vol. 55, no. 7

Primary tabs

aclu news


NON-PROFIT


ORGANIZATION


U.S. POSTAGE


PAID


PERMIT NO. 4424


SAN FRANCISCO, CA


Volume LV


December 1991


No. 7


Bicentennial Celebration


Artists Celebrate Bill of Rights Day


he joyous voices


of the Oakland


Interfaith Gospel


Choir greeted a capacity


crowd at the annual


ACLU-NC Bill of Rights


Day Celebration on


December 15.


"Today is a_ historic


occasion," said ACLU-


NC Chair Milton Estes as


ACLU supporters to the


event. "It is the 200th


birthday of the Bill of


Rights, a living, changing


document that promises


freedom and equality to


all of the people of the


United States."


In paying tribute to the


"courageous individuals


the law and the landscape of


this country in regards to


equality, race relations, crimi-


nal justice, freedom of


expression, legislative appor-


tionment and separation of


church and state in 1954,


when the era of the Warren


Court, personified by the two


men we honor today, began,"


Estes said.


Justice Brennan, appear-


ing on a videotaped interview


created especially for the


Celebration by Connecticut


ACLU Executive Director


Bill Olds, thanked the


ACLU-NC "for this most


prized award." Recalling his


early days and long experi-


ence on the Warren Court,


Brennan urged every one


who have stood up to ful-


fill the promises of the


Bill of Rights," Estes


99


introduced a videotape protect me.


Comic Marga Gomez said she appreciated the Bill of Rights


but `there aren't enough amendments to the Constitution to


Ric Rocamora


Poet Lawrence Ferlinghetti: "We at City Lights


will always be grateful to the ACLU for


Ric Rocamora


defending us."


"not to jump ship" because


there will always be people


on the nation's courts who


"are wedded to the goals of


collage, created for the


ACLU-NC by San Francisco State film


students, featuring ACLU-NC clients tell-


ing their own stories.


Estes also presented the Earl Warren


Civil Liberties Award to retired United


States Supreme Court Justices William


Brennan and Thurgood Marshall, whose


combined tenure on the nation's court


"created a body of law that made the


Supreme Court a refuge for all Americans


seeking to exercise their rights.".


"Tt is difficult to remember the state of


the ACLU."


An interview with Justice Marshall,


produced by WUSA in Washington, D.C.,


resounded with wisdom and _ humor.


Continued on page 3


to INS Raids


_ Latino Workers Reach


Historic Settlement with INS


historic settlement culminating


A nine years of legal battles on


behalf of Latino workers through-


out northern California whose rights were


violated during INS workplace raids was


approved on December 11 in U.S. District


Court in San Francisco. The settlement


comes in Pearl Meadow Mushroom Inc. vy.


Nelson filed by the ACLU-NC, the


Employment Law Center of the Legal Aid


Society of San Francisco (ELC), the


Mexican American Legal Defense and


Educational Fund (MALDEF), California


Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA) and coop-


erating attorneys from Orrick, Herrington,


Sutcliffe.


The suit, originally filed in 1982,


charged that the U.S. Immigration and


Naturalization Service (INS) violated the


rights of employees and employers


through a pattern of discriminatory


enforcement tactics and unlawful searches


and seizures in workplace raids.


The settlement states that INS agents


must have a valid warrant or consent


before entering a worksite, that the INS


may not detain anyone without reasonable,


individualized suspicion, and that the INS


cannot detain or arrest anyone "solely on


the basis of ethnic characteristics or


appearance." The settlement also bars the


use of excessive or unnecessary force.


Monitor and enforce


To monitor and enforce the terms of


the settlement, new complaint procedures


have been established through the Office


of Professional Responsibility of the


Justice Department in Washington, D.C.


and the INS Central Office.


According to lead counsel John True,


senior staff attorney with the ELC, "This


settlement will place significant limita-


tions on INS conduct during workplace


raids. The agency will be closely moni-


tored to ensure that excessive force, gutter


language and singling out of Mexican


Americans - all of which used to charac-


terize INS behavior - remain vestiges of


the past."


"The protections of the Fourth


Amendment - the requirement of a war-


rant or consent to search a private busi-


ness, and of probable cause to detain or .


arrest a person - are bedrock principles


of our Constitution," said ACLU-NC


attorney Alan Schlosser. "In the past, INS


agents have persistently acted as if these


_ principles do not apply to immigrants and


persons who look like immigrants.


"The settlement in this case reaffirms


that these fundamental civil liberties pro-


tect all persons in this country - regard-


less of their immigration status. Plaintiffs


and their attorneys are committed to insur-


ing that the settlement is rigorously


enforced so that these rights become a


reality," Schlosser added.


Workers' sacrifice


According to Manuel Romero,


MALDEF regional counsel in San


Francisco, the settlement provides greater


protection to the Latino community from


abuses of the INS. "This settlement is a


testament to the sacrifice and courage of


scores of workers who stood up for jus-


Continued on page 3


Club Patrons Receive


Damages from INS Raid


atrons and employees at a Mission


District nightclub whose rights


were violated during a 1989 INS


raid will be awarded $83,000 as a result of


a settlement approved by the U.S. District


Court.


Just before midnight on July 22, 1989,


approximately 20 agents from the


Immigration and Naturalization Service


(INS) and the California Alcohol and


Beverage Control Bureau (ABC) raided


the popular Hispanic-owned nightspot


Club Elegante in San Francisco's Mission


District. Without a warrant or consent,


they blocked exits, prevented patrons from


leaving, and interrogated all the patrons,


the band members and club employees.


A class action suit, Aguayo y. Ilchert,


was filed in U.S. District Court in


December 1989 by the ACLU-NC and


attorneys from Heller, Ehrman, White and


McAuliffe charging that the raid violated


the constitutional rights of everyone


present in the Club.


In October, U.S. District Court Judge


James Ware granted preliminary approval


to the settlement and issued an order certi-


fying the class of plaintiffs. The settlement


received final approval from Judge Ware


on December 6. Approximately 35 mem-


bers of the class stepped forward to


receive proceeds from the settlement.


Speaking at a press conference to


announce the settlement, attorney Sergio


Garcia-Rodriguez of Heller, Ehrman said,


"We believe that this is a very favorable


result for our clients and for the Latino


community in San Francisco. The raid at


Club Elegante had a major negative


impact throughout the Mission District -


folks in the neighborhood believed that if


this could happen at Club Elegante, it


could happen again at any other business


establishment patronized by Latinos.


"When we filed this action, we hoped


to curb a disturbing pattern of discrimina-


tory conduct against the Latino community


by the INS and the ABC. The damages


we've obtained here vindicate everyone


present at the Club during the raid and,


more importantly, the Latino community


at large," Garcia-Rodriguez added.


ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan


Schlosser agreed. "The raid at Club


Elegante was a perfect example of why the


INS has such a sinister reputation in immi-


grant and ethnic communities. Persons out


for a Saturday night of dancing and social-


izing were subjected to a mass round-up in


flagrant disregard of the U.S. Constitution.


Although this was one incident, it is part


of a persistent pattern of governmental


lawlessness that INS in particular has dis-


played over the years. We hope that this


award of monetary damages not only com-


pensates the victims but serves as a deter-


rent to future INS and ABC misconduct."


At the press conference, club patron


Debra Guzman, recalled the terrifying inci-


dent, "The whole thing was a nightmare.


Two years later I still see the faces of the


people who were led out the doors. I


remember young women crying and men


in shock. I kept thinking this can't be hap-


pening, this is America - this doesn't


happen here. Those people came to


America for freedom, safety and refuge,


Continued on page 3


aclu news


dec 1991


SAY WHAT??!! Conference Draws 1,000 Students


ore than 1,000 high school stu-


M dents from around northern


California gathered in San


Francisco's Fashion Center December 11


for Say What??!! Students Celebrate


Freedom of Expression. The response to


the conference, organized by the Howard


A. Friedman First Amendment Project of


the ACLU-NC, was overwhelming - and


not just because of the numbers. Everyone


involved, from students to teachers to the


diverse array of speakers, described the


day as an incredible learning experience.


"The students were very tuned into


how limitations on their speech and dress


and other First Amendment rights are tied


into issues about race and repression,


which are very much a part of their lives,"


said Marcia Gallo, Director of the


Friedman Project. "They were not at all


afraid to spark discussions on complicated,


emotional topics."


San Francisco School Board Vice-


, President Tom Ammiano, who also is a


professional educator, stand-up comedian,


and gay activist chaired the conference.


After a multimedia presentation on


Freedom of Expression, developed by


Nanci Magoun, a communications expert


who serves on the Advisory Committee of


the Friedman Project, and Chuck Farnham


of Nextworld, Inc., Ammiano introduced


keynote speaker Eva Jefferson Paterson. |


Paterson, who spoke on "Students' Rights


from the '60s to the '90s," is the Chair of


the Bay Area Civil Rights Coalition.


Paterson, who was a well-known anti-


war and civil rights activist during her stu-


dent days at Northwestem University,


spoke of the continuing need for loud dis-


sent and direct action in the '90s. "People


who've been in the vanguard of the fight


for civil rights and free speech were your


change that have proven effective, from


building coalitions among student groups


to taking over administration offices.


A panel discussion on Censorship of


Dress and Music was chaired by Diane


Chin, a member of the Lawyers'


Committee for Urban Affairs. Panelist


Dominique Di Prima, a rap musician and


host of KRON-TV's "Home Turf," urged


students not to limit their understanding


by refusing to listen to the views of others.


The panel also featured music critic


Danyel Smith, Chiyuka Carlos, one of the


young men represented by the ACLU-NC


when they were denied entrance to Great


America theme park because their clothing


fit a so-called gang profile, ACLU-NC


staff attorney Alan Schlosser and Polly


Ramos, an East Bakersfield High School


student who organized a student protest


against the school's ban on hats. Ramos


said even though they ultimately lost the


Students from San Francisco's Wallenberg High School spoke up about racism,


dress codes and censorship of hate speech.


Laura Trent


"The way you get information is through


expression," she said. "Censorship limits


the information you can get, which is why


you have to have freedom of expression.


Whether I agree with it or not, you have


Court Enjoins Concord's


Anti-Gay Rights Measure


he Contra Costa Superior Court


: issued a preliminary injunction on


November 21 to prevent enforce-


ment of Measure M, the Concord anti-gay


rights initiative, until the validity of the


measure can be decided by the court.


Measure M, passed by only 42 votes in the


November 5 election, repealed portions of


the City of Concord's Human Rights


Ordinance that prohibit discrimination


based on sexual orientation. Opponents of


Measure M fear that people who live,


work, shop, do business, or use services in


Concord will be subject to discrimination


and harassment on the basis of sexual


orientation if the measure goes into effect.


The preliminary injunction was


ordered in response to a suit filed on


November 20 by the ACLU-NC and coop-


erating attorneys from the Walnut Creek


office of the law firm of Morrison and


Foerster on behalf of several community


organizations and Concord residents. The


suit, Bay Area Network of Gay and


Lesbian Educators v. City of Concord,


alleges that Measure M violates numerous


provisions of the state and federal


Constitutions and would cause irreparable


injury if enforced during the time it will


take the courts to decide the legality of the


initiative. A hearing on the merits has


been scheduled for February 28, 1992.


Plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Bay Area


Network of Gay and Lesbian Educators


(BANGLE), the Mt. Diablo Peace Center,


the Contra Costa Chapter of NOW, and


several Concord residents charge that


Measure M is unconstitutional because it


authorizes arbitrary discrimination in


employment, housing, city services and


other matters on the basis of sexual orien-


tation. This discrimination violates state


and federal equal protection guarantees,


the suit charges.


The lawsuit also asserts that Measure


M violates the constitutional rights of free


speech and due process. Kathy Bagdonas,


lead counsel at Morrison and Foerster, said,


"Measure M could prevent a city council


member from speaking in favor gay rights,


or the use of city facilities by an organiza-


tion that provides educational materials


about AIDS."


The suit also contends that Measure M


violates state law regarding a city's author-


ity to enact legislation, and that it conflicts


with state law protecting the right of lesbi-


ans and gay men to be free from arbitrary


discrimination.


Guy Stark of the Mt. Diablo Peace


Center testified in a declaration submitted


to the court that members of his organiza-


tion were subjected to verbal harassment


during recent peace demonstrations in


Concord, including being called "faggots"


and "queers." Stark stated that he fears if


Measure M is enforced "people who


engage in these verbal assaults may turn


them into physical assaults. Measure M


would prevent the City of Concord from


acting to prohibit such acts."


Barbara Hannafan, a member of the


City of Concord's Human Relations


Commission, testified in her declaration


that she feared she could be removed from


her position on the Commission because


she has publicly supported gay rights. The


Commission may "no longer be able to


encourage AIDS education and awareness,


fair treatment of people with HIV infec-.


tion, or any other policy that is perceived


as a `homosexual issue,"" Hannafan added.


In addition to Bagdonas, other attor-


neys working on the lawsuit are ACLU-


NC staff counsel Matthew Coles; and Ruth


Borenstein, Gregory Dresser, Erica Grubb,


and Alisa Wynd, all of Morrison and


Foerster.


fight against the dress code, she and her


classmates gained something just as


important: a common cause. "We realized


that we do have the power to fight these


things," said Ramos. "It brought people


together who otherwise would never know


each other. Even members of rival gangs


came together over this protest against the


dress code."


Following the panel, students split up


for small discussion groups and talked


about how First Amendment issues affect


them in their schools, on the streets and at


home. Racism, and the lack of understand- -


ing among even well-meaning members of


different ethnic groups, dominated most


discussions. Learning about freedom of


expression, one student said, helped him to


"get over name-calling, and really sit down


and talk about things."


chaired by ACLU-NC Public Information


Director Elaine Elinson, featured John


Stewart, an editorial page writer at the San


Francisco Chronicle; Bill Wong,


Associate Editor at the Oakland Tribune;


Daniel Alejandrez, founding editor of


Barrio Warrior, and Lori Radzikowski, a


student journalist at Redwood High School


in Marin whose story on sexual harass-


ment was threatened with censorship.


Many of the students attending worked


on their own school newspapers, and some


had experienced censorship first-hand.


"Our school newspaper is limited to


things that are good about our school,"


complained one student journalist. "so it


makes it seem like everything is great, but


it's not. We even had to start an under-


ground paper to get the real news out."


The students showed a high degree of


sophistication about what they read and


watch in the news, noted Elinson. "They


asked questions about many ethical and


`moral issues that experienced journalists


struggle with every day," she said. "The


issue of press censorship during the Gulf


War provoked very heated dialogue among


the students and panelists."


ACLU-NC Executive Director Dorothy


Ehrlich moderated a discussion on Limits


on Speech. The panelists were ACLU-NC


staff attorney Ann _ Brick; Margaret


Russell, a law professor at Santa Clara


University and a member of the ACLU-


NC Board of Directors; and Doreena


Wong, a staff attorney at the Asian Law


Caucus.


"What most impressed me," `said


- Ehrlich, "was the incredible diversity of


the young people. We had students from


rural schools near Healdsburg with stu-


. dents from inner-city schools.. There were


students from the extremely competitive


academic program at Lowell High School


and students from continuation high


schools. One teacher told me it was the


first time those students had ever been to a


program with Lowell students."


"It is very heartening to me," said


Paterson, "to see 1,000 young people try-


ing to keep their minds open, trying to


make a difference."


A 20-minute videotape of the confer-


ence, produced by San Francisco State


film students Lydia Szajko and Caitlin


Manning, will be shown in high school


classrooms by the Friedman Project.


Jean Field is an assistant in the Public


Information Department.


Harris Appeals to U.S.


Supreme Court


owing to. seek review from the


V U.S. Supreme Court to correct a


"fundamental miscarriage of jus-


tice,' attorneys for San Quentin Death


Row inmate Robert Harris responded to


the latest denial from the Ninth Circuit


Court of Appeals.


On November 8, the Ninth Circuit


refused to reconsider its previous uphold-


ing of the U.S. District Court's denial of


habeas relief to Harris.


Harris's attorneys had asked the full


Court of Appeals to vacate the August 21,


1991 opinion that held Robert Harris was


not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on


his claims. Harris had argued that he was


denied due process because his court-


appointed psychiatrists failed to undertake


any meaningful examination of his severe


mental impairments. As a result, the jury


that sentenced Harris to death was not


Continued on page 4


aclu news


8 issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in January-February, June-July, August-


September and October/November.


Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California


H. Lee Halterman, Chairperson


Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director


Elaine Elinson, Editor


Marcia Gallo, Field Page


ZesTop Publishing, Design and Production


1663 Mission St., 4th Floor ee


San Francisco, California 94103 aS


(415) 621-2488


Membership $20 and up, of which 50 cents is for a subscription to theaclu news and 50


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


gore


aclu news


dec 1991 3


Civil Rights Bills, Axed by Governor, to be Reintroduced


by Francisco Lobaco


ACLU Legislative Advocate


alifornia's long standing reputa-


tion for strong and effective civil


rights laws protecting victims of


discrimination has been seriously tar-


nished. In the past few years a series of


California Supreme Court decisions have


essentially gutted the authority of


California's civil rights agency - the Fair


Employment and Housing Commission -


from awarding meaningful relief to victims


of employment and housing discrimina-


tion. Other court decisions have substan-


Latino Workers


Continued from page |


tice. More than sixty workers came -


forward and testified in U.S. District


Court about the abuse they suffered at the


hands of the INS - abuses which we


hope will not recur."


One of the workers, Francisco Rivera,


was working at a Petaluma poultry


processing firm during a 1982 INS raid.


Agents handcuffed him and roughed him


up, and verbally abused him even though


he had proper immigration documents.


"They put me in their van and they later


dropped me off at a parking lot several


miles from my worksite - I had to get


back to work on foot," Rivera explained.


"I think this suit is a big step towards


recognizing individual rights."


Plaintiff Randolph Ferguson, an


employer who runs a small business in


Sacramento, said, "The INS agents told


me bluntly that they had the right to come


onto my property if they saw Mexicans in


plain view from the street. I asked them


for a warrant and they said they didn't


need one."


Noting that one agent started to draw a


gun, Ferguson added that he testified


because although "I felt threatened, but no


matter what the cost, I was willing to go


through with it."


The case was originally filed on behalf


of five employers and hundreds of


workers of Hispanic origin in 1982


following a nationwide INS sweep called


"Operation Jobs" and subsequent INS


raids. The lawsuit charged that in northern


California the INS systematically violated


the constitutional rights of employees and


employers.


During a four-month trial before U.S.


District Court Judge Robert Aguilar,


plaintiffs presented scores of witnesses,


including workers who spoke about their


detention, arrest, racial harassment and


the use of excessive force by INS agents.


tially limited victims of arbitrary discrimi-


nation from obtaining relief under the


Unruh Civil Rights Act.


These court decisions prompted the


ACLU and other civil rights organizations


to seek passage of legislation overturning


these decisions and to support enactment


of meaningful civil rights laws. The good


news is that a majority of the Legislature


recognizes that all California residents are


entitled to effective relief from unlawful


discrimination. | The bad news is that


Governor Pete Wilson demonstrated that


his commitment to civil rights is no better


than his predecessor George Deukmejian


- every important civil rights bill that


The plaintiffs charged


that the INS ~ entered


private worksites without


warrants or voluntary


consent, used unlawful


general warrants to seize


workers, arrested workers


without reasonable suspi-


cion that they were


undocumented, subjected


workers to physical and


verbal abuse and targeted


Latino workers for arrest


and abuse.


Injunction


During the course of


the lawsuit, a preliminary


injunction was issued in


1985 prohibiting INS


agents from _ entering


worksites without a valid


warrant or consent and


from unlawfully detain-


ing workers without rea-


sonable suspicion that the


person is unlawfully in this country.


In addition to True, Romero, and


Schlosser, the plaintiffs' litigation team


includes Denise Hulett of MALDEF,


reached the Governor' s desk in 1991 was


vetoed.


SB 827 (Bergeson) would have over-


turned the two Supreme Court decisions of


Peralta v. FEHC (1990) and Dyna Med v.


FEHC (1987) by reauthorizing the Fair


Employment and Housing Commission the


right to grant compensatory damages and


limited civil penalties in cases of employ-


ment discrimination. The Governor's veto


of SB 827 was particularly insensitive


coming in the midst of the sexual harass-


ment charges raised by Professor Anita


Hill against Supreme Court nominee


Clarence Thomas.


Francisco Garcia-Rodriguez, formerly of


MALDEF and currently with Santa Clara


County Legal Aid, David Grabill of


CRLA, and Steven Brick and Barbara


Public outrage


The public outcry surrounding the veto


of AB 101 (Friedman) was heard through-


out the country. The bill would have pro-


hibited discrimination in employment on


the basis of sexual orientation. The


Governor's veto was especially dishearten-


ing coming after clear indications that he


would sign the legislation and despite


widespread support from all segments of


California society including employer


groups.


The Governor also demonstrated a lack


of sensitivity to the language minority


community by vetoing SB 834 (Marks).


Continued on page 4


ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan Schlosser (I.), translator and legal worker Diana Velez, plaintiff


Francisco Rivera, and ELC attorney John True announce the historic settlement with the INS.


Ric Rocamora


Moses of Orrick, Herrington, and Sutcliffe.


The settlement also provides for the pay-


ment of plaintiffs' attorneys fees and


costs.


Club Elegante ...


Continued from page I


then they went out one night and look


what happened. I don't think government


can ever pay enough for what they caused


in human suffering.


"Tt was so important that people were


indignant and did come forward.


Otherwise, this terrible raid would have


gone unnoticed. The government made a


real mistake that night - and they thought


_ Russ of GSD M The billboad 5


jets possible because of a genero


ice _ donation from | Fran and Anselm Strat


_ in honor of


no one would care. They learned that we


won't sit by and stand for this," Guzman


added.


Another plaintiff, local television pro-


ducer Patricia Aguayo, said, "I hope that


by us winning this suit it sends a clear mes-


sage to immigration and other government


officials, that Latinos and Chicanos, those


born here and those born in other Latin


American countries, will not sit back and


tolerate inhumane abuses against our peo-


ple, whose only reason for coming to the


United States is the promise of a better life


for them and their family.


"How dare this country criticize other


countries for their violations of human


rights, when immigration raids conducted


with the blessing of our government here


clearly abuse human rights. I want to say


that our community will continue to fight


the injustices put upon our people,"


Aguayo added.


This settlement represents a culmina-


tion of favorable court rulings for the


plaintiffs. The Court twice rejected defen-


dants' attempts to dismiss the action.


"After the Court validated our clients'


claims, all parties believed that it would be


in everyone's interest to negotiate a satis-


factory settlement," Garcia-Rodriguez


said.


In addition to Schlosser and Garcia-


Rodriguez, plaintiffs in Aguayo were also


represented by Charles N. Freiberg,


Charles F. Robinson, and Gia L. Cincone


of Heller, Ehrman; Manuel Romero of the


Mexican American Legal Defense and


Education Fund, and attorneys from La


Raza Centro Legal and the Immigrant


Legal Resource Center.


Bill of Rights ...


Continued from page 1


Addressing the Georgia sodomy case,


Marshall said, "You let Big Brother in


your bedroom and I don't know any place


you can keep him out."


ACLU-NC Executive Director Dorothy


Ehrlich told the audience that other "very


painful" videotaped images from this year


- the Los Angeles police beating of


Rodney King, the censored images of a


war fought in the Persian Gulf and pack-


aged in yellow ribbons, and the CHP attack


on peace demonstrators during the Gulf


War - remind us that many of the free-


doms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights are


threatened. Ehrlich also presented the Lola


Hanzel Courageous Advocacy Award to


Joe Mayberry, an outstanding volunteer


who has served on the ACLU-NC


Complaint Desk since 1983.


The second half of the program, "A


Tribute to Freedom of Expression," was


emceed by poet and gay rights activist


Carmen Vazquez. A timely poem from


June Jordan, "Letter to Mrs. Virginia


Thomas, Wife of What's-His-Name,


recently appointed to the Supreme Court," -


was read by Ayesha Jenkins. Performances


by modern dancer June Watanabe and jazz


pianist Jon Jang, and a side-splitting, icon-


oclastic look at the Bill of Rights from


comic Marga Gomez thrilled the audience


and vividly portrayed the wide range of


. artists who are fighting for freedom of


expression. The program closed with a call


to fight censorship from renowned San


Francisco poet Lawrence Ferlinghetti, who


recalled his own charges of obscenity for


distributing Allen Ginsberg's "Howl" in


1957 and graced the event with a poem,


"Civil Rights Dog," who "will not be muz-


zled, Congressman Doyle [of HUAC] is


just another fire hydrant to him."


aclu news


dec 1991


How Your Money Works


for Civil Liberties


Membership Contributions v.


Tax-Deductible Donations


The ACLU was founded in 1920 as a


non-profit organization supported by its


membership. Membership contributions


are essential to the ACLU's existence,


providing about 25% of the ACLU of


Northern California's support. However,


membership dues are not tax-deductible


because a significant part of ACLU's


work involves lobbying (before Congress,


the state Legislature, city councils and


county boards of supervisors). The IRS


places restrictions on the use of tax-


deductible funds for lobbying.


The ACLU Foundation of Northern


California is a tax-exempt, tax deductible


organization which finances litigation and


public education. Funds contributed to the


ACLU Foundation are not used to support


the ACLU's lobbying work. If you wish to .


make a tax-deductible donation, you may


do so by making your gift payable to the


ACLU-NC Foundation.


Tax-Deductible Gifts


The ACLU-NC Foundation conducts


four annual fundraising drives: the Major


Gifts Campaign, the Lawyers Council


Campaign, the Physicians Campaign for


Reproductive Rights and the Bill of


Rights Day Campaign. These campaigns


support the ACLU's legal program in


northern California and all donations are


tax-deductible. If you are interested in


other ways you can donate to the ACLU,


or if you would like to name the ACLU in


your will, please send your inquiry to


Cheri Bryant, Development Director,


ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission Street, #460,


San Francisco 94103 or call 415/621-


2493.


Confused about your


Contribution? (c)


Many members welcome the opportu-


nity to support civil liberties by making


special contributions to the ACLU


throughout the year, in addition to renew-


ing their membership. Some supporters


send their gifts to the national ACLU


office as well as the ACLU of Northem


California office. Combined with the four


fundraising campaigns mentioned above,


it?s easy to see how gifts could be incor-


rectly applied. If you think your contribu-


tions have not been accurately recorded,


please write or call:


Sandy Holmes


Membership Department


ACLU-NC


1663 Mission Street, #460


San Francisco, CA 94103


415/621-2493


Civil Rights ...


Contnaed from page 2 2


Co-sponsored by the ACLU, SB 834


would have codified existing regulations


prohibiting discrimination for speaking a


language other than English in the work-


place unless justified by a business neces-


sity.


These vetoes establish a clear pattern


demonstrating the Governor's lack of sen-


sitivity and compassion to the civil rights


of employees.


While disheartening, the vetoes should


be interpreted as a call for action by the


ACLU and other civil rights advocates.


New legislation


The three Wilson-vetoed civil rights


bills are all expected to be reintroduced


when the Legislature reconvenes in


January. Additionally there are other


important civil rights bills which will be


acted upon in 1992.


AB 531 (Polanco) is intended to bring


California into compliance with the


Federal Fair Housing Act. The Fair


Housing Act authorizes the federal


enforcement agency to award compensa-


tory damages and assess civil penalties to


victims of housing discrimination. The Act


also provides new protection for families


with children and the disabled. AB 531


would effectively overturn the Supreme


Court decision in Walnut Creek v.FEHC


which held that the Commission was pro-


hibited from awarding compensatory dam-


ages to victims of housing discrimination.


SB 1257 (Roberti) would overturn


another bad civil rights case recently


decided by the Supreme Court. In Harris v.


Capital Investments (1991) the court over-


tured 20 years of precedent by holding


that the Unruh Civil Rights Act does not


protect all victims of arbitrary discrimina-


tion.


AB 1077 (Bronzan) and AB 1286


(Vasconcellos) seek to bring California


law into compliance with the federal


_American with Disabilities Act of 1990


(ADA). The ADA extends federal protec-


tion against discrimination with disabili-


ties, including persons with AIDS and HIV


infection, in the private workplace and in


places on public accommodation. The bills


are intended to strengthen California law


where it is weaker that the ADA and to


maintain the strength of California law


where it offers higher protection for per-


sons with disabilities.


The ACLU will make passage of these


civil rights bills one of its legislative priori-


ties in 1992.


Harris...


Continued from page 2


aware that he suffered from organic brain


damage, post-traumatic stress disorder,


fetal alcohol effects, and a myriad of other


mitigating mental health problems.


Michael Laurence, Director of the


ACLU-NC Death Penalty Project and one


of Harris's attorneys, condemned the


Court of Appeals' decision as "further evi-


dence that the federal judiciary has turned


its back on poor people in this country."


"This decision sends a clear message in


this Bicentennial year of the Bill of Rights


that due process is guaranteed only to


those who can afford it," Laurence said.


To support his claim, Harris presented


swom affidavits from ten highly regarded


mental health experts and requested the


Opportunity to prove his claim at an evi-


dentiary hearing.


Despite the powerful affidavits, a panel


of the Court of Appeals rejected the peti-


tion by a 2 to 1 vote on procedural grounds


in August. The Court retroactively applied


the U.S. Supreme Court decision in


McCleskey v. Zant to conclude that Harris


should have presented the claims earlier.


Attorneys for Harris argued to the full


court that applying McCleskey in this man-


ner required Harris to foresee in 1982 that


the U.S. Supreme Court in 1991 would


Overturn years of precedent and violates


every precept of due process.


According to Laurence, "Even the most


fundamental tenets of federalism do not


permit the state unjustly to forfeit the lives


of its citizens.


"Robert Harris stands ready to prove


that he was neither legally nor morally cul-


pable for capital murder. He should be


afforded an evidentiary hearing,"


Chapter Meetings


(Chapter meetings are open to all interested


members. Contact the chapter activist listed


for your area.)


B-A-R-K __(Berkeley-Albany-Richmond-


Kensington) Chapter Meeting: (Usually


fourth Thursday) Volunteers needed for


the chapter hotline -- call Florence


Piliavin at 510/848-5195 for further


details. For more information, time and


address of meetings, contact Julie Houk,


510/848-4752.


Earl Warren (Oakland/Alameda County)


Chapter Meeting: (Usually second


Wednesday) Meeting on Wednesday,


January 8, 1992. The Earl Warren Chapter is


sponsoring a high school essay contest. For


time and address of meetings, please call Irv


Kermish, 510/836-4036 or Abe Feinberg,


510/451-1122.


Fresno Chapter Meeting: (Usually third


Monday) Meeting on Monday, January 20,


1992 at San Joaquin Law School. New


mation, call Nadya Coleman at 209/229-


7178 (days) or A.J. Kruth at 209/432-1483


(evenings).


Gay Rights Chapter Meeting: (Usually


first Thursday) Meet Thursday, January 2,


1992 at the ACLU Office, 1663 Mission,


460, San Francisco at 7:00 PM. For more


information, contact Teresa Friend, 510/


272-9700.


Marin County Chapter Meeting: (Third


Monday) Meet Monday, January 20, 1992 at


7:30 PM, Westamerica Bank, East


. Blithedale and Sunnyside Avenues, Mill


Valley. For more information, contact


Harvey Dinerstein, 415/381-6129.


Mid-Peninsula (Palo Alto area) Chapter


Meeting: (Usually first Thrusday) Meeting


on Thursday, January 9, 1992 at 7:30 PM at


the California Federal Bank, El Camino


Real, Palo Alto. New members welcome!


For more information, contact Harry


Anisgard, 415/856-9186 or call the Chapter


Hotline at 415/328-0732.


Monterey County Chapter Meeting:


(Usually first Tuesday) Meeting on


Tuesday, January 7, 1992 at 7:30 PM at the


Monterey Library, Community Room,


Pacific and Madison Streets, Monterey. The


Monterey Chapter will hold its Annual


Meeting on Saturday, January 25, 1992 at


1:00 PM. at the Monterey Library,


- Community Room, Pacific and Madison


Streets, Monterey. For more information,


contact Richard Criley, 408/624-7562.


Mt. Diablo (Contra. Costa County)


Chapter Meeting: (Usually fourth


Thursday) Meeting on Thursday, January


23, 1992 at 7:30 PM. For more information,


contact Mildred Starkie, 415/934-0557.


North Peninsula (San Mateo area)


Chapter Meeting: (Usually third Monday)


Meeting on Monday, January 20, 1992 at


7:30 PM at the offices of Planned


Parenthood, 2211 Palm Avenue, San Mateo.


Note: The North Pen Chapter has a new


Hotline number: 579-1789. The Chapter is


seeking volunteers to help with the Hotline.


To volunteer on the Hotline or for more


information, contact Emily Skolnick at 340-


9834.


Field Program Monthly


Meetings


members always welcome! For more infor- -


North Valley (Shasta, Siskiyou, Tehema,


and Trinity Counties) Chapter Meeting:


(Usually third Wednesday) The North


Valley Chaper will have a Bill of Rights


Phone Nite on Tuesday, January 7, 1992 at


7:00 PM at the law offices of Eric Berg,


1308 Placer Street, Redding. For more infor-


mation contact interim Chairperson Tillie


Smith at 916/549-3998.


Redwood (Humboldt County) Chapter


Meeting: (Usually third Monday) The new


Redwood Chapter will meet on Monday,


January 20, 1992 at Humboldt State


University, Science B Building, Room 135


at 7:15 PM. For more information contact


Christina Huskey at 707/445-7634.


Sacramento Valley Chapter Meeting:


(Usually second Wednesday) Meeting on


Wednesday, January 8, 1992 at 7:00 PM at


Hearing Room 1, Sacramento County


Offices, 700 H Street. Meeting will focus on


Church/State issues. For more information,


contact Ruth Ordas, 916/488-9956


San Francisco Chapter Meeting: (Usually


third Monday) Meeting on Monday, January


20, 1992 at 7:00 PM. at ACLU office, 1663


Mission, 460, San Francisco. For more


information, call the Chapter Information


Line at 415/979-6699.


Santa Clara Valley Chapter Meeting:


(Usually first Tuesday) Contact John Cox,


408/226-7421 for more information.


Santa Cruz County Chapter Meeting:


(Usually second Wednesday) Chapter will


continue to work on combating Hate


Crimes. Contact Keith Lesar, 408/688-1666,


for further information.


Sonoma County Chapter Meeting: (Third


Thursday of the month) Meet Thrusday,


January 16, 1992. All members welcome.


Contact Len Bronstein at 707/527-9018.


Yolo County Chapter Meeting: (Third


Thursday of the month) Meeting on


Thursday, January 16, 1992. ACLU


National President Nadine Strossen will


speak on Free Speech on Campus at U.C.


Davis Main Theater on Tuesday, January 14,


1992 at 7:30 PM. For more information,


contact Alan Bronstein at 916/752-2586.


Field Action


Meetings


(All meetings except those noted will be held


at the ACLU-NC Office, 1663 Mission


Street, Suite #460, San Francisco.)


Student Outreach Committee: (Usually


third Saturday) Contact Marcia Gallo, at


ACLU-NC 415/621-2493.


Civil Rights Committee: (Fourth Saturday)


Meeting on Saturday, January 25, 1992 from


10:00 AM to 11:30 AM. RSVP to Nancy Otto


at the ACLU-NC 415/621-2493.


First Amendment Committee: (Fourth -


Saturday) Meeting on Saturday, January 25,


1992 from 12:00 PM to 1:30 PM. RSVP to


Nancy Otto at the ACLU-NC 415/621-2493.


Pro-Choice Action Campaign: Contact


Nancy Otto at the ACLU-NC 415/621-2493.


Laurence added.


He noted that the Ninth Circuit opinion


conflicts sharply with the opinions of other


state and federal decisions.


The Ninth Circuit order did not reveal


the vote of the full Court, however, articles


in the Los Angeles Times and New York


Times revealed that the vote was 13-13 |


with one judge not voting.


In a powerful dissent, Judge Stephen


Reinhardt noted, "I believe the people have


a right to know if an individual is being


executed notwithstanding the fact that a


substantial number of judges who have


examined the constitutionality of the


state's proposed action believe further judi-


cial review is necessary - and I believe


that there is no justification for concealing


the actual division in the court. There are


good reasons why history should fully


record the judicial votes in death penalty


cases."


Judge Reinhardt further stated in his


15-page dissent, "When a human life is at


stake, we should provide en banc review in


all cases in which legitimate questions


exist concerning a panel's decision in favor


of the state. Harris most certainly qualifies


under that standard.


"Common decency and fairness - as


well as due process - require that we


rehear his case en banc. In the absence of


such a hearing, the state of California


should not be permitted to execute him. I


deeply regret that we have decided other-


wise," Judge Reinhardt concluded.


Following the order, Harris's attorneys


filed a motion to stay the mandate pending


the filing of a petition in the U.S. Supreme


Court. The motion was granted, giving the


defense team 60 days to file the writ of


certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court.


Although state Attorney General Dan


Lungren made a last ditch effort to vacate


the stay, the U.S. Supreme Court denied


his motion without dissent on December 9.


"The Supreme Court properly rejected the


patently frivolous application by the


Attorney General," said Laurence. "The


State's application provided no legitimate


reasons why Harris should not be afforded


his right to appeal to the Supreme Court.


The Court's action fully supports our view


that this case involves substantial constitu-


tional questions of due process and fair-


ness."


S WE COMMEMORATE THE


Bicentennial of the Bill of Rights, those who cherish


the freedoms embodied in that document may not


find much cause for celebration. For although the


Bicentennial comes at a time when Americans enjoy


more rights than at any time in our history, it also


occurs at a moment when the United States Supreme Court is on


the verge of abdicating the role it has played, as protector of the


Constitution, for most of the past three decades.


The U.S. Supreme Court, in an unprecedented assault on the


First Amendment, upheld the "Gag Rule" prohibiting federally


funded family planning clinics from even mentioning the word


"abortion." Restricting Fourth Amendment bans on unreason-


able search and seizure, the high court ruled that passengers on


buses can be randomly searched as part of the War on Drugs.


Death Row inmates whose lawyers missa filing deadline may not


appeal the case - thus ensuring a greater practice of the most


cruel and unusual punishment. Police can now detain a suspect


for up to 48 hours before bringing the suspect before a judge, the


court decided. A series of Supreme Court rulings swept away


decades of hard-won civil rights cases, undermining


equal protection guarantees at the workplace. NJ LL


And on it went. cy


Here in northern California, the


ACLU-NC has witnessed and


challenged many violations of ee


fought for freedom of ny


expression for anti-war Re


demonstrators, AIDS


activists, environmental- =


ists and students. We


have challenged illegal


individual rights. We have


LX searches by police, im-


migration agents and


corrections officials. We


have fought discrimination


R against minority youths ac-


cused of fitting a "gang pro-


O file," against people infected with


s HIV, against homeless people whose


C A ay only "crime" is sleeping out of doors, against


those who wish to speak their native language.


Justice William Brennan noted the potential of state constitu-


tions to serve as a "font for individual liberties." In California, we


have relied on our state Constitution to protect many rights. The


privacy right embodied in Article 1, Section 1 of the California


Constitution has served to uphold a woman's right to choose,


even as the U.S. Supreme Court whittles away at reproductive


freedom. As the national ACLU looks more and mote to state


courts for advances in civil liberties litigation, we at the ACLU of


Northern California have an increasingly important role to play.


This report does not list every case on our legal docket. It


includes those cases in which there was significant activity this


year, as well as other forms of legal advocacy in our priority areas.


(A complete listing of our cases and thetr current status 1s available from


the Legal Department.) With this report, we hope to share with you


some of the highlights of our legal program of the ACLU-NC


during 1991.


We celebrate the Bicentennial of the Bill of Rights by continu-


ing to be the leading civil liberties advocate in northern Califor-


nia. In doing so, we remember well the words of Justice Brennan


as he left the Supreme Court, "The goal of universal equality,


freedom and prosperity is far from won and .. . inequities


continue to mar the face of the nation. We are surely nearer the


beginning than the end of the struggle."


6


Anne Heitbrink and Patrisha Vestey.


THe ACLU-NC LeGAL


Department is staffed by five


attorneys, Ann Brick, Edward


Chen, Matthew Coles, Margaret


Crosby and Alan Schlosser. The


responsibilities of the Managing


Attorney are rotated among the staff counsel yearly; in


1991, the Managing Attorney is Margaret Crosby. In


addition, the Legal Department includes the Police


Practices Project, directed by attorney John Crew and the


Death Penalty Project, headed by attorney Michael


Laurence. The attorneys are ably assisted by Frances Beal,


The Legal Department also oversees the work of the


Complaint Desk, which is supervised by Lisa Maldonado.


The Desk, staffed by a dozen volunteer counselors,


receives more than 200 calls and letters each week from


people who feel their rights have been violated. Assisted


_by the staff attorneys and law students who clerk for the


ACLU-NC during the year, these lay counselors screen


requests for assistance and often provide the advocacy


needed to resolve particular grievances.


We share the accomplishments of the legal program


with over 100 dedicated lawyers who donate their


services to the ACLU-NC as cooperating attorneys. Half


of our cases this year were handled by cooperating


attorneys working with staff counsel. Without their


expertise and advocacy, the ACLU-NC would not be able


to address many pressing civil liberties issues. A list of


the 1991 cooperating attorneys and firms is on page 8.


the ACLU argued that


the head shaving was a


malicious and retalia-


tory measure designed


toinflict injury to pun-


ish the political views


of the demonstrators.


The four won a


$100,000 settlement


and a change in jail


policy which now pro-


hibits the cutting or


shaving of hair of any


pre-trial detainee for


the purposes of lice re-


moval unless all other


less intrusive methods


have failed, and the


shaving is specifically


recommended and su-


pervised by a medical


professional.


AIDS Activists


An ACT-UP dem-


onstration in San


Francisco's Castro Dis-


trict against the


government's AIDS


policies turned into a


Demonstrators


In times of war, the govern-


ment will often crack down on


dissent and on the press in the


name of "national: security."


This year, the ACLU-NC took


on battles to defend freedom of


POMEL YE


expression for anti-war dem-


onstrators and for groups fight-


ing for such diverse causes as


preservation of the redwood


forests, government funding for


AIDS, and support for students


in China.


mG


a - |


can


eS


"


)


fame


=)


|


FoR aes oer ee


Anti-War Protestors


The ACLU-NC filed a suit,


Lamperti v. California Highway


Patrol, on behalf of three anti-war protesters


who were beaten by CHP officers during


two separate non-violent demonstrations


against the Persian Gulf War.


The suit asks for damages against the


individual officers for the beatings, as well


as against the CHP supervisory officers for


failing to provide adequate crowd control


training and supervision. We are also seek-


ing an injunction to prevent the recurrence


of such unlawful acts.


The ACLU asserts that peaceful acts of


civil disobedience never can justify the use


of violence by law enforcement agencies.


Such acts of violence jeopardize the First


Amendment rights of individuals express-


ing controversial points of view.


AN as


Environmentalists


Other legal action centered on the war


raging over the forests of northern Califor-


- nia. The ACLU-NC successfully represented


four Redwood Summer protesters in a fed-


eral lawsuit filed against the Humboldt


County Sheriff's Department in 1990. The


suit charged that the demonstrators' consti-


tutional rights were violated when their


heads were forcibly shaved in jail after being


arrested for trespassing during a civil dis-


obedience action against lumber company


logging practices that threaten old growth


forests.Sheriff's Department officials claimed


that the protesters' heads were shaved to rid


them of lice. However, as they were never


examined by qualified medical personnel,


nightmare when hun-


dreds of police officers


attacked demonstrators and passers-by alike,


blockading streets, and trapping people


against their will in stores and restaurants in


the area. The ACLU-NC 1s joining a team


of attorneys in representing those who were


the victims of police abuse before a special


hearing of the Office of Citizen Complaints.


ACLU-NC attorney Ann Brick represents a


Catholic priest who was caught up in the


police sweep.


aS


Cyclists


A group of bicycle-riding protesters,


seeking to commemorate the anniversary of


the Tienanmen uprising by cycling through


downtown San Francisco, were nearly pre-


vented from holding their protest when the


city demanded that they obtain an expen-


sive athletic event permit. A phone call


from the ACLU-NC was


all it took to ensure the


cyclers could carry their


message on wheels


through thestreets of San


Francisco.


BART Ads


The ACLU inter-


vened on behalf of the


The ACLU-NC's War Emergency Desk responded to over 50 callers a week


ranging from conscientious objectors to those who were told they could not wear


a peace button - or a yellow ribbon - at work.


tractual two-week period.


a]


Anti-choice Demonstrators


Demonstrating its commitment to all


forms of expressive freedom, the ACLU-


NC publicly criticized the arrest of anti-


choice demonstrators at a street fair in Al-


bany. The demonstrators, who were carry-


ing large photo-posters of dead fetuses,


were arrested under statutes prohibiting


the display of obscenity to children and


barring display of naked children. Charac-


terizing the charges as a misuse of the


obscenity laws to suppress political speech,


the ACLU offered legal assistance to the


arrested demonstrators. The charges were


dismissed; and the anti-choice demonstra-


tors never responded to the ACLU's offer.


Press Freedom


In the longest running press freedom


case on our docket, the California Supreme


Court rejected two separate requests by law


enforcement officials to reinstate a libel


judgment and reopen a libel suit, McCoy ",


Hearst Corporation, against journalists Lowell


Bergman and Raul Ramirez for a series of


articles on a Chinatown murder published


in the San Francisco Examiner. In a 1986


opinion, the Court ruled that the articles


were protected under the Constitution; this


year's decisions end a fifteen-year-old legal


battle over the articles. Though


the Court's ruling upheld the ACLU posi-


tion, such protracted libel suits can have a


chilling effect on a free press.


Two other press freedom cases illustrate


the dangers that small newspapers face when


they voice dissenting views.


The ACLU-NC is representing a small


Santa Cruz newspaper in a libel suit,


Hartmann v. Solar Powers, brought against it


by a local political activist. The paper re-


fuses to reveal the source of the challenged


article, which claims the plaintiff was fired


from a city job because he was "potentially


dangerous" and "unstable."


The ACLU argues that because the ar-


ticle involves a public figure and is a matter


of important local political controversy, the


plaintiff should be required to prove consti-


tutional malice. The paper claims that the


article is accurate, and that there is no


evidence of malice in its publication. The


paper also claims a privilege for the identity


of its source.


Asserting that an article critical of a San


Francisco welfare worker was clearly a pro-


tected statement of opinion, the ACLU-NC


is representing the General Advocacy As-


sistance Project (GAAP) and Judith


Blowchiak, a GAAP staff member, against


charges of libel in San Francisco Superior


Court in the case of Tepper v. Regents of the


University of California.


Although the article included expres-


OVER THE PAST


70 years, the ACLU has


learned that in times of


war, the government will


use the excuse of


protecting national


the "largest draft counseling workshop ever held"


was presented to more than 700 participants at


UC Berkeley.


Demonstrators' Rights: The ACLU provided


assistance when permits were denied or unreason-


able insurance or fee requirements were being


Middle East Peace Network


when the group's political


poster ads were covered up


in BART stations because of


their controversial content.


The Network had entered


into a contract to display


theirads - which criticized


U.S. policy with respect to


Israel and the actions of Is-


rael in the West Bank and


the Gaza Strip - in BART


stations. The ads were cov-


ered over when BART and


the advertising company


received complaints about


the message of the ads. The


ACLU-NC wrote a letter


protesting the action as a


clear case of censorship in


violation of the First Amend-


ment. In response to the let-


ter, it was agreed that the


Network would be permit-


ted to display posters at 15


BART stations for the con-


security interests as a


weapon to deny civil liberties. During the Persian


Gulf War, the ACLU-NC established a War


Emergency Desk to help prevent civil liberties


from becoming domestic casualties of the war.


Working in concert with our national office and


affiliates around the nation, the ACLU-NC


became part of a national network to monitor and


challenge violations to civil liberties. The War


Emergency Desk dealt with many civil liberties


violations on behalf of active duty military


personnel; people arrested at demonstrations; press


freedom; and Arab-Americans interrogated by the


FBI.


Directed by staff attorney Alan Schlosser who


was assisted by two legal interns, the War


Emergency Desk responded to over fifty callers a


week ranging from victims of police abuse to


employees who were told they could not wear a


peace button-or a yellow ribbon-at their work.


Conscientious Objection: Many active duty


and reserve military personnel were concerned


about their rights. The ACLU recruited volunteers


to train in counseling enlistees and reservists, and


provided in-depth training for lawyers, law


students and volunteers. In conjunction with the


ACLU-NC Field Department and the Central


Committee for Conscientious Objectors (CCCO),


imposed. The ACLU also represented demonstra-


tors who were beaten by California Highway


Patrol officers during anti-war demonstrations.


The ACLU-NC complained to the Public


Utilities Commission about the exclusion of


passengers wearing peace buttons from municipal


buses; the PUC agreed that the exclusions were


impermissible


Discrimination against Arab-Americans:


The ACLU-NC protested the FBI's investigation


of Arab-Americans as discriminatory on the basis


of national origin. Among the many calls that


came through the War Desk was the case of a


school administrator who forced an Arab-


American student to be sent out of a local


community college classroom to report for an FBI


interrogation.


Press freedom: Press guidelines issued by the


Department of Defense came under fire from the


ACLU as a restriction of the media's ability to


cover the war. The ACLU-NC recruited 64 Bay


Area reporters and editors to sign a national


statement protesting the stringent Pentagon


restrictions on reporting; we also recruited media


outlets to be part of an amicus brief filed by the


national ACLU to challenge the government's


exclusion of freelance journalists from covering the


Gulf War.


sions such as "criminals" and "the Hitler of


General Assistance,' - for which retrac-


tion was demanded, the ACLU-NC argues


that government officials must expect to


have their official actions criticized in harsh


rhetorical languageas it is part of the Ameri-


can political tradition.


Free Expression on Campus


Racismand diversity are important pub-


lic issues that have emerged as an emotional


topic on many campuses. These issues in-


variably involve strong expressions of opin-


ion and fiery rhetoric, which must be pro-


tected under the First Amendment. The


ACLU-NC has striven to create a policy


that accommodates free speech and rights of


equality in the context of college rules


regulating hate speech. Our representation


of a UC Santa Cruz bursar in the case of


Vandenburg v. Kimura underscores the im-


portance of that policy.


Ruling that a letter written to a univer-


sity official calling him a racist is constitu-


tionally protected speech, the California


Court of Appeal dismisseda libel suit against


the author of the letter, UC Santa Cruz


Budget Director Victor Kimura.In his


letter, Kimura had written that the official


demonstrated "an incredible level of big-


otry" when he agreed to cancel a Filipino


ethnic theme event solely because it


coincided with the anniversary of Pearl


Harbor Day.


High School Students


Students in high schools also find that


their rights to freedom of expression are -


curtailed when they enter the schoolhouse


door. ACLU-NC attorney Alan Schlosser


has complained to numerous principals and


school officials on behalf of students who


were told they could not wear a certain T-


shirt, could not perform a play, or could not


publish a critical article in the school news-


paper. At Redwood High School in Marin


County, for example, the school newspaper


published an article charging that an un-


named teacher had been sexually harassing


students. The principal and the District


Superintendent said they thought it was


libelous and threatened to stop


publication. Afteraphone call from


the ACLU, the principal checked


into the story and finally agreed to


its publication. School officials


ended up praising the young


journalist's reporting skills.


After a letter from the ACLU-


NC, a San Francisco high school


principal agreed that a student


could remain quietly seated dur-


ing the Pledge of Allegiance, and


that the school would refrain from


requiring him to either stand or


leave the room. The ACLU also


protested the actions of a Moun-


tain View high school official in


confiscating pamphlets in the pos-


session of a student that criticized


the government's War on Drugs


as an assault on civil liberties; the


school subsequently agreed that a


student's free speech rights could


not be infringed based on the con-


troversial nature of the message.


The Sonoma Chapter of the


ACLU protested the policy of the school


district which banned distribution ofanony-


mous publications, including an under-


ground newspaper. The Board of Trustees


of the school district subsequently revised


its policies, deleting the requirement that


all articles and publications be signed.


cept


Dress Codes


One emerging battle in this arena is the


question of highly restrictive school dress


codes. In Oakland, the School Board has


proposed a sweeping new dress code which


would bar students from wearing fancy


sneakers, fashion jewelry, or even any cloth-


ing "designating membership in non-school


or private clubs." Questioning whether this


draconian policy would even prohibit the


wearing of an ACLU T-shirt, the ACLU


protested the policy by letter and testimony


before the school board. Although the ACLU


arguments were joined by parents, stu-


dents, and even school officials who object


to the dress code, the policy was passed by


the Oakland School Board in November.


Loyalty Oaths


Although loyalty oaths are clearly un-


constitutional, oaths that prohibit mem-


bership in groups that advocate the over-


throw of the government are still periodi-


cally presented to jobapplicants. The ACLU


Monterey Chapter wrote a letter to the City


of Monterey when it learned that such an


oath was being used as part of the applica-


tion for city employment. The city agreed


that the language in the oath was patently


unconstitutional and agreed to delete it.


Minors' Rights


As the assault on a woman's


right to choose continued in


the United States Supreme


islatures throughout the coun-


try, the ACLU-NC went to


trial in the most significant


reproductive rights case in Cali-


fornia-A merican Academy of


Pediatrics v. Lungren.


pa - |


fy =]


a - |


La)


fo ]


comin


eS


e


ei


je


S


ci)


- -


Passeesc En]


)


- a


aoe


(Te)


On October 1, attorneys


representing a coalition of


medical organizations and


health-care providers delivered


opening arguments in San Francisco Supe-


rior Court challenging California's 1987


law requiring teenagers to obtain parental


consent ora court order before they can have


Court, Congress, and state leg--


as adult women. The law has never taken


effect because of the court orders issued in


the lawsuit.


In 1989, the state Court of Appeal up-


held the lower court order enjoining the


law. The Court ruled that the California


Constitution provides a right independent


of the federal Constitution to choose abor-


tion, which the state can infringe only if it


shows a compelling purpose.


Inthe month-long trial before San Fran-


cisco Superior Court Judge Maxine Chesney,


more than twenty expert witnesses pro-


vided extensive testimony on teenagers'


capacity to make informed decisions about


pregnancy and about the devastating im-


pact parental involvement laws have on


young women's health. Counselors, medi-


cal workers and judges from states that have


parental consent laws testified about the


physical, mental and emotional damage


suffered by teenagers who are forced to


confront unsympathetic or abusive parents.


Confronting a complex and intimidating


judicial system to obtain a court-authorized


abortion is not a realistic option for many


young women, the experts further testified.


Inaddition, medical personnel and coun-


selors from various hospitals and clinics


within California testified that the current


health care system in California promotes


adolescents' health by encouraging family


communication and ensuring informed con-


sent. The new law would treat abortion


differently from all other comparable health


services - including contraception, prena-


tal care and childbirth. After almost 20


years of experience with the current adoles-


cent health care system, the state cannot


show that teenagers need compulsory over-


sight in making reproductive decisions.


The two cases decided by the U.S. Su-


preme Court in 1990 (Hodgson and Akron)


upholding parental notification laws in


Minnesota and Ohio will not have an effect


in California because of the independent


state Constitution. But with the departure


of Justices Brennan and Marshall from the


Supreme Court, federal constitutional pro-


tection for the right to choose is in serious


jeopardy. American Academy of Pediatrics v.


of the Norplant contraceptive device as a


condition of her parole. This order, issued


only three weeks after Norplant was ap-


proved by the federal Food and Drug Ad-


ministration, was the first coercive use of


the contraceptive in the nation.


Arguing that government control of


human reproduction is inherently repres-


sive, the ACLU-NC filed an appeal on


behalf of Darlene Johnson in People v. John-


JON.


Johnson, a 27-year old mother of four


who was convicted of child abuse and sen-


tenced to a year in jail, suffers from high


blood pressure, diabetes and a heart mur-


mur - conditions for which the newly


approved Norplant is contraindicated. Five


days after the sentencing she filed a motion


to reconsider the probation order, stating


that she had accepted the condition out of


fear that she would be sent to state prison if


she refused. The trial court refused to modify


the conditions of probation.


In appealing the Norplant condition of


probation, the ACLU argues it invades


several dimensions of the right to privacy:


procteative choice, bodily integrity and


medical self-determination. In addition the


ACLU charged that state-coerced contra-


ception will promote neither Johnson's abil-


ity to be a better parent nor the state's


interest in protecting her.


Staffattorney Margaret Crosby, who has


litigated the major abortion rights cases in


California, also has prepared briefing papers


and conducted training sessions through-


out the country on state constitutional liti-


gation to protect reproductive rights.


RE


Addicted Women


Through measures like the "gag rule"


prohibiting doctors in federally funded fam-


ily planning clinics from even mentioning


abortion as an option, the government and


the courts continue to restrict women's


freedom of choice while limiting their ac-


cess to education and reproductive health


care. Pregnant women and new mothers


who have substance abuse problems are


increasingly being subjected to an array of


punitive measures. In the guise of protect-


While the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the "Gag Rule" prohibiting counseling about abortion in federally funded clinics,


the ACLU-NC went to trial in California to protect teenagers' reproductive rights.


an abortion.


After the parental consent law was passed


by the Legislature and signed by the Gov-


ernor in 1987, the ACLU-NC and the


Adolescent Health.Care Project of the Na-


tional Center for Youth Law filed a chal-


lenge in superior court seeking to block the


law. The plaintiffs argued that under the


California Constitution, minors have the


same right to privacy in reproductive choice


Lungren could provide an important prece-


dent for state constitutional protection for


women's reproductive rights. A decision is


expected in 1992.


aa


Norplant


California courts became the battle-


ground for another attack on women's te-


productive rights when a superior court


judge in Tulare County ordered a young


mother to undergo a surgical implantation


ing "fetal rights," drug addicted pregnant


women and addicted women who give birth


are criminally prosecuted and denied cus-


tody of their children. The ACLU argues


that prosecution is both cruel, in light of the


almost total unavailability of treatment


programs, and counterproductive, since it


deters women from obtaining prenatal care.


The ACLU-NC is monitoring these cases


and preparing a manual on legal support for


drug addicted pregnant women.


The ACLU-NC responded to


the AIDS crisis in this, the


tenth year of the epidemic, by


lending its legal resources to


those HIV infected persons


mostat risk of losing their civil


rights to intrusive and irratio-


nal government actions.


Health Care Workers


The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals


issued a significant decision in the case of


Dr. Doe v. FBI, ruling that a medical doctor


with AIDS can sue the FBI for discrimina-


tion under the Federal Rehabilitation Act.


The agency stopped sending its employees


to-Dr. Doe for routine physical examina-


tions when it learned that he had AIDS. All


experts in the case agreed that routine physi-


cals, like most non-surgical procedures,


present no risk of HIV transmission.


Though the Act classifies AIDS as a


disability, the U.S. District Court ruled in


1989 that federal agencies cannot be sued


under the Rehabilitation Act. The appeal,


filed by the ACLU-NC and the Employ-


ment Law Center, challenged that ruling; it


also charged that Dr. Doe's privacy was


invaded when the FBI used the information


that he has AIDS to stop sending agents to


him.


This appellate court ruling in favor of


health care workers is particularly timely in


face of a recent congressional demands for


mandatory HIV testing of all health care


workers and patients. Experts agree that


adherence to universal precautions and in-


fection control is the best solution for mak-


ing the health care environment safer.


The government has filed a petition for


rehearing ev banc in the Court of Appeals.


Confidentiality


In coalition with East Bay AIDS groups


and public health professionals, the ACLU-


NC persuaded the Union City Police De-


partment to halt the practice of gathering,


storing, and disseminating information


about HIV-infected citizens. The Depart-


ment said it had added HIV status to its


data base on residents so that police, fireand


other emergency personnel dispatched to


those residences could take precautions.


Upon learning of the computer fie,


attorney Matthew Coles wrote a letter de-


manding an end to the practice, pointing


out that it violated the right to privacy and


did nothing to prevent the spread of the


disease.


The most serious danger in the practice,


the letter explained, is that it gives the


officers a false sense of security. Since most


people with HIV do not know themselves


that they are infected, public safety officers


must treat all individuals they encounter as


infected, and use a few simple "universal"


precautions. The letter also said that keep-


ing the data confirms fears people hold


about lack of confidentiality of govern-


ment, and would, in fact, dissuade people


from getting tested.


The police and AIDS rights groups now


are working together to ensure that health


authorities understand the specific kinds of


exposures the police and firefighters face


and to devise policies which will both pro-


tect the officers and the rights of HIV


infected people.


The ACLU-NC has been providing train-


ing and advice to AIDS service providers


trying to cope with the maze of complex and


sometimes contradictory rules about confi-


dentiality of HIV infection. Our staff pre-


pared a chapter on confidentiality for the


"San Francisco AIDS Knowledge Base," a


medical text published by the New En-


gland Journal of Medicine.


In coalition with other public interest


law firms, the ACLU-NC prepared and


distributed a set of comments on the em-


ployment provisions of the Americans with


Disabilities Act, seeking to ensure that


these provisions are equitably and effec-


tively applied to people with AIDS.


Needle Exchange


In addition, perceiving thealarming rise


in HIV infection among intravenous drug


users, the ACLU-NC prepared a memo for


San Francisco city authorities explaining


why the Health Department has the legal


authority to operate a needle exchange pro-


gram to stop the spread of HIV. A decision -


on this matter by the City is pending. We


have also agreed to join an amicus brief to be


filed in People v. Halem, a criminal prosecu-


tion in Berkeley for operating a needle


exchange program. The brief argues that in


view of the unavailability of treatment and


the growing spread of HIV through needle


sharing, the defendant should be allowed to'


present the defense of necessity to the jury.


Nursing Homes


This summer, the ACLU-NC learned


that for several years, no skilled nursing


home in Marin County had accepted a


single AIDS patient. Working with local


AIDS service providers, hospitals and com-


munity groups, the ACLU-NC sent a letter


to all nursing homes in the area warning


that the refusal to accept patients with HIV


would violate state


James Camarillo filed a class action lawsutt to stop the segregation of


HIV positive inmates at the CMF in Vacaville.


and federal law, and


explained the law


in detail. After the


process began, a


number of patients


were admitted, and


community groups


are cautiously opti-


mistic that the


problem may be at


an end.


Inmates


A prisoners'


rights class action


suit, Gates v.


Deukmejian, which


was settled in U.S.


District Court, has


paved the way for


Major improve-


ments at the state's


2 largest medical and


psychiatric correc-


tional facility.


The ACLU-NC repre-


sented HIV-infected prison-


ers at the California Medical


Facility (CMF) in Vacaville


who challenged the state's


policy of segregating HIV


infected inmates in the state


prison system as a violation


of the Federal Rehabilita-


tion Act which prohibits dis-


crimination against the dis-


abled. The suit charged that


the segregated inmates were


denied access to virtually all


prison programs, jobs and


facilities. Other aspects of


the suit handled by the


Prison Law Office and a


group of private firms fo-


cused on overcrowding, in-


adequate medical treatment,


psychiatric care, recreational


Chiyuka Carlos -barred from Great America for allegedly


fitting a "gang profile' -is joining 17 other minority youths


in suing the amusement park for discrimination.


and educational facilities.


Under the terms of the Consent Decree,


a pilot program was launched with the


eventual goal of limiting segregation to


prisoners who posed a significant risk of


infecting others, and improving access and


programs for those who remained segre-


gated. The decree also provides for better


AIDS counseling and education as well as


improved medical care.


The Department of Corrections issued a


report in February which called the pilot


program a success and extended it as part of


the regular prison program. However, the


ACLU has concerns about the criteria used


to decide who will be segregated, and the


quality of programs for segregated inmates.


The ACLU also opposes the continued ex-


clusion of HIV-infected inmates from the


overnight visiting program for children


and families and from jobs in the food and


medical departments of the prison. These


concerns are being addressed through a


mediation system created by the Consent


Decree.


A similar class action lawsuit, Jane Does


v. Department of Corrections, filed in 1989 by


the ACLU-SC and the ACLU-NC on behalf


of six women inmates infected with HIV,


charges that the California Institute for


Women's "AIDS Isolation Unit" violates


inmates' rights to privacy, to decent condi-


tions of confinement, and toadequate medi-


cal care. The suit charges that the segrega-


tion policy illegally discriminates on the


basis of physical disability.


Womencurrently confined inthe "AIDS


Isolation Unit" are faced with overcrowded


and unsanitary living conditions and are


not permitted to participate in prison voca-


tional education and alternative programs.


They live in quarantine, causing them to be


publicly identified as "AIDS carriers." A


trial is set for October 1992.


Arguing that Proposition 96, the ballot


initiative passed in 1988 that requires health


care workers in jail to the report the names


of all HIV-infected inmates to corrections


officers who in turn disseminate it to most


staff, constitutes an invasion of privacy and


violates the Federal Rehabilitation Act, the


ACLU-NC is representing six San Fran-


cisco County jail inmates in Capaldiniv. San


Francisco Sheriff's Department.


In addition to violating the prisoners'


constitutional rights, the measure discour-


ages inmates from being honest with their


physicians and gives jail workers a false


sense of security.


The prisoners' position is supported by


the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and by


most prominent experts on AIDS in correc-


tional facilities, including all of the physi-


cians who work in the jail. The plaintiffs


request for a preliminary injunction was


denied, but the case is proceeding to trial.


-= |


L saan ba e@ e@ @,e@


(yen-y= Racial Minorities


oor |


at Fee Siac


= we 0x00A7(c)6Gang Profiles


Pann


The racially discriminatory use


of "gang profiles" was brought


out very sharply when the


ACLU-NC teceived numerous


complaints from African


pom |


Qu


Fea


tn


American, Latino and Asian


teenagers whohad been thrown


out of Great America amuse-


ment park in Santa Clara be-


cause the park's security guards did not like


their "dress" or "attitude."


The ACLU-NC filed suit against Great


America Amusement Park on behalf of 16


minority youths who were ejected from or


denied admission to the amusement park.


The lawsuit also seeks damages against the


Santa Clara Sheriffs Department, which


worked closely with Great America in for-


mulating the "gang profile" policy.


~The suit argues that the exclusion of


these youths solely on the basis of their


appearance violates their civil rights, par-


ticularly in light of the fact that similarly


dressed non-minority youths were not ex-


cluded from the park.


Although Great America agreed to ter-


minate its "gang profile" policy, and base its


exclusions solely on conduct rather than


appearance, the lawsuit was filed as the


company refused to offer an adequate mon-


etary settlement to the youths.


This is not an isolated incident: the


ACLU also has protested the use of "gang


profiles" at county fairs, restaurants and


other sites throughout California. When


officials at the Sonoma County Fair issued a


policy banning the wearing of "colors" and


congregating in large groups, the Sonoma


Chapter of the ACLU criticized the rules as


vague and discriminatory. As a result, the


Santa Rosa Police Department and park


officials agreed to scrap the "gang profile"


and use only conduct-based admittance


regulations.


Eee


Police Mug Book


The ACLU-NC joined a number of civil


rights and Vietnamese organizations in pro-


testing the San Jose Police Department's


use of an all-Asian mug shot book. The


book contained pictures of Asian men be-


tween the ages of 18 and 25, most of them


Vietnamese, some of whom had never been


arrested or convicted of a crime. Because of


0x00B0


this mug book, one young man was falsely


accused of a crime and kept in jail for three


months. He now faces $20,000 in attorney


fees.


The ACLU charged that the mug book


perpetrates racial stereotypes, exacerbates


_ racial tensions, and violates individual rights.


As a result of the protests, the Department


agreed to abolish the book.


Language Minorities


Through litigation, research and coali-


tion-building, staff attorney Ed Chen has


become a national leader in the movement


to fight English Only laws, ordinances and


workplace rules. This campaign has be-


come especially important in California,


where, following the passage of a statewide


"English Only" initiative in 1986, such


laws have proliferated.


The ACLU won a major victory when


USS. District Court Judge Robert Schnacke


ruled in October that a meat processing


plant's "English-only" rule for production


workers discriminates illegally on the basis


of national origin.


The ACLU-NC, in conjunction with


the Employment Law Center, filed a com-


plaint with the Equal Employment Oppor-


tunity Commission against the Spun Steak


Company on behalf of Priscilla Garcia and


Maricela Buitrago, challenging an English-


only workplace rule instituted in 1990.


Garcia and Buitrago, who have worked


for Spun Steak for 18 and seven


ees and employers during a nationwide


series of raids, "Operation Jobs," and subse-


quent workplace raids.


Attorneys for the ACLU-NC, MALDEF,


CRLA and the Employment Law Center


presented nearly 100 witnesses in the class


action lawsuit. During the six-month trial,


witnesses spoke about the racial slurs and


physical abuse suffered by Latino workers at


the hands of INS and Border Patrol agents.


In 1985, an injunction was issued by the


USS. District Court forbidding INS agents


from. entering worksites without a valid


warrant or consent, and from questioning


and detaining workers without reasonable


suspicion that the person was unlawfully in


the country. The court ruled that INS use of


a "general" warrant to search, seize, and


arrest persons who were not specifically


named in the search warrant was "patently


invalid."


The settlement, which was given pre-


liminary approval by the U.S. District Court


in November, forbids the INS from sin-


gling out and detaining individuals be-


cause of their race or appearance. Any arrests


made during a workplace search must be


based on a valid warrant or probable cause


that the person is an undocumented alien


and would escape before a warrant could be


issued. Under the settlement agreement,


people who felt they had been subjected to


illegal search or harassment could file a


complaint through a newly established ad-


During the Persian Gulf crisis, anti-war


demonstrators faced suppression of their


First Amendment rights.


final settlement is expected in December.


eer eae


Club Raids


In a lawsuit concerning INS raids out-


side of the workplace, Aguayo v. Ichert, the


US. District Court granted preliminary


approval toa monetary settlement of a civil


rights suit filed by the ACLU-NC to protest


a 1989 raid on a San Francisco nightclub


with a predominantly Hispanic clientele.


The class action suit was on behalf of all


persons who were present at Club Elegante


at the time of a joint raid by agents of the


and Beverage Control.


The lawsuit charged that the agents


violated the patrons' and employees' Fourth


Amendment rights by detaining every per-


son in the club for up to two hours without


having any reasonable or individualized


suspicion that the persons were involved in


any illegal activity or were unlawfully present


in the United States. It also charged that the


raid on the Hispanic-owned and primarily


Hispanic-patronized club violated equal


protection laws.


The final settlement is expected in De-


cember; each member of the class will re-


years respectively, each re-


ceived warnings for violating


the rule by speaking to each


other in Spanish.


The ACLU argued that


without some legitimate busi-


ness or safety reason, the only


purpose of sucha rule can be to


disadvantage persons who


speak languages other than


English. Such laws not only


create isolating and oppressive


work environments, they also


violate civil rights laws that pro-


hibit discrimination based on na-


tional origin.


Unfortunately, within two


weeks of that landmark decision,


Governor Wilson vetoed a bill by


Senator Milton Marks that would


have barred English-only rules at


the workplace absent a compel-


ling business necessity. That same


week a federal court in Los Ange-


les upheld a rule which prohib-


ited Filipino nurses from speak-


ing their own language at a


Pomona hospital.


Workplace


Raids


A landmark settle-


ment negotiated by a


coalition of public in-


terest law firms sets


standards for INS


conduct


workplace searches,


and sets up a new


complaint procedure


for workers whose rights have been


violated. Thesettlement caps Pear!


Meadow Mushroom Farms v. Nelson,


which was filed in 1982 and a


lengthy trial, which began in


1989. The plaintiffs charged the


Immigration and Naturalization


Service (INS) with violating the


constitutional rights of employ-


during |


ministrative procedure. The


INS and the state Department of Alcoholic


WHEN THE IMAGE


of Los Angeles police


officers brutally beating


Rodney King flashed on


TV screens across the


country in early March,


the kind of work that the


ACLU-NC Police Practices Project engages in on


a daily basis garnered national attention. The


videotaped police beating put police abuse back


on the front pages of the nation's newspapers after


what seemed like an absence of at least a decade.


However, as ACLU affiliates around the country


know, the absence of headlines did not mean the


persistent police abuse problem had been solved in


the interim.


For the last six years, the ACLU-NC Police


Practices Project, directed by attorney John Crew,


has focused on this problem and developed :


comprehensive strategies that, when combined


with our litigation program, can lead to lasting


reforms. As a unique effort within the ACLU


nationwide, the ACLU-NC Police Practices


Project became a key resource in the furor around


the country created by the King incident. As


police abuse grew into a nationwide issue, the


demand for information about and from the


Project intensified. Crew responded to a flood of


media calls from reporters from around the


country who were seeking basic information on


police abuse and accountability.


As a more long-term response, Crew co-authored


a national ACLU report on police abuse, Oz the


Line, addressing a comprehensive approach to the


problem. That report has now been widely


circulated by the national ACLU to activists,


community groups, ACLU affiliates and police


administrators around the country.


This valuable report stresses that simplistic


answers to police abuse-for example, firing a


police chief or instituting sensitivity training -


may provide the short-term illusion of reform but


are unlikely to produce lasting reductions in


police abuse. Instead, On the Line argues that five


key areas must all be considered and addressed if


brutality and abuse are to be minimized.


First, our society must be more realistic about


the mission of local police departments. Pretend-


ing that police can win a "war" on the overwhelm-


ing problems of drugs and crime, leads to


desperation tactics and the "us vs. them" mentali-


ty that pervades many police officers as they


confront "the enemy."


Second, police leaders must set an unmistakable


tone in words and deeds that police abuse will not


be tolerated. Ifa police chief shows contempt for


community concerns or downplays brutality when


it occurs, officers will reflect that contempt in


their behavior toward the civilians they are


supposed to be serving.


Third, police departments must reflect the


diversity of the communities they serve. Depart-


ments that are disproportionately composed of


white and male officers risk becoming out of


touch and isolated from the public.


Fourth, police policies and training must not be


the sole province of police insiders-but instead


should be set and conducted openly with public


participation. If police policies and tactics cannot


withstand public scrutiny, they should be


abolished or reformed.


Finally, there must be an open, independent and


credible system of accountability that will ensure


that violations of policies and standards will be


handled appropriately. Effective civilian oversight


mechanisms must be established and faithfully


implemented to combat the intolerable reality in too


many communities of the "police policing the police."


In addition, the Project worked with ACLU


lobbyists in Washington, D.C. on federal


legislation and in Sacramento on state legislation


that emerged in response to the incident.


The Project also continued its reform efforts on


the local level. For example, the Project participat-


ed in a special committee in San Francisco


convened by Mayor Agnos to identify needed


reforms in the police disciplinary and civilian


oversight systems. In Berkeley, the Project was


asked by the City Council to participate in a task


force which studied law enforcement issues related


to the homeless population.


During the Gulf War, the Project coordinated


with the ACLU-NC "War Desk" to respond to


complaints of police abuse during anti-war


demonstrations. The Project also helped defeat a


proposal before the San Francisco Recreation and


Park Commission to close Civic Center Plaza


overnight that would have removed people who


were holding vigils against the war across the


street from City Hall.


ceive monetary damages for the


violation of their constitutional


rights.


A


Affiliations


In the case of Price v. INS, the


Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals


upheld a ruling by the INS deny-


ing citizenship to a British-born


permanent resident of the United


States who has been living and


working in this country for al-


most 30 years. The man refused to


answer one question on the natu-


ralization application that asked


him to list present and past mem-


bership in or affiliation with every


organization, association, club,


party or society in the U.S. or


another country. The ACLU-NC


represented the applicant, argu-


ing that the inquiry violated his


First Amendment right to free-


dom of association.


By adivided vote, the Court of


Appeals ruled in favor of the gov-


ernment, finding the application


and the underlying statute con-


stitutional. The ACLU-NC has


requested the federal appeals court


to consider the issue ev bane .


aE


Job Protection


In Castrejon v. Tortilleria La


Mejor, a federal judge ruled that


undocumented workers are pro-


tected from discrimination under


civil rights laws.


The suit was brought against


a food company on behalf of an -


- undocumented worker who was


fired from her assembly line job


after her maternity leave. In an


amicus brief with other public in-


terest law firms and labor unions,


the ACLU-NC argued that un-


documented workers are covered


by laws prohibiting employment


`discrimination in light of new


immigration laws.


This ruling underscores the


fact that all workers in this coun-


o)


Page: of 12
Clip Image

In collections

Details
Title

vol. 55, no. 7 (December, 1991)

Creator

American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Date

1991 December

Identifier

ACLUN_0579

Genre

newspapers

Physical description

40.5 x 28 cm

Publisher

San Francisco (Calif.): American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Preferred citation

ACLU of Northern California News vol. 55, no. 7, 1991 December; PER ACLUN; California Historical Society.

Rights statement

In Copyright

Publication rights

Copyright (or related rights to publicity and privacy) for materials in this collection, created by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, was not transferred to the California Historical Society (CHS). Permission for reproduction or publication of materials in this collection beyond that allowed by fair use must be secured from the copyright holder.

Topical subject(s)

Searches and seizures
Civilian review boards (Police administration)
Drug policy
Linguistic rights
Freedom of expression
Pledge of allegiance
Educational equity
Discrimination in housing
Criminal justice
Conscientious objectors
Civil unions
Church and state
Capital punishment
Arab Americans
Reproductive rights
HIV/AIDS
Gang profiles
LGBTQ rights
Police practices
Immigrant rights
Japanese Americans--Incarceration, 1942-1945

Named subject(s)

Bergman, Lowell
Brennan, William
Brick, Ann
Chen, Edward
Chesney, Maxine
Coles, Matthew
Crew, John
Crosby, Margaret
George Deukmejian
Ehrlich, Dorothy
Estes, Milton
Ferlinghetti, Lawrence
Gallo, Marcia
Harris, Robert
King, Rodney
Korematsu, Fred
Lobaco, Francisco
Lungren, Dan
Maldonado, Lisa
Paterson, Eva
Purcell, James C.
Ramirez, Raul
Russel, Margaret
Schlosser, Alan
Seligman, Brad
True, John
Warner, Douglas
Wilson, Pete
Asian Law Caucus
California Highway Patrol
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Unruh Civil Rights Act

Geographical subject(s)

Sacramento (Calif.)
Monterey (Calif.)
San Quentin (Calif.)
Monterey County (Calif.)
Vacaville (Calif.)
Bakersfield (Calif.)
Fresno (Calif.)
Oakland (Calif.)
Berkeley (Calif.)

Collection identifier

PER ACLUN