vol. 68, no. 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

a ee

BECAUSE

FREEDOM

mey

CAN

PROTECT

[ise Er

VOLUME LXVIII ISSUE 4

WHAT'S INSIDE

PAGE 2

November Election:

"YES" on 66, "NO" on 69

PAGE 3

Supreme Court Rules on

Marriage Equality

PAGE 4

Youth Explore Sexism

on ACLU Summer Trip

pace and

ACLU Victory Limits

Patriot Act

PAGE 8

VOTE in the ACLU-NC's

Board Election

LANDMARK VICTORY FOR CALIFORNIA STUDENTS

By Elaine Elinson, ACLU News Contributor

ilthy bathrooms. Dilapidated equipment. Mouse-infested class-

rooms. Is this what California students should expect from

their public schools? O

n August 13, a $1 billion settlement in

a historic lawsuit delivered the answer: a resounding "no."

Williams v. California eveled grave charges at the state.

Brought by civil rights and educational advocates on behalf

of students in California's poorest schools, the suit charged

that California was abdicating its constitutional responsibil-

ity to provide predominantly low-income students of color

with the bare essentials necessary for learning: adequate

books and classroom materials, credentialed teachers, and

clean, safe facilities.

"The settlement provides up to a billion dollars to put

instructional materials in the hands of students, to identify

and repair crumbling, low-performing schools, and to assure

that qualified teachers are in every classroom," said Mark

Rosenbaum, Legal Director of the ACLU of Southern Cali-

fornia (ACLU-SC). "Equally important," he noted,

standards for access to books, teachers, and clean and safe

ae

TERSCLS

facilities, and holds districts accountable for meeting those

standards in our lowest performing schools. It empowers

students and teachers to file complaints and receive quick

|

Non-Profit

Organization

U.S. Postage

PAID

Permit No. 4424

O

9

g

Q

S

`c

5

a

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION |

Oye aes ey ees

redress when the standards are not met."

The lawsuit was filed in May 2000 by the ACLU affiliates

of Southern and Northern California, Public Advocates, Inc.,

the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund

(MALDEF), and the law firm of Morrison and Foerster on be-

half of 46 students in 18 school districts. It was later expanded

to include scores of additional schools after a toll-free hotline

established by the ACLU was flooded with calls from students,

parents, and teachers around the state.

"I knew conditions at my school were a lot worse than the

conditions at schools in `wealthier areas," said lead plaintiff

Eli Williams, now 16, who was a student at Luther Burbank

Middle School in San Francisco when the suit was filed. "Our

bathrooms were dirty and flooded, ceiling tiles would fall in -

the gym, and the railings around the playground were rusty

and broken. Our classrooms were dirty, cold, and infested

with mice. It made it hard to concentrate in class."

The settlement will benefit more than one million students

Eli Williams (center),

lead plaintiff in the suit

seeking equality in California public schools, at a

press conference in 2000. Eli is now a 16-year-old

senior at San Francisco's Balboa High School.

in the state's 2,400 lowest-performing schools. It requires that

all students have books, and that their schools be clean and

safe, and provides nearly $1 billion to accomplish these goals:

$800 million over four years to make emergency repairs and

CONTINUED ON PAGE 10

YES ON PROPOSITION 66, NO ON 69

FAIR SENTENCING, DNA PRIVACY AT STAKE

By Jeff Gillenkirk, Guest Editor

The ACLU is taking leadership on two critical initiatives on the

California ballot this November-Propositions 66 and 69.

Proposition 66 would reform the "Three Strikes You're Out"

law passed by voters in 1994 and restore it to its original intent

-providing lengthy sentences for repeat violent and serious

felony offenders, not for people convicted of stealing a loaf

of bread or a package of videotapes. The ACLU of Northern

California (ACLU-NC) strongly supports Prop 66 and urges

its members to vote "Yes" for more sensible sentencing.

Proposition 69 would expand California's violent criminal

database to include the DNA profiles of all people arrested

for a felony-even if they are never charged with a crime. The

ACLU-NC vigorously opposes expanding California's already

vast government database to include innocent people, and

urges its members to vote "No" on 69 (see "No on 69", page

2, and ACLU Forum, page 12).

CONTINUED ON PAGE 2

BILL OF RIGHTS DAY 2004

CELEBRATING THE 700x2122 ANNIVERSARY OF THE ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 12 AT THE FAIRMONT HOTEL IN

SAN JOSE

RECEPTION AT NOON, PROGRAM AT I P.M.

KEYNOTE SPKEAKER: JULIAN BOND, CHAIRMAN OF THE NAACP

TICKETS: $25 ($10 STUDENT/LOW INCOME) @ CALL: (415) 621-2493 x382 To RSVP

WELCOME 10 THE ACLU NEWS.

YES ON 66, NO ON 69 CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1

The move to reform California's "Three Strikes You're

Out" law is spearheaded by a broad coalition including Joe

Klaas, the grandfather of Polly Klaas. It was the kidnapping

SAN FRANCISCO

CHRONICLE:

",.- STUDIES BY

CRIMINAL-JUSTICE

EXPERTS SHOW THE

LAW T0 BE UNDULY

COSTLY... AND FAILING

IN ITS PRIMARY

MISSION TO CURB

CRIME."

and murder of 12-year-old

Polly Klaas by repeat offender

Richard Allen Davis which

helped ignite support for the

"Three Strikes" ballot initia-

tive that passed in 1994 with

support from 72 percent of

the voters.

Strongly supported by the

California Prison Guards

Union, the "Three Strikes"

law _ substan-

tially length-

ened | | prison

sentences for

persons who

had previously been convicted of a violent

or serious crime. Specifically, a person who

committed one prior violent or serious of-

fense and committed any new felony could

receive the normal prison sentence for the

new felony (the "second strike"). A person

` who committed two or more violent or se-

rious offenses and then committed any new

felony would automatically receive 25 years

to life in prison (the "third strike").

According to the California Department

ORANGE COUNTY

REGISTER: "THE

MEASURE. .

THE UNREASONABLE

PRACTICE UNDER

CURRENT LAW OF

SENDING THOSE

CONVICTED OF PETTY

OFFENSES 10 LIFE IN

PRISON AT GREAT COST

TO TAXPAYERS."

. WILL END

of Corrections, almost 65 per-

SACRAMENTO BEE:

"CALIFORNIA NEEDS

TO MODIFY ITS THREE-

STRIKES LAW, THE

HARSHEST IN THE

NATION."

cent of those now serving sec-

ond and third strike sentences

were convicted of nonviolent,

petty offenses such as writing

a bad check, stealing a video-

tape, a loaf of bread, or pack

of T-shirts. Critics of the law

believe this is a major factor

behind Califor-

nia's prison population soaring to more than

160,000 inmates, the most in the nation, and

its prison budget increasing from $1 billion

in 1983 to nearly $6 billion today.

ORIGINAL INTENT OF VOTERS

"California is the only state

with a three strikes law that

doesn't require a third felony

conviction be violent or serious

in order to trigger such harsh

sentences," says Bob Kearney,

Associate Director of ACLU-

NC and a spokesperson for

the Yes on 66

"Proposition 66 will restore

campaign.

the three strikes law to what

voters originally intended, and

bring some common sense to

sentencing in California."

people have lost their jobs or

based on genetic "predictions."

have spent years in jail for crimes

t

of

FRESNO BEE:

"CALIFORNIANS HAVE A

LEGITIMATE INTEREST

IN PROTECTING

THEMSELVES BY

PUTTING AWAY FOR

LIFE... VIOLENT

HABITUAL CRIMINALS.

BUT THE `THREE

STRIKES' LAW SHOULD

NOT BE NETTING

NONVIOLENT, THREE-

TIME SHOPLIFTERS FOR

25-YEARS-TO-LIFE

SENTENCES."

While opponents of Prop

66 attribute California' fall-

ing crime rate to the passage of

SAN JOSE MERCURY

NEWS: "THE LAW IS

WASTING TENS OF

MILLIONS OF TAX

DOLLARS ... AND

WASTING LIVES."

Three Strikes, Kearney points

out that crime rates have fallen

nearly everywhere across the

country, even in jurisdictions

`Three

Strikes laws or where it has not

without comparable

been vigorously

enforced.

"San Francisco has used this law sparingly

and in the fashion the voters intended," Ke-

arney says. "And San Francisco's crime rate

has dropped far more quickly than places like

Fresno, which has prosecuted three strikes of-

fences far more aggressively."

At a time of record state budget deficits and

severe cuts in government services and local

funding, another benefit of Prop 66 that pro-

ponents point to is savings. According to the

state's Legislative Analyst, Prop 66 is expected

to save "potentially... several hundred millions

of dollars," as "the lower prison population

resulting from this measure would potentially

result in capital outlay savings in the long-

term associated with prison construction and

renovations that would otherwise have been

needed." It all ends up to a strong argument

for voting "Yes on 66."

INAUGURAL LAWYERS RECEPTION FOR

LGBT RIGHTS

MICHAEL WOOLSEY

On July 14, ten law firms sponsored a reception for Bay

Area attorneys and summer associates. The first annual

Summer Attorneys Reception was generously hosted by

Morrison and Foerster and benefits Frontline, the joint

advocacy program of the ACLU-NC and the ACLU

Lesbian and Gay Rights and AIDS Projects. ACLU-NC

staff attorney Tamara Lange (second from left) and

ACLU-NC associate director Bob Kearney (second from

right) are joined by Jeanne Rizzo and Pali Cooper,

plaintiffs in the Woo v. Lockyer marriage equality case.

JACK STRATFORD LEAVES A LASTING LEGACY

By Stan Yogi, Planned Giving Director

Longtime Oakland resident and ACLU member John "Jack"

Stratford spent a lifetime supporting the rights of political activists

and labor organizers, the separation

of church and state, and internation-

al human rights. When he passed

away in July following hospitaliza-

tion for a stroke, Jack ensured that

his values would carry on after him

by leaving a generous legacy for the

ACLU through his estate plan.

Born in Albany, California in

1933, Jack earned a bachelors de-

gree in Electrical Engineering from

DeVrys University and_ served

in the Air Force as a telegraphic

mechanic during the Korean War.

Jack Stra tford

His wartime service, unfortunately, left him with permanent

hearing loss and post traumatic stress disorder.

Upon returning to the Bay Area, Jack worked as a gardener

for the East Bay Regional Park District. His love of botany led

him to publish a plant list of the Huckleberry Trail in Oakland.

He also compiled an extensive collection of plant specimens

from Anthony Chabot Regional Park that he donated to the

UC Berkeley Jepson Herbarium. Actively involved in his labor

union, he was once arrested while on strike.

His 1984 retirement provided him time to pursue his other

great interest: jazz. He loved listening to jazz recorded before

1955, particularly the works of Louis Armstrong.

"All of us at the ACLU of Northern California are deeply

honored that Jack Stratford remembered the ACLU in his es-

tate plan," said Dorothy Ehrlich, executive director. "Because

of the thoughtfulness of civil libertarians like him, the ACLU

has the resources necessary to fight the good fight."

ACLUnews

THE QUARTERLY PUBLICATION OF THE

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA.

Membership ($20 and up) includes a subscription to the

ACLU News. For membership information call

(415) 621-2493 or visit www.aclunc.org/join.html.

Quinn Delaney, CHAIR

Dorothy Ehrlich, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Erika Clark, COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR

Jeff Gillenkirk, GUEST EDITOR

Gigi Pandian, DESIGNER AND

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

1663 Mission Street #460, San Francisco, CA 94103

(415) 621-2493

2 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

TWO STEPS FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK

FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY

By Adam Forest, ACLU Intern

ealing a bitter blow to thousands of same-sex couples who

were married in San Francisco's City Hall this winter, the

California Supreme Court invalidated close to 4,000 mar-

riages on August 12. The court ruled that Mayor Gavin Newsom

overstepped his authority by granting marriage licenses to 3,955

same-sex couples before the court ordered the City to stop issu-

ing the licenses on March 11.

In protest of the decision, hundreds of couples affected by

the court's decision marched from Harvey Milk Plaza to San

Francisco City Hall along with supportive community mem-

bers, some wearing their wedding garb. The mood was somber,

yet resolute.

GINA ORTEGA

The faces of Woo v. Lockyer. Lancy Woo (r), her

partner Cristy Chung, and daughter Olivia are

plaintiffs in the historic challenge to California's

marriage laws.

By Stella Richardson, Media Relations Director

"Tm very hurt," said Dave Chandler, 40, who was married

on Valentine's Day to his partner of 11 years. The couple at-

tended the City Hall rally with their 8-month-old baby, Jacob.

"T feel violated to have these rights given to me, and then taken

away," Chandler added. "I'm going to fight. I don't want Jacob

to grow up in a world where he has to live with this."

MAJOR CASE PENDING

The Court could have waited to declare the 3,955 licenses

"null and void" until a later marriage equality case involving

the ACLU is decided. That case, Woo v. Lockyer, is pending in

San Francisco Superior Court, and will decide whether mar-

riage discrimination violates California's constitutional guaran-

tees of equality and right to privacy. The case was brought on

behalf of several same-sex couples, Our Family Coalition, and

Equality California by lawyers for the American Civil Liber-

ties Union of Northern California (ACLU-NO), the National

Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), and Lambda Legal.

A majority of the California Supreme Court elected not to

await the outcome of the Woo case, however, saying "it would

not be prudent or wise to leave the validity of these marriages

in limbo for what might be a substantial period of time given

the potential confusion." The Court's vote to nullify the mar-

riage licenses was 5-2. Its declaration that Mayor Newsom

overstepped his authority was unanimous, 7-0.

The Justices were careful to note that their decision that

Mayor Newsom overstepped his authority was in no way

indicative of their opinion on same-sex marriage in general.

"To avoid any misunderstanding," wrote Chief Justice Ronald

George, "we emphasize that the substantive question of the

constitutional validity [of prohibiting marriage between same-

sex couples] is not before our court in this proceeding, and

our decision in this case is not intended, and should not be

interpreted, to reflect any view on that issue."

Mayor Newsom, who launched himself into the national

spotlight by approving marriages between same-sex couples

LEGAL BRIEFS

Clara County student who was imprisoned for writing a

poem. The :

GIGI PANDIAN

Same-sex couples wait in line for marriage licenses

at San Francisco Hall in February. Almost 4,000

couples obtained licenses before the California

Supreme Court ordered a halt on March 11.

just weeks into his first term as Mayor, sounded an upbeat

note after the ruling. "Now we have these 4,000 couples to

tell their stories, I'm not in any way discouraged," he said.

"There is nothing any judge, lawyer, and politician can ever

do to take away the moment those couples shared together

when they said `I do."

For more information about marriage equality, go to http://

aclunc.org/couples/index.html. m

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF | 3

ACLU YOUTH ACTIVISTS

EXPLORE SEXISM

his August, 23 high school students spent a week traveling through-

out Northern California on a field exploration entitled, "SEXism:

A Youth Study of Gender, Power, and Privilege." On this page we

present the reflections of three of our travelers on their experiences and

perceptions around this critical issue.

SEXISM IN THE AIR WE BREATHE

"T had no idea to what extent sexism affected me, and how I

saw it everyday and just thought it was "normal." For example,

the exploitation of women in the media to sell products and

the unattainable standard of beauty that it portrays: I never

thought there was anything wrong with this. That shows how

sexism is so ingrained...

"One of the groups we met with was the National Or-

ganization of Men Against Sexism (NOMAS), on the final

day of their national conference in San Francisco. They

brought up a concept that I'd

the media, government, etc. Women are denied equal access

to certain jobs, opportunities and leadership roles, raped

by men, taught to starve themselves, paid less, and forced

into a double standard of sexuality. I also learned that the

gender binary system is polarized and isolating to many,

many people who do not fit into one of the two standard

gender categories. I have always been a feminist, but this

trip ignited my passion for gender politics, forced me to

think introspectively about my own internalized sexism,

and allowed me to teach and empower other people to take

action on these vital issues."

-Amanda Gelender, 17, Friedman Project Youth Activist

Committee.

AS AN 18-YEAR-OLD BOY...

"To consider myself an activist is one thing, but to consider

myself a feminist is another. As an 18-year-old boy, I have taken

on the responsibility of making a change in the world. This

summer's trip, Sexism: A Study of Power and Privilege, revealed

sexism in the media, in schools, in family restaurants, even pris-

ons. Now educated, it is only fair to educate others around me,

and to let them know of the injustices inflicted upon people

because of not only sex, but skin color, sexual preference, age,

ability, or social status. Through this experience, I feel that I may

better serve as an advocate for the third wave of the feminist

movement. I embarked on this trip, ignorant of the sexist world,

but disembarked with a fueled flame of anger. When it's said

and done, we all stand and fall as one."

-Adam Chang, First Year at UC Davis

COMMITTED TO HELPING OTHERS

"We spoke with five inspiring women who are clients and

peer advocates with LIFETIME (Low-Income Families' Em-

powerment through Education), an Oakland organization

that was created by a group of mothers at U.C. Berkeley who

completed college degrees while raising their families on welfare,

and who are committed to helping others do the same. One of

them shared her story of how she'd never been on welfare before

and was forced to go on it after being in-

never given any deep thought

to-making men more aware of

their part in challenging sexism.

Their national conference aims

to make men more aware of the

system of sexism, how it relates

to the other `isms' (racism, clas-

sism, heterosexism, etc.), and how

men can make both individual

and systemic changes. They had

a lot to say about how sexism is

programmed into men at a young

age, being taught to be tough and

not show emotion. One idea that

stood out to me was when they

said that sexism, like other forms

of oppression, is "in the air that

we breathe" - that we're so used to

it, we often don't even notice that

it's there."

-Samantha Johnson, 15, Friedman

Project Youth Activist Committee

IGNITING A PASSION FOR GENDER

POLITICS

"This year's trip on gender,

power, and _ privilege was

unbelievable. I learned that the

and

oppression, degradation,

objectification of | women is

prevalent in every aspect of U.S.

culture. Women arediscriminated

against in the criminal justice

the

system, school - system,

Trip Participants and Chaperones at State Capitol Building in Sacramento.

TOP ROW (L-R): Tynan Kelly (Senior, Carlmont High, Belmont); Aaron Leonard (Friedman Project Staff); Kiran Savage-

Sangwan (Junior, Davis Senior High, Davis); Claire Greenwood (Senior, Urban High School, SF); Samantha Johnson

(Sophomore, Elk Grove Charter School, Sacramento); Danni Biondini (First-Year, Lewis and Clark University); Jenni Lerche

(Senior, Carlmont High, Belmont); Jackson Yan (First Year, UC Davis). MIDDLE ROW (L-R): Shayna Gelender (ACLU

staff chaperone); Adam Chang (First-Year, UC Davis); Lindsay Waggerman (Friedman Project Staff); Barbara Pinto (Senior,

Lowell High, SF); Dessi Woods (Senior, Berkeley High, Berkeley); William Tian (Senior, Lowell High, SF); Caitlin Di Mantova

(Junior, Rio Americano High, Carmichael); Liliana Cabrera (Senior, Mission High School, SF); Brittany Davis (Junior,

Leadership Charter High, SF); Danielle Smith (Junior, Lowell High School, SF); Amanda Gelender (Senior, Castro Valley

High, Castro Valley); Eveline Chang (Friedman Project Director). FRONT ROW (L-R): Rashida Harmon (Junior, Urban High

School, SF); Angela Suen (Senior, Oceana High School, Pacifica); Amelia Rosenman (First-Year, Brown University); Kelsi Ju

(Junior, Lowell High, SF); Ashlee Lake (Sophomore, Elsie Allen High, Santa Rosa); Akasha Perez (Sophomore, Pioneer High,

San Jose); Maraya Massin-Levey (Senior, School of the Arts, SF); Rupali Jain (Senior, Sheldon High, Sacramento).

volved in a domestic abuse situation. She

was unable to keep a job because her ex-

husband stalked her and wouldn't leave

her alone.

sOur visit with EIPETIME re

ally helped me understand the barri-

ers that so many women face in their

daily lives. Many women are out there

struggling to survive difficult situa-

tions without much support, but get

blamed for "being lazy." At the end of

the trip I felt I understood sexism a

lot better and it changed my outlook

On cverytaine ssrom ee to careers,

to everyday conversation. I felt ex-

tremely moved by all these groups'

perseverance to make people more

aware of how deep sexism is, and

what we can all do to challenge sex-

ism for the betterment of all people."

-Samantha Johnson, 15

The ACLU-NC's Howard A. Friedman

First Amendment Education Project

organizes an annual investigative trip

based on a topic selected by the program'

Youth Activist Committee (YAC). Of-

fering students an in-depth view of the

chosen subject, the summer trips prepare

participants to present in classrooms

throughout the following school year.

Past trips have focused on issues such as

immigration, the juvenile justice system,

and homelessness.

4 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

GENDER EQUALITY REACHES FOR GRASSROOTS

By Donald Lathbury, ACLU intern

n 1972 President Richard Nixon signed into law Title IX, a

sweeping education reform that guaranteed gender equity

in school athletics funding. Thirty-two years later, Gov-

ernor Arnold Schwarzenegger got the same opportunity to

ban gender inequity in community-based athletic programs

by signing AB 2404, "The Gender Equity for Community

Athletics" bill.

Introduced by Assembly Member Darrell Steinberg and

co-sponsored by the ACLU

and the Commission on

the Status of Women, AB

2404 provides Title [X-type

guidelines to ensure gender

equity in community ath-

letic programs run by cities,

counties, and special dis-

tricts. The ACLU had earlier

sought feedback from com-

munity leaders and coaches

across the state, and found

that girls' athletics still expe-

rienced unequal treatment

across the state.

"Everyone says there is

no difference between girls

and boys, but we are sure

treated differently," 10-year-

old Kelsey Craven told the

Assembly Judiciary Com-

mittee. "On the field where

I play fast pitch, there are

holes in the ground, no

stands for the parents, we

have to go out and clean up

papers-and worse-before

we play."

Assembly

Gov-

bills

New legislation guarantees girls in California the same level

of facilities and funding for community sports as boys.

SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL

The conditions described are common for girls' athletics

throughout California. In Petaluma, the girls' softball fields

are not maintained or groomed, and have no scoreboard.

The boys' baseball fields have scoreboards, restrooms, covered

dugouts, and grass that is regularly maintained. In Murietta

and Riverside, boys are allowed storage facilities on the park

site, but the girls are not. In Stockton, the boys' Little League

teams are given first

choice of fields, while

girls are left with poorly

maintained fields that are

a safety hazard, due to

inadequate lighting and

an outfield littered with

gopher holes.

AB 2404 seeks to

reduce this kind of

discrimination in girls'

sports by ending the

practice of local commu-

nities providing superior

services, facilities, and

funding to boys' sports

programs than to girls'.

While studies show that

girls and boys are equally

interested in sports from

thelaces ol orto; 9) the

disparities become ir-

reconcilable once girls

see a lack of opportunity

and encouragement. If a

gitl doesn't play a sport

by the age of 10, she is

less than 10% likely to

SACRAMENTO REPORT

and counties.

to

youth athletic programs

above).

FAIRNESS WITH FOOD STAMPS

California citizens with prior drug felony convictions are

currently subject to a lifetime ban on receiving food stamps.

Denying individuals food stamps threatens their ability to

become self-sufficient, to provide for their children, and to

overcome their drug convictions. AB 1796 (Leno) brings

additional Federal funding (not state funding) back into

California for food stamps to help people who have served

time for drug possession and are participating in a drug

treatment program. Signed by Governor.

OF CHILDREN

police

Bill 101

obtain

be involved in athletics by the age of 25, the Women's Sports

Foundation reports.

"ON THE FIELD WHERE The benefits to girls of end-

| PLAY FAST PITCH,

THERE ARE HOLES

IN THE GROUND, NO

STANDS FOR THE

PARENTS, WE HAVE T0

GO OUT AND CLEAN

UP PAPERS-AND

WORSE-BEFORE WE

PLAY."

-KELSEY CRAVEN, 10

ing this kind of discrimination

go well beyond youth, the

foundation's studies show. Ath-

letic teenage girls have higher

graduation rates, and _ skills

learned on the playing field,

such as teamwork and goal set-

ting, are of immense help later

in the workplace, studies show.

Teenage female athletes are less

prone to depression, and have

higher rates of self-esteem and

confidence. They are less likely

to be sexually active in adoles-

cence, and more than half as

likely to become pregnant as

non-athletes. Fewer female athletes smoke, and athletes have a

lower risk of breast cancer and other diseases later in life.

COMPLIANCE WILL BE MONITORED

Local governments must comply with the new standards set

up by AB 2404 by demonstrating one of the following in their

community athletic programs: that male and female participa-

tion in sports is roughly equivalent to the gender breakdown

of the community; that the community has a history and con-

tinuing practice of advancing opportunities for an underrep-

resented gender; or that the community is fully and effectively

accommodating female athlete's interests and abilities.

"It's not fair that girl players aren't able to play on the same

types of fields as the boys," Kelsey Craven told California leg-

islators. With passage of AB 2404, California's government has

shown it is willing to take a major step toward ending gender

discrimination in community athletics. 0x2122

ing terminally

who no

1946 (

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF 5

TAKE ACTION

LET THE SUN SET

ON THE PATRIOT ACT

When Congress passed the USA Patriot Act just

45 days after September 11, 2001, it acted in haste

-but not without foresight. Section 224 of the Act

holds that some of the provisions that pose grave

threats to civil liberties should expire-or "sunset"

on December 31, 2005-approximately 10% of the

Patriot Act. With that date fast approaching, the fu-

ture of the "sunset provisions" is up for grabs.

The Bush administration is campaigning tirelessly

for the permanence-and expansion-of the USA

Patriot Act. With the administration's support, Sena-

tor Jon Kyl (R-AR) has introduced Senate Bill 2476,

which calls for all sunset provisions to be lifted, thereby

making permanent the whole of the Patriot Act.

On July 31 in San Francisco, the ACLU of North-

ern California (ACLU-NC) hosted a teach-in for

Bay Area activists covering efforts to roll back the

Patriot Act and other erosions of civil liberties since

September 11, 2001. ACLU-NC Associate Director

Bob Kearney was joined by Sanjeev Bery, ACLU-NC

Field Organizer, and guest speakers Phil Gutis, Di-

rector of Legislative Communications at the ACLU's

Washington National Office, and Naheed Qureshi,

Safe and Free Western Organizer for the Washington

Legislative Office.

"We know it takes only ten letters to a Member

of Congress to get their attention," Kearney told the

gathering of activists. "With 100 people attending

this training, we are ready to flood Capitol Hill with

demands that our government keep us both safe

AND free."

Teach-in hosts urged activists and ACLU-NC

members to contact their representatives in Congress

and ask them to:

= Oppose S 2476 and let the sunset provisions ex-

pire as planned. There is no evidence that these

provisions have made us any safer - but plenty to

show that they pose grave threats to civil liberties

and rights.

@ Support the SAFE Act of 2003 (S 1709, HR

3352). Co-sponsored in the Senate by Larry Craig

(R-ID) and Richard Durbin (D-IL), the "Security

and Freedom Ensured Act" is a big step towards

rolling back the Patriot Act's worst excesses.

Oppose the CLEAR Act/Homeland Security En-

hancement Act (S 1906, HR 2671). By requiring

local and state law enforcement officers to enforce

federal immigration laws, this bill would signifi-

cantly burden already overstretched police forces

and likely result in an increase in racial profiling.

For additional action alerts, or to become a member

of the ACLU-NC's email action network, visit our

website at www.aclunc.org/takeaction.htm! m

6

THE SUNSET PROVISIONS

WHAT WILL SUNSET?

More than a dozen major provisions of the Patriot

Act, including Section 215, which allows the gov-

ernment to obtain lists of books people have read at

bookstores and libraries, and require booksellers and

librarians to keep that hidden from you. Section 215

also permits secret courts to issue subpoenas on US

citizens.

WHAT WILL NOT?

Section 213, which allows the government to con-

duct "sneak and peek" searches of your home without

notifying you first. The SAFE Act would eliminate

this section from the Act.

STUNNING ACLU VICTORY

LIMITS PATRIOT ACT

aying that "democracy abhors undue secrecy," Judge Victor Mar-

rero of federal district court in New York struck down an entire

Patriot Act provision that gives government unchecked authority

to issue "National Security Letters" to obtain sensitive customer records

from internet service providers (ISP) and other businesses without ju-

dicial oversight. The court also found a broad gag provision in the law

to be an "unconstitutional prior restraint" on free speech. -

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and New York

Civil Liberties Union, which brought a challenge to the law

earlier this year, hailed the ruling as a major blow to the current

administration's efforts to expand government surveillance pow-

ers in violation of the constitution. The September 29 ruling

was the first to uphold a challenge to the surveillance section of

the Patriot Act.

"This is a landmark victory against the Ashcroft Justice

Department's misguided attempt to intrude into the lives of

innocent Americans in the name of national security," said

ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero in reaction to

the decision. Added ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer, who argued

the case, "As this decision suggests, certain provisions of the

Patriot Act should never have been enacted in the first place."

The suit was brought on behalf of an Internet Service Pro-

vider (ISP) that received a National Security Letter (NSL)

from the FBI. Due to the gag order that applies to NSLs, the

ISP could not even publicly reveal its name. Moreover, the

gag order prevented the ISP from telling its customers that

the FBI had collected their information, which included cus-

tomers' names, addresses, credit card data, and details of their

Internet use. It even implied that those who received it could

not discuss it with a lawyer.

Judge Marrero called the National Security Letter "an

ominous writ" that the FBI issued "in tones sounding virtually

as a biblical commandment" and "had no place in our open

society." His 120-page ruling struck down Section 505 of the

Patriot Act on grounds that it violates free speech rights under

the First Amendment, as well as the right to be free from un-

reasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment. His ruling

will not take effect for 90 days, to give the Bush administration

time to appeal. m

GOVERNMENT OUTSOURCING SPYING,

ACLU STUDY FINDS

By Lauren Asher, ACLU News Contributor

new ACLU report has identified an alarming new trend

A in government surveillance: relying on the private sec-

tor to do the dirty work. From banks to airlines to

Internet service providers, intelligence and law enforcement

agencies are tapping into the

personal data collected by

"THE REPORT'S

MOST IMPORTANT

CONCLUSION IS THAT

MASS SURVEILLANCE

THREATENS FREEDOM,

BECAUSE IT MAKES

EVERYONE A SUSPECT."

-ACLU-NC STAFF

ATTORNEY ANN BRICK

companies we do business

with every day.

From buying data from

companies that create indi-

vidual "profiles," to pressuring

businesses to share customer

information, to requiring

whole industries to gather,

store, and analyze data in

ways that support intelligence

goals, the tactics are as varied

as the entities involved.

`These are among the chill-

ing findings of a national

ACLU teport released in August, The Surveillance-Industrial

Complex: How the American Government Is Conscripting Busi-

nesses and Individuals in the Construction of a Surveillance So-

ciety. The 40-page report documents how new technologies,

aggressive business practices, and expanded government pow-

ers are converging to make average Americans more vulnerable

to surveillance than ever before.

Another major finding is that despite Congress's rejection

of the infamous TIPS (Terrorism Information and Preven-

tion System) Program, there are ongoing federal, state, and

local efforts to recruit individuals to spy on their neighbors

and customers. Those asked to serve as "eyes and ears" for the

authorities include truck drivers, neighborhood-watch groups,

utility workers, and real estate agents. They are encouraged to

report "suspicious" people and behaviors, including "people

who don't seem to belong"-directives that easily lend them-

selves to racial profiling.

In addition to directing Americans to "keep your yard clean"

and "prune shrubbery," a "Citizens' Preparedness Guide" pub-

lished by the federal Citizen Corps asks people to be "on the

lookout" for suspicious activities "in your neighborhood, in

your workplace, or while traveling"-in short, everywhere.

KEY FINDINGS IN THE NEW ACLU REPORT INCLUDE:

m0x2122 Many companies provide customer data to the government

even when they are not required to by law. Examples range

from major airlines giving up millions of passenger records,

to diving instructors passing along the names and contact

information of nearly everyone with a recent scuba license.

@ Government is using its expanded powers since 9/11 to

force businesses to share customer records. Under the Pa-

triot Act, the FBI has broad discretion to access a wide range

of information about people who are not even suspected

of a crime. Businesses can also be forbidden to tell anyone

what happened. In one known incident, the FBI collected

every hotel, airline, and rental car record for the estimated

270,000 people who planned to spend Christmas or New

Year's in Las Vegas in 2003.

0x2122 Businesses are bearing a growing burden for the costs of

government surveillance. These range from having to check

customers and employees against official watch lists such as

the error-laden "No-Fly" list (see article on the next page),

to conducting their own increasingly intrusive background

checks. While the private surveillance sector is thriving

under direct and indirect government sponsorship, main-

stream businesses, from jewelers to health insurers, are pay-

ing a rising "surveillance tax" to comply with government

mandates.

@ Public pressure can help contain the growth of the surveil-

lance-industrial complex. For example, while California

initially expressed interest in a multi-state surveillance da-

tabase, it and several other states withdrew in response to

concerns about privacy and civil liberties.

@ According to ACLU-NC staff attorney and cyberliberties

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

KEEEP AMERICA SAFE AND FREE: GET INFORMATION AND UPDATES AT

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

FRIVOLOUS CLAIMS: JUDGE BLASTS

GOVERNMENT STONEWALLING IN "NO-FLY

By Stella Richardson

federal judge has accused the government of using

"frivolous claims" as justification for withholding in-

formation about controversial government watch lists

sought by two Bay Area peace activists and the ACLU of

Northern California (ACLU-NC).

The ACLU-NC is seeking information about the govern-

ment's "no-fly" list and other transportation watch lists in a

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) action. At least 339 pas-

sengers were stopped or questioned in connection with these

lists between September 2001 and March 2003, according to

information obtained from San Francisco International Air-

port (SFO) last April.

"NO-FLY" TIMELINE

= August 2002: Bay Area activists Jan Adams and

Rebecca Gordon are briefly detained at San

Francisco airport and told their names are on a

government "no-fly" list.

m= November 2002: ACLU-NC files a Freedom of

Information Act and Privacy Act request for in-

formation about post-9/11 transportation watch

lists, including how the two activists' names ap-

peared on the no-fly list, and how they can be

removed.

@ April 2003: With no response from the govern-

ment to the FOIA request, the ACLU-NC files a

FOIA lawsuit on behalf of Adams and Gordon.

The suit garners widespread media attention.

= December 2003: The government releases 94

pages of heavily redacted documents which fail to

answer crucial questions. ACLU-NC charges that

the documents reveal "shoddy" management that

puts innocents at risk.

m April 2004: National ACLU files class-action

lawsuit in Seattle on behalf of individuals whose

names appeared on the no-fly list and other trans-

portation watch lists.

m June 2004: Federal Judge Charles Breyer accuses

government of relying on "frivolous claims" in

refusing to release crucial documents about the

transportation watch lists in the Adams/Gordon

case.

expert Ann Brick, "The report's most important conclu- {~~

i,

sion is that mass surveillance threatens freedom, because /

it makes everyone a suspect. It shows an extraordinary /

shift in intelligence techniques-from tried and true |

methods focusing on real suspects, to casting an im- /

possibly wide net that is more likely to put innocent /

people on permanent `watchlists' than catch crimi- /

nals." /

The launch of ACLU's national Surveillance /

Campaign coincided with release of the new re- /

port. The campaign encourages consumers to fight

the growing "Surveillance-Industrial Complex" /

by asking prominent companies to take a "no- j

spy' pledge and defend customers' privacy. Fora /

sample letter and list of suggested businesses to

contact-including drugstore chains, insurance

companies, and retailers-see www.aclu.org/privatize. For

a copy of the report, see www.aclu.org/surveillance.

RULING BOLSTERS FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

In a sharply worded decision issued on June 15, U.S. Dis-

trict Judge Charles Breyer ordered the FBI and the Transporta-

tion Security Administration "to review all withheld material

and reconsider whether it is exempt from disclosure," and "to

prove that an exemption applies and that exemptions are to be

construed narrowly." The FOIA contains nine exemptions that

a government agency may invoke to protect documents from

public disclosure. :

"This decision is significant because the court rejected the

federal government's sweeping contention that information

having to do with the government's screening of airline passen-

gers after September 11, 2001, is off limits," explained ACLU

cooperating attorney, Thomas R. Burke, of Davis Wright

Tremaine LLP in San Francisco. "The court agreed that many

of the documents that the government is withholding simply

cannot be kept secret."

Judge Breyer also criticized the government's refusal to

disclose how many people are on the list, saying that the "de-

fendants do not meet their burden by simply reciting that in-

formation derived from security directives is sensitive security

information." The judge also said that the government blacked

out the names of two public government officials from the

documents, which "makes no sense."

The Court is ordering the government to review all withheld

information, and if it is exempt, "to provide a detailed affidavit

that explains why the particular material is exempt."

ACTIVISTS' DETENTION SPARKED SUIT

ACLU-NC filed the case, Gordon v. FBI, after Bay Area activ-

ists Jan Adams and Rebecca Gordon were detained at SFO when

they checked in for an

American Trans Air

(ATA) flight to Boston

via Chicago in August

2002. The ATA agents

who checked them in

told them that their

names appeared on a

"no-fly" list. San Fran-

cisco police arrived and

informed Adams and

Gordon that the police

would have to check

GIGI PANDIAN

whether their names

Plaintiffs Rebecca Gordon and

Jan Adams asked how they got

on the government's "no fly"

list-and how to get off.

appeared on a "master

Although

were eventually allowed

list." they

to fly, their boarding

passes were marked

with a red "S," which subjected them to additional searches.

In November 2002, the ACLU-NC filed a FOIA and

Privacy Act request on behalf of Gordon and Adams, in an

Sree 200,

MARYCLAIRE BROOKS

~ QUIT

Lm

Sarosh Syed, a special projects coordinator at the

ACLU, was flagged as a member of the "no fly" list

five times.

effort to determine how the women's names appeared on

the list, and how could they be removed. When government

failed to respond by April, 2003, the ACLU-NC filed a FOIA

THECOURPREJECIEDIWE "oe

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S

SWEEPING CONTENTION

THAT INFORMATION [ON]

THE GOVERNMENT'S

SCREENING OF AIRLINE

PASSENGERS AFTER

SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, |S

OFF LIMITS."

-ACLU COOPERATING

ATTORNEY THOMAS BURKE

subsequently released 94

pages of heavily redacted

government documents,

which failed to answer

fundamental questions,

including why names are

added to the lists, how

incorrect names can be

removed from such lists,

and what guidelines are in

place to restrict the use of

such lists.

In addition, the docu-

failed

another crucial question:

ments to answer

whether individuals are

being singled out on the list based solely on their First Amend-

ment-protected activity. The documents also raised serious ques-

tions about how well the list is being managed, by whom, and

whether it contains clear constraints to ensure that it does not

violate basic freedoms.

"When potentially thousands of innocent travelers are being

subjected to unwarranted searches and detentions because of the

government list, the public should be able to understand and

meaningfully deliberate on whether the lists improve security or

are just a waste of government resources," said Burke. @

HOMELAND SECURITY 5.5

An entire industry has sprung up to produce software that makes it easier for companies

to enforce the government's blacklists and other mandates. An example is "Homeland

Tracker," produced by a subsidiary of the giant database company Choicepoint, to "help

any business comply with OFAC and USA PATRIOT Act regulations." The manual

proudly touts the software's ability to "get identity verification, check individual names, scan

customer files" and "build personal accept and deny lists" (otherwise known as blacklists).

Once a company's customer data is "scanned for violations against all data lists'-that is,

government watch lists-the software lets the company "scan, block or reject business transac-

tions" involving any entities "that threaten national security."

This kind of product is offered by more than 50 companies and is being used, according to

one survey, by 83 percent of financial companies for watch list screening, and by 50 percent to

analyze transactions for money-laundering violations. -from The Surveillance Industrial Complex

KEEP AMERICA SAFE AND FREE: GET INFORMATION AND UPDATES AT

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF | 7

CANDIDATES

MICHELLE ALEXANDER

Joining the Board of Directors would be a great honor, allowing

me to continue my service to the ACLU-NC in a new role. I

served as the Director of the Racial Justice Project at the ACLU-

NC from 1998-2002 and in that role coordinated the Project's

litigation, media, lobbying and grassroots organizing work. |

helped to launch a major campaign against racial profiling in

California that later evolved into a national campaign by the

ACLU, known as the "DWB Campaign." I remain committed

to the ACLU's multi-disciplinary approach to strategic advocacy,

and J am eager to support the work of the organization in a new

capacity. Currently, I am an Associate Professor of Law and the Director of the Civil Rights

Clinic at Stanford Law School.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: No

BOB CAPISTRANO

As a legal aid lawyer, I understand the needs of the most dis-

franchised members of our community, and have used these

insights as a member of the ACLU legislative policy and legal

committees. Some of the fundamental problems of the most

marginalized actually affect broader strata of society. The abil-

ity to meaningfully participate in the political process is one

of the most important civil liberties, and implies not simply

the formal right to vote, but also such things as access to an

adequate (and affordable) education, wide-ranging public de-

bate over issues, and the lessening of barriers for independent

candidates and their ideas. Meaningful political participation by the great majority is central

STATEMENTS

to safeguarding basic freedoms. The activists of the ACLU-NC will continue to play a key

role in this and other campaigns.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

SUSAN FREIWALD

I am honored to be nominated. I have found being a member of

the ACLU-NC board to be inspiring and important. I attended

both membership conferences, and was a delegate to the biennial.

I have also enjoyed my work on the Development Committee. An

essential and quite enjoyable aspect of board work is fundraising.

I have long supported many of the ACLU's efforts, particularly

its campaigns for privacy, reproductive rights and gay rights. As a

law professor at USE, I have focused on cyberspace law and con-

tracts, and also taught courses on employment discrimination and

women and the law. Although I went to Harvard for college and

law school, I am delighted to be back in San Francisco, where I was raised.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: Yes

LISA HONIG

Lisa Honig is a weaver-an art she returned to after practicing employment discrimination law

for 15 years. She has served on the ACLU-NC Board for the past year, and previously served

on the Board for 8 years. She is currently a member of the Finance Committee and Executive

Committee. She has an extensive background in development work, as well as civil rights law.

She is thrilled to be a part of the ACLU-NC Board, particularly at this time when civil liberties

are so threatened.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: Yes

8 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

GOODWIN LIU

I am honored to be nominated for the Board. I grew up in

Northern California, attending public school in Sacramento

before going to college at Stanford. After law school, I spent

several years in Washington, including one year clerking for

one of the ACLU's finest, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, another

year in the Clinton Administration working on civil rights and

K-12 policy in the U.S. Department of Education, and two

years in an appellate litigation practice. Now in my second

year on the Boalt faculty, I am eager to bring to the ACLU

what I bring to my teaching and research: a passion for civil

rights, broad expertise in constitutional law, and a commitment to liberty and opportunity

for the dissenters and disadvantaged in our society.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: No

ROBERTO NAJERA

I have worked as a a deputy public defender in Contra Costa

Before that I worked

as an attorney with various community agencies in the Bay

County, California for fifteen years.

Area, specifically focusing in the areas of Immigration and

Tenant Defense. I have devoted my professional career to

the plight of the poor and minorities. Throughout my life as

well as my career I have seen and fought against the results of

fear and race-based politics and policies and their devastating

effects on personal freedoms and the rights of the accused. I

believe my experience in these battles is an asset I can bring

to the board. I would be honored to serve if elected and will endeavor to do my best on

behalf of the entire organization.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: No

MARSHA ROSENBAUM

At no time in America's history do we need to worry more

about our civil liberties. As director of the San Francisco office

of the Drug Policy Alliance, I know how much the War on

Drugs has contributed to the erosion of our basic freedoms,

through racial profiling, disproportionate arrest, conviction,

and sentencing, disenfranchisement, wire tapping, drug test-

ing, persecution of those who use and prescribe "certain" medi-

cations, and silencing debate about this failed policy.

The ACLU has been the leading organization protecting the

Bill of Rights, and a major force fighting against the War on

Drugs. I am proud to come from a family of "card carrying" members, and now look forward

MICHELLE ALEXANDER

BOB CAPISTRANO

SUSAN FREIWALD

LISA HONIG

ae fl el

Ee eo ee

GOODWIN LIU

ACLU-NC BOARD OF DIRECTORS BALLOT

Please vote by marking one square next to each candidate you support.

You may vote for up to 10 candidates on this ballot (joint members: use both squares).

Please clip and send along with your address label to:

Elections Committee

ACLU of Northern California

1663 Mission Street, #460

San Francisco, CA 94103

Ballots must be received by noon on December 9, 2004.

to working with the ACLU's strongest and most progressive affiliate, the ACLU-NC.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: Yes

PEGGY SAIKA

I first worked with the ACLU in the early 1980's when I was the

executive director of the Asian Law Caucus. We were privileged

to be involved with some of the most significant and amazing

cases/issues impacting immigrant and refugee communities. Be-

ing on the ACLU this board this past year and as the current

Executive Director of Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders in Phi-

lanthropy continues to inform my perspective on the challenges

that face us today. Just as we opposed the internment of Japanese

Americans in the 1940's, we must continue to oppose current

injustices being perpetuated against Muslims and all people of

color. With your support, I look forward to continuing my participation on the ACLU board

and contributing to its growth and development.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: Yes

PATRICIA WALL

As Executive Director of the Homeless Action Center, I defend the rights of those who have

the hardest time advocating for themselves - people who are homeless with mental disabilities.

My projects include defending the civil rights of homeless individuals who are given "quality

of life" citations and ensuring that electronic welfare benefits are designed to accommodate

people with severe disabilities. I am particularly interested in how poverty affects my clients'

civil liberties, including their access to the voting booth and their access to healthcare and

reproductive rights. I am eager to continue this work in the company of the ACLU.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: Yes

GUY WALLACE

I suffered a spinal cord injury at the age of 16, and I have been

a wheelchair user ever since. I am a partner in the law firm

of Schneider and Wallace, and a graduate of the Harvard Law

School. For the past twelve years I have worked as a lawyer

in various civil rights class actions on behalf of persons with

disabilities, persons of color, and women. It has been an honor

to serve on the Board of the ACLU-NC during the past year

because of its unyielding commitment to protecting civil

rights and civil liberties. I would welcome the opportunity to

continue serving as a Board member so that I can help in the

ACLU's ongoing struggle to ensure equal opportunity for all.

NOMINATED BY: Board of Directors

INCUMBENT: Yes

C1 (1 ROBERTO NAJERA

CL! (CJ MARSHA ROSENBAUM

CL} (C1 PEGGY SAIKA

Cl (1 PATRICIA WALL

CL! (1 GUY WALLACE

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF 9