vol. 51, no. 1
Primary tabs
The ACLU News celebrates a very important semicentennial this month-its
own. For fifty years, the ACLU News has, in uninterrupted publication, informed
its readership of the burning civil liberties issues of the day.
The first issue of the ACLU News came out as a one-page tabloid in January
1936 as the official newsletter of the two-year-old Northern California affiliate. With
uncanny prescience, the stories seemed to portend the future. Under the banner of
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty," the News ran stories of censorship of handbills
in San Jose, an INS attempt to deport a Canadian student because of past membership
in the Communist Party, and the expulsion from a Sacramento elementary school
of a nine-year-old Jehovah's Witness who refused to salute the flag.
The News also reported that the San Mateo Junior College Board of Trustees
refused to dismiss Professor G. Iliff for charges of "radicalism" brought by the American
Legion. "The ACLU helped in resisting this attack upon academic freedom," the 1936
story says-just as fifty years later the ACLU fought Professor Bruce Franklin's firing
; _ACLU News Celebrates 50 Years
from Stanford for political speeches.
The first editor of the ACLU News was ACLU-NC founder and executive director
_ Ernest Besig. The second edition of the paper in February 1936 added photography
to the news coverage, and by the third issue, the paper was up to two large pages
of newsprint. The first cartoon-about the House Un-American Activities Committee-
appeared in 1956.
Today, the ACLU News is an eight-page tabloid which comes out eight times
ayeat
Silk-screened posters featuring the first edition of the ACLU News were designed
in 1984 by artist Selwyn Jones to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the affiliate.
A limited number of the posters are still available for $5.00 from the ACLU office.
An eight-page historical edition of the ACLU News with stories taken from the pages
of five decades of the affiliate newspaper, produced by former editor Elaine Elinson
in 1984, is available free of charge from the ACLU-NC.
Volume LI
Solons Trade H
by Marjorie Swartz
and Daphne Macklin
ACLU Legislative Advocates
The past year witnessed the emergence
of a number of strange political bedfellows
in Sacramento, unusual bipartisan and
liberal-conservative coalitions. Instead of
the normal impasse between the two
parties and the two branches of govern-
ment, there was more horse trading and
compromise. The results were for the most
part antithetical to civil liberties-
although in a few cases ACLU positions
prevailed.
New legislation which was introduced
covered very little new ground. A "clerical"
error, which will be remembered for years
to come, provided one of the most uncanny"
events of 1985. Most of the significant civil
liberties legislation failed to move, as is
1986 Board
Nominations
As provided by the ACLU-NC bylaws,
the ACLU-NC membership is entitled to
elect its 1986-87 Board directly. The
Nominating 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 Committees consideration
before March 25, 1986. Address sugges-
tions to
Nominating Committee
ACLU-NC
1663 Mission Street
San Francisco, CA 94103.
Include your suggested nominee's qual-
ifications and how the nominee may be
reached.
Continued on page 2
aclu news
January-February 1986
1985 Legislative Review
orses, Liberties
In Unusual Legislative Session |
often the case in the first year (and a non-
election year) of a two-year session.
Nonetheless, some issues of concern to the
ACLU bubbled to the surface as the
session progressed to its halfway point.
Chairing Criminal Justice
The first inkling of a new bipartisan
spirit was the appointment of a Republican
chair to the Assembly Public Safety
Committee, which has traditionally been
dominated by liberal Democrats. Pre-
viously called the Criminal Justice
Committee, this panel deals with key civil
liberties issues, including police matters,
administration of justice and the courts.
The appointment of Larry Stirling (R-
San Diego) as chair of the Committee was
of major concern to civil libertarians as
he has always been a consistent- vote for
law enforcement interests.
Although working with an unsympa-
thetic chair made ACLU lobbying more
difficult, legislation which passed over
ACLU objection was not substantially
greater than usual. And, the increase can
be attributed as much to an overall
conservative shift in the Legislature as to
this Republican chair.
Many examples of the new coalitions
for compromise occurred on criminal
issues, for instance, new funding for
prisons. In the past, the budget-concious
Legislature has refused to allocate large
sums of money for prison construction.
The ACLU opposes new construction
except to eliminate unconstitutional
conditions or when the need is demon-
strated in light of sentencing policies which
ensure imprisonment only when lesser
punishment will not suffice. Yet this
Legislature passed most of the adminis-
tration's requests, at a long-term cost of
$400 million, authorizing funding of new
prisons in exchange for deleting of a prison
planned for central Los Angeles and the
Governor's signature on a pork barrel piece
of public works legislation.
Death Penalty Victory
A second example of strange bedfellows
in the criminal justice chamber, this time
between anti-death penalty forces and
anti-Rose Bird forces, handed death
penalty opponents an unexpected victory.
Early in the session, the introduction
of more than a dozen bills advancing the
death penalty made the ACLU's prospects
look particularly bleak. These proposals
included applying the death penalty to
more categories of murder, reversing
California Supreme Court decisions
establishing procedural safeguards, altering
the direct appeal process and placing
stricter time limits on the review process
in the Supreme Court. As in the past,
the Senate was sympathetic to these
measures.
In the Assembly, although death penalty
legislation had rarely passed out of the
Public Safety Committee, this year one
measure did. AB 1467 (Condit, D-Ceres)
contained many provisions which would
have resulted in more death sentences as
well as longer imprisonment for non-.
capital homicides.
Ironically, opponents of the Chief
Justice (mostly conservative Republicans)
complained that AB 1467 did not contain
provisions requiring the Supreme Court
to speed up review of death sentences.
These legislators teamed with anti-death
penalty legislators and the bill was
defeated in the Assembly Ways and Means
Committee. The author of AB 1467
attempted on numerous occasions to
attach his proposal to other measures, but
each time the same coalition combined
No. 1
to defeat them.
Another surprising result of this new
spirit of coalition was that Committee
Chair Stirling agreed to carry a search
warrant bill for the ACLU. Although not
usually sympathetic to civil liberties,
Stirling agreed that ACLU-sponsored AB
1917 was a "good government" piece of
legislation: the measure prevents "judge
shopping" by law enforcement officials by
giving the defense the right to discover
previously denied search warrant applica-
tions. After being amended to meet some
law enforcement objections, AB 1917
passed easily and was signed by the
Governor.
_ Continued on page 7
Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark
will speak on the attacks on California's
state Supreme Court, Friday, February 14,
7 p.m. at Golden Gate University,
sponsored by ACLU-NC's San Francisco
Chapter. (See ad in this issue.)
aclu news
Jan-Feb 1986
S.E Becomes Sanctuary City:
ACLU Lobbies Mayor, Board
San Francisco became a "City of
Refuge" for Salvadoran `and Guatemalan
refugees fleeing war and repression in their
homelands when the Board of Supervisors
voted 8-3 to support a resolution by
Supervisor Nancy Walker on December
23,
With the resolution, which was signed
by Mayor Feinstein, San Francisco joined
more than a dozen other cities, including
Berkeley, Sacramento, Los Angeles and
West Hollywood, in declaring itself a
refuge for Central Americans. The
resolution also calls on Congress to pass
the Moakley-DeConcini Bill (HR 822/S -
377) which would grant Extended
Voluntary Departure status to Salvadoran
refugees.
The standing room only crowd in the
Board chambers heard testimony in
support of the resolution from over thirty
people representing religious, legal,
minority, political and labor organizations
as well as from Salvadoran refugees
themselves. The only person to testify
against the measure was David Ilchert,
regional INS Director.
ACLU Testimony
ACLU-NC testimony was submitted by
Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlich in a
December 18 letter to each of the
Supervisors. Ehrlich documented her
testimony with national ACLU publica-
tions Salvadorans in the United States and
Testimony on Displaced Salvadoran
Refugees (both are available from the
Letters
False Accusations
Editor:
Is the ACLU doing anything to help
these poor people who find themselves at
the mercy of police and public prosecutors
acting on the accusations of children?
It appears that many of these children
are led into their accusations by counselors
and psychologists with no training in_
99
sexology. "Innocent until proven guilty
becomes a joke, a macabre joke, as no
amount of testimony or evidence which
contradicts the "innocent child's" testimony
serves to convince juries that anyone
accused of these unspeakable acts by a
child could be innocent.
Board
Continued from page I
2. They may submit a petition of
nomination with the signatures of 15
current ACLU members. Petitions of
nomination, which should also include the
nominee's qualifications and written
consent, must be submitted to the Board
of Directors by May 28, 1986 (20 days
after the May Board meeting).
Current ACLU members are those who
have renewed their membership during
the last 12 months. Only current members
are eligible to submit nominations, sign
petitions of nomination and vote.
ACLU members will select Board
members from the candidates nominated
by petition or by the Board. The ballot
will appear in the June issue of the ACLU
News. The ACLU-NC Constitution
provides:
"ARTICLE Vil, SECTION 4: Any fifteen
or more members of the Union in good
standing may themselves submit a
nomination to be included among those
voted upon by the general membership
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 accom-
panied by asummary of qualifications and
the written consent of the nominee."
It has reached the Salem Witch Hunt
stage, it seems to me. I don't know who
but the ACLU can hope to turn it around.
I know there are many important attacks
on our freedom just now, but I fear this
too has far reaching effects on the future
of our society.
Earline M. Reid
Individual Autonomy
Editor:
I was pleased to see a letter in your
most recent issue asking about the ACLU's
stand on individual autonomy, since I am
interested in this area myself. I was quite
disappointed to see that you chose to
ignore the questions on this subject and
instead address an irrelevant side issue.
Would you please answer the questions
of Mr. Grindle's letter for me? Again, they
are:
Why doesn't the ACLU recognize
individual autonomy as a civil liberties
issue on a part with its interest in equality,
due process, privacy, free speech, and the
rights of the group? Why doesn't the ACLU
advocate natural rights theory-the view
that human rights are inalienable natural
attributes intrinsic to our autonomy as
individuals rather than being sociopolitical
constructs at the whim of judges,
politicians, and the shifting majority
opinion? Why doesn't the ACLU recognize
private property as a civil liberties issue
when it is obvious that without self owner-
ship, personal property, and personal
freedom of exchange civil liberties cannot
~ be actualized in the real world?
Jeffrey D. Smith
The ACLU News welcomes letters of
opinion, inquiry, outrage, and praise.
Letters longer than 200 words will usually
be edited for length. Please tell us what
is on your mind by writing Editor, ACLU
News, 1663 Mission St., San Francisco,
CA. 94103.
ACLU-NC office).
Ehrlich's letter in support of the
resolution said in part:
"The ACLU has a number of concerns
with the Central American refugee
population in the United States, a
significant proportion of whom are in San
Francisco. .
".. the death, torture and suffering that
threaten Salvadorans and Guatemalans in
their homelands or that await them if they
are deported by the INS after reaching
the relative safety of our borders, will not
wait for the passage of this Congressional
measure. That is why the declaration of
San Francisco as a City of Refuge is so
crucial to the lives.and well-being of those
refugees who are among us."
Political Asylum
"The ACLU Political Asylum Project
has focused on a particular area of
documentation: the fate of Salvadorans
deported from the United States. Fewer
than 700 Salvadorans have been granted
asylum since 1980 (less than three percent
of those who applied) while approximately
35,000 were sent back to El Salvador
during that same time period. Many more
thousands have had their applications for
asylum denied and are soon to receive final
deportation orders.
"The Political Asylum Project obtained
(after initially being denied information
and litigating the request) a list of 8500
persons deported to El Salvador from the
United States between March 1981 and
March 1983. We compared those names
with those on records documenting human
rights abuses in El Salvador already
` assembled in the ACLU office. We were
alarmed by our findings: we identified 112
likely cases of persecution, including 52
political murders, 47 disappearances and
13 unlawful political arrests."
Refugee Law :
"That the federal government is not
fulfilling its obligation [under international
and federal refugee laws], and, moreover,
is punishing some private citizens who are
adhering to these laws, is more a reflection
of politics than of law."
Ehrlich's letter reflected the resolution
passed at the December 1985 ACLU-NC
Board of Directors meeting endorsing the
San Francisco "Sanctuary City" resolution
and an April 1985 ACLU-NC resolution
authorizing the staff and the Immigration
Working Group to "cooperate in any
appropriate manner with sanctuary
workers in the community."
ACLU Organizes
Police Group
The new ACLU-NC Police Practices
Project began operations two weeks before
its official January starting date in order
to mobilize community input on the
selection of a new San Francisco Police
Chief.
According to Project Director attorney
John Crew, the late-December announce-
ment that. Police Chief Cornelius Murphy
was resigning his post raised immediate
concern about whom Mayor Dianne
Feinstein would appoint to replace him
and how-she would conduct the selection
process.
Crew contacted a number of minority -
rights, women's and legal organizations
which, as a group, wrote a letter to the
Mayor requesting an emergency meeting
to voice their collective concerns.
Meeting with the Mayor
At a January 3 meeting, the groups
asked Feinstein to conduct a nationwide
search and not limit herself only to high
ranking officers within the department.
They also stressed that the new chief
should push affirmative action, be sensitive
to community views, and ensure that
constitutional rights of all citizens are
protected.
"The Mayor postponed her decision on
appointing the new chief until after our
meeting," said Crew. "Given that there was -
very little chance she was going to look
outside the department or conduct a
national affirmative action search, we-feel
that the appointment of Frank Jordan-
out of those being considered-was
responsive to some of our concerns."
Jordan has a reputation for listening to
community input, Crew noted, and, in one
of his first actions as Chief, appointed the
first black Commander in the history of
the Department, former Lt. Isiah Nelson.
Crew said that he plans to keep working
with the coalition, which includes the
NAACP, Chinese for Affirmative Action,
Equal Rights Advocates, the Latino
Democratic Club, Harvey Milk Lesbian
and Gay Democratic Club, and the
Lawyers Committee for Urban Affairs
among others.
The ACLU-NC Police Practices Project
has on its agenad the continuing contro-
versy of affirmative action hiring in the
San Francisco Police Department, strength-
ening the Office of Citizen Complaints
(OCC), and allegations of ongoing police
street sweeps.
The Police Practices Project was started
with an initial $5000 contribution from
the ACLU-NC San Francisco Chapter.
Crew has been hired as part-time Director
for six months.
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
Nancy Pemberton, Chairperson Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director
Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page
Elaine Elinson, Scribe
ACLU NEWS (USPS 018-040)
1663 Mission St., 4th floor, San Francisco, California 94103. (415) 621-2488
Membership $20 and up, of which 50 cents is for a subscription to the aclu news
and SO cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publication, Civil Liberties.
Michael P. Miller, :ditor
aclu news
Jan-Feb 1986
Bill of Rights Day Celebration 1985
When Richard Criley stepped up to the
podium to receive the 1985 Earl Warren
Civil Liberties Award at the December
8 Bill of Rights Day Celebration, he
brought with him a half-century of
dedicated activism and wisdom. Always
the organizer, he also brought to the
Celebration many veterans of the major
civil liberties battles of the past five
decades.
Pointing out old friends in the crowd
of 600, Criley introduced partisans of the
1934 Free Speech Movement at U.C.
Berkeley, friends of his Chicago organizing
days, leaders of the National Committee
Against Repressive Legislation (which he
see
ra
helped to found) and colleagues from
Monterey campaigns for reproductive
rights and nuclear disarmament. They had
come to honor Richard Criley.
_ The thirteenth annual Bill of Rights Day
Celebration at the Sheraton Palace Hotel
in San Francisco also featured a keynote
presentation by national ACLU Vice-
President Eva Jefferson Paterson and the
honoring of Santa Clara Chapter activists
Dom and Aurora Sallitto with the Lola
Hanzel Advocacy Award. The Celebration
also marked the culmination of the
ACLU's annual fundraising efforts, the
Major Gifts and the Bill of Rights
Campaigns.
"Civil liberties will always be here and I hope the [ ACLU's]
volunteers will always be here and be true to the principles
of freedom, justice and human dignity."
- Aurora Sallitto
Lola Hanzell Advocacy Award recipients Dom and Aurora Sollitto.
Gains and Setbacks
ACLU-NC Executive Director Dorothy
Ehrlich opened the program with an
Annual Report highlighting the grave
setbacks to civil liberties which occurred
in 1985, including the massive libel
judgment against two San Francisco
reporters, the upholding of a probe of
bilingual ballot seekers, and the decision
that Stanford University's firing of an anti-
war professor for political speech was not
unconstitutional. "In every case, appeals
are being vigorously pursued," Ehrlich
said.
Ehrlich also noted that last year's Earl
Warren Award honoree, civil rights and |
trade union leader C.L. Dellums, had been
"quietly removed" by Governor. Deukme-
jian from his position on the Fair
Employment Practices Commission, a
body Dellums had founded and served on
for twenty years.
But Ehrlich's report included significant
victories, as well, such as the successful
litigation against Medi-Cal abortion fund
restrictions and the stopping of a dozen
anti-choice measures in the state Legis-
lature. She also applauded the passage,
with strong ACLU support, of the first
city ordinance banning urinalysis testing
of employees, approved in November by
the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
Brickbats and Awards
ACLU-NC Field Representative Marcia
Gallo introduced award winner Criley as
"one who gives flesh and blood to the
principles of civil liberties." Criley told the
audience that he was more accustomed
to receiving "brickbats than awards." A
look at his combative history makes it easy
to understand why he has accumulated
Cie
ACLU-NC Chair Nancy Pemberton.
some powerful enemies-among them
HUAC, the FBI, the Chicago Red Squad
and the Moral Majority.
"Our government is the greatest
perpetrator of terrorism in the world today,
the most lawless administration in the
history of the United States," said the
septuagenarian Criley who has witnessed
the abuses of many administrations. :
"The United States is waging undeclared
covert wars all across the world to
overthrow popularly-elected governments
and replace them with military
dictatorships.
"There is also a war of repression here
at home," said Criley. "The government
is trying to turn the clock back on civil
liberties with domestic CIA surveillance,
political trials (like the sanctuary trial in
Tucson) and the destruction of an
independent judiciary."
Criley concluded with a warning that
moved the audience to its feet. "Fascism
adapts to whatever society it emerges in.
Fascism in the U.S. will not come with
the swastika of the Third Reich-it will
be as American as apple pie. American
fascism will come under the symbols of
democracy itself-the Bibles of Jerry
Falwell and the superpatriotic stripes of
Caspar Weinberger."
The Framers' Intentions?
Keynote speaker Paterson invoked a
similar alarm: "What's going on here," she
said, "is an ideological war.
"Attorney General Meese wants us to
look at the `intentions of the original
framers of the Constitution," she observed,
noting wryly that the framers were "white
men who had slaves and thought women
shouldn't vote.
"Are these the intentions he wants us
to return to?" she asked.
Paterson also made an impassioned and
powerful plea for people to understand
affirmative action-"I've made this my
own personal campaign this year," she said.
"Affirmative action is needed to provide
opportunities to minorities and women
who have long been shut out by racism
and sexism. This administration is even
trying to undo regulations against
discrimination in federal contracting
dating back to Eisenhower."
And Paterson ended with a combative
call. "We're not going to go away and they
are not going to win," she said to
_ thunderous applause.
_ Richard Grosboll presents Hanzell
Award.
Volunteer Award
Bil of Rights Day Committee chair
Richard Grosboll presented Dom and
Aurora Sallitto, founders and leading
activists of the Santa Clara ACLU chapter,
with the Lola Hanzel Advocacy Award -
for outstanding volunteers.
In response, Aurora quoted Shake-
speare, "To thine own self be true..." and
adapted the Bard's words to the ACLU.
"Civil liberties will always be here," she
said, and I hope the volunteers will always
be here and be true to the principles of
freedom, justice and human dignity."
ACLU-NC Chair Nancy Pemberton
moderated the program.
Short Takes
"Our government is the
greatest perpetrator of terror-
ism in the world today, the
most lawless administration in
the history of the United
States." |
"American fascism will
come under the symbols of
democracy itself-the Bibles
of Jerry Falwell and the super-
patriotic stripes of Caspar
Weinberger."
_ -Richard Criley
"What's going on here is an
ideological war.
"Attorney General Meese
wants us to look at the
`intentions' of the original
framers of the Constitution,
white men who had slaves and
thought women shouldn't
vote.
"Are these the intentions he
wants us to return to?"
-Eva Jefferson Paterson
Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlich.
aclu news
4 Jan-Feb 1986
---- LE SSE SE SSS ESSE SSS SSS EE
ctemauarenemns
carat
The Northern California Pro-Choice Coalition erected six human billboards in San Francisco on January 22, the 13th anniversary of Roe v. Wade which legalized abortion.
meme
man
Michael P. Miller
Franklin Loses
Final Review
On January 3, the California Supreme
Court denied the ACLU-NC'%s petition for
review in the case of Franklin v. Stanford
ending a fourteen-year battle over
academic freedom.
In response to a Court of Appeal ruling
in October upholding Professor Bruce
Franklin's firing by Stanford University for
anti-war speeches he made during the
height of campus Vietnam protests in 1971,
the ACLU-NC told the Supreme Court
that the University administration has for
more than a decade "attempted to create
a false history concerning the events that
triggered Professor Franklin's dismissal.
"This is a major free speech case,"
asserted ACLU-NC staff attorney Mar-
garet Crosby who is representing Franklin
with staff counsel Alan Schlosser. "It has
attracted nationwide interest because of
the disturbing precedent established when
a powerful and prestigious university fired
a tenured faculty member for political
advocacy."
Crosby charged that Stanford has
strenuously attempted to block the courts
from independently reviewing the factual
context of the speeches for which Franklin
was fired. "Stanford has depicted Bruce
Franklin as something of a mythic figure,
singlehandedly turning a tranquil campus
into a charred battleground," she said.
"They would have the courts and the
public believe that the 1971 anti-war
protests at Stanford occured not because
the Nixon administration invaded Laos,
nor because Stanford was supporting war
games on its computer in violation of its
own rules, nor because the police acted
unconstitutionally toward demonstrators.
The protests occurred, in Stanford's
revisionist history, because the evil Bruce
Franklin stirred up mindlessly obedient
crowds which hung on his every word,"
Legal Briefs
Crosby added.
T-Boone Pickens
Where Are You?
FOR IMMEDIATE. RELEASE,
DECEMBER 17, 1985:
The American Civil Liberties Union,
in a Move unanticipated on Wall Street,
today offered to buy the United States
Justice Department.
_ The offer came in a letter to Attorney
General Edwin Meese only days after ~
President Reagan had proposed selling
the Federal Housing Administration to
private interests, on the grounds that
they could do a better job than the
government.
."We think the same can be said about
the Justice Department," said Ira
Glasser, ACLU Executive Director.
"Civil rights and civil liberties organi-
zations are already doing much of the
work that should be done by the Justice
Department, and particularly by its
Civil Rights Division," Glasser said.
"Civil rights lawyers are increasingly
functioning as `private attorneys-
general,' enforcing laws that the Justice
Department is failing to enforce," he
said. "We might as well go all the way."
Just as President Reagan proposed
selling the Federal Housing Adminis-
tration, including all its assets and
liabilities, Glasser said the ACLU was
"prepared to take over the entire Justice
Department, including its assets and
liabilities, which are many."
The leveraged buyout of the Justice
Department, Wall Street insiders said,
would be the largest in history, dwarfing
the recent purchase by General Electric
of RCA. But Glasser said that it
wouldn't cost as much as anticipated
because "the net worth of the Depart-
ment has plummeted since Mr. Meese
became Attorney General, and investors
have lost confidence in top
management.
"Indeed," said Glasser, "those with
a longterm investment in justice believe
that the Department is now nearly
bankrupt. An examination by our
_ auditors of the balance sheets of its key
unit, the Civil Rights Division, shows
liabilities exceeding assets to an
alarming degree."
It was not immediately clear how the
offer would be received in Washington,
but Mr. Meese was undoubtedly
consulting The Federalist Papers in an
attempt to find out what the framers'
original intentions were with respect to
such an offer.
Meanwhile, Glasser said the ACLU
would be willing to consider purchasing
only the Civil Rights Division, if Mr.
Meese found that offer more acceptable.
"That part of the company is potentially
its most valuable asset," said Glasser,
"and the one that the government seems
the least interested in developing."
Court Justifies
Roadblocks
The state Court of Appeal ruled on
December 19 that drunk driving road-
blocks, conducted by police according to
guidelines which the court outlined, are
permissble under the United States and
California Constitutions.
"Though intrusive and burdensome to
the public even when properly conducted,
the degree of intrusion is justified by the -
magnitude of the drunk driving hazard
and the potential for deterrence and
detection," the 2-1 court opinion stated.
The decision came in an ACLU-NC
taxpayer lawsuit, Ingersoll v. Palmer,
challenging the constitutionality of police
roadblocks. Former ACLU-NC staff
attorney Amitai Schwartz said he would
seek review of the decision in the California
Supreme Court.
Schwartz argued the case in the Court
of Appeal on November 19. "The use of
random roadblocks where motorists are
detained without reasonable suspicion is
a violation of both the California
Constitution and the Fourth Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution," Schwartz said.
Airport Search Precedent
The court found that the roadblocks
were in accordance with California laws
governing searches for the administrative
purpose of deterring criminal conduct. "If
deterring hijacking and detecting potential
hijackers can be characterized as an
`administrative purpose, so too can
deterring drunk driving and detecting
drunk drivers," stated the court.
_ The court also noted that "a properly
conducted roadblock would not violate the
federal Constitution, [although] there is as
yet no U.S. Supreme Court decision
squarely addressing this question." The
court added that some state courts had
found police sobriety checks constitutional,
while others, looking at the same cases,
had found them unconstitutional.
"Our big fear is that this ruling may
usher in a new era of dragnet-type law
enforcement for other types of crimes that
are at least as serious as drunk driving,"
said Schwartz.
The defendants in Ingersoll were the
California Highway Patrol and the Police
Departments of Burlingame, Riverside
and Los Angeles.
During the 1985 Christmas-New Year's
holiday, all eight divisions of the California
Highway Patrol put up_ sobriety
roadblocks.
Police Appeal
Libel Loss
On December 23, former ACLU-NC
staff counsel Amitai Schwartz argued in
the state Court of Appeal the ACLU's
challenge to a 1982 California statute
which allows police officers to sue for libel
persons who file "unsuccessfull" miscon-
duct complaints.
In 1984, Schwartz successfully defended
a police abuse victim who was later sued
by two San Francisco police officers. The
officers sued the man for libel because he
had filed a complaint against them in the
San Francisco Internal Affairs Bureau,
alleging that they had used unnecessary
force in arresting him.
The police libel suit was dismissed by
the San Francisco Superior Court in
March 1985; the officers appealed.
"The law punishes only those who
criticize police officers-criticism which
would otherwise be protected by freedom
of speech," said Schwartz.
Top Court Takes
Libel Case
The California Supreme Court has
accepted the ACLU-NC's petition for
review on behalf of two reporters, Raul
Ramirez and Lowell Bergman, who face
a multi-million dollar libel judgment
because of a series they wrote in the San
Francisco Examiner criticizing the police .
investigation and prosecution of a China-
town murder case. oS
The reporters spent 18 months inves-
tigating the circumstances surrounding the
murder case before publication of the
series. Two former police officers who
investigated the killing and a former
District Attorney who prosecuted the
suspect sued for libel and a jury awarded
damages totaling more than $4 million
against the reporters and The Examiner.
The award was upheld in the Court of
Appeal on October 23.
The ACLU argues that the case involves
many major issues concerning press
freedom. These include the right of
reporters to inform the jury completely
about their investigation, the punishment
which can be inflicted for a reporter's
refusal to reveal a confidential source,
whether a reporter's political beliefs and
personal relationships are relevant, and
whether the court can refuse to advise the
jury of the constitutional policy of press
freedom.
aclu news
Jan-Feb 1986
Arizona D.P.
Challenged
Arguing that "unless this court reverses
the District Court's judgment, the State
of Arizona will execute a man for a crime
committed while he was insane, but who
has never had the opportunity to prove
it," the ACLU-NC filed an appeal in the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on
December 9 on behalf of an Arizona
Death Row inmate.
ACLU-NC staff attorney Edward M.
Chen, along with co-counsel Charles
Breyer of the San Francisco law firm of
Coblentz, Cahen, McCabe and Breyer and
John P. Frank of the Phoenix firm of Lewis
Roca, is representing Robert Wayne
Vickers in federal habeas corpus proceed-
ings. Vickers was sentenced to death for
the killing of his cellmate.
Chen believes that Vickers' case clearly
demonstrates the inherent fallibilities,
inequities and arbitrariness of capital
punishment. "Vickers' conviction and
death sentence is more the result of his
indigency and the incompetence of his
court-appointed trial attorney than
anything else," said Chen.
"We also believe the Arizona death
penality statute is unconstitutional," he
added.
Denied Medical Tests
Vickers has a long history of mental
and emotional disorders stemming from
a brutalized childhood and organic
pathology of the brain, including epilepsy.
"Although insanity was his sole defense,
the trial court refused to order for Vickers,
an indigent, the basic diagnostic medical
tests. One of his court-appointed psychi-
atrists vigorously urged these tests and they
were essential to substantiate his insanity
defense," explained Chen.
Unless Vickers is given a new trial and
provided with adequate medical assistance,
his inability to pay for medical tests to (c)
prove his insanity and to retain a
competent lawyer to defend him could well
cost him his life. .
According to Chen, Vickers was
"defended" by an incompetent attorney, a
confirmed alcoholic once censored by the
Arizona State Bar. This attorney,
appointed just 30 days before the trial,
conducted virtually no pretrial investiga-
tion, did not obtain or examine Vickers'
medical or social records (which graph-
ically depicted his brutal upbringing and
history of psycological disturbances), or
even consult with the defense psychiatrist
prior to the trial.
The petition for habeas corpus advances
seventeen constitutional claims, including
legal challenges to the Arizona death
penality statute. In particular, the petition
challenges the death sentencing scheme in
Arizona where the trial judge reaches the
sole determination to impose capital.
punishment without any jury findings,
input or advice.
The case was originally referred to Chen
by the NAACP Legal Defense and
Education Fund when he was an attorney
with the Coblentz firm. Chen brought the
case with him when he joined the ACLU-
NC staff in September.
If the habeas corpus petition is
successful, Vickers will be retried in the
Arizona courts.
' The last death penalty case in which
the ACLU-NC was involved was the
appeal of Robert Alton Harris in the U.S.
Supreme Court.
Government Fails to Reverse
ACLU Check on INS Abuse
The federal government was unsuccess-
ful in two attempts to reverse a court
injunction halting unconstitutional Immi-
gration and Naturalization Service raids.
The injunction, an unprecedented check
on INS abuse, will remain in effect until
the case goes to trial unless the government
seeks a U.S. Supreme Court stay.
The preliminary injunction, issued by
U.S. District Court Judge Robert Aguilar
on October 11, prohibits INS and Border
Patrol agents in California from entering
businesses without a warrant or randomly
rounding up persons whom they suspect
to be undocumented workers. The
injunction also prohibits unlawful ques-
tioning and detention of workers.
Impact in California
Thirty-eight INS raids in Northern
California were canceled in the first two
weeks following the order. INS officials
.claim the injunction is tying their hands.
Leading immigration and civil rights
attorneys assert that workers are now being
granted a modicum of respect, and that
the INS can still do its job, albeit within
constitutional parameters.
The injunction came in a class action
lawsuit filed in 1982 by the ACLU-NC,
the Mexican American Legal Defense and
Education Fund (MALDEF), California
Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), the
Asian Law Caucus and the National
Lawyers Guild challenging INS procedures
which violate the civil liberties of workers
of Hispanic background. .
As soon as the injunction was issued,
the INS, represented by U.S. Attorney
Joseph Russoniello, sought a stay with
Judge Aguilar, who refused it on October
28.
On December 2, the government
requested a stay from the federal Court
of Appeals-which also denied it.
Explained ACLU-NC staff attorney
Alan Schlosser, "Basically, the INS will
now have to abide by the Constitution like
everyone else."
The case, International Molders vy.
Nelson, is now proceeding through the
discovery stage in preparation for trial in
U.S. District Court. At the same time,
- the government's appeal or the preliminary
injunction is still pending. -
This lawsuit stems from the highly
publicized, nationwide series of INS raids
on worksites in 1982 euphemistically called
"Project Jobs." :
During these raids, according to court
documents, the INS seized, chased,
handcuffed and at times even beat workers
without cause. INS agents indiscriminately
questioned anyone who they thought
looked Hispanic.
The raids were characterized by blatant
violations of individuals' civil rights and -
__ violations of the limitations on search and
seizure established in the Fourth Amend-
ment. Though "Project Jobs" allowed
broad exposure of these abuses by the INS,
it was not an isolated instance. "Such
behavior is common practice of the INS
and Border Patrol," said ACLU-NC
attorney Alan Schlosser, adding that such
raids are still continuing unabated in other
parts of the country.
Here are some statements from both
sides, drawn from affidavits submitted in
the case.
Opposing the Injunction
Joseph F. Brandon, Jr., Assistant District
Director for Investigations for the San
Francisco District of the INS: |
"INS enforcement and investigative
operations will be severely impeded by the
preliminary injunction issued on October
11, 1985 by the Honorable District Court
Judge Robert P. Aguilar. eS
"When Border Patrol Agents conduct
workplace operations, they usually wear
uniforms and travel in marked vehicles.
It is Our experience that these uniforms
and vehicles are readily identified by illegal
aliens. It is a matter of common knowledge
that, when an illegal alien views an
approaching Border Patrol Agent's
uniform and/or vehicle, the alien will flee
the area. [So], it is difficult or impossible
to comply with [the section of] the order
requiring the INS not to arrive in a manner
that would foreseeably provoke flight by
workers." |
John F. Shaw, Assistant Commissioner
of the INS in charge of the Investigation
Branch:
"The effect of the injunction entered in
this case negates INS' ability to effectively .
enforce immigration laws...
"Without the ability of INS to conduct
interior enforcement operations, such as
`Project Jobs' INS will be unable to
remove or reduce the job incentive that
draws aliens to enter the United States
illegally."
In Favor of the Injunction
Donald L. Ungar, Senior partner in the
San Francisco law firm of Simmons and
Ungar, specialist in immigration law for
23 years:
"The [INS] has effective methods
available to it which do not result in the
widespread violations of constitutional
rights that factory `surveys have produced
in the past.
"Based on my experience, I believe the
preliminary injunction will help curb
many abuses of constitutional rights which
have consistently occurred during -the
chaotic and disruptive atmosphere of
factory `surveys in the past. Although the
injunction will change the way these
~ `surveys' are conducted, it will not severely
restrict or cripple the INS' ability to
enforce the immigration laws."
Bill Ong Hing, Professor of Immigration
Law and Policy, Director of the Immi-
gration Law Clinic at Stanford University:
"I have represented many aliens who
have been arrested at the workplace, and
I have been called by employers, or their
attorneys, who have sought my advice on
the extent of employer responsibilities.
owed to INS inquiries.
"In general, I have found that employers
are willing to cooperate with the INS when
asked to provide lists of employees and
their respective immigration statutes.
While there does not appear to be a legal
obligation to cooperate, most employers
that I have spoken to generally have
cooperated [with INS inquiries].
"I believe that the district court's order
in this case is fair and not unmanageable.
I am confident that the INS can and will,
within the parameters of the order,
continue to apprehend undocumented |
aliens at the workplace."
Keynote speaker Dr. Kenneth Clark
responds to a reporter's question at a
San Francisco civil rights conference.
Over 300 people attended the confer-
ence, co-sponsored by ACLU-NC in
mid-January. Dr. Clark provided the
psychological studies used as the basis
for overturning the doctrine of
"separate but equal" in Brown v. Board
of Education.
For more than 50 years the ACLU
of Northern California has fought to
defend the Constitution and the Bill
of Rights. Through the pages of
history-redbaiting, vigilantes, WWII
internment camps, HUAC, the Free
Speech Movement, Vietnam, civil
rights, the women's movement, gay
rights and more-the ACLU has
liberties.
You can do something now to
insure that the ACLU will continue to
fignht-and win-ten, twenty and fifty
years from now, through a simple
addition to your will.
Every year thoughtful civil libertar-
ians have, through their bequests,
pioneered the fight for individual
A Will to Give
provided important support for the
ACLU. In 1985, interest income alone
earned by these bequests contributed
over $50,000.
Making a bequest is simple: you
need only specify a dollar gift or a
portion of your estate for the American
Civil Liberties Union Foundation of
Northern California, Inc.
lf you need information about
writing a will or want additional
information, consult your attorney or
write:
Bequests
ACLU Foundation
1663 Mission Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
ae @
aclu news
Jan-Feb 1986
CRIMINAL
JUSTICE
-AB 1467/AB 989 (Condit) -
Death Penalty
These two bills are the major legislation in
this area and are virtually identical. They
propose to increase sentences for murder,
expand the felony murder rule to allow a
conviction for murder without intent to kill,
increase the types of murder which are capital
offenses and overrule decisions of the
California Supreme Court which limit or refine
the existing death penalty statute.
Action: AB 1467 was defeated in the
Assembly Ways and Means Committee. The
_ author then amended its provisions into AB 989
which had already passed the Assembly and
was pending in the Senate Judiciary Commit-
tee. After passing the Senate, AB 989 was
referred back to the Assembly Public Safety
Committee where it is now pending.
ACLU: Opposed
AB 1917 (Stirling) -
Search Warrants
As introduced, this bill, sponsored by the
ACLU, required logs to be kept of all search
warrant applications including those refused.
Court personnel and law enforcement repre-
sentatives considered this to be administratively
impossible. The bill was then amended to
provide that the defense has the right to
discover all previously denied warrant appli-
cations in a particular case. It is hoped that
such a procedure will prevent judge shopping
and will be useful in determining "good faith"
as there is now a good faith exemption for
searches conducted without a valid search
warrant.
Action: Passed Legislature, signed by
Governor.
ACLU: Sponsored
SB 1054 (Lockyer), SB 1296
(McCorquodale) -
Extended Commitment of
Mentally Ill Prisoners
This measure provides that mentally ill
prisoners may continue to be involuntarily
confined, even after they have served their
legally mandated term of imprisonment.
Action: Passed Legislature, signed by
Governor.
ACLU: Opposed
AB 487 (Robinson), AB 2251
(Costa), SB 253 (Presley) - _
Prison Construction
Early in the legislative session, Senator
Presley introduced the Deukmejian adminis-
trations new prison construction plan. It was
a modest proposal comprising approximately
4,000 new beds. Just as the session was about
to end it was announced that the administration
had seriously underestimated the number of
new prisoners and that it was necessary to
double the size of the program. Overcrowding
has in fact become a crisis, but it is in large
part due to sentencing practices which rely
heavily on incarceration, increased denial of
work credits and more frequent suspensions
of parole for minor transgressions.
AB 487, AB 2251 and SB 253 were all
drastically amended in the last weeks of the
session to accommodate the administration's
request for new beds, waivers of environmental
impact reports (EIRs) and additional funding
for construction. Present plans include new
prisons in Avenal, Corcoran, Blythe, Del Norte,
San Diego and lone, a new women's prison
in Stockton, and additions to prisons at
Tehachapi, Susanville, Soledad and Folsom.
Action: Passed Legislature, signed by
_ Governor.
ACLU: Opposed
1985 Bill Highlights
Each year over 5,000 bills are introduced
in the California Legislature. About 2,000
have a potential civil liberties impact and
are on the "watch" list for the ACLU%
Sacramento staff. The Legislature is in the
middle of its 1985-86 two-year session. Bills
introduced last year which were not passed
or killed may still receive consideration in -
1986.
AB = Assembly Bill
ACA = Assembly Concurrent
Amendment
SB = Senate Bill
Sponsors are listed in parentheses
following the bill number.
FAMILY PRIVACY
SB 7 (Montoya) -
Minors' Access
to Abortion
This bill requires minor women to have the
written consent of a parent in order to seek
abortion services. If a woman under 18 does
not believe she can get such permission, she
must apply to a court for an exception from
the rule. The measure follows similar laws in
Minnesota, Indiana and Massachusetts which
are currently being litigated. The restriction falls
most heavily on minors who are poor, and who
are the victims of rape or incest. The measure
would place a substantial burden on the state
courts and undermines the constitutional
privacy interests of young persons.
Action: Passed Senate, awaiting action in
Assembly Judiciary Committee.
ACLU: Opposed
SB 150 (Alquist) -
State Budget/Anti-Abortion
Control Language
The budget, as usual, contained language
restricting the use of Medi-Cal funds for
abortions for indigent women. This year, a new
twist appeared. Senator Richardson success-
fully carried language restricting the appropri-
ation of state funds to organizations which
advocate, counsel or otherwise advertise and
promote abortions. When the budget went to
conference committee to resolve Senate and
Assembly differences, this language was voted
out. This language, however, was "inadver-
tently" retained when the printed bill went to
the Governor's desk. The effect was almost
immediate closure of family planning clinics.
Action: Abortion restriction passed by the
Legislature; advocacy language voted out but
retained, both signed by Governor; both
restrictions have been struck by Courts of
Appeal (CDAR v. Kizer - ACLU case, Planned
- Parenthood v. Swoap - ACLU amicus.)
ACLU: Opposed
SB 903 (Presley) -
Termination of Parental Rights
In a novel attempt to expedite the termination
of parental rights of an unwed father, SB 903
proposed to require him to register his intent
to assert parental rights in the adoption of any
infant children born as a result of his sexual
relationship. This measure raises serious
questions as to its constitutionality (as it requires
an affirmative act in order to assert a
fundamental privacy interest) and also provides
no protection against collateral use in paternity
and child support actions or criminal trials. The
measure also raises questions of confidentiality
and invasion of privacy for the sexual partners
of registrants as it would create a government
record of sexual contacts between unmarried
persons.
Action: Passed Senate, pending in Assem-
bly Judiciary Committee.
ACLU: Opposed
POVERTY
AB 648 (Margolin) -
Indigent Health Care
Counties are currently responsible for
providing health care to indigent persons who
are not eligible for Medi-Cal. Although the state
reimburses some costs, the counties claim they
are paying a disproportionate share. AB 648
was an attempt to provide additional state funds. -
Action: Passed Legislature, vetoed by
Governor (but some additional money was
agreed to by the Governor in the budget).
ACLU: Support
AB 986 (Margolin) -
Indigent Health Care
AB 986 proposes to extend certain safe-
guards which had expired and which ensured
that counties do not enact burdensome
eligibility requirements for the medically
indigent.
Action: Passed Assembly, pending in
Senate Health and Human_ Services
Committee.
ACLU: Support
AB 2580 (Assembly Members
Konnyu, Agnos, Molina, Killea,
Herger; Senators Nielsen, Gara-
mendi, Greene) -
Welfare "Workfare"'
AB 2580 is the product of Assembly Member |
Agnos' negotiations with the State Department
of Social Services in the area of welfare reform.
Dubbed GAIN (The Greater Avenues for
Independence Act of 1985), it includes both
some positive and some strong negative
aspects. In a nutshell, all AFDC recipients with
children over six years of age must enroll in
a training, education or workfare program in
order to receive benefits. The positve aspect
is that it provides for training and education
which may lead to useful long-term employ-
ment. The negative is that it does not contain
sufficient safeguards to ensure that counties
. actually offer a full range of appropriate
services. The major objection is that it contains
a mandatory work component. Recipients may
end up in menial, make-work jobs or-may
displace salaried workers.
Action: Passed Legislature, signed by
Governor
ACLU: Opposed
SB 270 (Nielsen) -
Due Process in Welfare Hearings
The Supreme Court has applied the principle
of "collateral estoppel' to welfare administrative
hearings. If a recipient prevails and the ruling
is that there has been no overpayment, criminal
prosecution is barred. SB 270 seeks to overturn
this.
Action: Passed Senate, pending in Assem-
bly Public Safety Committee.
ACLU: Opposed
FIRST
AMENDMENT
SB 139 (Deddeh) -
Obscenity
In California, obscenity is defined as material
which (1) taken as a whole and applying
contemporary standards, (2) predominately
appeals to the prurient interest and goes
substantially beyond customary limits of candor
and (3) is utterly without redeeming social
importance.
SB 139 was one of a number of bills which
proposed to move California closer to the Miller
standard. As introduced, it would have deleted
the third prong of "utterly without..." and
substituted "lacks serious literary, artistic,
political and scientific value" SB 139 was
amended and a new third prong, unknown
anywhere else, was inserted. It read "signif-
icantly without redeeming social importance."
Action: Passed Senate, defeated in Assem-
bly Public Safety Committee
ACLU: Opposed
JUVENILE LAW
AB 1369 (Frizzelle) -
Student Searches
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that school
Officials do not need probable cause to conduct
a warrantless search of a student, merely
reasonable grounds to believe a crime or
violation of a school regulation has been
committed. AB 1369 was an attempt to codify
this and extend it to school lockers, thereby
preventing California from adopting a more
restrictive standard.
Action: Failed in Assembly Public Safety
Committee.
ACLU: Opposed
EQUAL
PROTECTION
AB 1 (Agnos) - |
Sexual Orientation
As in past years, AB 1 defines an unlawful
employment practice to include employment
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Action: Pending in Assembly Labor and
Employment Committee, must pass out by the
end of January. -
ACLU: Support
AB 201, ACA 30 (Hill) -
English as Official Language
These bills are an attempt to implement the
November 1984 ballot proposition which
declares English as the official language of the
State of California.
Action: AB 201 was defeated in the
Assembly Government Organization Commit-
tee; ACA 30 was introduced shortly thereafter
and is still pending.
ACLU: Opposed
AB 977 (Frizzelle) -
Pre-employment
Investigations
Although the stated purpose of this bill is
to weed out job applicants who have a history
of abusing the elderly in hospitals or nursing
homes, the method of obtaining information is
Continued on page 7
oe aclu news
Jan-Feb 1986 7
Mixed Record for Civil Liberties
Continued from page I
Reproductive Choice - The
Continuing Battle
None of the more than a dozen anti-
choice measures introduced passed the
Legislature; as usual, the Budget Act
became the real arena of battle.
The yearly budget fight over Medi-Cal
funding for abortion took one odd twist
this year. The ban on funding was inserted
as usual, but proponents went further and
also proposed language restricting access
ACLU's Sacramento staff: Legislative Advocates Daphne Macklin (L) and
Margie Schwartz (R) with Legislative Assistant Rita Egri (middle).
Bill Highlights
Continued from page 6 -
extreme. AB 977 proposes to permit hospitals
and community care facilities to inquire into
the personal lifestyles and histories of persons
seeking employment. It also permits release
by public agencies of all records regarding a
potential employee.
Action: Referred to interim study. :
ACLU: Opposed
POLICE
SB 969 (Robbins) -
Punitive Damages
Current law provides that public employees
(often police officers) personally pay punitive
damages awarded against them by a court.
This measure changes the law to allow public
entities to pay any punitive damages awarded
against a publicly employed defendant. It allows
cities and counties to selectively repudiate the
findings of trial courts indicating that public
employees have acted willfully, maliciously and
outside the scope of their duties. It creates a
large loophole for escaping punishment for
willful misconduct on duty.
Action: Passed Legislature, signed by
Governor.
ACLU: `Opposed
AB 1225 (Roos) -
Private Security
AB 1225 establishes standards for security
guards and persons working as private police
officers that are similar to those which must
be met by publicly employed police officers.
The bill also permits the termination or denial -
of a license when an applicant or licensee
poses an undue hazard to the public because ~
of his or her misconduct or incompetence.
Action: Passed Legislature, signed by
Governor.
ACLU: Support
to state funds by organizations which
"advocate, counsel or otherwise advertise
and promote" abortion. Although this
language, authored by Senator Richardson
(R-Arcadia), was deleted from the Budget
Act by members of the Senate-Assembly
Conference Committee, the language was
"inadvertantly" retained in the printed
version of the budget that was sent to the -
Governor.
Governor Deukmejian declined to
delete the language although it was
universally recognized to have been
included in error.
Planned Parenthood and other family
planning providers-threatened with a
massive cut-off of funds and closure-
sued. The ACLU filed an amicus brief in
the case which was decided in favor of
the plaintiffs in November by the Court
of Appeal; the state did not appeal.
Working Together for Workfare
The last, but certainly not least, example
of unlikely coalitions was in the area of
poverty and civil liberties. For decades,
the right wing in the Legislature has been
advocating "workfare"-mandatory work
for welfare recipients. Ronald Reagan had
even proposed a workfare program when
he was governor. Liberal Democrats
consistently opposed such a program as
forced labor and because of the potential
threat it posed in displacing salaried
workers.
However, in the spring and summer of
1985, one of the leading liberal Democrats,
Art Agnos (D-San Francisco), toured
workfare programs in several Eastern
states and came home a_ born-again
believer. Agnos negotiated with the
administration and developed a compro-
mise, AB 2580.
Agnos was successful in gaining
agreement on some key points, such as
a wide array of training alternatives and
`due process appeal protections before
sanctions could be imposed. However, the
ACLU, labor unions and welfare rights
groups still adamantly opposed the
mandatory work aspect of the measure.
Because AB 2580 won the support of
other liberal Assembly members, including
Gloria Molina (D-Los Angeles) as well
as the administration, it moved quickly
through the Assembly. It was stalled in
the Senate until the administration agreed
to fund Senator Roberti's (D-Los Angeles)
latch-key childcare package in exchange
for his support. With this horse-trading,
an unusual coalition of liberals and
conservatives emerged to enact AB 2580
mlolaw ;
1986: AIDS, Abortion and
Financial Privacy
Predicting future activities in the
Legislature is always risky business, and -
it is hard to judge whether these new
bedfellows will continue their tenuous
alliances. Because 1986 is an election year,
we may see more legislators speaking and
voting along party lines. The November
Supreme Court balloting will also solidify
the division between pro-Bird and anti-
Bird forces. For example, death penalty
legislation will certainly be reintroduced
and will no doubt be used to fan anti-
Supreme Court sentiment.
One thing we can be certain of is that
this year's legislation will be quite
controversial.
High on the agenda will be measures
relating to AIDS. Shortly after the
Legislature recessed in the fall of 1985,
lobbyists from the insurance industry
launched an effort to overturn provisions
of AB 4 (Agnos) which prohibits the use
of the results of an AIDS screening test
in determining the insurability and
employment of an individual. State law
also currently requires that a person give
- specific permission for the AIDS test to
be performed on his or her blood sample.
The insurance lobby is arguing that
without the test results the industry faces
economic disaster as a consequence of the
high cost of treatment of AIDS victims.
Without access to test results, the
insurance companies are threatening to
institute life-style "red-lining" for single
men living in communities known to have
large numbers of homosexual residents.
Because many workers receive health
care benefits as part of their employment,
the question is directly related to
employment discrimination against gay
men. Employers may demand information
about the sexual preferences of unmarried
male employees because of the increased
costs associated with health care claims
made by AIDS victims. They may also
begin to inquire into a prospective
employee's medical history, particularly
with regard to any past use of intravenous
drugs. This practice is becoming more
commonplace, as employers are invoking
the AIDS crisis as an excuse to ask
intrusive questions.
The establishment just over a year ago
of the California AIDS Task Force was
a vital move in focusing the state's attention
and resources around the AIDS/ARC
crisis. Meeting regularly under the
auspices of the Legislature, the Governor's
Office and the Department of Health
Services, the AIDS Task Force coordinates
some levels of the state's official response
to the need for basic AIDS research and
related issues. To date the Task Force has
dealt mainly with AIDS/ ARC as a public.
health emergency, but in the next few
months it will begin to address the civil
rights implications of AIDS and society's
response to the disease.
Privacy: Old and New
A new issue, "money-laundering," is
emerging which threatens provisions of the
hard-won Financial Privacy Act. Attorney
General Van de Kamp alleges that the state
is losing the war on drug trafficking
because law enforcement agencies may not
gain access to banking records of those
who transact business in large amounts
of cash.
The measure urged by Van de Kamp
would go beyond the federal reporting laws
and would create a serious breach in the
privacy of financial records. California has
been a leader in privacy protection since
the Financial Privacy Act was passed, with
strong ACLU support, in 1976.
In the area of reproductive choice, there
are some old and new developments. Left
over from last year is SB 7 (Montoya, D-
Whittier) which requires parental or
judicial consent for minor women seeking
abortions. A new question arose because
of a California Supreme Court decision
which struck down a statutory bar on
sterilization of persons who are develop-
mentally disabled. Some legislators want
to codify the decision and enact statutory
guidelines for sterilization.
arm,
aclu news
Jan-Feb 1986 -
Pro-Life Measure
Petition Drive Fails
Pro-choice advocates had additional
reason to celebrate the thirteenth anniver-
sary of the landmark Roe v. Wade decision
on January 22-just a few weeks earlier
one of two anti-choice initiatives failed to
obtain enough signatures to qualify for the
June 1986 ballot.
A statewide pro-choice coalition,
Californians for Choice, established by the
ACLU-NC and others to defeat the
initiatives, played a key role in opposing
the measure.
San Francisco Chapter
ACLU of Northern California
Presents a series of forums
An
`American Tradition:
Our Independent
Courts
7:00 P.M. Friday, February 14
Justice Under Stress
The National Perspective
February, 1986
Former U.S..
Attorney General
Ramsey
Clark
Golden Gate
University
Auditorium, 2nd
Floor
536 Mission Street
San Francisco
Location:
Tickets: $5.00 general public;
$3.00 students,
ACLU, and SF Bar
Association members;
available at BASS
outlets and at the door.
Information: call 415-621-2493.
Co-sponsors: The Bar Association of
San Francisco and
Golden Gate University
School of Law
The failed initiative, entitled "Limitation
on Public Funded Abortion" and spon- -
sored by the Children's Fund, would have
added an amendment to the state
Constitution prohibiting Medi-Cal funding
of abortion and directing that the $30
million from Medi-Cal abortion funds be
allocated for three years to programs for
disabled children. Late in December, the
Children's Fund admitted that they had
failed to obtain the required number of
signatures to qualify the initiative.
Second Initiative
The battle is still on, however, as a
second initiative, sponsored by the
national American Life Lobby, is still
lurking in the shadows. This harsher
measure would ban public funds for
abortion even in cases where the woman
faced "imminent death." Supporters of this
proposed constitutional amendment must
turn in signatures by February 22 to
qualify for the November 1986 ballot.
Californians for Choice has decided to
maintain itself as an organization. ACLU-
NC Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlich
is on its Executive Committee.
ACLU-NC Board member Barbara
Brenner and staff counsel Margaret
Crosby provided significant legal assistance
to Californians for Choice. Board
members Anne Jennings and Marlene
DeLancie, and Pro-Choice Task Force
members Mary Hackenbracht and Dick
Grosboll also made significant contribu-
tions to the work.
If you would like to learn more about
`the ACLU-NC Pro Choice Task Force,
please contact: Marcia Gallo, Field
Representative, 415/621-2493
Volunteers Needed
Volunteers are needed now during
our busy Spring Recruitment season.
We need office help. Tasks involve
batching and handling contributions,
researching donor files, updating
records and responding to member-
ship inquiries. We're looking for flexible
individuals who possess attention to
detail, accuracy, problem solving
ability, and who may enjoy the active
pace of the ACLU office in San
Francisco. Bookkeeping or account-
ing experience is especially helpful.
If you are interested, please contact
Sandy Holmes, Membership Coordi-
nator at (415) 621-2493.
Computers Needed
The ACLU of Northern California
needs the following equipment for use }
by the legal, field, public information,
and development departments:
cent IBM PC or compatible and North-
Star "Advantage" microcomputers,
a hard disk, printers and modems;
0x00B0 Heavy duty paper cutter (up to 100
sheets);
cent Legal-sized metal file cabinets;
cent Paper-folding machine.
Tax deductions available-call
Michael Miller, 415/621-2493.
Field Program Calendar
B.A.R.K. BOARD MEETING: (Usually
fourth Thurs.) Volunteers are needed to staff
hotline. Please contact Florence Piliavin,
415-655-7786.
EARL WARREN BOARD MEETING:
(Third Wed.) Contact Beth Weinberger
415-839-2743.
FRESNO BOARD MEETING: (Usually
third Wed.) Contact Sam Gitchel for details:
209-486-2411 (days), 209-442-0941 (eves).
MARIN COUNTY BOARD MEETING:
(Third Mon.) Contact Milton Estes
415-383-6622 (days), 415-383-8405 (eves).
MID-PENINSULA BOARD MEETING:
(Usually last Wed.) Contact Harry Anisgard,
415-856-9186.
MONTEREY BOARD MEETING: (Usu-
ally fourth Tues.) Tuesday, February 25, 8:00
p.m., Forum on "Right to Freedom of
Choice-What's Next?" Speaker: Daphne
Macklin, ACLU Legislative Analyst.
Monterey Library, Pacific and Jefferson
Streets, Monterey. Next Board Meeting,
Tuesday, March 25. Contact Richard Criley,
408-624-7562.
MT. DIABLO BOARD MEETING:
(Fourth Wed.) Contact Hotline
415-939-ACLU.
NORTH PENINSULA BOARD MEET-
ING: (Second Mon.) Contact Sid Schieber
415-345-8603.
SACRAMENTO VALLEY BOARD
MEETING: (Usually second Wed.) Contact
Jerry Scribner 916-444-2130.
SAN FRANCISCO BOARD MEETING:
(Usually fourth Tues.) Contact Chandler
Visher, 415-391-0222.
SANTA CLARA BOARD MEETING:
(First Tues.) Contact Michael Chatsky,
408-379-4611.
SANTA CRUZ BOARD MEETING:
(Second Wed.) Wednesday, February 12,
Louden Nelson Center. Tuesday, February
18, 8:00 p.m., Saul Landau will speak on
National Security: Myths and Realities at
First Congregational Church, 900 High
Street, Santa Cruz. Donations requested.
Contact Bob Taren, 408-429-9880.
SONOMA BOARD MEETING: Contact
Andrea Learned, 707-544-6911.
STOCKTON BOARD MEETING: (Third
Wed.) Contact Eric Ratner, 209-948-4040
(eves).
YOLO COUNTY BOARD MEETING:
Contact Dan Abramson, 916-758-2762.
FIELD COMMITTEE MEETINGS
FIELD COMMITTEE: Saturday, Febru-
ary 8, 10:00-1:00 p:m. Annual Field
Committee Priority Setting Meeting:
Selecting Organizing Issues for 1986.
ACLU, 1663 Mission Street, #460, SE
Contact Marcia Gallo, 415-621-2494.
PRO-CHOICE TASK FORCE: Wednes-
day, February 5, 6:00 p.m. Special
Educational/ Training Program with Guest
Speaker: Margaret Crosby, ACLU Staff
Attorney, ACLU, 1663 Mission Street,
#460, SE Contact Marcia Gallo or Deborah
Shibley, 415-621-2494. :
RIGHT TO DISSENT COMMITTEE:
Wednesday, February 5, 7:30 p.m., ACLU,
1663 Mission Street, #460, SE Contact
Marcia Gallo, 415-621-2494.
DRAFT OPPOSITION NETWORK:
Next meeting, Tuesday, February 25, 7:00
p.m. at CCCO, 325 Ninth Street, SE
Contact Judy Newman, 415-567-1527.
IMMIGRATION WORKING GROUP:
February 13, 6:00 p.m., ACLU 1663
Mission Street, SE Contact Marcia Gallo
or Cindy Forster, 415-621-2494.
INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY: (Usually
First Saturday each month.) February 1,
Saturday, 10:00 a.m., ACLU 1663 Mission
Street, SE Contact Marcia Gallo, 415-621-
2493.
ee
"An entire generation has grown up with the expectation
that the courts and the Justice Department guard our
liberties for us. This assumption is a dangerous error."
Join the ACLU...
C1 Individual $20
L1 Sponsoring $125
L] Renewal
C1 Joint $30
LX Benefactor $500
C1 Contributing $50
CL] Gift membership from __
Name(s)
Address
City
Return to ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St, S.F. 94103
ee ee =)
AMERICAN
CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION-NEWS
FREE SPEECH
FREE PRESS
FREE ASSEMBLAGE
a
lal
Nee
_ "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." 86
History from the pages of the ACLU News
"This branch sprung into being
_as a result of the San Francisco
General Strike in 1934. That
strike was marked by destructive
vigilante raids on the headquarters
of labor and radical organizations.
Chester Williams and I were
sent by the national ACLU to
oppose the reign of lawlessness
that was tolerated, and many times
participated in, by law enforcement
officers."
4 Ermest Besig
During the 1934 dock strike, local police attacked Executive Director ACLU,
strikers with tear gas and bullets. 1935-1971
On Bloody Thursday, July 5, 1934, a longshore-
man and a cook from the strike kitchen, were
felled by police bullets.
eRe AEA SE REE
Vol Il.
Court Orders Eight Syndicalism
Victims Discharged From Custody
SACRAMENTO, Sept. 28.-The Third District Court of Appeal today reversed the
conviction of the eight Sacramento criminal syndicalism victims, because the verdicts ren-
dered by the jury were inconsistent. The case was not sent back to the lower court for
a new trial. Instead, the appellants were ordered discharged from custody because `"`No
good will be subserved by a second tria!. We are of the opinion the verdict of acquittal
which was rendered by the jury on the sec-
ond indictment will furnish conclusive proof acquitted by the jury of resorting to writ-
of a former acquittal of the charges con- ten or spoken language or personal conduct,
tained in the first indictment." to advocate, teach, aid or abet criminal
Vol. III.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, OCTOBER. 1937
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, MAY, 1938 |
ae
No. 10
The Story of Tessie
Tessie Palmaymesa won't be six years old
until November 14. She's pretty, with black
hair and dark eyes, and quite bright, too.
And, what's more, Tessie is a good little
girl-she obeys her mother. For that rea-
son she was made the innocent victim of
the following flag salute incident:
Registered in the first grade of San Lean-
dro's Roosevelt School, her teacher noticed
that she failed to join the other pupils in
the flag salute ceremony. "Why won't you
salute the flag' Tessie was asked. "Be-
cause my mother told me not to," she re-
enandad Taccia'a tanornhayr wrac ineancad and
ts | Ae a
Camera-Shy Stanley Doyle, professional red-baiter and former Communist Party
stoolpigeon, went berserk during the course of a demonstration before the Nazi Con-
sulate in San Francisco on Saturday, April 23rd, and assaulted Ernest Besig, local director
of the Civil Liberties Union, and Carl Bergmark, photographer for the San Francisco
NEWS. Doyle and n unidentified companion destroyed motion pictures taken by Besig,
but failed in an attempt to ruin a picture
taken by Bergmark showing the destruc- twoshots which apparently escaped Doyle's
tion of Besig's films. : attention.
Yr. News Cameraman
IMMIGRATION OFFICIAL
DRAWN INTO CALIF.
_ "RED NETWORK" -
Another amendment has been tacked on
to the $5,100,000 complaint filed by Ivan
Francis Cox, erstwhile International Long-
shoremen Workers' Union official, who
claims he was ousted from his job as the re-
sult of a state-wide red plot engaged in by
more than five thousand named and un-
named defendants.
It charges that Edward W. Cahill, Com- .
Photo: courtesy D
=