sexual Orientation Employment

- Discrimination,'' and is encouraging all

ACLU members and supporters to fill

out the form. ``Anyone who has ex-

perienced employment discrimination

because they are lesbian or gay or who

anti-gay discrimination at the workplace

should complete the form describing

their experiences,'' said Gay Rights

Chapter chair Doug Warner.

"The information collected will be

compiled to demonstrate to the gover-

nor, the Legislature and the public at

large the scope and severity of the unjust

employment discrimination encountered

by lesbians and gay men in this state," _

Warner added. :

All identifying information on the

forms will be kept confidential and the

forms may be completed anonymously if

desired.

Agnos plans to Pon fone: the legisla-

tion in January, bolstered by . the

documentation collected through the

project.

Forms are available from:

AB 1 Documentation Project

PO Box 161702

Sacramento, CA 95816

(Telephone: 916/452-9091)

8 aclu news

october 1984

Horsewoman Sues Sheriff continued from p. 3

law firm of Morgenstein, Ladd and

Jubilerer, who, along with ACLU-NC

staff attorney Donna Hitchens, is

representing Sokolow in her suit..

"We are also asking the court to pro-

hibit the exclusion of women from

membership in the Patrol, "" added Hun-

tington.

The Sheriff's Department actively

maintains and fosters a close relationship

`with the Patrol by deputizing all Patrol

members, assigning a salaried Sheriff's

Department employee to supervise train-

ing of members of the Patrol in search-

and-rescue techniques,

security checks on candidates for

membership and calling on the Patrol to

assist the department in searching for

lost persons. The partnership is furthered

by the Sheriff's position as Commander-

~ in-Chief of the Patrol.

The Sheriff's Department and Sheriff,

have in the past and continue to expend

tax monies and use public resources in

support and encouragement of the

Patrol and its policies and activities,

despite the fact that the Patrol has a

bylaw limiting membership to men only.

Sokolow, a Woodside mother of two

girls, is an accomplished horsewoman

with experience in carriage driving,

parading, breeding, sowing, cattle cut-

ting, roping and penning. She has cer-

tificates in Reserve Officers Training and

First Aid as well as a Ph.D. in education

evaluation from Stanford University. A

self-employed math tutor, Sokolow also

serves aS a trustee in the Woodside

School District and as a member of the

B.A.R.K.

each month.) Contact:

415/654-4163.

Earl Warren

Sky, 415/841-9020.

Fresno

conducting |

Board Meeting: (Usually fourth Thursday

Joe Dorst,

Board Meeting: (Third Wednesday each

month.) Wednesday, October 17, 7:30

p.-m.; Sumitomo Bank, 20th and Franklin

Streets, Oakland. Contact: Larry Polan-

Board Meeting: (Third Wednesday each

month.) Wednesday, October 17, at 5:30

p.m.; 906 N Street, Fresno. Contact: Scott

Williams, 209/442-0410.

Membership Meeting: Saturday, October

20. Details to be mailed.

Gay Rights:

Board Meeting: (First Tuesday each

month.) October 2, 7:00 p.m. ACLU,

1663 Mission Street, Fourth Floor, S.F.

`No Board Meeting in November.

Everyone Please Vote! Contact: Doug

Warner, 415/621-2493.

Gay Rights Chapter Phone Night for Bill

of Rights Campaign is Thursday,

November' 1 at 6:00 p.m. Contact:Doug

Warner or Marcia Gallo, 415/621-2493.

Marin County

Board Meeting: Monday, October 15 at

6:30 p.m. at Citicorp Savings, Mill Valley.

Contact: Milton Estes, 415/383-6622.

Woodside Animal Regulatory and Con-

trol Committee. =

"I belong to four equestrian clubs,

~ and'would like to belong to the Mounted.

Patrol too,'' said Sokolow. `"`It would

combine my civic and equestrian in-

terests and give me a chance to serve my

community in yet another way - a way

in which I am well qualified.

"I would take pride in being a member

of an organization dedicated to using

equestrian abilities and facilities for

public service,''. she added.

Early Refusals

Sokolow first attempted to join the

Mounted Patrol in 1975, asking then-

Sheriff John McDonald for help in ar-

ranging an introductory meeting with the

Patrol. When he refused, she requested

that the Patrol rescind its bylaw restrict-

ing membership to males, but the

Patrol's Board of Directors refused this

request.

In 1976, Sokolow again urged that the

Patrol rescind its bylaw or that the

Sheriff's Department disassociate itself

from the Patrol: Neither action was

taken.

In late 1982, Sokolow contacted

newly-elected Sheriff Brendan Maguire,

explaining her efforts to join the Patrol |

and seeking his assistance. For the past

two years, neither Sheriff Maguire nor.

the Patrol have responded positively to

Sokolow's repeated requests and have

continued to refuse to allow her to join

the Patrol.

`I have pursued every avenue sug-

Debate/Candidates Night: Candidates for

State Assembly and State Senate, 7:30

p.m. at Tamalpais High Student Center.

Contact: Milton Estes, 415/383-6622.

Mid-Peninsula

Board Meeting; (Usually last Wednesday

each month.) Wednesday, October 31,

8:00 p.m. at All Saints Episcopal Church

in Palo Alto. Contact: Harry Anisgard,

415/856-9186.

Monterey

Board Meeting: (Fourth Tuesday each

month.) Tuesday October 23 at 7:30 p.m.

at the Monterey Library, Pacific and Jef-

ferson, Monterey. Contact: Richard

Criley, 408/624-7562.

Ralph Atkinson Award: Saturday, Oc-

tober 20 from 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. at the Santa

Catalina School, Monterey. Honoring

Rosemary Matson. Reservations: $17

donation. For further information con- -

tact: Richard Criley,, 408/624-7562.

"Our Endangered Rights'; Two broad-

casts on KAZU (90.3 FM). October 10:

`Political Surveillance and Right to

Privacy", Steve Slatkow and Richard

Criley, October 17: ``Rights of Women'',

Samson Knoll, Riane Eisler and Mae

~ Johnson.

Mt. Diablo

_ Contact: Barbara Eaton, 415/947-1338

North Peninsula

Board Meeting: (Second Monday each

month. ) Monday, October 8 at 8:00 p.m.

gested by lawyers, politicians, friends,

aquaintances and the women in Marin

County who have gained membership in -

Marin Mounted Posse. Court action is

my last recourse,'' explained Sokolow.

ACLU-NC staff attorney Hitchens ex-

plained why the ACLU was taking

Sokolow's case: `"The Sheriff's Depart-

ment and the Patrol have jointly

established a governmental regulation,

policy, custom and practice of abridging

the rights of Sokolow and other women

to equal protection of the laws by

_ limiting membership in the Patrol to men

and persistently refusing to admit

women.

``The Sheriff's Department and the

Patrol have thereby jointly undertaken

and engaged in willful and malicious

discrimination under color of law and

are in violation of the state and federal

constitutions,'' Hitchens said.

Public Funds

San Mateo County taxpayer Sid

Scheiber is joining Sokolow in her suit

charging that the continued expenditure

of public funds and public resources to

support and encourage the Patrol in its

activities and policies is illegal and con-

stitute an inexcusable waste of public

funds.

"As is often the case with sex

discrimination, the defendants are really

cutting off their nose to spite their face,"

said Hitchins, ``as adding Sokolow and

other women to the organization would

a it immensely."'

at Sears Savings Bank, San Mateo. Con-

tact: Sid Schieber, 415/345-8603.

Sacramento

Board Meeting: Contact: Mary Gill,

916/457-4088

San Francisco

Board Meeting: (Usually fourth Tuesday

each month.) Contact: Cheney Visher,

415/626-5978

Santa Clara

Board Meeting: (First Tuesday of each

month.) Tuesday, October 9 and Tuesday,

"November 13, Community Bank Building

Conference Room, 111 West St. John

Street, second floor, San Jose at 7:30 p.m.

Contact: Steve Alpers, 415/792-5110

(days).

_ Santa Cruz

Board Meeting: (Usually second Wednes-

day each month). October 10 at 7:30 p.m.,

' Louden Nelson Center. Public discussion

on legal and legislative issues at 8:30 p.m.

_ Annual Meeting: November 13 at Louden

Nelson Center. Cocktails at 6 p.m.; Din-

ner at 6:30 p.m. Contact: Keith Lesar,

408/688-1666.

Sonoma

Board Meeting: (Third. Thursday each

month.) Contact: Andrea _ Learned,

707/544-6911.

As Sokolow explained,

has the potential to expand its public ser-

vice and equestrian activities to fully

utilize the marvelous facilities available

in Woodside. I can envision, for exam-

ple, more equestrian demonstrations,

contests and education programs for San

Mateo residents, especially for school -

children, the disabled, and the under-

priviledged.

"I am eager to participate in these ac-

tivities, and it is unfair not to allow me

the opportunity just because I am a

woman," Sokolow said.

ICULATION

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP MANAGEMENT AND ci

TA. TITLE OF PUBLICATION 1B. PUBLICATION NO. }2. DATE

eee

ACLU NEWS ola 8)014)0

ui

`OF ISSUE Z 3A. NO. OF ISSUES PUBLISHED | 38. Al

RE REE ANNUALLY, == =| PRICE.

monthly/bimonthly - : 8 $.50

4, COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS OF KNOWN OFFICE OF PUBLICATION (Street, City. County, State and Z/P+4 Code) (Not printers)

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission, Suite 460, San Francisco, CA sere?

I. COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS OF THE HEADQUARTERS OF GENERAL BUSI eas GFF ICES OF THE PUBLISHER (Nor printer)

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission, Suite 460, San Francisco, CA 94103

MANAGING EDITOR (Phas item MUST NOT be blank)

6: FULL NAMES AND COMPLETE Mi iG ADDRESS OF PUBLISHER, EDITOR, AND.

PUBLISHER (Name and Complete Mailing Address)

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission, Suite 460, San Francisco, CA~ 94103

EDITOR (Neme and Complete Mailing Addrezs)

"The Patrol

SUBSCRIPTION

Elaine Elinson, ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission, Suite 460, San Francisco, CA 94103

[AGING iN.

JORESS

American Civil Liberties Union 1663 Mission St., Suite 460

of Northern California San Francisco CA_94103

KNOWN BONDHOLDERS, MORTGAGEES, At! OTHER SECURITY HOLDERS ING.

AMOUNT OF BONDS, MORTGAGES OR OTHER SECURITIES (if there are none. sv state)

LLNAME-"`"-~`~0x2122TSSC*CSCUCCOMPLETE MAILING ADORI ESS

= Fu

Notzapplitcabl ese 2 2s is ae ee ee

G. TOTAL (Sum of E.

F1 and 2-should equal net pre: 16,482

ae 1 certify that the statements ny HER, BUSINESS R, OR

me above are correct and complete ab cL Gi Se Editor

PS Form 3526, J ction on reverse)

Biocon

`Board Meeting: (Third Wednesday each

month.) Wednesday, October 17. Con-

tact: Bart Harloe, 209/946-2431 (days)

Yolo County

Board Meeting: Thursday, October 18.

Contact: Larry Garrett, 916/427-4285

(days) or 916/758-1005 (eves). Executive

Committee meeting: Thursday, September _

27. Prop 41 Meeting on Tuesday,

September 25. Contact: Larry Garrett,

916/427-4285 or 916/758-1005 or Casey

McKeever, 916/442-0753 (days) or

916/666-3556 (eves). Membership Social

tentatively set for the first week in

December. Bill of Rights Phone Night to

be scheduled in October with the

Sacramento Chapter.

Field

Committee

Meetings

Pro-Choice Task Force: Wednesday, Oc-

tober 3, 7:30 p.m. ACLU office. All pro-

choice supporters and friends welcome.

Contact: Marcia Gallo, 415/621-2493.

Right to Dissent Subcommittee: Wednes-

day, October 3, 6:00 p.m. ACLU office.

Contact: Marcia Gallo, 415/621-2493.

Draft. Opposition Network: Tuesday,

November 13, 7:30 p.m. at Unitas House,

2700 Bancroft Way, Berkeley. Contact:

Judy Newman, 415/567-1527.

Immigration Working Group: Wednes- -

day, October 11, 6:00 p.m., ACLU office,

1663 Mission Street. Contact: Cindy

Forster, 415/621-2493.