vol. 27, no. 9

American

Civil Liberties

Union

Volume XXVII

immigration Sees Light

San Francisco, September, 1962

ins

; (R), oe os e

U. S. Citizenship

Persistence paid off for ACLU client Frank Bonetti. He

was informed on August 9 that the Immigration Service

- would recommend he be naturalized as a U. S. citizen in a

federal court hearing on August 29. This victory comes after

342 years of hearings and investigations without the Immi-

gration Service being able to de-

cide whether, to recommend the

denial or grant his petition for

ctizenship, filed in February

1959.

Service Delays

Finally ACLU staff counsel

Marshall Krause filed a motion

requiring the Service to come to

a decision on the petition, and

the district court gave the Serv-

ice 90 days in which to make a

recommendation. The Service

held one more all-day hearing,

at which Bonetti was represented

by both Krause and executive di-

rector Ernest Besig. No new evi-

dence was presented which the

Service did not already have on

the record, with the exception of

some written notes an investiga-

tor claimed to be an accurate

summary of a conversation he

had had with Bonetti in 1951.

The investigator had no inde-

pendent recollection of that con-

versation; he could: only testify

it was his practice to make ac-

curate summaries. Over vigorous

ACLU objection, the notes were

admitted against Bonetti, even

though their accuracy could not

be tested by cross-examination.

Bonetti denied he had ever ex-

pressed the sentiments con-

tained in the notes.

Background Issues

Just inside the court-pre-

Scribed 90-day period, the Immi-

gration Service came through

with its recommendation that

the petition be granted. It is-

sued a six-page written decision,

with no mention of the damag-

ing notes. It did note the two

issues which bothered the Serv-

ice: that Bonetti had been a

member of the Communist Party

during the depression years,

1932-36, and that he had been a

member of the Veterans of the

Abraham Lincoln Brigade. The

Service accepted Bonetti's un-

contradicted testimony that he

had completely severed connec-

tions with the Communist Party

in 1936 and that, though he was

a veteran of the Abraham Lin-

coln Brigade which fought in the

Spanish Civil War, he had not

been a member of the; organiza-

tion for at least 20 years.

Bonetti previously survived

the Service's attempts to keep

him from re-entering the U. S.

as a quota immigrant in 1938 and,

' in 1951, to deport him as an alien

who had been a member of the

Communist Party. The deporta-

tion was thrown out by decision

of the U. S. Supreme. Court in

1958, holding that since Bonetti

had-not been a Party member

since his last entry in 1938, the

statute did not apply to him.

The new citizen lives with his

wife in El Cerrito. -M.W.K.

ACLU'S Stand Against

The Francis Amendment

The following statement has been adopted by the special

committee of the ACLUNC authorized by the Board of Direc-

tors to define its opposition to the Francis Amendment. The

committee expects to prepare a more detailed analysis of

each section of the prolix amendment, to be available shortly.

The American Civil Liberties

Union of Northern California be-

lieves that Proposition 24, to

add a new article to the Califor-

hia Constitution named the

"Louis Francis Amendment," is

wholly inconsistent with Ameri-

can constitutional liberties. Un-

der cover of the bandwagon mu-

sic of anticcommunism, the slop-

pily drafted, vague and _ ill-con-

sidered language of the amend-

ment would give various govern-

ment agencies broad arbitrary

powers to silence dissent by label-

ing it subversion and to enforce

' conformity by equating its ab-

sence with disloyalty. These

powers could be exercised with-

out its victims even having such

fundamental rights as the op-

portunity to cross-examine their

accusers, to present evidence in

defense and to appeal from an

adverse decision.

The.sponsors of the Francis

Amendment tell us. that Califor-

nia is in such danger from sub-

versive activity that extraordi-

nary counter measures are neces-

sary, sacrificing the basic liber-

ties upon which our democracy

was built. The fact is that no na-

tional or state agency now en-

gaged in combating subversion

and espionage has asked for extra-

ordinary powers, nor has any

spokesman for such agency said

that they are needed. There are

now laws which punish espionage,

sabotage or plotting to violently

overthrow the government and

which prevent any person who

advocates violent overthrow of

the government from running for

election in California and from

being a public employee in. Cali-

fornia, including teaching in pub-

lic schools and state universities

and colleges.

The Francis Amendment seeks

to punish an individual for be-

liefs and opinions, rather than

what he actually does. In an in-

dividual were a member of a so-

called "subversive organization"

- even if he did not know the

purpose of the organization or

subscribe to its principles - he

could not run for public office,

could not hold`any public employ-

ment and could receive no tax

exemption. The threat of these

. results would make it dangerous

for an individual to belong to

any controversial group, regard-

less of his belief that it has a

legal and worthwhile purpose.

The possibility of an unjustified

smear isa real one under the

proposed amendment because it

makes a mockery of our tradi-

tional ideas of fair play and due

process of law.

The outstanding example of

this mockery is section 13 un-

der which the Francis Amend-

ment would "supersede all pro-

-Continued on Page 2

Number 9

In This Issue . =

To Be Informed on

Francis Amendment ....p. 2

Supreme Court:

Review and Prospects cent 7p. 3

Test Case on

Denationalization ,.....p. 4

S. F. Schools re

Prayer and Integration ..p. 3

Proposition 24

Stays on Ballot

The California Supreme Court

on August 15 declined to enter-

tain a petition for a writ of man-

date to require the Secretary of

State to remove Proposition 24,

the Louis Francis Amendment,

from the November ballot. The

petition, filed by former States

Attorney General Robert Kenny,

claimed that the proposition to

appear on the ballot was differ-

ent from the one submitted to.

the Attorney General Mosk for

titling and used to gather the

over 400,000 signatures necessary

to get the measure before the

state electorate.

The fact that Section 9 of the

proposition, denying all tax ex-

emptions to members of pro-

scribed organizations, was not in

`the earlier versions of the initia-

tive measure was admitted by its

supporters, but they claimed the

omission was inadvertent and in-

significant. The Supreme Court,

`with Justice Peters dissenting,

did not hear argument on the

case. It authorized its clerk to say

that there had been `substantial

compliance" with the initiative

procedure and that the court had

not passed on the constitutional-

ity of any of the provisions of the

proposed constitutional amend-

-ment.

Opposition Mounts

Many responsible groups have

indicated their opposition to the

3300-word red-hunting measure.

An ad hoc committee, tentatively

known as the Northern Califor-

nia Committee against Proposi-

tion 24, is still in the process of

being formed to concentrate on

working against its passage,

which only requires a simple ma-

jority of the votes to become part

of-our state Constitution. Pro-

ponents of the measure are as-

sured of a well-financed, large

and enthusiastic campaign, built

on the organization remaining

from the state-wide drive to col-

lect signatures for the initiative

measure.

The Los Angeles Times and

the San Francisco News-Call

Bulletin have urged defeat of the

amendment. Their opposition

rests primarily on the astonish-

ing perversion of the grand jury

function in section 3, which

would give that body in any

county the power to declare an

organization subversive without

hearing any evidence. The San

Francisco Chronicle and the East

Bay Labor Journal have placed

their opposition on broader

grounds, the Chronicle stating,

"the Francis Amendment is not

only undesirable, but a distinct

danger to basic American con-

cept . ..." The San Francisco

Junior Chamber of Commerce an-

nounced its-opposition and con-

demned the measure's sponsors

for deceptive practices in push-

ing its passage. Other groups

which have condemned the prop-

osition are State AFL-CIO, the

California Teachers' Association,

the San Francisco Democratic

County Central Committee, the

Jewish Community Relations

Council (San Francisco) and the

American Jewish Congress. Both

gubernatorial candidates have

spoken out against the amend-

ment,

Free Speech Victory

Reinstated

Jack Owens, the Lassen Junior College teacher who wrote

letters to the editor of the Lassen `Advocate critical of the

educational achievements of the county's public schools, was

ordered reinstated to his position by an opinion of the Third.

District Court of Appeal handed down on July 26. Owens had

been fired from his

position at the college after a

superior court judge decided in

a suit brought by the local school

board that the teacher had-been

guilty of "unprofessional con-

duct" since, in the judge's opin-

ion, the schools of Lassen County

were being run in a "proper"

`manner and the people of the

county were satisfied with the

results.

First Amendment Question -

Former staff counsel, Albert

Bendich, who handled the appeal

for the ACLU, argued the case

on First Amendment grounds

Stating, "This case presents the

question: Are teachers free to |

enjoy the rights guaranteed by

the First Amendment on a par

with other persons or are they

`second class citizens?'" This

question, Bendich argued, can

not be avoided by characterizing

public criticism as unprofession-

al.

The three-judge District Court

of Appeal split 2-1 on the case

with Justice Peek writing and

Justice Pierce concurring in the

opinion reversing the trial court.

The majority bluntly stated, "It

was not the court'S function to

debate the subject of proper ad-

"ministration of the school sys-

tem. Within the limitations pre-

viously discussed (disruption or

impairment of discipline or the

teaching process), defendant had

the constitutional right to differ

with the court and the adminis-

trators over what is proper man-

agement, at least in a responsible

manner."

CTA Position

The dissenting opinion of Jus-

tice Schottky agreed with the

"expert" panel appointed by the

California Teachers' Association

to study the case which reported

that Owens' conduct was unethi-

eal (and therefore unprofession-

al) because he was "pressing

a personal viewpoint

in an intemperate manner ...

{with disregard} for the opinion'

or status of a colleague...

.' The

CTA panel considered it unethi-

cal to go outside of professional

channels to effect a revision of

educational policy once a deci-

sion as to that policy had been

made.

Some Can't Read

An unbiased observer might

be tempted to think that the

_ public schools in Lassen County

could use a little criticism-

whether within or without pro-

fessional channels or before or

after decisions had been made-

by the following facts: The prin-

cipal of the high school testified

_ that the median score of a high

school English class on a nation-

ally administered test was 9 (i.e.,

tenure ,

JACK OWENS

halt the class was in the lowest

10% of all the students taking

the test). In 1960 the 150 enter--

ing 10th grade students were

tested in English and the median

Score was 22. Of the 150, only

33 were average or better when

compared with entering 10th

graders around the country and

46 were in the lowest 5% na-

tionally; 14 of the group were

not tested at all because they

could not read. Only 10% of the

high school graduates from Las-

sen County are eligible to enter

the University of California.

Teachers' Rights

The majori ty opinion con-

tinued: "The uncontradicted evi-

dence reveals that defendant

- violated no board or school poli-

cy by publicly airing his griev-

ances; indeed, it appears that the.

board and school had no writ-

ten grievance procedure. Neither

did defendant violate any other

ascertainable school rule. There

is no issue of disobedience or in-

subordination. ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Defendant

. was not precluded from join-

ing in this great public debate

{on the quality of education] be-

cause of his status as a teacher.

Nor was he precluded from criti-

cizing education in the course

of his electioneering in support ~

of his choice of a candidate for

the school board in the coming

election."

Further Appeal

The Lassen County Board of

Education has voted to petition

the California Supreme Court to

grant a hearing in the case and

if it does so, there will be a new

opinion written, In view of the

impo:' nce of the case, the

Supreme Court may well vote to

grant a hearing in order to set

a State-wide policy on what is

"unprofessional conduct."

: Ss M.W.K.

National ACLU Director

Stops Over in San Francisco

On his way up the coast in a national tour of ACLU affili-

ates, John de J. Pemberton, Jr., executive director of the na-

tional ACLU, will spend overnight in San Francisco on October

1. That evening he will meet with ACLUNC board members,

dining together as guests of Mrs.

member of the board of our northern California branch.

Helen Salz, founder and

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

ERNEST BESIG... Editor

503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California, EXbrook 2-4692

Subscription Rates -- Two Dollars a Year

Twenty Cents Per Copy

Dr. Alfred Azevedo

_ Theodore Baer

Prof. Arthur K. Bierman

Rev. Richard Byfield

Prof. James R. Caldwell

John J. Eagan

Prof. Van D. Kennedy

Rey. F. Danford Lion

John R. May

Lloyd L. Morain

Honorary Treasurer:

- Jeseph M. Thompson

Honorary Board Member

Sara Bard Field

Mrs. Gladys Brown

Mrs. Paul Couture |

Joseph Eichler

Morse Erskine _

Dr. H. H. Fisher

Mrs. Margaret C. Hayes

-Prof. Ernest Hilgard

Mrs. Paul Holmer

Mrs.' Mary Hutchinson

_Richard Johnston

Roger Kent

Mrs. Ruth Kingman

Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

CHAIRMAN: Howard A. Friedman

VICE-CHAIRMEN: Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn

Helen Salz

Rev. Harry B. Scholefield

SECRETARY-TREASURER: John M. Fowle

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig

Committee of Sponsors

Prof. Charles Muscatine

Prof. Herbert L. Packer

William M. Roth

Clarence E. Rust

Prof. Nevitt Sanford

Mrs. Alec Skolnick

Mrs. Martin Steiner

Gregory S. Stout

Donald Vial

GENERAL COUNSEL

Wayne M. Collins

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

Norman Lezin

Prof. John Henry yea

Hon. Clem Miller

Rey. Robert W. Moon

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Prof. Hubert Phillips

Prof. Wilson Record

_ Dr. Norman Reider

Prof. Wallace Stegner

Mrs. Theodosia Stewart

. Mes. Kathleen D. Tolman

Rt. Rey. Sumner Walters

Stanley Weigel

Franklin H. Williams

reecom for Teachers

Freedom of expression for school teachers is not the

broadest freedom in the land - school principals, superin-

tendents and school boards being what they are. When this

freedom was throttled to the point where a Lassen Junior

College teacher lost his job in 1959 for expressing his opin-

ions of the educational system in letters to the editor of the

Lassen Advocate, we felt a genuine concern for the freedom

of teachers generally.

Jack Owens, the letter-writing ae accused the school

administrators of Lassen Union High School district of

bureaucracy, lack of policy and isolation from the teachers;

he also took on the State Department of Education (which,

however, refused to revoke his teaching credentials) and the

California Teachers Association. His employers fired him for

`unprofessional conduct."

Backed by the American Civil ibe: Union, Owens

has fought the case through the District Court of Appeal,

which has handed down an opinion supporting him. The

court said his expression of views must be shown to have

disrupted or impaired the discipline of the teaching process

to warrant his being fired.

This is a welcome distinction. Many a teacher disagrees

with the status quo; when one says so, he should not be made

a pariah unless the effect of his criticism is to cause real

_turmoil in the school system.-S. F. Chronicle, 7-30-62

NS

Chapter Board

Meetings

MARIN:

Tuesday, Sept. 4, 8:15 p.m.

Dr. Sam Hanzel's

100 Goodhill Road in

Kent Woodlands

MID-PENINSULA:

Thursday, Sept. 13, 8 p.m.

All Saints Church

555 Waverly in Palo Alto

(see program details, p.3)

SACRAMENTO:

Tuesday, Sept. 11, 8 p.m.

James D. Lucas.

5628 McAdoo Avenue

SANTA CLARA VALLEY:

in conjunction with Mid-

Peninsula's meeting

(see above)

ACLU NEWS

Pade 2 SEPTEMBER, 1962

Fall Course on

"The Negro and

The City"

S.F. State College is offering a

special course of study on "The

Negro and the City" to help in-

dividuals and community groups

understand and cope with the mi-

gration of Negroes to urban

areas. Frank Quinn, executive di-

rector of the Council for Civic

Unity, will be the instructor.

Using the Bay Area as its lab-

oratory,

how cities receive migrant

groups, the history of Negroes in

the U.S., Negroes in northern

cities and implications for com-

munity programs. It is designed

especially for students, teachers,

social workers and civic leaders,

but is open to all persons who

want insights into recent large-

scale migration of Negroes into

the Bay Area.

The course will be given at the

Downtown Center of the College,

540 Powell Street, from Septem-

ber 18 to January 8, Tuesdays

from 7 to 9:45 pm. Tuition is

$30.00.

_ State's

the course will cover.

Basis of Douglas'

Position In

Prayer Case

In a concurring opinion in the

Regents' Prayer Case, Justice

Douglas set forth the underlying

philosophy of the First Amend-

ment's guarantee of religious

freedom. He borrowed language

appearing in a dissent of Justice

Rutledge in the Everson case

which upheld, by a 5 to 4 vote,

free public transportation for

parochial school students. Curi-

ously enough, he and Justice

_ Black are the only members of

that majority still on the court,

although Justice Douglas would

now seem to be in disagreement

with the decision. In any case,

here is what Justice Douglas calls

"durable First Amendment phil-

osophy":

Reasons for Amendment

"The reasons underlying- the

Amendment's policy have not

vanished with time or diminished

in force. Now as when it was

adopted the price of religious

freedom is double. It is that the

church and religion shall live

both within and upon. that free-

dom. There cannot be freedom of

religion, safeguarded by the

state, and intervention by the

church or _ its agencies in the

domain or dependency

on its largesse. Madison's Remon-

strance, Par. 6, 8. The great con-

dition of religious liberty is that

it be maintained free from sus-

tenance, as also -from other in-

terference, by the state. For

when it comes to rest upon that

secular foundation it vanishes

with the resting. Id., Par. 7, 8.

Public money devoted to payment

of religious costs, educational or

other, brings the quest for more.

It brings too the struggle of sect

against sect for the larger share

or for any. Here one by numbers

alone will benefit most, there

another. That is precisely the

history. of societies which have

-had an established religion and

dissident groups. Id. Par. 8, 11.

It is the very thing Jefferson and

Madison experienced and sought

to guard against, whether in its

blunt or in its more screened

forms. Ibid: The end of such

strife cannot be other than to de-

stroy the cherished liberty. The

dominating group will achieve

the dominant benefit; or all will

embroil the state in their dissen-

tions. Id. Par. 11."

Prayer's Import

Justice Dougias joined the ma-

jority in the Regents' Prayer

Case, he said, because `What

New York does with this prayer

is a break with that tradition."

Discrimination

Siopped

Henry Doelger's Westlake .

(Daly City) development, called

Country Club Apartments, did a

turnabout last month after hav-

ing refused to rent an apartment

to a couple belonging to a minor-

ity group.

The couple qualified shapely

in financial and credit rating.

After their deposit had been ac-

cepted, they were informed that

"for confidential reasons" their

application had been rejected by

the "Rental Committee."

ACLU staff counsel Marshall

Krause then paid a visit to the

development's manager and in-

formed him of the recent Cali-

fornia Supreme Court decision in

Burks v. Poppy Construction

Company (see May NEWS). The

"Rental Committee' reconsid-

ered and rented the apartment

to the couple -M.W.K.

posed

ACLU'S Stand Against

The Francis Amendment

Continued from Page 1-

visions of this Constitution

(meaning the Constitution of

California) and laws _ enacted

thereunder in conflict there-

with." Thus the California Con-

stitution's guarantees of inalien-

able human rights to life, liberty,

property, religious freedom, pro-

tection from cruel and unusual

punishment, jury trial, freedom

of speech and press and freedom

of assembly would all have to

give way to suppressions of the

Francis Amendment. The effect

of this may be seen in the op-

eration of section 3 of the pro-

amendment allowing a

grand jury, which operates in

secret sessions and does not hear

any opposing evidence, to de-

clare an organization subversive

and thereby invoke all the strict

penalties of the amendment with-

out any judicial process. The At-

torney General would have the

same power, again without the

opportunity to present a de-

fense by the person or group

concerned. This portion of the

Francis Amendment subverts

`the basic concept of justice by

making prosecuting agencies

perform-the functions of judges

and allowing their judgments to

be made in secret.

Confused and frustrated by the

menace of external communist

expansion, the proponents of the

Francis Amendment have turned

their fire internally where it will

provide the irrational heat for

6

Aspirant Opposes

@ ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log e

Wiretapping

Edward J. McCormack, candi-

date for the U.S. Senate from

Massachusetts, testified before a

House Judiciary Subcommittee

against a wiretap bill sponsored

by Attorney General Robert F.

Kennedy. As his state's attorney

general, McCormack urged de-

feat of the proposed legislation,

authorizing state

wiretaps in cases involving na-

tional security. He voluntarily re-

jected the broad wiretap powers

the bill would grant. Declaring

the "sacred right of privacy is,

and must remain, the cornerstone

of an open society,' Mr. McCor-

mack expressed abhorrence for

all wiretapping.

Prayer Gase

Opinion on Hand

The ACLU office has copies of -

the decision in Engle v. Vitale,

outlawing the New York Re-

gents' Prayer. They contain the

prevailing, concurring and dis-

senting opinions in the ease.

Coipes are available at 20 cents

each (please enclose with your

order). :

Also available are copies of a

sermon in strong support of the

Court's decision by Rev. Edward

O. Miller, Rector of St. George's,

Episcopal Church in New York.

These are free.

and federal

the political smear which weak--

ens democracy and makes the

people distrust its government.

The American Civil Liberties

Union takes its stand on the side

of democracy where no one may

be punished for his beliefs or

opinions and where open evi-

dence and due process of law are

required for a person who is

penalized for his actions. Commu-

nism will be defeated by pointing

out its defects and weaknesses in

the market place of free speech

and not by preventing its discus-

sion. The methods of totali-

tarianism are not admissible in

a democratic system of govern-

ment and every American,

whether he _ feels personally

threatened or not, should be con-

cerned with this attempted ero-

`sion of constitutional liberties.

_The anti-democratic, anti-consti- _

tutional Francis Amendment

should not become part of our

California Constitution.

Santa Clara

Valley Chapter

On the Alert

Less than a year old, the San-

ta Clara Valley chapter of

ACLUNC is already earning the

reputation for leaving no ciyil

liberties' stone unturned. It

keeps tabs on local. develop-

ments, tackling issues as they

crop up. :

In its latest move to assure

the free play of liberty at home,

the chapter last month urged the

City Council of San Jose to re-

peal certain portions of the ordi-

nance relating to handbill distri-

bution and permits. A letter to

the local governing body intro-

duced "in exhaustive memoran-

dum, prepared by attorney Hal

Gross of Mt. View, analyzing the

unconstitutionality of those sec-

tions of the ordinance regulating

the exercise of First Amendment

rights.-The chapter questions the

requirements of permits, author-

ity given to the Chief of Police

to grant or deny them and the

unapportioned tax (charges in

excess of administrative costs)

for permits granted. These are,

the chapter states, limitations on

freedom of speech and assembly

prohibited by the First Amend-

ment. Application of these regu-

Jations to commercial handbills

is not being challenged.

The chapter's September cal-

endar calls for a public debate of

the Louis Francis amendments.

Plans are in process for a meet-

ing and/or radio program on

this proposition threatening our

state's constitutional liberties.

In order to stimulate broader

membership interest and partici-

pation, the chapter is also plan-

ning future board meetings for

each session to include discus-

sion of a topic of civil liberties'

import. Education will be a regu-

lar feature of these monthly

meetings open to all ACLU

members.

To 5e infor rf

The Francis

Hear (c)

8, at 10: 45 a.m.).

Read

Attend

on p. 3).

Coleman Blease, xegislative representative for

ACLU of Southern California and Richard J. Dol-

wig, state Senator from San Mateo County, debate

the amendment-KPFA(FM) on Friday, Septem-

ber 7, at 1:00 p.m. (repeated Saturday, September

a detailed, comprehensive analysis of the measure

by the American Jewish Congress-available at

the Congress office, 47 Kearney, S. F.

_or a succinct review, aptly termed "Loyalty on the

Ballot?" in the May Newsletter of the California

Friends Committee on Legislation, 2160 Lake, S.F.

the joint Mid-Peninsula and Santa Clara Valley

ACLU chapters' meeting, September 13 in Palo

a Alto, and participate in their educational program

to apprise the public on the destructive contents

and far-reaching effect of the proposition (details

ent

History may record the 1961 term of the United States

Supreme Court for the vituperative and seemingly over-

whelming criticism which followed its decision in the case

of "Engle v. Vitale," declaring the New York Regents' Prayer

to be a violation of the First Amendment's prohibition of the

establishment of religion. Calm

voices have already pointed out

that a careful reading of the de-

cision (printed in the August

NEWS) shows it was not anti-

religious but merely in accord

with the strict principles of sepa-

ration of church and state found.

necessary by our Founding Fa-

thers. The threat to amend the

First Amendment remains a Sseri-

ous one. A campaign in this Gi-

rection could create one of the

_most important civil liberties

fights since the adoption of the

Bill of Rights.

Reapportionment

However, the most significant

decision of the Term will prob-

ably be Baker v. Carr. This case

"overturned the rule of Colegrove

v. Green that reapportionment of

legislative districts was a political

question not to be inquired into

by the Federal courts. Baker v.

Carr held that a complaint al-

leging the denial of the equal

protection of the laws because

voters in rural districts had a

disproportionate amount of polit-

ical power evolving from no

change in state elective districts

since 1900, did state a case for

relief in the Federal courts. As a

result of this decision, just in the

course of the past few months,

suits have been brought in the

Federal courts of at least seven

states to end the partial disen-

franchisement resulting from

failure to redistrict those areas of

the state in which large popula-

tion growth has made districts

formerly equal in population

grossly unequal. The Supreme

Court has yet to rule on exactly

how far the states must go in

ereating districts equally divided

_on the basis of population. Sev-

eral questions remain to be an-

swered. Will districts for the elec-

tion of state representatives

based on geographical considera- -

tion be upheld? Will there be a

difference in the requirements .

for state elective districts and

Federal elective districts?

_ Free Speech

- Other significant decisions

which have been previously re-

ported on in the NEWS are the

reversals of nine out of ten con-

tempt of court convictions aris-

ing from failure of witnesses to

"answer questions of Congres-

sional Committees. As reported

in the August NEWS, these deci-

sion were based on technical

grounds and did not reach the

vital question of free speech

abridgement. Cramp v. Board of

Public Instruction held that a

Florida statute requiring state

employees to take a loyalty oath

was invalid, a unanimous court

so ruling, because the oath's

terms were so vague as to un-

constitutionally inhibit the free

exercise of the individual free-

doms protected by the Constitu-

tion (see December NEWS).

Obscenity

The Court on the last decision

day of the Term granted an in-

junction requested by the pub-

lisher of a magazine the post of-

fice had declared obscene and re-

fused to deliver. Only seven mem-

bers of the Court sat on the case,

Manual Enterprises v.. Day, six

of them ruling for the injunction

but on two different theories.

Three justices, Warren, Brennan,

and Douglas, decided that Con-

gress had never intended to give

the Post Office Department

power to determine material ob-

scene and therefore "non-mail-

able." In their opinion, the prac-

tice of administrative censorship,

if Congress had authorized it,

would raise grave constitutional

doubts; but censorship, and at-

tendant criminal penalties, by a

"fully judicial" process would,

the opinion stated, raise no such

doubts.

Justices Harlan and Stewart

wrote a most interesting opinion

in which they decided that the

magazines in question, composed

of male figure studies designed

for homosexual appeal, were not

obscene. Therefore, they did not

discuss the question of the Post

Office's authority. In their view

even if the prurient. interest

test were satisfied, the publica-

tions were still not obscene be-

cause they were not indecent or

offensive. These justices made

their own independent evaluation

of the magazines and decided

they were merely "unpleasant,

uncouth and tawdry." They would

hold that nothing can be obscene,

at least under Federal. statutes,

unless it both stimulates sexual

interest to a degree which sur-

passes contemporary community

standards and does it in a way

which a majority of the Supreme

Court considers offensive. The

question of literary, scientific or

social value as a defense to an

obscenity charge was not dis-

cussed, as the litigants did not

claim that the magazines had

such value.

Justice Black concurred in the

judgment without an opinion.

Evidently, he would-hold all cen-

sorship statutes unconstitutional

as an abridgement of free speech

and press. Justice Clark would

have granted the injunction and

therefore dissented from all the

other views expressed.

Drug Addiction

Robinson v. California declared

unconstitutional as cruel and un-

usual punishment the California

statute punishing the status of

being a drug addict. The decision

was written by Justice Potter

Stewart, who agreed to stay the

effect of his decision after the

State of California filed a peti-

tion for rehearing, after discov-

ery that the defendant in the

case had been dead for a con-

siderable time before the court's

decision. This fact may make the

court's decision in this particular

case moot.

`No matter how the court rules

on the technical point of moot-

ness, it seems*clear that the law,

Health and Safety Code Section

11721, will be declared unconsti-

tutional with finality when the

issue is squarely presented. The

fundamental defect in the law,

said a six-man majority, was that

it attempted to punish an illness

as a erime. Under the law, pun-

ishment of drug addiction was al-

lowed without proof of an unlaw-

ful act within the State. This was

held to be cruel and unusual

punishment. It is to be noted that

California's laws punishing the

possession, sale or use of nar-

cotics within the State are not af-

fected by the decision. The Rob-

inson case may well have im-

portant ramifications in other

areas of criminal law such as

alcoholism.

Important Decisions Expected

Many important cases are al-

ready docketed for the 1962-63

Term of the United States Su-

preme Court. Some of these are:

-y. Maryland will

Local Chapters

Pick Up Gauntlet

On Prop. 24

Perhaps the single most im-

portant task for ACLU during

the next few months is defeat of

the Francis amendment.

To educate the citizenry on

this uepressive, unnecessary and

poorly drafted measure, the Mid-

Peninsula and Santa Clara Val-

ley chapters are jointly sponsor-

ing a training session for speak-

ers and an expanded speakers'

bureau devoted exclusively to

supplying speakers on this

amendment.

If you can speak to a _ local

civie organization, your help is

urgently needed. Attend the ses-

sion, learn about the amend-

ment in detail, pick up your

speaker's kit and join other

ACLU members who will be ad-

dressing groups in the commu-

nity.

The session will be held on

Thursday, September 13 at 8:00

p.m. at the All Saints Church,

555 Waverley and Hamilton in

Palo Alto. All ACLUNC mem-

bers are welcome and urged to

attend. |

For further information, call

Ann McNaughton at DA 5-9774

(Mid-Peninsula) or Ed Laing at

948-9731 (Santa Clara Valley). If

an organization you belong to

wants to know about the content

and effect of this proposed

~ amendment, a call to either of

these numbers will lne up a

speaker.

Kennedy v. Mendoza and Rusk v.

Court-testing the constitutional-

ity of involuntary loss of citizen-

ship because of an act declared

to be expatriatory by Congress;

and NAACP v. Gray-testing the

constitutionality of a Virginia

statute prohibiting the challenge

of state segregation statutes by

litigation financed by the NAACP

or similar organizations. A large

group of pending cases such as

Griffin v. Maryland and Drews

determine

whether it is unconstitutional

state action for a city to prosecute

persons for disorderly conduct

who refuse to comply with the

racial segregation policy of a

private business. The question of

whether a state has a constitu-

tional duty to appoint an attorney

for every indigent defendant

charged with a felony in a state

court will come up in the case

of Gideon v. Cochran.

At least two cases will continue

the challenge to abusive powers

of legislative investigating com-

mittees. Gibson v. Florida is the

most interesting. It involves the

additional allegation that the

state legislative committee was

acting out of racial prejudice

when it required Gibson, presi-

dent of the Miami chapter of the

NAACP, to indicate whether cer-

tain named individuals, said to

be Communists, were members

of the NAACP according to the

membership lists in-Gibson's pos-

session. The other case, Yelien

v. United States, will attempt to

get the court to answer questions

it has avoided so far. How should

the balancing test, concerning

First Amendment rights and

Congress' right to information,

be applied? Is evidence on the

weight of conflicting public and

private interests at stake admis-

sible or inadmissible?-

Wong Sun v. United States will

decide the question of admissibil-

ity of a voluntary confession in

Federal court cases where the

defendant was illegally arrested.

Two cases will consider the right

of cross-examination. The first,

Willner v. Committee on Char-

acter, involves an applicant for

admission to the New York Bar

who was denied the opportunity

to cross-examine two witnesses

who testified against his char-

acter. The second, Williams v.

Zuckert, involves the question of

whether the government was re-

quired to produce adverse wit-

nesses for cross-examination be-

fore it could fire a Civil Service

employee. -M.W.K.

Segregation, Nerthern Style

_ far

School Integration Issue

Flares Up in San Francisco

Too comfortably viewed as a regional disease of the

South, the ugly head of segregation reared into full view in

San Francisco this summer. The bug came out in foree

around the question of boundary lines for Central Junior

High School, a new school created by the transfer of old

Lowell High School to a new

building.

Points at Issue

The cure, according to the

NAACP, CORE and the Grattan

Parents and Friends Association,

is for school student populations

to approximately reflect the com-

munity population at large in

ethnic. proportions. With the

Board of Education's proposed

boundaries for the new school,

pupil enrollment would approxi-

mate 60 percent Negro and 40

percent white-far out of line

with the city's ratio of 20 percent

Negro and 80 percent white. The

Board claims adherence to the

principle of the neighborhood

oriented school. It refuses to

recognize that segregated schools

-are educationally unsound and

sees no remedy for the conse-

quences of residential segrega-

tion reaching out into the public

school patterns-de `facto segre-

gation. Community groups pro-

testing this limited viewpoint de-

mand that educationally' sound

steps can assure ethnic balance

in our schools, so that modern

-youth learns and grows up in an

environment paralleling the

world they live and work in.

S.F. Schools

To Prayer

`benefits of the

Developments to Date

When several. heated hearings,

appeals from the Mayor and

picket lines failed to move the

Board from its segregated posi-

tion, a group of parents filed suit -

asking for the school to be closed

rather than open with a dispro-

portionate number of Negro pu-

pils. Federal Judge Alfonso J.

Zirpoli postponed decision to al-

low the Board and Central's par-

ents to settle their differences..

When the Board voted unani-

mously to close the school, court

action became unnecessary.

Judge Zirpoli stated: "The re-

sponsibility for reconciling the

neighborhood

school policy with the constitu-

tional requirements for integra-

tion rests with the school authori-

ties and will require the whole-

hearted cooperation of the com-

munity, the parents, students and

teachers."

The issue is not closed-just

evaded for the time being. There

are indications that action may

be taken against the Board of

Education on the charge of gerry-

mandering school zone lines to fit |

color lines, thus maintaining seg-

regation.

lolds on

At its meeting of August 7, the Board of Education of the

San Francisco Unified School District voted, without com-

ment, to accept the opinion of Board attorney Irving Breyer

continuing the "Song of Thanks" prayer used in many of the

city's public schools. Breyer's somewhat inconsistent opinion

concluded as follows: "Thus, in

response to the statement of the

American Civil Liberties Union

that the Supreme Court decision

makes illegal the prayer recited

in some of our San Francisco

schools, I would disagree; yet at

the same time I recognize that

the decision raises doubts which

probably will not be fully re-

solved without future court de-

cision. Finally, the policy of con-

tinuing or discontinuing the

prayer in question is not a legal

matter at this time."

ACLU Request

On July 27, ACLU director

8th ACLU Group

Takes Shape in

`Santa Cruz

Members of the Santa Cruz

area, in-a meeting June 29,

voted to form a county chapter

of the ACLU, the eighth one so

in northern California. in

view of the summer recess of

ACLUNC's board, approval of the

new chapter is delayed pending

the September board meeting.

Meanwhile the unsanctified new-

born is moving ahead with its or-

ganizational preparations,

A temporary board, headed by

Dr. Marvin Naman, is on the job.

Nominations are open for official

board members, to be voted on

by the full membership in an

October or November meeting.

By-laws have been drafted for

submission to the members.

Two-thirds of the county's paid-

up members endorsed the chap-

ter move and over half of the

members promised they would

actively participate in a going

chapter program. The first poll

was taken at a meeting in May.

Among those present were

twenty-one persons who were not

yet ACLU members. They ex-

pressed equal enthusiasm for the

organization - a propitious sign

of immediate growth potential

for the new fledgling.

Ernest Besig wrote the Board

calling attention to the recent

U. S. Supreme Court decision

holding the New York "non-de-

nominational" prayer an. unecon-

stitutional establishment of re-

ligion and asking the Board to

reconsider its policy. The prayer

most often used.in the San Fran-

cisco schools is a song recited or

sung before milk and: crackers in

the kindergarten and first grade.

Tt is:

"We thank Thee God, for food

we eat -

For family and friends we

meet;

For books we read and songs

we sing.

We thank Thee God for

everything."

Test Case

The ACLU Board of Directors

will be asked at its September

meeting to authorize a test case

to determine if the "Song of

Thanks" is an establishment of

religion contrary to the First

Amendment. If the suit is

brought, Breyer's opinion sug-

gests that the School Board's de-

fense will be based on the argu-

ment that this is not an `official'

prayer because not formally

composed or adopted by the

school system. This argument

seems wide of the mark, how-

ever, because it is the use of the

public school system to support a

religious exercise which breaches

the constitutional wall of separa-

tion between church and state.

The questions of who composed

the prayer and whether it is of-

ficially or unofficially adopted

do not appear to be determina-

tive.

The Board's acceptance of the

Breyer opinion is consistent

-with its practice of making no

deviation from established policy

until forced to do so by direct

court order. -M.W.K.

ACLU NEWS

SEPTEMBER, 1962 Page 3.

Test

enationalization

f Native-Born American

The American Civil Liberties Union announced recently

that an appeal has been filed with the United States Court

of Appeals in New York contesting a Federal District Court

decision which held that American-born Herman Marks was

denationalized because of his service in the Cuban Rebel

~ Army.

The civil liberties group dis-

closed that the appeal has been

filed by Murray A. Gordon, an

ACLU cooperating attorney serv-

ing as Marks' counsel from Fed-

eral Judge John M. Cashin's de-

cision on March 29 upholding

the United States Immigration

and Naturalization Service's con-

tention that Marks had lost his

- citizenship because of his service

with the Castro forces after Jan.

-uary, 1959.

Deportation Defeated

The organization also stated

that no appeal would be taken

from that portion of Judge

Cashin's decision which held

"that Marks was not deportable

and was entitled to a writ of

habeas corpus discharging him

from the custody of the Service

as a deportable alien. The Serv-

ice had sought to deport Marks

because of a 1950 moral turpi-

tude conviction and because he

had re-entered the United States

after escaping from Cuba with-

out the entry documents re-

quired by aliens but not citizens.

According to Judge Cashin,

Marks' conviction came at a time

when he was an American citi-

zen and could not, therefore,

serve as a basis for deportation.

' Furthermore, at the time Marks

entered the United States from

Cuba there had been no prior de-

termination of his denationaliza-

tion so there was no require-

ment that he possess the entry

' documents required of aliens but

not of citizens.

Case of First Impression

An amendment to the Immi-

gration Act in 1952 provides that -

an American citizen who enters

or serves in the armed ~forces

of a foreign country shall auto-

matically lose his citizenship, un-

less "such entry or service is

specifically authorized in writ-

ing by the Secretary of State

and the Secretary of Defense."

The Immigration Service con-

tends that Marks, born in 1923

in Milwaukee, lost his American

citizenship through serving with

Castro's army during the revolu-

tionary period, and later, under

the Castro regime. The United

States Supreme Court has never

ruled on the constitutionality of

expatriation because of service

in a foreign army, which makes

the Marks case one of unusual

importance,

ACLU Interest.

The ACLU said it was support-

ing Marks' appeal as a test of

the constitutionality of the gov-

-ernment's effort to strip a na-

tive-born American of his citi-

zenship because of his service

in a foreign army. The case as-

sumes greater significance, be-

cause it is the first involving de-

nationalization and deportation

of a native-born American who

has acquired no other citizenship

and always intended to retain his

American citizenship. In the

earlier legal proceedings before

the Immigration Service and the

District Court, Marks said that

while an American may willing-

ly and voluntarily relinquish his

native-born American citizenship,

no American can be stripped of

~ such citizenship contrary to his

will or intention.

Fourteenth Amendment

According to the ACLU, this

case will decide whether the

Fourteenth Amendment, which

provides that all persons born

or naturalized in the United

States and subject to the juris-

diction thereof, are citizens of

the United States and of the

state wherein they reside, and

Page 4

- elsewhere,

ACLU NEWS

SEPTEMBER, 1962 -

the Fifth Amendment, which

provides that `No person shall

.~ . be deprived of .. . liberty

... without due process of law,"

prohibit the government from

imposing involuntary expatri-

ation upon American-born citi-

zens. The ACLU has previously

stated its position that the `"con-

stitutional limitation upon Con-

gress to enact expatriation legis-

lation should be circumscribed

by the following standards: the

performance of a voluntary act

which imports renunciation of

allegiance to the United States.

The test is objective and applies

both to native-born and natural-

ized citizens."

Survey of

Religion in

Public Schools

Half of the public school sys-

tems in the United States today

hold homeroom devotional serv-

~ices in at least some of their

schools. This was reported re-

cently by R.-0x00B0B. Dierenfeld, as-

sociate professor of education at

Macalester College in St. Paul,

in a survey published in Reli-

gious Education on "The Extent

of Religious Influence in Ameri-

ean Public Schools."

Widespread in South

This practice was true of

eighty percent of the school sys-

tems in the East, only seven per-

cent in the West, and twenty-

six. percent in the Midwest. But

the inclusion of religious ma-

terial in the public school en-

vironment is in general far more

widespread in the South than

particularly in the

smaller communities.

Almost ninety-five percent of

the southern systems report

teaching "spiritual values," as

distinct from `moral values,"

and almost two-thirds provide

materials to teachers for this

purpose. Regular chapel exer-

ercises are held in the schools

in seventy percent. of the south-

ern systems, and Bible readings

in three-fourths of them.

Two practices which the U. S.

Supreme Court has already

found permissible, those of re-

leasea time and bus transporta-

tion for parochial school stu-

dents, are especially common in

the East. Only one-eighth of the

schools have regular chapel ex-

ercises, but almost half have re-

leased time programs and over

_ one-third provide transportation.

However, in one-eighth of the

nation's systems that. provide re-

leased time programs, these

classes are held in the school

buildings.

Religious Observances

As for actual religious observ-

ances, only fifteen percent of

the school superintendents. felt

that they were not proper in the

schools, and almost ninety per-

cent reported activities to cele-

brate Christmas. Thanksgiving

activities were reported in bare-

ly three-fourths. A few systems

even reported holding classes in

church buildings and allowing

members of religious orders to

teach in the public schools, but .

these practices were compara-

tively rare.

`These findings were all based

on a mailing of 4,000 question-

naires to a proportional sam-

pling of the four geographical

divisions of the country and five

population categories. But only

half of these were returned, and

only one-third of those sent to

the South were returned, while

the Midwest returned almost

three-fourths and the East and

West almost fifty-five percent.

Results

Concord

Humboldt

Mid-Peninsula

Santa Cruz

Miscellaneous

NOTE:

Berkeley age Sis

Butte County 2202:

Daye

Hayward =

Marin County ..... ee

Los Altos ....

Menlo Park

Palo Alto:....

Monterey County

INADA ees ee

Oakland 22-30

Orinda. 2

Redwood City ..........02......... S

"Richmond = =

Sacramento

San Francisco ..................2...

San: Mateo: 2

Santa Clara Valley ............

Steekion 2

Walnut Creek-Lafayeite ....

a Otal eo es,

m Includes 74 subscribers to NEWS.

of 1962 Membership Campaign

(to July 15, 1962)

New Members Total

(or subscribers) Members

ee 122 984

oo 5 22

oe 2 44

Bo 5 as

oo 13 "15

Se 14 80

ee 2 15

eee 20 390

oe 17 89

fe 15 113

oe 34 344

eee 15 107

oe 6 3.

De 26 254

Ci 18 61

- ey

See 19 139

eo AY 191

es 123 1093

oe 22 198

Se a AS 214

ee 9 54

oe 24 a

ee Sr = 76

ee, 16 714

oe 32. 468

oF 695% =~ "584%

Since office records count each membership application as one, these

figures do not reflect family memberships of $12.00 which cover two members (hus-

band and wife). Excluding subscribers, 621 new members have joined the ACLU this

year; of these, 54 are family memberships. Therefore, the actual number of individual

members new to the ACLU is 675.

Dorothy Hull

Frank Ficarra

George Nichols

Natalie Dukes

_ James M. Smith

Thomas Whayne

(Mail Campaign Only)

Libby Ginsberg

Peter Szego

Linden Leavitt, Jr.

Don Feiner

Arthur Goldman-

Marilyn Pennebaker

Marion Lewenstein

Katherine Ann Spencer

Rosalie Nichols

Doris Kahn

Elizabeth Seelig

_ Lawrence Johsens

Marvin Naman

Jack Warnick - Doris Sloan

Shirley Rapaport-

Ruth Freedman

Barbara Suezek-

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Includes 214 subscribers to NEWS. .

Area

Chairman

Richard L. Smith

Jack Rudinow

Aron Gilmartin

Second in a Series on

How Local

Committees

emer

ership

ork

The July NEWS carried reports from five membership

committees in different areas, describing the variety of ways

members take to educate their communities to the ACLU

and civil liberties. Since then three other committees have -

sent in reports on their work.

NAPA County

Just arranging a public meet-

ing-the event of the year and

of the membership drive-

brought the Napa committee face

to face with a civil liberties'

challenge in its county seat.

"When Don Feiner,

area chair-

man, applied for the Napa Jun-

ior College library as a meeting

place, he was confronted with

the out-of-date loyalty oath and

informed he had to sign it to get

the use of the auditorium. His

immediate telephone call to the

office put ACLU's enforcement

gears into action. Executive di-

rector Ernest Besig got in touch

with county school authorities,

reminding them of the State

Supreme Court's ruling, January

25, 1961, which declared the

Civic Center Loyalty Oath un-

constitutional, and referred them

to the Napa County Counsel for

corroboration. Shortly er-

wards Mr. Feiner was advised

the loyalty oath no longer ob-

tained. Appropriately the subject

of the meeting, held May 11

without benefit of oath, was aca-

demic freedom. Charles Musca-

tine, ACLUNC board member,

vividly interpreted this strategic

area of our liberties to an audi-

ence of 60 people.

Napa members who worked on

this year's membership campaign

are: Jane Eger, Mr. and Mrs.

Dave Evans, Carroll Mellin, Nina

Smart and Dawn Wilson, co-

chairman with Don Feiner. They

proved principle and practice

can be at one.

- Santa Clara Valley

Larry Johsen, membership

chairman of the Santa Clara Val-

ley's budding chapter, reported

that the major load of their suc-

cessful drive was carried by Jim

Ernst, Bebe Peterson and Caro-

lyn Smith. They found most of

their contacts with prospective

members interesting and produc-

tive, except for a few whose

names

the ACLU for laughs." Notwith-

standing this misplaced sense of

the committee has

humor,

chalked up a record of 45 new

members to date.

"

Mid-Peninsula

The Mid-Peninsula chapter

closed its drive with a cham-

pagne .reception in July. Over

200 people took part in the ef-

fervescent celebration, greeted

this year's 66 new members and.

NEWS subscribers in the area

and added $200.00 fo the chap-

ter's treasury.

"must have been given.

effective,

Saying It With

Civil Liberties

Last year (December NEWS)

we told of one ACLU member

who carries on a _ year-round,

one-woman campaign getting

new members. She keeps a small

supply of membership envelopes

in her purse. When a civil liber-

ties' dialogue gets to the crucial

nub of "What can we do?"...out -

comes an envelope. Direct an-

swer to question at hand.

We've recently heard of an-

other creative approach, equally

possibly more deco-

rative. A couple in the Mid-Pen-

insula uses ACLU (c) literature

(with membership envelopes en-

closed) as centerpieces for their

dining room table replacing the

more traditional floral arrange-

ment. No plea is made for the

materials - anymore than they

would be for flowers. They're

just there, attractively arranged.

As questions arise or points at

issue develop, reference may be

made to one pertinent item or

another for documentation. And

that's it.

The first right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible,

JOIN TODAY

p 151

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron Membership . 2... 6cs6 sacs esos, esse 00

Sustaining Membership... 2... ee cece ee ce

Business and Professional Membership .........0+.+ .

Family Membership LEO e CE ONO OE OS 0058 8-009 OOO 0 00 02002 OR: @

50

25

12

Associate Membership 3... . s. tn ee cc ce ee 7 10

Annual Membership

eee rere eee eee HS Oooeeoeseeeres 6

Junior Membership (under 21) .......cccecccccccce 2

ACLU News Subscription ...+. cces;00-te15t++e "$2.00

NAME C}ERKRSCHHHTDCEHHHHKHSCHREFHKHHHHHFSHCHHSSHHESC HEH HHHSCHHHHEHHH HO HRHROE

ADDRESS eoOFTF ODES CHHEOHFOHHOFC HHH HOHTHEKEFT TH LHHFHFHHVHH OHH HHRAHHO

TELEPHONE NUMBER.

coco eens seees AMT. ENCLOSED.

503 Market Street

San Francisce, 5

e@oeeeereee