vol. 63, no. 2

Wo.utume LXIill

NEWSPAPER OF THE AMERICAN Givil LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

aclu news

(IMarcH-APRIL 1999

Non-Profit

Organization

US Postage

PAID

Permit No. 4424

San Francisco, CA

Minority Students Sue U.C. Berkeley for Discrimination:

Admissions Process Violates Federal

Civil Rights Laws

@ Jesus Rios is the son of immigrant farmworkers who worked in the fields

since he was eight years old. The first in his family to attend college, he

graduated from San Benito High School in Hollister with a 4.0 grade point

average, having played a leading role in several Latino student organiza-

tions and the California Scholarship Federation.

@ Raina Dyer was on El Cerrito High School's varsity basketball team for four

years, served as tutor in her church and as Treasurer of the Black Student

Union. Raina, who aspires to be a teacher, and her brother are the first in

her family to attend college and she ts currently a freshman at UCLA.

@ Justine Certeza attended Armijo High School in Fairfield where she was

Senior Class President and a member of the National Honor Society and the

Asian Pacific Islander Club. She was a member of her high school's Academic

Decathlon Club which placed second in Solano County.

Despite their high academic achievement and outstanding school records,

Jesus, Raina and Justine could not get into U.C. Berkeley this year.

hey are part of a group of African

PP aera, Latino, Pilipino Ameri-

can students and organizations who

filed a class action lawsuit on February 2

in U.S. District Court in San Francisco,

charging that U.C. Berkeley's undergradu-

ate admissions process violates federal civ-

il rights laws. Plaintiffs include African

American, Latino and Pilipino American

freshmen college students currently

attending college elsewhere who were

denied admission to U.C. Berkeley, as well

as three minority organizations that repre-

sent future applicants to Berkeley: the

Imani Youth Council of the Oakland

NAACP, the California League of United

Latin American Citizens, and the

Kababayan Alliance, a Pilipino high school

student organization.

"U.C. Berkeley discriminates against

the students of color we represent. The

new admissions policies and practices

have a totally unjustified disparate impact

on African American, Latino, and Pilipino

American applicants. This type of discrim-

ination is illegal under Title VI of the Civil

Rights Act," explained Joseph Jaramillo,

an attorney with the Mexican American

Legal Defense and Educational Fund, one

of several civil rights organizations repre-

senting the plaintiffs.

Berkeley implemented a new policy to

admit freshmen for Fall 1998. One change,

resulting from the University of California

Regents Resolution SP-1, prohibits admis-

sions readers from considering an appli-

cant's race, as one among many other

factors, in selecting the freshman class.

Berkeley has also made other changes to

its admissions process, not required by SP-

1, that plaintiffs allege fail to consider fair-

ly African American, Latino, and Pilipino

American applicants.

"Even when affirmative action was in

place, parts of the Berkeley admissions

process were unfair to African American,

Latino, and Pilipino American applicants.

For instance, Berkeley has always placed

too great an emphasis on SAT scores and

has now adopted a policy that gives extra

preference to students who take courses

not equally available to all California high

school students," added Jaramillo.

"The new admissions process has

resulted in the resegregation of U.C.

Berkeley," charged Michelle Alexander,

Director of the ACLU-NC Racial Justice

Project. "The process has a totally unjusti-

fied disparate impact on the African

American, Latino, and Pilipino American

applicants in violation of the Civil Rights

Act and the U.S. Constitution.

"In just one year, the numbers of

African American and Latino students

admitted to Berkeley were cut in half,"

Alexander noted.

"In the past, affirmative action policies

attempted to compensate for some of the

unfair components of the admissions

process," stated Eva Paterson, Executive

Director for the Lawyers' Committee for

Rick ROCAMORA

Honor student plaintiffs Jesus Rios and Justine Certeza at the press conference at the

Federal Building announcing the lawsuit against U.C. Berkeley

Civil Rights. "In the absence of affirmative

action, we are simply left with a discrimi-

natory system."

Julie Su of the Asian Pacific

American Legal Center of Southern

California, charged, "As a leading public

institution in California, responsible for

educating future leaders of the most

diverse state in the country, Berkeley

must live up not only to its own mission,

but to the principles of fairness and

equality we all cherish."

In the Fall of 1998, over 750 African

American, Latino and Pilipino American

applicants with grade point averages of 4.0

or better were denied admission. While

white students with 4.0 GPAs or better had

a 48.2 percent chance of admission, Latino

students had only a 39.7 percent chance,

African American students a 38.5 percent

chance and Pilipino students a 31.6 per-

| cent chance. The disparity is even greater

when comparing the total number of appli-

cants of each group.

Speaking at a packed press conference

at the San Francisco Federal Building, stu-

dent plaintiff Jesus Rios said, "As the son

of immigrant farm workers, my family

encouraged me to work hard to earn a 4.0

grade point average so that I could have

the type of good college education

Berkeley provides. There is something ter-

ribly wrong when qualified minority stu-

dents cannot attend UC Berkeley,"

observed Rios, a 1998 graduate of San

Benito High School in Hollister who is a

freshman at U.C. Davis.

Students at many of California's 2,600

high schools never reach U.C. Berkeley's

gates. More than half of the freshman class

at Berkeley (53%) come from fewer than 5

Continued on page 3

Courts Uphold

Uncensored Internet Access

LIVERMORE LIBRARY PREVAILS

BY MELISSA DAAR

PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSOCIATE

wo recent court decisions, one

[Meni a parent's second attempt

to force library Internet censorship,

the other enjoining enforcement of a fed-

eral Internet censorship law, demonstrate

the ACLU's continued success in the

courts to maintain uncensored expression

on the Internet.

In a first of its kind ruling endorsing

on-line free speech in libraries, the

Alameda County Superior Court on

January 14 dismissed a lawsuit seeking to

require the Livermore Library to censor

INSIDE: 1998 ACLU-NE Annual Report

Internet use at the library. The ruling in

Kathleen R. v. City of Livermore marks the

second time that the court has rejected an

attempt by the plaintiff Kathleen R. to

force the Livermore library to abandon its

open access policy governing Internet use.

"The court's ruling sets an important

precedent for libraries in California and

across the nation," said ACLU-NC staff

attorney Ann Brick, who filed a friend of

the court brief in support of the library. "By

upholding the library's open access policy,

the court not only vindicates the judgment

of the library board in adopting the policy,

it vindicates the First Amendment values

on which the policy rests."

Last October, the Alameda County

Superior Court dismissed the lawsuit's origi-

nal complaint in which Kathleen R. argued

that the library's open access policy consti-

tuted a public nuisance. In her amended

complaint, Kathleen R. claimed she had a

constitutional right to force the library to

discontinue its open access policy.

Following the hearing on January 13, Judge

George Hernandez dismissed the second

complaint, stating that no further amended

complaint could be submitted to the court,

thereby dismissing the entire lawsuit.

In its amicus brief, the ACLU noted

that the Livermore Public Library's policy

Continued on page.2

`New Hope for a Civil Rights Agenda

in California

BY DOROTHY EHRLICH

ACLU-NC Executive DIRECTOR

nvigorated by the prospect of new

opportunities for successful legislative

action as a result of the November

election, the ACLU-NC and our coalition

partners are developing exciting, aggres-

sive legislative agendas to promote civil

rights, immigrant rights, the rights of the

poor and reproductive freedom.

Our previous efforts at sponsoring

affirmative legislation, even when ap-

proved by the Legislature, had been met

with the veto of Governors over the past 16

years. A new administration allows for new

thinking and cautious optimism that bills

proposed by the ACLU and its allies have a

chance of becoming law.

Our new-found optimism resulted in a

series of proposals - a veritable shopping

list of ideas for new legislation and execu-

`tive orders, which ACLU's legislative office

has already begun to pursue.

Our talented and experienced legisla-

tive advocates Francisco Lobaco and

Valerie Small Navarro are literally at. the

center of this legislative storm. Their

knowledge of the workings of the Capitol

and their commitment to civil rights and

civil liberties help them to provide leader-

ship to multi-faceted advocacy coalitions.

Our priorities range from reintroduc-

ing two ACLU-sponsored bills that had

been vetoed over the past two years,

including the "Driving While Black of

Brown" legislation; and the "Access to

Prisoners by Media' legislation.

We are also proud to spearhead the cam-

paign to pass a new piece of legislation, the

Civil Rights Coalition-sponsored Omnibus

Civil Rights bill. This measure, authored by

Assemblywoman Shiela Kuehl (D - Los

Angeles) will add needed provisions to the

Fair Employment and Housing Act to

strengthen and expand its protections.

We are also asking the new Governor to

rescind some of Governor Wilson's previ-

ous executive orders. We joined with other

civil rights organizations throughout the

"This shameful record reflects the ~

loss of an incredible pool of talent and

experience which would have greatly

benefited our state. Indeed although

We urged the new Governor to make

a "sharp departure from the politics

of exclusion and division practiced by

his predecessors."

state in a letter asking Governor Gray

Davis to rescind Wilson's order banning the

collection of data on the participation of

minority and women-owned business

enterprises in state contracting. This

`information is crucial in determining

whether or not there is race or gender dis-

crimination in the multi-billion dollar

state contracting.

DIVERSE APPOINTMENTS

With our Civil Rights Coalition part-

ners, we sent letters to the Governor and

new cabinet members to urge appoint-

ments to top public policy positions to

reflect the diverse people of California.

While the new Governor has made an

explicit commitment to women's groups

that women would be included in top.

positions, no such commitment has been

made to advocates for people of color.

In our letter to Governor Davis, we

noted, "It is our sincere hope and expec-

tation that your administration will rep-

resent a sharp departure from the

politics of exclusion and division prac-

ticed by your predecessors. Over the

past sixteen years, very few appoint-

ments of women and minorities were

made to top public policy positions in

state government.

Thank You, ACLU

Volunteers!

Rick ROcAMORA

Richard Rafael (left), a long-time librarian at the ACLU-NC, was one of several dozen

ACLU volunteers presented with certificates of appreciation from Executive Director

Dorothy Ehrlich and Board Chair Dick Grosboll at an appreciation luncheon on

February 5.

"Many of our volunteers have been with the ACLU-NC longer than most of the current

staff," said Grosboll. "Our deepest appreciation goes to you for your tireless efforts in

helping the ACLU-NC become a strong organization, and in furthering the cause of civil

liberties and justice."

Rafael, a retired San Francisco Public Library librarian, uses his skills to organize

the ACLU-NC library and research files. Other volunteers staff the Complaint Desk,

assist with organizing and fundraising mailings, monitor the media for civil liberties

issues and take on other multi-faceted tasks for the affiliate.

Ifyou are interested in volunteering, please contact Volunteer Coordinator Eddie

Jen at 415/621-2493 ext. 51.

The event was organized by Field Representative Lisa Maldonado with assistance

from Jen.

Latinos constitute more than 25% of

California's population, less than 5% of

the appointed policy leaders were Latino.

Similarly, Asian Americans constitute

nearly 10% of the state's population, yet

accounted for less than 2% of appointed

policy leaders. African Americans make

up more than 7% of California's popula-

tion, but they held approximately 2% of

appointed policy positions.

"Good governance requires the

thoughtful participation of skilled peo-

ple who represent diverse experiences

and backgrounds," our letter noted, and

we urged the Governor to ensure that

his administration "reflects the talent

and takes advantage of the wisdom of

all Californians."

NEw BALLOT INITIATIVES

On the initiative front, however, this

year brings sobering news. Both

Governor Pete Wilson's draconian

Juvenile Justice Reform Initiative and

the anti-same sex marriage measure

have qualified for the March 2000 ballot.

The ACLU-NC will be joining with

our allies to initiate early efforts to orga-

nize statewide campaigns to defeat

these two measures, which, if enacted,

would present grave dangers to civil lib-

erties. (see article page 4+.).

Internet Access...

Continued from page |

on Internet use specifically informs its

patrons that material available over the

Internet may be controversial, that the

library is responsible for the content of

material available on the Internet, and

that parents are responsible for supervis-

ing the Internet use of their children.

"The library's policy is sensitive both to

First Amendment concerns and the con-

cerns of parents," Brick noted. "It enables

each family to be sure that its children use

the Internet in a manner that is consistent

with its own values without imposing those

values on other families."

Brick explained that this position has

long been espoused by the American

Library Association and the majority of

libraries across the country.

In a recent related case in which the

ACLU represented Internet content

providers, Mainstream Loudoun v.

Board of Trustees of the Loudoun

County Library, a federal court in

Virginia held that a library's policy of

using filters to censor Internet access on

library computers violated the First

. Amendment. The federal judge, in strik-

ing down the library's filtering policy,

noted that the software, which claimed

to block only obscene materials, blocked

sites such as those of the San Francisco

Chronicle and Examiner.

"We are pleased that the Livermore

court recognized, as a Virginia court

recently did, that blocking software in

libraries creates, rather than solves, con-

stitutional problems," said Ann Beeson, a

ACLU News = January-Fesruary 1999 = Pace 2

National ACLU staff attorney who repre- -

sented a group of Internet content

providers in the Virginia case.

The amicus brief in support of the

Livermore Library was filed on behalf of

the ACLU-NC, the national ACLU and

People for the American Way.

NEW FEDERAL LAW BLOCKED

In another related case, ACLU v. Reno,

a federal court in Philadelphia granted a

preliminary injunction against the "Child

Online Protection Act," saying that the fed-

eral Internet censorship law would restrict

free speech in the "marketplace of ideas."

The national ACLU filed the lawsuit

along with the Electronic Privacy

Information Center (EPIC) and the

Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

The law, passed by Congress last

October, made it a federal crime for com- .

mercial websites to communicate mater-

ial considered "harmful to minors.". In

granting the preliminary injunction, the

Court held that the groups challenging

the law are likely to succeed on their

claim that the law "imposes a burden on

speech that is protected for adults."

The Court's ruling came after a six-

day hearing at which the ACLU present-

ed testimony from website operators who

provide free information about fine arts,

news, gay and lesbian issues and sexual

health for women and the disabled, and

who all fear that the law will restrict

their ability to engage in communication

protected by the First Amendment. San

Francisco Poet Laureate Lawrence

Ferlinghetti and David Bunnell, former

ACLU-NC Board member and publisher

of Upside Magazine, filed statements

supporting the plaintiffs' position.

Court Halts Wilson Plan to End

Affirmative Action Programs

office, Pete Wilson was delivered a

setback by the Sacramento Superior

Court when it ruled that the affirmative

action programs of several state agencies

were indeed constitutional and should not

be discontinued.

The ruling came in the case of Wilson

v. State Personnel Board, et. al., which

Wilson filed in 1995 as part of his plan to

end affirmative action in California.

Wilson sued five state agencies that

administered legislatively-mandated affir-

mative action programs, including the

_ State Personnel Board, California

Community Colleges, the California State

Lottery Commission, and others. These

programs affected more than 200,000 state

civil service employees, 47,000 community

college employees, and $4 billion in public

works contracts awarded each year.

The Governor sought to invalidate

these statutes and end the programs. He

was later joined in his lawsuit by Ward

Connerly, the architect behind Proposition

209. Once Proposition 209 went into effect,

Wilson and Connerly added a claim that the

statutes violated that initiative as well.

Because the state agencies were sued

by the Governor, they did not vigorously

defend the constitutionality of the statutes.

So several civil rights organizations,

including the ACLU-NC, Equal Rights

Advocates and the Employment' Law

Center, joined by Jeff Bleich of Munger,

Tolles and Olson intervened and assumed the

substantive defense of the programs

attack. Connerly and Wilson were repre-

sented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a

conservative public interest law firm that

has challenged many affirmative action

programs since 209's implementation.

In November, the Sacramento

Superior Court upheld the constitutionali-

ty of three of the five programs. Equal

Jo days before he left the Governor's

Rights Advocates attorney Beth Parker

explained, "The court found that the two

affirmative action employment programs

and the disadvantaged small business pro-

curement program did not violate either

the Equal Protection Clause or Proposition

209. It specifically held that equal protec-

tion guarantees were not implicated by

affirmative government actions that seek

to expand employment and other econom-

ic opportunities for minorities and women

without disadvantaging persons of other

racial groups or men. Thus, outreach,

monitoring, and recruitment programs

were permissible."

To the extent Proposition 209's ban on

"preferential treatment" conflicted with these

principles, the court ruled, it must yield to the

broader, anti-discrimination mandate of fed-

eral law and the U.S. Constitution.

Parker noted that the court also artic-

ulated for the first time the test courts

should apply in determining the validity of

a statutory program under Proposition

209. "A program only should be invalidated

if it, `in its general and ordinary course,

will inevitably result in a preference for

minorities or women in public employ-

ment and contracting which, considering

the economic realities of the program,

actually disadvantages non-minorities or -

men. This was a far more restrictive test

than plaintiffs had advanced. Under it,

most programs under attack should with-

stand constitutional scrutiny,' Parker

added.

Connerly has announced his intention

to appeal. "With the election of a new,

Governor, who publicly opposed

Proposition 209 and other anti-affirmative

action measures, it is unclear what posi-

tion the State now may take," said ACLU-

NC staff attorney Ed Chen. "Hopefully, it

will decide to support the decision of the

Superior Court and vigorously defend the

Minority Students...

Continued from page |!

percent of California's high

schools, the advocates point out.

"U.C.Berkeley's current

process places too much weight

on insignificant differences in

SAT scores and gives enormous

preferences to students who

take Advanced Placement, or

AP, courses," explained Kimberly

West-Faulcon, Western

Regional Counsel for the

NAACP Legal Defense and

Educational Fund. "The first

problem is that an SAT score

tells you very little about what

an applicant will ultimately

contribute to Berkeley. The

second problem is that many

schools with high concentra-

tions of African Americans,

Latinos and Pilipino Americans

have no AP courses at all.

Rewarding applicants with slightly higher

SAT scores who had access to AP courses

simply because of where they attended

high school doesn't reward merit, it

rewards privilege."

Student plaintiff Justine Certeza, a

Pilipina American freshman at U.C. San

Diego, had little access to AP courses at her

Fairfield high school. "We were very limited

in resources," she said. She is angry that

Berkeley puts so much emphasis on courses

that she and others could not take. "They

tell us we're not good enough for them. Well,

(Front row) Eva Paterson of the Lawyers' Commit-

tee for Civil Rights, with student plaintiff Jesus

Rios and (second row lI. to r.) ACLU-NC attorney

Michelle Alexander, LCCR attorney Phoenix Streets,

and students Eric Tandoc and Raina Dyer.

that's not good enough for me!"

One of the student plaintiffs, Gregory

McConnell Jr. is the grandson of attorney

Wendell McConnell who joined Thurgood

Marshall in fighting school desegregation in

Brown v. Board of Education. "1 am fighting

the same battle that my grandfather fought

fifty years ago," McConnell said.

The suit was filed by the ACLU-NC,

MALDEF, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil

Rights, the NAACP-LDF, and the Asian

Pacific American Legal Center.

The defendants include members of

the University of California Board of

Regents, the President of the University of

California System and the Chancellor of

U.C. Berkeley.

programs against constitutional attack." |

Chen noted that the ACLU-NC and oth-

er civil rights groups that defended the

statutes during the litigation, have asked

both the Governor and the newly elected

Attorney General to reconsider the State's

position. It has also requested the Attorney

General to investigate the prior administra-

tion's hiring of the Pacific Legal Foundation

and terminate its representation. @

Vigil at San Quentin

for Jay Siripongs

RS

a

S

Q

=

Ps

os

a

S|

In the driving rain and howling wind, ACLU-NC members and staffjoined more than

300 demonstrators gathered outside the gates of San Quentin to protest the execution of

Jaturun Siripongs on February 9. ACLU-NC Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlich spoke

out at the midnight rally against the Governor's denial of clemency.

"Gray Davis had to make a decision about sparing Jay Siripongs life. He had a

choice to act like a Governor or to continue to campaign for Governor. Tragically, he

chose the latter.

"Governor Davis issued a remarkably superficial order to deny clemency, in a case

where the widow of the victim, the former Warden of San Quentin and the Pope asked for

mercy. A case where the condemned man was uniformly described as gentle. A case

where the prosecution illegally withheld and concealed important information from the

defense," Ehrlich continued.

"This was a case where a pro-death penalty Governor, if willing to look independent-

ly at the facts, could have and should have granted clemency.

~ "What does that foretell for the more than 500 others sitting on California's Death

Row?" Ehrlich asked the crowd of abolitionists. "Decisions about whether a life should

be spared are heart wrenching decisions. They cannot be made on the basis of politics.

We must insist that Governor Davis find the will to carry out this solemn responsibilty."

Language Rights

Victories in State,

Federal Courts

BY MELISSA DAAR

PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSOCIATE

n January, the ACLU-NC had victories

I: two important cases challenging

language discrimination. On January

11, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to

revive an English-only initiative passed by

Arizona voters declaring English to be the

state's official language. In California, the

Sonoma County Superior Court approved a

settlement ensuring that the California

Labor Commissioner provide non-

English speaking persons filing claims

for unpaid wages with materials and ser-

vices in their own languages.

Legal representation and support on

both these cases were provided by the

Language Rights Project, cosponsored by the -

ACLU-NC and the Employment Law Center

of the Legal Aid Society of San Francisco.

"These decisions demonstrate that both

federal and state courts still understand the

serious harm caused by language discrimi-

ACLU News = January-Fesruary 1999 = Pace 3

nation, which is prohibited by well-estab-

lished civil rights laws," said Christopher

Ho, ELC staff attorney who worked on the

California case. "In the settlement of our

case, the Labor Commissioner recognized

his obligation under state law to provide

access to non-English speaking persons.

By approving that settlement, the court

reaffirmed the critical importance of

ensuring that all aspects of government

be available to all people, irrespective of

their primary language."

That case, Martinez v. Millan, began

when Ramiro Martinez, a Spanish- speak-

ing worker, filed a claim for back wages

against his former employer with the

California Labor Commissioner. At the

_hearing to discuss a possible settlement of

the wage dispute, the Labor Commissioner

failed to provide an interpreter even

though Martinez spoke no English.

Martinez later filed the class action repre-

Continued on page 4

Stop the Anti-Gay

Marriage Initiative

START ORGANIZING Now!

he ACLU of Northern California is'

[Meni to defeat a statewide,

anti-same-sex marriage ballot ini-

tiative that will appear in the March 2000

primary election.

The ballot initiative, popularly referred

to as the "Knight Initiative" (after.

Republican Assemblymember Pete Knight

who led the successful drive to qualify the

measure for the ballot after his bill to ban

same-sex marriage failed), would add a pro-

vision to the California Family Code stating

that "only a marriage between a man and a

woman is valid or recognized in California."

The purpose of the initiative is to pre-

vent same-sex marriages, including those

performed in other states, from being rec-

ognized in California.

"The initiative is divisive and a slap in

the face to gay men and lesbians," charged

ACLU-NC staff attorney Robert Kim. "The

ACLU believes that marriage is a funda-

mental right and a choice that should be

Name

| want to fight the anti-gay marriage bill! Sign me up!

available to individuals without regard to

the gender of their partner.

"What's more, should this initiative

become law and should same-sex marriage

become legal in another state, the law

would almost certainly be challenged as a

violation of the constitutional principle

that each state is required to recognize the

laws of other states," Kim added.

ACLU-NC is working with other orga-

nizations including the All Our Families

Coalition, the National Center for Lesbian

Rights and the California Alliance for

Pride and Equality to defeat the initiative.

Our first speakers training will be

Saturday, April 17. We also plan to orga- -

nize extensive grassroots efforts through-

out Northern California. If you are

interested in volunteering or can sponsor

a discussion in your area, please fill out

and return the form on this page, or con-

tact Field Representative Lisa Maldonado

at 415/621-2493 ext. 46.

Address

Phone (Day)

(Eve)

I

I

I

I

1

I

1

I

1

1

I

I

I

I

I

| E-mail

1

1

I

I

I

Francisco, CA 94103

Ce ee ee

Please return to Field Representative Lisa Maldonado, ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission Street, #460, San

ee ee ee =!

PCOOHOHOHSHSHOHOHOOSOHHOHOHOHHOHSSSHHOHHSHHHHHHHHHHSOHHHHHHHHHOHOHHHEEOOE

Language Rights...

Continued from page 3

senting the interests of non-English

speaking persons throughout the state.

"In Martinez, the Labor Commissioner

had violated both the Labor Code -

which specifically requires the agency to

provide-interpreters at hearing and inter-

views - as well as other state laws requir-

ing each state agency which serves a

sizable language minority population to

provide interpreters and written materials

in appropriate languages," said Ed Chen,

ACLU-NC staff attorney who also repre-

sented the plaintiffs. "In the settlement,

the Labor Commissioneragreed to provide

qualified interpreters at all proceedings

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

sington) Chapter Meeting: (Usually first

Wednesday). For more information, time and address of

meetings, contact Jim Chanin at 510/848-4752 or

Rachel Richman at 510/540-5507.

Fresno Chapter Meeting: (Usually fourth Tuesday).

Please join our newly-eorganized Chapter! Meetings are

held at 7:00 PM at the Fresno Center for Non-Violence. For

more information, call Bob Hirth 209/225-6223 (days).

Marin County Chapter Meeting: (Usually fourth

Monday) Meet at 7:30 p.m. at the Corte Madera Town

Center, Community Meeting Room. for more information,

contact Rico Hurvich at 415/389-8009.

Mid-Peninsula Chapter Meeting: (Usually fourth

Thursday) Meet at 7:00 PM, at 460 South California

Avenue, Suite 11, Palo Alto. For more information, con-

tact Ken Russell at 650/325-8750.

Monterey County Chapter Meeting: (Usually

third Tuesday) Meet at 7:15 PM, Monterey Library.

For more information, contact Richard Criley at

408/624-7562.

and in all communications with the gener-

al public as well as translate all appropri-

ate forms and written materials."

U.S. SUPREME COURT

`In the U.S. Supreme Court case, Ruiz

v. Hull, the high court refused to review an

Arizona Supreme Court decision voiding

`an initiative passed by Arizona voters in

1988. The Court ruled that the initiative,

which made English Arizona's official lan-

guage, violated the First Amendment and

unduly obstructed non-English speakers'

access to government.

The Arizona initiative, Article 28,

would have required all state agencies to

"act in English and in no other language."

The Arizona Supreme Court held that by

prohibiting public employees and officials

from using non-English languages in the

North Peninsula (San Mateo area) Chapter

Meeting: (Usually third Monday) Meet at 7:30 PM,

at 700 Laurel Street, Park Tower Apartments, top

floor. Check-out our web page at: http://members.

"aol.com/mpenaclu. For more information, contact

Marc Fagel at 650/579-1789.

Redwood (Humboldt County) Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Tuesday) Meet at Chan's at 359 G Street in

Arcata at 7:00 PM. For information on upcoming meeting

dates and times, contact 707/444-6595.

Sacramento Valley Chapter Meeting: (Usually

first Wednesday) Meet at 7:00 PM at the Java City in

Sutter Galleria (between 29 and 30, J and K Streets) in

Sacramento. For more information, contact David Miller

at 916/991-5415.

San Francisco Chapter Meeting: (Third Tuesday)

Meet at 6:45 PM at the ACLU-NC Office, 1663 Mission

Street, Suite #460, San Francisco. Call the Chapter

Hotline (979-6699) for further details.

Santa Clara Valley Chapter Meeting: (Usually

first Tuesday) Meet at 7:00 PM at the Peace Center, 48

Ramon

BY ANNA SOROKINA

ile an Economics and History

major at UC Santa Cruz, Ramon

Gomez was introduced to the

ACLU through a 1988 dispute with a col-

lege administrator over the menu in his

Dining Hall.

The administrator

planned college Filipino dinner because

it fell on the

anniversary of

Pearl Harbor

Day. Gomez

joined a group

of students of

color who pro-

tested the in-

sensitivity of

the officer's

= remarks and

2 the cancella-

etion of the

2 dinner. The

students orga-

nized a boycott and a rally. The students'

actions were supported in a letter from

Victor Kimura, a U.C. finance officer,

who objected both to the lumping togeth-

er of all Americans of Asian descent and

to the punishing of students for an act of

war by the Japanese government almost

50 years earlier. The administrator sued

Kimura for defamation over his letter.

When the ACLU stepped in to defend

Kimura's free speech rights - Gomez

and the other students learned a vital

lesson about civil liberties.

performance of their duties, the amend-

ment unduly burdened the employees'

First Amendment rights as well as the

rights of those they served. The Arizona

Court observed that the law's adverse

impact fell almost entirely on Latinos and

other national origin minorities. The

ACLU-NC, along with the National ACLU

and others filed an amicus brief in Fuzz.

The Language Rights Project helps

combat language-based discrimination

in the workplace, in businesses, and in

government services. The Language

Rights Hotline (1-800-864-1664) offers

free multi-lingual telephone advice and

referrals in English, Spanish, Mandarin

and Cantonese to workers who have

been subject to discrimination based on

their language or accent.

S. 7th St. San Jose, CA. For further chapter information

contact Dan Costello at 408/287-6403.

Santa Cruz County Chapter Meeting: (Usually

third Monday) Meet at 7:15 PM. For more information,

contact Dianne Vaillancourt at 408/454-0112.

Sonoma County Chapter Meeting: (Usually third

Tuesday) Meet at 7:30 PM at the Peace and Justice

Center, 540 Pacific Avenue, Santa Rosa. Call Judith

cancelled a.

Gomez

The dispute at UC Santa Cruz brought

Gomez to the Santa Cruz Chapter board -

where Kimura is also a board member!

Gomez also represented the Chapter on

the affiliate Board. As a Chapter leader,

. Gomez has organized workshops against

z

police abuse and the rights of youth, host-

ed an Annual Conference at UCSC, and

defended the rights of homeless people. As

an active member of the ACLU-NC Field

Committee; Gomez helped plan the 1998

Activist Conference at Asilomar.

"Ramon is an example of the perfect

ACLU Chapter activist" said ACLU Field

Representative Lisa Maldonado. "He is

always thinking of ways to bring the ACLU

message to the local community. And he is

very effective at helping the chapter to

work in coalition with other groups"

The Santa Cruz Chapter has organized

Reproductive Rights and Death Penalty

network coalitions; and has been involved

in racial justice issues. The Chapter is also

recruiting college students to participate

in ACLU activities.

In November, Gomez, a paralegal in a

labor law firm, won a seat on the

Watsonville City Council Watsonville.

After fifteen years of registering and edu-

cating voters about the democratic

process, Gomez sees the victory as an

important step in his effort to open the

doors of government to everybody. He said,

"T am looking forward to serving as a coun-

cilman to make sure that the Bill of Rights

is seriously looked at and protected in the

Council."

Gomez, who also tutors junior and

senior high school students, worked with

youth from the community to defeat a gang

injunction. Gomez noted that the defeated

ordinance would have prohibited youth to

have any type of affiliation with one anoth-

er, including associating at a Youth Center,

coming to a particular area for gang pre-

_ vention work, or even carpooling for work

or school.

"I grew up in Watsonville," said Gomez,

who also tutors junior and senior high

~ school students. "I saw how people retreat-

ed in classrooms because of different treat-

ment for English-speaking students versus

Spanish-speaking students. | will continue "

my work to ensure equal treatment, fair-

ness, and justice."

Anna Sorokina, a student at USF is an

intern in the Field Department.

Volkart at 415/899-3044 for more information.

Yolo County Chapter Meeting: (Usually third

Tuesday) Meet at 7:30 PM, 2505 5th Street #154,

Davis. For more information, call Natalie Wormeli at

530/756-1900 or Dick Livingston at 530/753-7255.

Chico Chapter: If you are a member in the

Chico/Redding area, please contact Steven PostJeyes at

530/345-1449.

Friday, March 19-Thursday, April 1

San Francisco AGLU-NG Chapter presents

Lenny Bruce:

Swear to Tell the Truth

In 1948, Lenny Bruce was just another comic who couldn't get arrested. By 1961, all that

would change... .This Oscar nominated documentary, narrated by Robert DeNiro, chonicles the

life of this unorthodox American stand-up comedian who was no stranger to controversy.

Nightly at 6:00, 8:00, 10:00; Sat/Sun/Wed Mats at 2:00, 4:00. Note: No evening

shows on Sun, March 21. For more infromation call The Roxie at (415) 431-3611.

ACLU News = Januvary-Fesruary 1999 me a

ion of Northern Cal

il Libert

ican

Dedicated to Ernie be

ACLU-NC Founder and Executive Director (1934-1971)

Ernest Besig (1.) with Fred Korematsu at

. the 1995 Bill of Rights Day Celebration.

American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

1663 Mission Street, #460

San Francisco, CA 94103

413/621-2493

WWW.aclunc.org

Dear Friend of the ACLU,

ur annual report begins with a reference to the ACLU-NC's "passion for justice."

The passion that drives our organization today was ignited by our esteemed

Executive Director Ernest Besig, who led this affiliate from its founding in 1934

through 1971. Ernest Besig died on November 13, 1998 at the age of 94. We ded-

icate our annual report to him as a tribute to the enormous contribution he made to the

ACLU-NC and to civil liberties. ;

As we share with you the tremendous challenges of the past year, we realize how fortunate

we are to have had the guidance of Besig's inspiring wisdom and leadership. He prepared

us well to face these challenges.

The same xenophobia that interned Japanese Americans during World War II, which Besig

so courageously confronted, continues to animate much of the anti-immigrant and

"English only" policies that we grapple with today. The same forces that crudely blocked

the schoolhouse door during Besig's tenure, are behind the manipulative campaigns to

end access to equal opportunity that we respond to in post-Proposition 209 California.

While the venue changes decade to decade - books were banned during Besig's time,

today the Internet is the target

of censorship - the principles -

remain largely the same.

These principles, which Besig

tenaciously clung to in times

of great adversity and even

q scorn, have . engendered

enduring respect for the orga-

nization he founded.

Fortunately, what distinguish-

es our work during the past

year "alesis the increased

resources which we were able

to devote to these challenges.

As a result of the growing gen-

erosity of our supporters, and

an extraordinary award of

attorneys fees this year, we

were able to expand our pro-

gram and to launch new initia-

tives on racial justice and

cyberliberties..

We continue to sharpen our

tools, whether we're using

public education, litigation or

mobilizing legislative strate-

gies - to combat anti-civil lib-

erties efforts. We rely on the

wide range of talent and expe-

rience of our 25-member staff

in San Francisco and Sacramento, and the deep commitment of our volunteers who serve

on our Board of Directors, with our Chapters, as cooperating attorneys, and in many other

capacities. Together we have achieved some remarkable victories.

We speak for the entire ACLU-NC family when we dedicate ourselves, in honor of the

remarkable Ernest Besig, to be as tenacious as he in our commitment to ensure that the

freedom of the Bill of Rights endures.

Anon E

Dorothy M. Ehrlich

Pace -21-be tl

Dick Grosboll

Executive Director Chair

1998 ACLU-NC ANNUAL REPORT

1998 ACLU-NC ANNUAL REPORT

Highlights of the Legal Docket

his year, the ACLU-NC's passionate work helped to tip the scales for justice.

Witnessing an unprecedented assault on affirmative action following the passage of

Proposition 209, we combined legal, legislative and public information strategies to

j fight back for equal opportunity. We fought back with a lawsuit against Contra

Costa County for its abysmal exclusion of women and people of color in its contracting

programs. We fought back with an inspiring publication "Reaching for the Dream:

Profiles in Affirmative Action." And we fought back with legislative efforts to stop key

programs in California from being dismantled.

We sponsored a Roundtable on Race and Criminal Justice, a groundbreaking dialog

with litigators, scholars and advocates to address the unconscionable criminalization of

young people of color. Our new Racial Justice Project will take up the work whose

seeds were planted there.

Facing the passage of Proposition 227 outlawing bilingual education, we joined with

students, parents, educators and other civil rights advocates to challenge the restrictive

measure in federal court, to ensure that all of California's children will have access to

quality education.

And we broke new ground in fighting attempts to censor the newest arena of expres-

sion: cyberspace, where federal legislation and local measures aimed to stem the free

flow of information.

Alarmed at the rise of anti-gay violence, we filed a suit against a school district whose

officials failed to protect students who were harassed with homophobic threats and

assaults. And we provide support for a new generation of activist students and others

who would protest today's injustices.

Our innovative legal work takes us from school boards to the Supreme Court as we

attempt to tip the balance for justice.

In 1998, the ACLU-NC Legal Department, directed by Managing Attorney Alan

Schlosser, included attorneys Michele Alexander, Ann Brick, Edward Chen, John Crew,

Margaret Crosby, Kelli Evans and Robert Kim. The staff attorneys were ably assisted

by Frances Beal, Leah Nestell, and Cynthia Williams.

In addition, the national ACLU Immigrant Rights Project, directed by attorney Lucas

Guttentag, maintains a center in our affiliate office. The presence of this project informs

and supports our own work in the crucial arena of immigrant and refugee rights.

The Legal Department also oversees the work of the Complaint Desk. The Desk,

staffed by committed volunteer counselors, receives more than 200 calls and letters each

week from people who feel their rights have been violated. Advised by the staff attor-

neys 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 pee

ular grievances.

We share the accomplishments of our legal program with more than 100 Aedicucd

lawyers who donate their services to the ACLU-NC as cooperating attorneys. More

than one-third of the 57 cases on our docket 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 1998

cooperating attorneys and firms is on page 15.

Though we cannot describe every one of our current cases, we summarize here the

highlights of our legal docket - and our passion for justice.

to v.): Robert Kim, Regina Meade,

Brick, Michelle Alexander, Dorothy Ehrlich, Winona Reyes, Frances

Beal, Mila De Guzman, Ed Chen; (standing: I. to v.): Elaine Elinson,

Cheri Bryant, Eddie Jen, Margaret Crosby, Lisa Maldonado, Nancy

Otto, Iain Finlay, Melissa Daar, Stan Yogi, David Blazevich, Sandy

Holmes, John Crew. (Not pictured: Kevin Grady, Andrew Oetzel,

Leticia Pavon, Alan Schlosser, Cory Thornton, Cynthia Williams.)

in Cyberspace

Library Censorship

The ACLU-NC and City of

Livermore succeeded in defending

online free speech when the

Alameda County Superior Court

dismissed a lawsuit, Kathleen R. v.

City of Livermore, seeking to

require the Livermore Public

Library to. censor Internet use at

the library. This key ruling marked

the second time the court rejected

an attempt by a Concord parent,

Kathicen RK to. force the

Livermore library to abandon its

open access policy governing

Internet use.

The court's ruling set an

important precedent for libraries in

California and across the nation. By

upholding the library's open access

policy, the court not only vindicat-

ed the judgment of the library

board in adopting the policy, but

also the First Amendment values

on which the policy rests. The

library's Internet access policy

specifically informs its patrons that

material available over the Internet

may be controversial, that the

library is not responsible for the

content of material available on the

Internet, and that parents are

responsible for supervising the

Internet use of their children.

Staff attorney Ann Brick, who

specializes in cyber-censorship,

submitted an amicus brief on

behalf of the National ACLU, the

ACLU-NC and People for the

American Way. `The brief argued

that the Livermore Public Library's

policy is sensitive to both First

Amendment concerns and the con-

cerns of parents. Such an appropri-

ate balance, the ACLU-NC assert-

ed, enables each family to be sure

that its children use the Internet in

a manner that is consistent with its

own values without imposing those

values on other families. This is the

same position that has long been

espoused by the American Library

Association and the majority of

libraries across the country.

In November, in a related

Virginia case in which the ACLU

represented Internet content

providers, Mainstream Loudoun v.

Board of Trustees of the Loudoun

County Library, a federal court

held that a library's policy of using

filters to censor Internet access on

library computers violated the First

Amendment. The federal judge, in

striking down the library's filtering

policy, noted that the filtering soft-

ware, which claimed to block only

obscene material, blocked sites

such as those of www.sfgate, home

of the San Francisco Chronicle and

Examiner.

Free speech online

In response to an ACLU law-

suit filed with the Electronic

Privacy Information Center

(EPIC) and the Electronic Frontier

Foundation (EFF), a Philadelphia

court blocked Congress' second.

attempt to censor cyberspace, rul-

ing that a federal Internet censor-

ship law would restrict free speech

in the online "marketplace of

ideas."

In the lawsuit, ACLU yp. Reno,

the ACLU represented website

operators who provide free infor-

mation about fine art, news, gay

and lesbian issues and sexual health

for women and the disabled, and

who all fear that the law would

force them to shut down their web-

sites. San Francisco Poet Laureate

Lawrence Ferlinghetti and former

ACLU-NC Board member and

magazine publisher David Bunnell

filed statements with the court sup-

porting the plaintiffs' position.

Although the Court acknowl-

edged a compelling interest in pro-

tecting minors, it ruled that the

"Child Online Protection Act,"

imposed a burden on constitution-

ally protected speech. "Indeed," -

the Court stated, "per-

haps we do the minors

of this country harm if

First Amendment pro-

tections, which they

will with age inherit

fully, are chipped away

in the name of. their

protection."

Freedom of

the Press

The ACLU-NC's

legal challenge -to the

state's practice of con-

cealing lethal gas exe-

cution procedures from

the view of journalists

and other witnesses

continues its journey

through the _ federal

courts. In the lawsuit,

California First Amendment

Coalition v. Department of

Corrections, the ACLU-NC argues

that these procedures prevent wit-

nesses from observing critical parts

of the execution process and con-

ceal from public view actual and

potential problems in execution

procedures, impeding democratic

discussion of the death penalty and

its implementation. The ACLU-

NC is currently preparing for the

trial on whether there were suffi-

cient prison security concerns to

justify the Department of

Corrections' witness restrictions.

In 1996, when William Bonin

became the first person in

California to be executed by

lethal injection, reporters and

other witnesses to his execution

were prevented by prison officials

from observing the complete exe-

cution procedure. Unable to

offer first-hand accounts of the

entire process, including the diffi-

culties prison officials admitted

they encountered in inserting the

IV needles, the journalists could

not thoroughly inform the public

on the state execution. Thus, the

public had to rely solely on prison

officials for information about

how the death penalty is being

implemented by this new method

of execution.

Although the ACLU-NC

obtained a permanent injunction

two years ago in federal district

cOUrE -fesfOling, the First

Amendment right to witness the

executions, in April the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals reversed

the lower court's ruling, finding

that the courts should defer to

rison officials' "expert judgment"

Pp pert judg

with respect to security and safety,

and sent the case back to District

Court for a determination as to

whether prison authorities have

legitimate security concerns.

1998 ACLU-NC ANNUAL REPORT

The ACLU-NC is represent-

ing a student reporter from the

U.C. Santa Barbara campus news-

paper charging that the Governor -

and several U.C.Regents violated

the State's Open Meeting Act

when they eliminated affirmative

action in the university system in

1995. The lawsuit, Molloy p.

Regents of the University of

California, currently pending in

the California Supreme Court,

was filed by the ACLU affiliates of

Northern and Southern California

and the First Amendment Project.

The lawsuit argues that Governor

Wilson's initiation of private tele-

phone conversations with a

majority of the Regents for the

purpose of obtaining a promise to

vote in favor of the resolutions

prior to the public meeting at

1998 ACLU-NC ANNUAL REPORT

which the Regents abolished affir-

' mative action was a violation of

the Bagley-Keene Act, which

states that "all meetings of a state

body shall be open and public."

The California Supreme

Court last year refused a request

by then Governor Wilson and the

U.C. Board of Regents to dismiss

the lawsuit.

Talking about

Medical

Marijuana

The ACLU-NC is seeking a

permanent injunction in U.S

District Court barring the govern-

ment from punishing doctors who

recommend the medical use of

marijuana to their patients. In

Conant v. McCaffrey the ACLU-

NC and others are representing

doctors and chronically ill patients

suffering from AIDS, cancer and

other serious illnesses.

Proposition 215, passed by

54% of California voters in 1996,

provided immunity for the posses-

sion or cultivation of marijuana by

seriously ill persons who use it on

the recommendation or approval of

their physicians. (According to

numerous studies, marijuana works

to relieve nausea and stimulate

appetite for seriously ill persons

where. other drugs fail.)

Immediately after the passage of

215, the Clinton administration

unveiled a harsh policy that threat-

ened to prosecute or revoke the pre-

scription drug licenses of doctors

who recommended medical mari-

juana to their patients. The lawsuit

was filed to stop the government

from carrying out its threats.

marijuana

The U.S. District Court issued

a preliminary injunction last year,

ruling that "the government's fear

that frank dialogue between physi-

cians and patients about medical

might foster drug

use...does not justify infringing on

First Amendment freedoms."