vol. 6, no. 7

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. VI SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, JULY, 1941 No. 7

CITIZENSHIP BAN REVERSED

Alien Can’t Be Penalized For Mere Reading of Communist Paper

Subscription by an alien to a Yugoslavian Communist paper in 1932 is not in itself sufficient cause to bar him from citizenship the California Supreme Court decided on June 24. This ruling was handed down in the case of George Bogunovich, Cupertino agricultural worker, who was denied citizenship by Superior Court Judge William F. James on December 21, 1939,-on the ground that he was “not attached to the principles of the Government of the United States.”

It was at this point that the A.C.L.U. intervened in the case. An appeal was taken to the District Court of Appeal by Attorney Wayne M. Collins of San Francisco, resulting in the order being affirmed by a unanimous court last October. Mr. Collins then turned to the State Supreme Court. A re-hearing was granted on December 16, and the case was argued before a 6-man bench on March 6.

Court Splits 5 to 1

The Court split 5 to 1 in favor of reversing Judge James’ decision. Justice Shenk wrote the majority opinion which was concurred in by Justices Traynor, Curtis, Car- ter and Chief Justice Gibson. Justice Edmonds was the lone dissenter.

“The fact adverse to the positive showing presented by the applicant,” said the majority opinion, ‘was his two years’ subscription to the Communist publication, which had expired more than five years prior to his application. There was no evi-. dence that the alien was a member of the communist party at the time of his application or at any other time.

Alien Merely Read C. P. Paper

“The examiner made the assertion before the trial court that his ‘confidential file’ contained more of a nature unfavorable to the applicant, but he made no offer and the court did not require him to introduce such matter in evidence. The only yeason apparent from the record for the order of denial was the fact that the applicant had read the communist party organ and this more than five years prior to the filing of the application. There was no dae quiry into the effect which such reading might have had on the attitude of the applicant and no other evidence to rebut the showing by him of good character and record and his attachment to the principles of our constitution and government.

The Test of Fitness

“The case of the U. S. v. Macintosh, 283 U.S. 605, at page 616-617, indicates the extent of the inquiry and showing deemed sufficient to justify an order denying ap- plication. It was there said: ‘Clearly, it would seem, in order that the court and the government, whose power and duty in that respect these provisions take for granted, may discover whether the applicant is fitted for citizenship ;—and to that end, by actual inquiry, ascertain among other’ things, whether he has intelligence and’ good character; whether his oath to support and defend the Constitution and Jaws of the United States, and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same, will be taken without mental reservation or pur(Continued on Page 2, Col. 8)

A BOOK BARGAIN!

“The Story of Civil Liberties in the United States.”? by Leon Whipple. (Vanguard Press and the American Civil Liberties Union, 366 pp.). Professor Whipple’s remarkable story of the fight for civil liberties in the United States, published in 1927, is now available in this office in a special edition at 25c a copy against the list price of 75c. Members are urged to take advantage of this unusual opportunity to secure this wellknown and competent record of the history of freedom’s struggle with power from 1776 to 1917.

UNION OPPOSES JUDGE'S BAN ON C.P. SCHOOL MEETINGS

Charging Judge John E. McGeehan of Brooklyn with ‘an open violation of the state education law” for ordering the New York Board of Education to cancel a permit for a public school meeting by the Communist Party, the A.C.L.U. has entered an appeal as a “friend of the court’.

Judge McGeehan who enjoined the Board of Higher Education from employing Prof. Bertrand Russell a year ago, was criticized by Miss Florina Lasker, Chairman of the New York City Committee, who held that ‘it is not the privilege of the bench to make or repeal laws, but to interpret them. There is no ambiguity in the State Education Law making school buildings available for all political parties alike’.

The Union challenged Judge McGeehan’s use of the President’s declaration of an un- limited emergency to justify a ban upon the minority rights, and quoted from a recent speech of the President: “No matter what comes we must preserve our national birth- right: liberty of conscience and of education, of the press and of free assembly, and justice to all under the law”’.

Liberties Not Affected By President's Proclamation

Civil liberties in the United States are not adversely affected by President Roosevelt’s declaration of an unlimited national emergency, according to a statement made public by the American Civil Liberties Union. A survey by the Union of all statutes giving the government additional powers in an emergency shows that all powers except one must be invoked by special proclamations. The one exception affects control of the radio, which under the Federal Communications Act, may be taken over and operated by the government on order of the Président.

The Union declared that ‘‘there is little likelihood that either national emergency oc wetual war would result in exercising so... vast a power,” and quoted FCC Chairman James L. Fly as saying that “no occasion is foreseen in which such a power will be exercised.”

All other emergency powers of the government deal with military and economic problems, according to the Union, “leaving the Bill of Rights in the field of expression and communication wholly intact. In a state of war a few statutes affecting liberty be- come operative automatically, particularly the Espionage Act of 1917, under which certain utterances and publications become criminal, and under which the Post Office Department is granted large powers of control over the mails.”

A.C.L.U. HITS ABRIDGMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS AT INGLEWOOD

The Executive Committee of the Southern California branch of the A.C.L.U. has adopted a resolution condemning the action of the troops in the Inglewood strike along two lines:

1. For arresting some 19 men, including an attorney, spiriting them away to military headquarters ten or fifteen miles away, quizzing them but holding none of them for prosecution ;

2. For preventing the right of peaceful picketing within a mile of the factory.

CRIMINAL SYNDICALISM CONVICTION REVERSED BY IOWA SUPREME COURT

On June 17 the Iowa Supreme Court reversed the conviction of William Sentner on criminal syndicalism charges. Sentner was convicted on October 7, 1939, and sentenced to pay a $2500 fine. His arrest grew out of the strike of the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, C.1.0., at the Maytag Washer Company in Newton, Ia., in the summer of 1939. Sentner is one of the international vice-presidents of the union.

Page 2

FCC Report Favors Seven Anti-Civil Liberties Bills Freedom of Speech

Declaring that there had been a “‘shocking inadequacy of public discussion” in the press and on the radio of the recent FCC report on monopoly controls in chain broad- casting, the American Civil Liberties Union has urged the Senate Committee on Inter- state: Commerce to hold hearings on the report.

Writing to Senator Burton K. Wheeler, chairman of the committee, Dr. John Haynes Holmes, chairman of the Union’s board of directors, asked that the committee furnish a “forum” through which the public might be fully informed of all sides of the controversy surrounding the FCC report.

In a memorandum submitted to the committee, the Union declared that it gives no “blanket endorsement to the FCC report” and is giving it further study, but is “‘inter- ested primarily in freedom of speech, convinced that diversity is fundamental to free- dom of speech on the air’. It termed the report “the first heartening sign that the FCC has at least become aware of the various devices which have been used by broad- casting licensees to concentrate control of what goes over the air in a few minds. It is the abuses leading to this concentration of control which form the crux of the Com- mission’s report from our point of view.”

The Union enumerated the types of contractual relations between networks and their affiliated stations which are prohibited by the report, and agreed with the Commission’s finding that the customary contracts give the networks a great advantage over individual stations in the choice of programs as well as “a large measure of control over station rates’. It pointed out that large sections of the public wgmay be excluded from hearing certain pro‘grams where two networks control all local outlets “while other stations or local interests find that no outlet is available to them.

“In effect, what the contractual arrangements now in force between networks and stations amount to is network control over what goes out during the best broadcasting hours of the day. The Federal Communications Act is premised on the existence of free competition and on the control by individual licensees of their own stations, day by day, program by program.”

The Union expressed the view that greater diversity in ownership and management of networks—as suggested by the FCC order that the National Broadcasting Company divest itself of one of its two networks—would tend to create a “capacity for genuine competition—competition not only in dollars and cents, but what is more important, competition in ideas.”

In spite of requests made by the Union to network officials for public debate of the issues, no radio station or network has yet put on an impartial discussion of the report. According to the Union, “unbiased newspaper accounts have been almost as scarce. The Senate Committee can therefore be of inestimable value in affording a forum for discussion of issues of the greatest importance to the listening audience.”

UNION HAILS VICTORY IN REINSTATEMENT OF PENNA. TEACHER

Hailing it as “another victory for academic freedom’, the American Civil Liberties Union announced last month the reinstatement of James Gillies, the Pennsylvania teacher who was dismissed on a charge of “immorality” for signing a Communist Party nominating paper. The Superintendent of Public Instruction, before whom the Union appeared as a friend of the court, reversed the School District’s dismissal declaring, in his decision, that “we cannot agree that ‘immorality’, as used in the School Code, means whatever conduct a community does not sanction.”

Enacted

One of the worst California Legislatures in years finally adjourned on June 14 and left behind an unenviable record of baiting labor, aliens and radicals. But, even so, considering the number and nature of the repressive measures that were introduced and the war hysteria that prompted many of them, the net results could have been a lot worse. The final count showed seven anti-civil liberties measures enacted, two of them over the (yovernor’s veto, while an assembly witch-hunting committe was established by a vote of 46 to 19.

The witch-hunting committee, sponsored by Jack Tenney, will be known officially as the Assembly Fact-Finding Committee on un-American Activities in California. More popularly, no doubt, it will be known as the Little Dies Committee. It will carry on from where a joint Assembly-Senate committee left off after spending $19,000 and holding no public hearings. At the same time, it provides a source of income to five assemblymen, as they will receive mileage and $8.00 per day expenses.

Witch-Hunting Comm. Has Broad Powers The Committee has been empowered to “investigate, ascertain, collate and appraise all facts causing or constituting interference with the National Defense Program in California or rendering the people of the State, as a part of the Nation, less fit physically, mentally, morally, economically or socially.” It is also specifically authorized to “investigate the activities of groups and organizations whose membership includes persons who are members of the Communist Party, the Fascist organizations, the German Nazi Bund, or any other organization known or suspected to be dominated or controlled by a foreign power, which activities affect the preparation of this State for National defense, the functioning of any State agency, unemployment relief and other forms of public assistance, education institutions of this State supported in whole or in part by State funds, or any political program.”

Foremost of the red-baiting bills is the one requiring the elaborate registration of groups which advocate the violent overthrow of the government or which are under foreign domination, A.B. 271. This is similar to the Federal Voorhees bill under which no groups have registered.

Witch-Hunt Set Against State Employees

The second red-baiting bill, A.B. 155, which was signed by the Governor, bans any person from a State job who “either directly or indirectly carries on, advocates, teaches, justifies, aids or abets a program of sabotage, force and violence, sedition or treason against the Government of the United States or of this State.”” Some merry times are ahead of us when the patrioteers start calling State employees ‘“‘reds.”

The most bitter fight of the Legislature developed over the “Hot Cargo Bill,” S.B. 877, which limits Labor’s right to strike and peacefully picket. The reactionaries just did get enough votes to pass the bill over the Governor’s veto. Also, on the labor front, the Sabotage Prevention Act, S.B. 180, was finally adopted in modified form. While this bill still seems objectionable to us, the A. F. of L. withdrew its opposition after the bill had been amended.

Anti-Refugee Bill Enacted

A bill banning refugee doctors from the practice of medicine in California was fin- ally enacted over the Governor’s veto after the State Medical Association camee out openly in support of it. The Assembly at first sustained the Governor’s veto, but later reversed itself by a vote of 56-to 17.

Less objectionable is a bill, also signed by the Governor, A.B. 2348, which bans the wearing of foreign military or semi-military uniforms, and uniforms similar thereto. The loose language of the measure leaves considerable room for abuse of personal lib- erty.

The same kind of criticism can be leveled by State Legislature at Senator Kenny’s bill, S.B. 29, which prohibits the installation of dictographs in any . place without the consent of the owner, lessee or occupant. If the bill had stopped there it would have been splendid, but it went on to except a “regular salaried peace officer expressly authorized thereto by the head of his office or department or by a district attorney.” The bill now gives legal sanction to the greatest offenders against the right of privacy.

Other Side of Ledger

On the other side of the ledger, the Legislature enacted an insignificant bill, A.B. 64, amending the Civil Service Act, prohibiting any notation to be made on any docu- ment concerning a person’s race, color or religion. We're afraid that so long as-oral | examinations continue this law won’t cor rect the discrimination against negroes at which it was aimed.

Finally, the Legislature adopted A.B. 680 providing that “All public schools and edu- cational institutions are directed to include in the school work .. . instruction... in the purpose, meaning and importance of the Constitution of the United States, in cluding the Bill of Rights.”

CITIZENSHIP BAN REVERSED

(Continued from Page 1, Col. 2) pose inconsistent therewith; whether his views are compatible with the obligations and duties of American citizenship; whether he will upon his own part observe the laws of the land; whether he is willing to support the government in time of war, as well as in time of peace, and to assist in the defense of the country, not to the ex—tent-or in the manner that he may choose, but to such extent and in such manner as he lawfully may be required to do so. These, at least, are matters which are of the essence of the statutory requirements, and in respect of which the mind and conscience of the applicant may be probed by pertinent inquiries, as fully as the court, in the exercise of a sound discretion, may conclude is necessary.’

Lower Court Abused Its Discretion

“The record herein fails to disclose the inquiry referred to in the Macintosh and other cases as necessary or desirable to serve as a basis for the exercise of the diseretion of the court adversely to the application. The trial court is of course the best judge of the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence in this as in other cases. Nevertheless, the nature of the proceeding is such that to justify a denial there should be a showing which is the result of an independent inquiry by the court, or a report by the examiner, with the opportunity afforded to the applicant to meet the same, as distinguished from an undisclosed investigation by the examiner prior to the hearing, and withheld from the court. Otherwise, the discretion indulged by the court is an arbitrary and not a legal discretion.

“We conclude that the record on the hearing of the application here presented does not meet the required test. A further inquiry and hearing, if requested, should be available to the parties.”

The court also decided that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The government had contended the proper procedure was to appeal to the federal courts.

Atlanta, June 16.—‘’’M NOT GOING TO PUT UP WITH ANY SOCIAL EQUALITY IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OR THE STATE SCHOOLS,” declared Governor Talmadge when informed that the Re- gents of the State university voted to retain the Dean of their School of Education even though he advocated that pupils in the new training school be “both blacks and whites,” .

Foreign Propaganda Should Be Identified

Disclosure of the publishers of all matter printed in the interest of foreign govern- ments or agencies was urged last month by the American Civil Liberties Union in a letter to Senator Alexander Wiley of Wisconsin in support of his bill requiring all foreign propaganda to be identified. The Union maintained that the “defense of democracy requires that all printed matter published in the United States by foreign agents registered with the Secretary of State should indicate its origin.’’ Such a re- quirement, in the Union’s opinion, does not restrict freedom of the press and serves only to “advise readers accurately”.

Exclusion of foreign literature whose publishers are clearly indicated was opposed, however, by the Union, because “any reader can determine the origin of what he reads when it carries a foreign publisher’s name and postage stamp, but he cannot identify foreign propaganda with an American stamp unless the name of the foreign agent is printed on it.”

The Union criticized the Post Office Department’s recent practice of destroying tons of foreign literature on the theory that every publisher abroad desiring to use the United States mails must register with the Secretary of State.

The authority to do so, according to the Union, is derived from an opinion by the Attorney-General. The Union held that the registration act applied only to agents in the United States. ‘‘Otherwise, every agency anywhere in the world desiring to send any matter to the United States by mail will be compelled to register, a procedure obviously impracticable. If adopted by other governments, it would require every agency in the United States desiring to send any mail matter abroad to register with the governments of every country. Foreign propaganda should be dealt with on its character, not on whether its publishers have registered’’, the Union said.

RED-HUNTING IN LOS ANGELES AND NEW YORK CITY

Two witch-hunt cases have arisen during the past month. In Los Angeles, Ray H. Garner, roller operator in’ the Bureau of Maintenance and Sanitation, may lose his job because he was a member of the Communist Party up to November, 1936. A recent amendment to the city charter requires the dismissal of any city worker who belonged to a group advocating the violent overthrow of the government within the past five years. The city attorney has been asked for a ruling.

In New York City, Rosalyn Cohen, 20, was denied her bachelor of arts degree from Brooklyn College because of recent testimony before a State committee investigating subversive activities in the schools. Miss Cohen denied membership in a Communist youth organization, while committee investigators claim she belonged.

TOWN ELECTION RESULTS IN EXPULSION FROM SCHOOL OF NON -SALUTING CHILDREN

By a vote of 108 to 87 the town of 29 Palms, California, has expelled three children of Charles F. Taylor, a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses, from the grade school for refusing on conscientious grounds to salute the flag. The Southern California branch of the A.C.L.U. is investigating the case to determine whether this novel procedure conforms with the requirements ofthe School Code. Incidentally, the American Legion brought the pressure that resulted in the expulsions.

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in Rochester, N. Y., decided last month that refusal of a school child to salute the flag does not constitute juvenile delinquency. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire reached a similar conclusion more than a month ago.

Page 3

Capital Cops Charged With

islocating

Sacramento City Manager James D. Dean and District Attorney Otis D. Babcock have exonerated the capitol city police department of charges of treating prisoners brut- ally. The whitewash, issued on the basis of a report submitted by Police Chief Alex K. McAllister, was administered without interviewing two eyewitnesses who made the charges, and apparently without securing the statement of the prisoner who was in- volved.

One of the eyewitnesses, John T. C. Pember of Berkeley, accompanied Christopher Leroy to Sacramento police headquarters to visit the latter’s daughter on June 1. At that time “permission was given by the booking sergeant on duty. Two other policemen who took part in the incident described below were then sitting, apparently unoccupied, in the back part of the room behind the desk.

“Mr. Leroy’s daughter was brought to the farthest of three interviewing screens of the women’s cell block which I judged to be some 25 feet from the sergeant’s desk and in line with it laterally, giving an uninterrupted view of booking proceedings.

“At 1:50 P. M., when said interview had lasted approximately 15 minutes, my attention was drawn to the desk by Mr. Leroy who was also in a position to witness the following incident.

He Would Not Talk

“The two policemen who had been sitting in the room behind the desk and a third whom I had not previously seen were holding a man under arrest before the booking sergeant. The man’s features were distorted with pain, apparently due to the manner in which he was being held. I judged him to be between 20 and 30 years old—dark hair, pale complexion, height “approximately 5’ 10’. He was asked his name by the booking sergeant and refused to give it or was in fact unable to do so. Two policemen then twisted his arms behind his neck, thrusting his face down on to the desk. In this position he was again asked for his name, but was unable to offer more than a half strangled groan. The treatment detailed above was then continued in such a manner as to break the man’s arms or to dislocate. them at the shoulder and to cause severe contusions to his neck over the jugular veins. After a few seconds the treatment caused the man to fall to the floor completely unconscious. The three policemen surrounded him then and I was unable to observe the immediate sequel. One of the three policemen then dragged him by the leg, face down, to the elevator and slung him on to the elevator floor.

“I saw that a quantity of sand or dirt, which had not been there previously, was then strewn on the floor in front of the booking sergeant’s desk.”’

“He Grabbed My Hair,” Says Cop

The Police Chief’s statement, as reported in the Sacramento Bee, asserted that the man had ben picked up unconscious after a street fight. Ambulance attendants Merrill H. Eve and Kay Marvin Hall said the man became violent four blocks from the emergency hospital and upon arrival seized Eve’s hair.

The report claimed that the man could not be handled by either police or hospital attendants, and, according to Sergeant L. E. Warren, it was necessary to handcuff him, take him to the prison and book him as a drunk. The Sergeant is quoted as saying, “He tried to battle at the desk sergeant’s window and we had difficulty in removing the handcuffs. He was still fighting and kicking and biting. After being booked he was taken (not dragged) to a place in the east cell block, where he was alone. We were advised by Dr. E. E. Varanini not to place him with other prisoners as he might do them injury.”

This is the same old self-defense plea trotted out to answer almost every police brutality charge. Invariably the prisoner is endowed with a police force mind and, consequently, although surrounded by cops, bites, kicks and struggles viciously to es- cape. No witnesses are usually available to contradict the policemen’s stories. This time, however, we are fortunate to have the statement of two disinterested witnesses, whose testimony contradicts that of the accused police at every point. Thus far, un- fortunately, the Union has been unable to contact the arrested man to secure a state- ment from him.

San Francisco Won’t Be Outdone

In San Francisco, George Doerr, night jailer at the county jail, is charged with administering a severe beating to one Horacio Fernandez Romo, a federal prisoner -arrested for failing to fill out his draft questionnaire. Romo suffered a deep, inch- long cut on the back of his head which required hospital treatment.

The jailer claims the 120-lb. Romo suffered the injury when he “fell over a bench.” Doerr also asserts that Romo “kicked me in the legs,” and that “I drew my club for protection.”

Sheriff Daniel C. Murphy has filed charges of incompetency against the jailer and a hearing will be conducted on the evening of June 30. The Sheriff’s attorney, Ray Williamson, has been appointed special proscutor.

HIGH COURT ORDERS REARGUMENT > OF TWO CONTEMPT CASES

Reargument of the cases of the Los Angeles Times, cited for contempt for its criticism of a pending court decision, and the case of Harry Bridges, West Coast labor | leader, also convicted on a charge of contempt of court, has been ordered by the U. S. Supreme Court for the October term. The two appeals, which had been consoli dated, had been awaiting a decision for more than seven months. The American Civil Liberties Union took part in the appeals, and has filed briefs amicus curiae in both cases.

Executive Committee Northern California Branch American Civil Liberties Union

CHAIRMAN Rt. Rev. Edward L. Parsons DIRECTOR Ernest Besig Philip Adams Gladys Brown Prof. Harold Chapman Brown Herbert C. Carrasco Wayne M. Collins James J. Cronin, Jr. Ralph N. Eckert Charles R. Garry Morris M. Grupp Prof. Glenn Hoover Dr. Edgar A. Lowther Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn Prof. J. R. Oppenheimer Mrs. Bruce Porter Judge Jackson H. Ralston Clarence E. Rust Helen Salz Joseph 8. Thompson Kathleen Drew Tolman Marie de L. Welch Col. Charles Erskine Scott Wood

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Fran- cisco, Calif., by the Northern California Branch of The American Civil Liberties Union.

Phone: EXbrook 1816 ERNEST BESIG Editor PAULINE W. DAVIES........Associate Editor Subscription Rates—Seventy-five Cents a Year. Ten Cents per Copy.

A.C.L.U. Supports Union Rights Of Government Employees

The right of government employees to organize into trade unions, bargain collec- tively, strike, and make “closed shop agreements where they are not excluded from doing so by civil service regulations” is maintained in a statement adopted by the Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union. The pronouncement was occasioned by the controversy, now in the courts, between the City of New York and the Transport Workers’ Union, which is opposing a suit brought by the Board of Transportation for a declaratory judgment that the board has no power to deal with labor organizations. The dispute concerns the right of subway employees to collective bargaining under city ownership. Closed shop contracts, taken over by the city in acquiring two lines, expire on June 30.

“This conflict plainly involves issues of civil liberty—namely the right of workers to organize, to bargain collectively, and to strike,’ the Union declared. “It further raises the general question as to whether government employees enjoy the same rights of organization and collective bargaining as the workers in private industry.

“It is often urged that ‘strikes against the government’ are contrary to public policy and should be prohibited. While ‘strikes against the government’ sounds indefensible in principle, it is not the ‘government’ at which the strikes of public employees are aimed, but a particular politician or administration.” The Union pointed out that while many unions of government employees have voluntarily renounced the’ right to strike, these provisions, of -eourse, do not affect the legality of strikes.” “The Union excepted policemen and firemen from exercising the right to strike. It opposed the “closed shop” as unlawful where workers are appointed under civil service rules.

The Union contended that the claim that government workers can turn for relief to the legislature, and that they enjoy a “privileged position” because of tenure, does not always secure fair treatment, and that “the voice of organized labor may on occasion be the only effective means 0 calling attention to injustices.” It expressed its support of mediation and arbitration rather than strikes as a means of settling labor disputes, and stated that “the more the spirit of democracy characterizes the relation of government | orkers to administrators the less occasion there will be for strikes.”

NEW BOOKS ON CIVIL LIBERTIES

“The New American”. Edited by Francis Kalnay and Richard Collins. (Published by Greenberg, 388 pp., $2.50.)

A handbook of necessary information for aliens, refugees and new citizens, ‘““The New American” should be of value to those interested in alien welfare and the problem of Americanization. It presents for the first time, a clear, simple account of the status quo—legal and social—of the alien in this country. The material is well organized, so that it makes an excellent volume for reference.

The book gives the facts concerning our immigration laws, change of status and naturalization. The chapter on alien rights and restrictions, while indicating that the alien has a constitutional right to work, proceeds to point out, state by state and profession by profession, legislation restricting the alien’s opportunities for em- ployment.

A.C. L.U.

During the past month the A.C.L.U. protested to the San Francisco Board of Edu- cation against the banning of a meeting of the “America First Committee” at the Marina Junior High School. According to the Board’s president, the proposed meeting was “too highly controversial’ and also likely to lead to disorder.

About a year ago the same board refused a permit to the Socialist Party for a “peace meeting”, whereupon the A.C.L.U. sought a writ of mandate to compel the board to grant the permit. The case is now pending before the District Court of Appeal where it is expected to be heard some time in August.

In the latter case, the board denied the permit because it has adopted a regulation forbidding all political meetings. In establishing civic centers at school houses, the California law provides, however, that ‘‘citizens ... may meet and discuss from time to time, as they desire, any and all subjects and questions which in their judgment may appertain to the educational, political, economic, artistic and moral interests of the citizens of the respective communities in which they reside.” Since political meetings are expressly provided for by law, the Union contends that the San Francisco School Board is without power to prohibit them.

Board Becomes Complete Censor

In the instant case, the Board has gone a step further and has set itself up as the complete censor of civic center meetings. Henceforth it will decide what issues are sufficiently non-controversial for public discussion in the schools. The effect, of course, is to bar every minority group. whose opinions are unpopular.

““T# civil liberty means anything,” the Union contends, ‘‘it means the right of un- popular groups to present their views on precisely the same basis as others. School buildings dedicated to democratic processes should become the true forums of the com- munity where all kinds of political and economic opinions may be freely expressed. Public schools are erected by the taxpayers of the entire community and should there- fore be open to use by. minority groups who are taxed like the others for their erection and maintenance.”

A.C.L.U. Letter of Protest

Following is the A.C.L.U. protest which was sent to the Board of Education:

We want to protest very strongly against the Board’s refusal to grant the use of the Marina Junior High School to the America First Committee for a public meeting. Press reports quote President Philip Lee Bush as stating that the permit was refused because the meeting was “to highly controversial” for a public school and might lead to dis- order. We submit that neither reason advanced is adequate under the Civic Center Act, and respectfully request that the application for the permit be reconsidered.

In submitting this protest, however, we take no sides on the controversial issues that were to be discussed. We are in no way connected with the America First Committee, and our only concern is with the limitation of freedom of speech and assemblage resulting from the Board’s ruling.

Only Innocuous Meetings Allowed The Board’s action implies that only innocuous subjects on which there is no disagreement may be discussed at Civic Centers. The Civic Center Act, on the other hand, expressly permits the discussion of “any and all subjects” pertaining to the political, economic, moral, etc., interests of the citizens of the respective communities. The subjects allowed discussion under the law are all “highly controversial,” and the Board’s ruling would, therefore, appear to conflict with the very law under which it assumes to act. At the same time, we venture to say that the Board itself engages in “highly controversial’’ discussions which privilege it would deny to the citizens generally.

The assertion that the permit was refused because the meeting might lead to disorder, implies, we take it, that the Board feels that persons in the community who disagree with the purposes of the meeting might have attempted interference with its orderly conduct. It strikes us that this is no ground for denying the permit but is a fit matter to be referred to the police department. Those seeking to interfere with the peaceful conduct of the meeting should be arrested ; the meeting should not be prohibited because of threats of lawlessness. To withhold such permission is to bow to the will of a mob, and implies that not the Constitution of the United States and of the State of California is the Board’s final authority, but the will of the mob.

Moreover, there is no real evidence that the proposed meeting would be attended with violence by its opponents. Numerous meetings of the America First Committee have been held in San Francisco and the Bay Area without any destruction of property or the disturbance of the peace. No clear or present danger to the peace of the community exists.

Mooney Meeting Not Too Controversial

Two years ago the Superior Court of Ventura County held that a School Board could not deny a permit for use of the Civic — Center because a subject was “highly con- troversial.”? Consequently, a writ of mandate was granted for a meeting at which Thomas J. Mooney was the scheduled speaker.

It is interesting to note that outside of San Francisco, Miami, Florida, is the only = community that has interfered with meetings of the America First Committee. In Miami, the permit was refused on the ground that the committee is “subversive and opposed to the foreign policy of the federal government.” Subsequently, however, the City Commission voted to remove the ban and the meeting was held.

Finally, the consequence of the Board’s action is to deny to one group the rights of © free speech and assemblage which are enjoyed by others. This is a denial of equal protection of the laws without which our democratic government cannot survive. If the democratic processes are to be maintained, not only must there be complete freedom of expression on matters of vital public concern, but it is the positive duty of public officials to foster rather than to interfere with freedom of speech, press and assemblage.

We sincerely hope that the Board will reconsider its decision in the light of its commitment to the fundamental liberties guaranteed by our Federal and State Con- stitutions.

FIFTEENTH C. 8S. VICTIM PARDONED BY GOV. OLSON

Governor Culbert L. Olson on June 17 granted a full and unconditional pardon to Charles Lesse, 47, victim of the California criminal syndicalism law who was convicted solely because of membership in the I.W.W. Lesse was arrested November 12, 1919, at Arcata, Humboldt county, shortly after the law went into effect. He was convicted January 21, 1920, and deported to Germany in March, 1922. He now resides in Sweden.

The pardon to Lesse raised to 15 the number of California criminal syndicalism vic- ‘tims pardoned by Gov. Olson since he took office. Twelve of the 15 received the as- sistance of the Northern California branch ue the A.C.L.U. in preparing their applica ions.