vol. 28, no. 1

_ American

Civil Liberties

Union

Volume XXVIII

SAN FRANCISCO, JANUARY, 1963

"Man Without A Country"

ong Plans

Return to

Hong Kong

The ACLU has been handling the case of Let Poy Wong,

the man without a country, since he was confined last Sep-

tember on the President Cleveland without being able to get

off at either end of that ship's voyage between San Francisco

and Hong Kong. It was successful in its petition for a writ of

habeas corpus heard by Federal

District Judge A. J. Zirpoli who

Strongly indicated that the Im-

migration Service had no right

to keep a 40-year resident, who

temporarily left the U.S. as a

crewman on a U.S. ship, from

returning to this country with-

out giving him a hearing even

though he was not a U`S. citizen.

Exclusion Proceedings

_, nh December" of 1962 the

Service did schedule a hearing

for Wong, who has been free

on $1500 bail, before Special In-

quiry Officer Monroe Kroll. Staff

counsel Marshall Krause _ ob-

jected to the fact that the hear-

ing was an exclusion proceeding

where Wong had to prove his

right to be in the U.S. rather

than an expulsion - proceeding

where the Service would have to

earry the burden of proof. This

objection was based on several

federal court cases stating that a

long-time resident who leaves

the country as a crewman on a

U.S. vessel should not be put

in the same position as one who

is coming in this country for the

first time. But the objection was

overruled and the hearing went

on.

Economic Pressures Mount

Meanwhile, economic pres-

sures were mounting on Wong,

who could not take a job as a

Seaman as he could not leave

the country and could find no

other job since he is 62 years

old. For a few weeks he received

unemployment compensation but

this was cut off when the Im-

migration Service reported that

his status was that of an illegal

alien here on permit. At the

exclusion hearing a government

witness testified that Wong had

told him that he had been a

member of the Communist Party

in Chinatown for three months

in 1940. If this charge were sus-

tained, despite Wong's denial, it

would threaten his Social Securi- |

ty benefits to which he had

No Appeal in

Alcoholic Case

The plans of the ACLU to ap-

peal the decision of Superior

Court Judge Harold Holden, that

a person committed for the dis-

ease of alcoholism could be

treated in exactly the same man-

her as if he had been convicted

of a crime, were changed last

month when the case became

moot with the release of the

prisoner, Solomon Earl Foster.

Foster had originally been com-

mitted for a "term" of one year

but was released shortly after the

decision on his habeas corpus

petition after serving a portion

of this sentence. The ACLU con-

tended that his commitment to a

jail farm was not treatment but

punishment for his sickness. It

is reported that officials of Santa

Clara County are attempting to

formulate a more adequate way

to care for alcoholics not con-

victed of crimes.-M.W.K.

been contributing `for many

years. In any event, Wong most

probably faced an adverse ruling

at the first level and the pros-

pect of at least a year spent in

appealing the case during which

he could not earn a living.

Best to Retire

With these considerations in

mind, Wong decided that it

would be best for him to retire

and go to Hong Kong where his

wife lives and where he could

subsist on his social security

benefits. Thus when he receives

permission to enter Hong Kong

and starts to draw his social se-

curity benefits he will leave the

United States and his case will be

terminated.-M.W.K. |

as

In This Issue...

AAUP Speaker Ban

Statement

ACLU Urges Court to

Reject Balancing Test . .p.

Oppose Loss of Citizenship

By Absence Abroad ..... p.

Order Return of Books Seized

On General Warrant ....p.

Suppression of Dissent

Still the Trend ........ P.

Marin Chapter

Annual Meeting

January 27

Coleman Blease will speak on

"Civil Liberties and the Legisla-

WwW NY FP W WN

ture" at the annual meeting of -

the Marin Chapter ACLUNC at

8 p.m. on Sunday, January 27,

1963. The meeting will be held

in the Board of Supervisors

Chamber of the new Frank

Lloyd Wright Civic Center.

Blease is teaching in the

Speech Department at the Uni-

versity of California, Berkeley,

is a graduate of Boalt Hall and a

member of the California bar. He

is legislative representative of

the ACLU of Southern California

in Sacramento and at one time

held the same position for the

Friends Committee on Legisla-

tion. Last fall, he campaigned

actively against Proposition 24 in

northern California.

Blease's talk will be followed

by a question period and discus-

sion from the floor. Also, Milen

Dempster, Marin Chapter Chair-

man, will give a brief report of

chapter activities and plans for

the future.

A Nominating Committee will

make nominations for the chap-

ter's 1963 Board of Directors.

Additional nominations may be

made from the floor by members

present at the meeting. Howell

Breece will be master of cere-

monies.

Refreshments will be

after the meeting.

All members and friends of the

ACLU are invited to attend.

served

Number 1

3 omb Hoax

Prosecution

Dropped

U.S. Attorney Cecil F. Poole

on November 30 dismissed a

"bomb hoax" prosecution against

John M. Biller, 70, Kent, Wash-

ington, retired farmer and pen-

sioner. The information charged

that 6n October 10, 1962, at. the

San Francisco Airport, Biller

"did impart and convey false in-

formation concerning an alleged

attempt then and there being

made to wilfully damage, destroy,

and disable and wreck United

Airlines Flight No. 715 ... to

the effect that, a destructive

substance, to wit: a bomb, was

aboard ... then and there know-

ing said information to be false."

Five Versions

It appears that Biller, upon

seeing a passenger struggling

through the plane with two ap-

parently heavy boxes remarked,

"Watch it, there might be (could

be) a bomb in there.' His wife

sat beside him as he said it. Both

he and his wife insisted he said

might or may be or could be and

not there is. There were five dif-

ferent versions of what was said.

The passenger with the boxes

thought Biller. merely asked

whether he had a bomb in the

boxes.

Evidence Conflicting

In dismissing. -the - charges

Poole is quoted as saying "the

evidence as to what Biller had

actually stated was entirely con-

flicting. . ... While the Depart-

ment of Justice believes in en-

forcement of the statute, we have

no intention of asking a court

to return a conviction when the

evidence is insufficient or con-

flicting as in this case."

ACLU Intervenes

The ACLU had agreed to pro-

vide counsel for Biller after

studying the facts of the case. At

the urging of the ACLU, Poole

agreed to re-examine the case

and the dismissal resulted.

This is the first "bomb hoax"

case in which the ACLU has in-

tervened. Generally speaking,

the ACLU has equated the bomb

hoax cases with Justice Holmes'

classic example of punishable

speech-crying fire in a crowded

theatre when there is no fire.

Minorities May

Not Be Barred

From Realty Bds.

Attorney General Stanley Mosk

ruled on October 30 that realty

boards may not exclude other-

wise qualified licensed appli-

eants solely on the grounds of

color, race, religion, ancestry or

national origin.

Under California law, the use

of the term "realtor" is limited

to members of the National As- -

sociation of Real Estate Boards.

There are also other advantages

in belonging to realty boards.

The Attorney General decided

that not only is the public policy

of this state against discrimina-

tion, but that the Federal and

State Constitutions may not sanc-

tion discrimination indirectly by

protecting the use of the trade

name "realtor."

Also, discriminatory exclusion

by realty boards is a violation of

the Unruh Civil _Rights Act

which forbids discrimination "in

all business establishments of

every kind whatsoever."

Nine Years in the Courts

After having the case before him sinee an alternative

writ of mandate was issued in February of 1962, San Fran-

cisco Superior Court Judge Byron Arnold has finally indi-

cated what his ruling will be in the case of City College in-

structor John W. Mass. The

Mass was recovery of three years'

back salary amounting to about

$19,000. The long-awaited deci-

sion will enable the ACLU to pre-

sent Mass's case to the appellate

courts for what is hoped will be

the third and final time in this

protracted litigation.

Case Started December 1953

Even a summary of the chro-

nology of the Mass case is a

lengthy exercise, but it started

in December of 1953 when Mass

declined to answer certain ques-

tions of the House Committee on

Un-American Activities. As a re-

sult, Mass was suspended from

his employment by the San Fran-

cisco School Board even though

he offered to answer any ques-

tions from the Board concerning

his political activities and affili-

ations and even though the Board

had had in its own records since

1950 Mass's statement that he

had been a member of the Com-

Lundquist

Loses Try

For Damages

The California Supreme Court

has declined to hear the ACLU's

appeal in the Frank Lundquist

case. This means that the deci-

sion of the District Court of Ap-

peal reported in the November

News will stand as the final deci-

sion in the case. That decision

sustained the findings of trial

court judge Theresa Meikle that

Lundquist was. not entitled to

any monetary damages from the

Marine Engineers Beneficial As-

sociation or its officers even

though that Association' wrong-

fully refused Lundquist rein-

statement for 43 months and

`thereby prevented him from

working at his profession of ma-

rine engineer for that period.

Reinstated In 1960

In her 1960 ruling Judge

Meikle ordered Lundquist rein-

stated to the Association but,

giving no reasons, denied him

damages. The District Court of

Appeal, following the rule that

all inferences are to be resolved

in favor of finding substantial

evidence for the judgment be-

low, held that the trial judge

might have found that Lund-

quist did not intend to go back

to sea aS a Marine engineer

even though he tried to get back

~ into the union and expressed his

intention. to go back to sea.

Screening Victim

Lundquist was an early victim

of the Coast Guard's screening

program and was denied the

right to sail as a seaman in 1951

because of allegations against

his loyalty. It took some five

years to get this baseless deci-

sion overturned and then his

own Marine Engineers Benefi-

cial Association, to which he

had belonged since 1920, ex-

cluded him and he was unable

to work until Judge Meikle's

1960 decision.

Now Retired

Lundquist is now 70 years old

and his age and health have

forced him to retire from active

employment as a marine engi-

neer. The ACLU's attorneys have

represented him in these pro-

ceedings since 1951-M. W. K.

only relief Arnold granted to

munist Party from 1947 to 1949.

Dismissal Proceedings

Since Mass had tenure, the

School Board was required to

_ prove in Superior Court its case

for firing him. It proved that

Mass had used the Fifth Amend-

ment and the trial judge held

that this was sufficient and or-

dered him fired. The California

Supreme Court reversed this de-

cision and held that Mass could

not be automatically fired for

using the privilege against self-

incrimination. The School Board

then did nothing on the case for

over three years and the ACLU

moved to have its suit dismissed

for failure to prosecute. The Su-

perior Court denied this motion

but the District Court of Appeal

held that it should have been

granted and ordered the Board's

suit against Mass dismissed.

Suit for Reinstatement

By this time eight years had

elapsed and the ACLU, in early

1962, asked the-Board of Educa-

tion to reinstate Mass in accord-

ance with section 13436 of the

Education Code which provides

that an employee may not be dis-

missed unless the Board receives

a judgment in its favor and sec-

tion 18439 wilich provides: "If

the employee has been suspend-

ed pending the hearing, he shall

be reinstated within five days

after the entry of judgment in

his favor, and shall be paid full

salary by the governing board

for the period of his suspension."

But the Board, on the advice of

its attorney, Irving Breyer, re-

fused to reinstate Mass and the

ACLU was forced to file a new -

action to require it to do its duty.

Judge Arnold's Position

Judge Arnold's delayed deci-

sion was evidently based on the

argument that Mass's failure to

renew his credential with the

State Board of Education in 1956

resulted in an "automatic" termi-

nation of his employment. There

is no law or precedent for this

holding and the ACLU is confi-

dent that it will not be upheld

on appeal. The holding ignores

the fact that Mass was eligible

for a credential (he applied for

and received a new credential in

May of 1960) and that the law

only requires that an application

for a credential be made before

a person actually engages in

teaching. In addition the Legisla-

ture has ratified past employment

without a credential and has spe-

cifically provided that a suspend-

ed teacher need not have a cre-

dential in effect for the period

during which he claims back

salary.

"Fitness and Loyalty"

The explanation for Judge Ar-

nold's ruling can be found in his

previous insistence that Mass

would have to appear personally

before him "to give evidence of

fitness and loyalty" before the

court could be expected to re-

instate him to his position. And,

at the final hearing, he expressed

regrets that Mass had not come

forward to establish his loyalty.

Breyer Witch-hunts

Judge Arnold was aided and

abetted in his witch-hunting by

Irving Breyer, attorney for the

school board, who made an emo-

tional plea that Mass be required

to answer the questions that he

had refused to answer before the

-Continued on Page 3

we

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNIGN 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, EXbreek 2-4692

Subscription Rates -- Two Dollars a Year

Twenty Cents Per Copy

Ralph B. Atkinson

Dr. Alfred Azevedo

Prof. Arthur K. Bierman0x2122

Rey. Richard Byfield

Prof. James R. Caldwell

William K. Coblentz

Richard DeLancie

Rabbi Alvin I. Fine

Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross

John J. Eagan

Prof. Van D. Kennedy

Rev. F. Danford Lion

Prof. Seaton W. Manning

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

Mes. Margaret C. Hayes

Prof. Ernest Hilgard

Mrs. Paul Holmer

Mrs. Mary Hutchinson

Richard Johnston

Roger Kent

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 cent

Committee of Sponsors

John R. May

Lioyd L. Morain

Prof. Herbert L. Packe:

William M. Roth

Clarence E. Rust

John Brisbin Rutherford

Mrs. Alec Skolnick

Mrs. Martin Steiner

Gregory S. Stout

Stephen. Thiermann

Richard J. Werthimer

Donald Vial

GENERAL COUNSEL

Wayne M. Collins

Mrs. Ruth Kingman

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

Norman Lezin

Pref. John Henry Merryman

Rey. Robert W. Moon

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Prof. Hubert Phillips

Prof. Wilson Record

Dr. Norman Reider

| Prof. Wallace Stegner

Mrs. Theodosia Stewart

Mrs. Kathleen D. Tolman

Rt. Rev. Sumner Walters

"Biggest Obscenity Raid"

Order Return of Books

Seized on General Warrant

On November 29, the State District Court of Appeal or-

dered the return to Burbank publishers of literature seized

in 1961 in what was described as the biggest obscenity raid

in history. On March 16, 1961, 400,000 books were confis-

cated at the M T Bindery i in Burbank under a general search

warrant.

The court's 35-page opinion

noted that it was not passing on

the question of obscenity, and

added that in reaching its con-

clusion: "It has been necessary

for us to cling steadfastly to the

basic truth that the rights of

`good men are secure only so long

as the rights of bad men are also

protected."

Search Warrant Invalid

The' court found the search

warrant to be invalid because it

failed to specify the material to

be seized, and declared that the

Municipal Court had violated the

Jaw in issuing the warrant. "We

are required to remember," the

opinion declared, "that when

government itself becomes a law-

breaker the foundations of our

freedom are weakened, and un-

less official oppressors are re-

strained those foundations may

completely collapse."

Police Criticized . :

The opinion also criticized the

conduct of the police. "The offi-

cers while on the premises dur-

ing the search,' the opinion

stated, "divided the various titles

of different books, some 62 in

number, among themselves for

reading purposes.

picking some 10 to 12 books.

"" From about 6:30 p.m. to about

1:30 am., a veriod of some 7

hours, the officers read the dif-

ferent books and `ruled' whether

each book was obscene or not.

They ruled 31 titles `not porno-

graphic' but took a copy of each

from the premises.

"The books and other material

which they ruled to be porno-

graphic were also seized and re-

moved."

Petition for Return of Books

When the bindery operators

sought return of their books,

Burbank Municipal Judge Archie

L. Walters, who had issued the

ACLU NEWS

JANUARY, 1963

Pade 2

Each officer.

search warrant, denied their peti-

tion.

The opinion in the case was

written by Justice Allen W. As-

burn and concurred in by Jus-

- tices W. Turney Fox and Roy L.

Herndon.

The petitioners in the ease

were Sanford E. Aday, Jack A.

Lindsay, Reva A. Chamberlain,

and Dorothy Elizabeth Mauricio.

They were represented by attor-

ney Stanley Fleischman, the

State's leading attorney in the

censorship field.

Protest Ban On

Karl Prussion

School Talk

The ACLU last month pro-

tested the refusal of a Los Altos

high school to allow Karl Prus-

sion, former Communist who be-

came an FBI informant, to speak

before its World Affairs Club.

An invitation of two months

standing was withdrawn on the

order of Dr. Gordon N. Arlett,

principal of Awalt High. School.

Dr. Arlett took the position

that because the subject, "The

Threat from Within," was con-

troversial, both sides of the ques-

tion should be represented.

"We think it was a mistake to

cancel the Karl Prussion meet-

ing," said the ACLU's letter to

Dr. Arlett, "unless some serious

violation of regulations was in-

volved, and that it would have

been more proper to insist that

another side be presented at a

subsequent meeting."

The ACLU's letter while not-

ing that it was a "frequent target

of attack by Mr. Prussion," of-

fered to make a speaker avail-

able. "If (Prussion) wants to

lambast us, we'll be happy to ac-

commodate him either on the

same program or on different

programs."

Editor's note: Following is the text of a statement

of the Berkeley Chapter of the American Association

of University Professors agaimst the University of

California's Communist speaker ban.

The Berkeley chapter of the American

Association of University Professors be-

lieves that any recognized student or facul-

ty group should be empowered to invite

any speaker to appear on campus to inform

the University community on matters of

intellectual importance. The appearance of

speakers on campus is part of the instruc-

tional function of the University, and to

restrict the University's range of choice in

speakers is to restrict its instructional

function. Traditionally the faculty has been

delegated the powers necessary to main-

tain freedom and completeness of instruc-

tion, and these powers should remain in

faculty hands.

In this specific connection, therefore,

the Berkeley chapter of the American As-

sociation of University Professors deplores

the University policy which categorically

refuses to allow members of the Communist

Party of the United States to speak on cam-

pus when invited to do so by recognized

student or faculty groups. The education -

of the University community is a con-

tinuing process that requires constant en-

richment of our class-room offerings by the

presentation of points of view that we may

even dislike or condemn. In our class-rooms

we try to present various points of view

dispassionately, but a committed speaker

embodies a point passionately, and the in-

structional value of such a display is enor-

mous. If we are convinced that a point of

UP Speaker Ban Sfiatement

view is in error, we should be all the more

happy to allow its full self-exposure. To

restrict the expression of that point of

view implies fear and distrust of the effica-

cy of free investigation.

Therefore we respectfully request Pres-

ident Kerr to bring the following statement

to the attention of the Regents of the Uni-

versity of California and to recommend |

rescinding those restrictions on freedom

of speech that still exist in the University

community.

The members of the University of Cali-

fornia, Berkeley Chapter of the American

Association of University Professors ap-

plaud the words of President Arthur Flem-

ming of the University of Oregon issued

during the recent controversy over a mem-

ber of the Communist Party being allowed

to speak on the campus of that University

in February, 1962:

"The University by its very nature can-

-not pay lip service to the concept of free-

dom of expression and then deny persons

with whom it is in sharp disagreement the

opportunity of giving expression to their

views."

A similar stand was taken by President

O. Meredith Wilson of the University of

Minnesota with regard to a speech by a

Communist on that campus.

The Berkeley chapter of the American

Association of University Professors be-

lieves that any recognized student or facul-

ty group should be empowered to invite

any speaker to appear on campus to inform

the University community on matters of

intellectual importance.

Dissent on Campaign Literature Issue

Who's Looney Now?

Editor:

Sometimes ACLU is nuts.

There is a story in your Decem-

ber issue deploring our tremend-

ously effective counterattacks in

court on the anonymous `"`Com-

munist" smear against Governor

Brown and other Democratic

candidates. The issue of free

speech is not involved.

We could not have gotten re-

straining orders and injunctions

if the perpetrators of this filthy

fraud had compiied with two en-

tirely reasonable statutes which

require that a means of identify-

ing who makes charges must be

provided-the name and address

of the printer or in the case of

a "Committee" the names of two

members.

Does ACLU advocate anony-

mous free speech? I hope not in

any case. Then there is and must

be balance and judgment in the

exercise of all freedoms. Justice

Holmes long ago colorfully de-

scribed one limit to the right of

free speech - "it does not in-

clude the right to cry `fire' in a

crowded theatre."

Free elections are at the heart

of our Constitutional guarantee

of the right to govern ourselves

and it is the duty of state and

national legislatures (within

Constitutional limitations) to po-

lice those elections. Who thinks

they shouldn't make anonymous

smears unlawful?

Now take the silly statement

in your paper: "In the second

place, he made the tenuous claim

that the group was attempting to

solicit funds under the name of

the Democratic Party without

consent of that group." It's not

a tenuous claim; it's a-fact that

the mailing did ask those who

received it to send in money to

help "The Committee To Pre-

serve the Democratic Party in

California" and the judge had a

copy in his hand. Our Legislature

has most wisely provided that no

one can solicit money by use of

the name of a political party

without authorization by identi-

fied officers or committees of the

party. What's wrong with that?

Where does it conflict with the

First Amendment?

ACLU should be proud that.

many of its members helped

wrap this dirly business around

the necks of those responsible

and hung them with it.

Best regards from a friend and

a thirty-year member of ACLU.

-Roger Kent, Northern Chair-

man, California Democratic State

Central Committee.

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_1963.batch 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_1963.batch 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_1963.batch 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

Editor's Note: The ACLU be-

lieves an issue of free speech is.

raised when courts issue restrain-

ing orders, often returnable after

election, preventing the distribu-

tion of allegedly fradulent cam-

paign literature.

In one recent case, a court, on

the petition of Republican Con-

gressman Edgar Hiestand en-

joined the distribution of a' politi-

cal. leaflet which purported to

recite Hiestand's voting record in

Congress "until and unless

checked with, and changed to

conform with the actual record

of the Congress."

In another case, the Democra-

tic State Central Committee se-

cured a temporary restraining

order in a suit filed by it against

Karl Prussion and others which

enjoined "writing and causing to

be written, posted and distribu-

ted in any manner (directly or

indirectly) the Prussion pam-

phliet, circular, poster or other

printed matter substantially simi-

lar to the Prussion pamphlet or

containing any substantial por-

tion thereof." The order, addi-

tionally, summarily required the

defendants "to remove from all

US. Post Offices in California

all copies of the Prussion pam-

phiet.". The complaint in this

case charged violations of the

California Election Code, which

require a political publication to

state the name and address of the

printer, and also that the pam-

phiet was false and libelous and

constituted a "public nuisance"

which should be enjoined.

In still a third case, the circu-

lation of a reprint of a Reporter

Magazine article concerning the

Hughes Tool Company Loan to

Richard Nixon's brother was re-

strained on the petition of the

Nixon for Governor Committee,

which claimed the leaflet im-

puted Richard Nixon's honesty.

In a fourth case, distribution

of a leaflet, purporting to repro-

duce a racial restrictive conven-

ant in the deed to the home pur-

chased by Nixon in Washington,

D.C., was prohibited, because it

was alleged to be phony.

And, finally, in San Francisco,

the Democratic State Central

Committee secured an order re-

straining the Committee for the

Preservation of the Democratic

Party from circulating the re-

_ sults of a poll and from sending

out further mailings of a ques-

tionnaire that smeared the Cali-

fornia Democratic Council as a

"left-wing minority' in the

Democratic Party. The poll also

sought contributions to me Com-

mittee.

As far as the ACLU knows,

there was no question of anony-

mity in any of these cases. Even

so, the U.S. Supreme Court de-

clared an ordinance outlawing all

anonymous literature to be un-

constitutional. Clark, Frankfurter

and Whitaker dissented.

The ACLU is not complaining

about the filing of damage suits

or about possible prosecutions

under the Election Code. What it

is complaining about is the re-

straint placed upon circulation of

campaign material before there

has been a court determination

whether it is true or false.

Of course, we would object to

anyone soliciting funds in the

name of the ACLU without its

authorization, and the same goes

for the Democratic Party. But

we don't think that a Committee

to Preserve the ACLU in Califor-

nia is the same as the ACLU, and

the argument gets a little thin

when it is asserted that solicita-

tions by the Committee to Pre-

serve the Democratic Party in

California is really the same as

solicitations by the Democratic

Party.

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_1963.batch 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 Our position is simply that the

voters should decide what politi-

cal. campaign literature to read

and that the courts shouldn't pre-

vent the circulation of literature

before trial because it is alleged

to contain untruths. In fact, the

editor has expressed a willing-

ness to debate the foregoing use

of restraining orders to prevent

distribution of campaign litera-

ture with Roger Kent before

some Democratic Club that is

looking for a program. Perhaps

the title of the discussion should

be, "Who's Looney Now?"

.s

(R)

42nd Annual ACLU Report

Dissent Sti

4 " Fy

il |

The Trend

A continuing trend toward official orthodoxy and toward

suppression of dissent in this country was reported last

month by the national office of the American Civil Liberties

Union in its 42nd annual report. This trend is hampering ef-

forts to achieve a lasting peace by blocking inquiry inte

"legal, social and moral truth,"

the Union's executive director,

John de J. Pemberton, Jr., wrote

in his introduction report, en-

titled "Freedom Through Dis-

sent." --

Bill of Rights Day

The report was released at a

ceremony at the National Ar-

chives in Washington, D.C., hen-

oring Bill of Rights Day, marking'

the 171st anniversary of the final

adoption of the Bill of Rights.

The Archives meeting was ad-

dressed by Pemberton and Fran-

cis Biddle, former U.S. Attorney

General who now serves as chair-

man of the ACLU National Com-

mittee.

"With man's present possession

of the power to destroy civiliza-

tion, and perhaps himself in the

process, every resource for the

discovery and application of le-

gal, social, and moral truth is im-

mediately necessary," Pemberton

wrote in the report's introduc-

tion.

How to Find Truth

"The great tragedy of our

twentieth century resurrection of

official orthodoxy and heresies,

both social and theological, is

their hopeless inconsistency with

the achievement of such truth.

It may even now be too late for

all of mankind to yield sufficient

wisdom for avoidance of annihi-

lation. But the greatest wisdom

to be found in our common in-

heritance has taught us that only

in unlimited inquiry and unre-

stricted debate-the antithesis of

official orthodoxy-is truth to be

found."

Combatting official orthodoxy

and opposition te dissent was a

key aspect of a majority of the

many cases that taxes the Union's

resources during its last fiscal

year, the report showed.

Most Hated Heretics

"The previous year's Supreme

Court decision holding valid the

`Communist-action organization'

registration provisions of the

1850 Internal Security Act un-

leashed a new round of activity

at the federal level to identify

and proscribe mid-twentieth cen-

tury America's most hated her-

etics,' according to the report.

"These included the invoking of

the 1950 law to gain new indict-

ment of Communist Party offi-

cers, proceedings to revoke pass-

ports issued to certain of them,

investigation of the Party's pub-

lications, and efforts to enforce

the as-yet-untested `Communist-

front' provisions of the Act."

At the same time, Congress re-

instated Post Office censorship

`of foreign political propaganda;

and the Justice Department re-

indicted several persons whose

earlier convictions for refusing

on First Amendment grounds to

answer Congressional committee

questions about the Communist

influence had been. overturned,

and announced it would retry

several labor union officers ac-

cused of conspiracy to file false

non-Communist affidavits.

Echoes of Pattern

"An inclination to be com-

forted in the belief that such ef-

forts are aimed only at the ulti-

mate heresy of Communism is

shaken by the echoes of this

pattern in other directions-es-

pecially at the state and local

level," the report declared.

- Supporting that statement, it

cited 52 unresolved academic

freedom cases of teachers, a

50% increase over last year; "a

new wave of textbook censorship

efforts [that] has threatened to

sterilize public school teaching

of all controversy"; attempts in

several states to "introduce in-

doctrination courses in Amer-

icanism sought to supplant teach-

ing about various political, eco-

nomic, and social philosophies

with a catechism in political or-

thodoxy"; denial of public facili-

ties for meetings on controver-

sial subjects; arrests of picketers

and demonstrators; and con-

tinued requirement of loyalty

oaths for many public jobs.

Church and State

The report noted that victories

were scored in the drive against

orthodoxy during the past year,

headed by the Supreme Court

decision invalidating the New

York Board of Regents' so-called

non-denominational prayer for

public schools. "By enforcing the

-Constitution's prohibition en es-

tablishment of religion the de-

cision has buttressed the guar-

antee of religious liberty and op-

erated toward insuring that the

social order will be subjected to

the independent moral judge-

ment of religious men and so-

cieties," the report said.

Some Gains

Appeals to reason were suc-

cessful also in limiting the "ex-

cesses of the textbook censors

and baiters of school teachers,"

the report said. "Each of the

countless battles. over Henry

Miller's Tropic of Cancer was

affording a forum for fuller pub-

lic understanding of the hazards

of obscenity censorship, and sev-

eral favorable censorship deci-

sions, especially those curbing

police threats and intimidations,

were won. Encouragement can

also be felt by the 1962 Congres-

sional election returns in which

several public spokesmen for the

John Birch Society were re-

jected at the polls, giving hope

that the divisive community and

anti-civil liberties effects of the

ultra-right movement have

reached their peak."

New Arguments

In Shaver Case

The Appellate Department of

the Superior Court in San Mateo

County has granted a rehearing

in the case of Mr. and Mrs. Jack

Shaver whose conviction for sell-

ing allegedly obscene books was

recently reversed. The Appellate

Department will not re-examine

its decision that the Shavers were

denied due process of law by the

refusal of the trial judge to al-

low the introduction of certain

- evidence, but will hear argument

on several remaining issues in

the case which it failed to decide.

San Mateo District Attorney

Keith Sorenson has indicated in

the press that he intends to have

a retrial in the Shaver case.

Request Change First Amendment Case

In Policy at

Hanna Center

Hanna Boys Center informed

the ACLU last month that "a

non-Catholic boy is required to

be present in a classroom when

religious instructions are given

to... Catholic boys." The ques-

tion arose in connection with

neglected boys who are made

wards of the court and Sent to

the Center. The public pays the

bill. :

Staff Teo Small

' Monsignor William L. O'Con-

nor, the director of the Center,

explained that "In spite of the

fact that we have fifty-seven full

and part-time staff members car-

ing for a maximum of one hun-

dred and twenty boys, we still do

not have a large enough staff

nor the facilities to supervise a

non-Catholic boy . . . during the

period religion is being taught."

For All Creeds :

"Tt is true," Monsignor O'Con-

nor stated, "that we advertise as

being a home for neglected boys

of all races and creeds and that

the courts of various counties

have sent us children of all

creeds." He also declared. that it

was the Center's policy not to

proselytize.

"You ask also," the letter from

Monsignor O'Connor went on to

say, "whether the courts are

familiar with`our program. Pro-

bation Departments have all re-

ceived copies of our printed

literature. Many Juvenile Court

judges have visited here and Pro-

bation Officers visit theix boys at

the Center routinely. Conse-

quently, I assume that the courts

understand our program."

Change Urged

After carefully considering the

matter, the ACLU Board of Di-

rectors expressed the view that

it was improper for non-Catholic"

wards of the Juvenile Court to

be required to attend Catholic

religious instruction and to re-

quest a change in the Center's

policies. The ACLU is awaiting a

reply from the Center.

Monterey

Annual Meeting

January 17

The Monterey chapter will

hold its annual meeting January

17, 8:00 p.m., in the meeting

room of the Monterey City Li-

brary. ,

Highlights of the agenda will a

discussion of "HUAC Cases Won

and Lost." Two lawyers, to be

announced later in a mailing to

the chapter members, will ana-

lyse the significance of these

cases handled by the ACLU.

They will scrutinize challenge of

the House Committee's legality,

contempt citations, freedoms of

the First and Fifth Amendments

and the Committee's affect on

the the climate of civil liberties.

A question period will follow the

speakers.

During the. business part of

the meeting, chapter members

will elect their board of diree-

tors for the coming year. In ad-

dition to recommendations from

the nominating committee, nomi-

nations may be made from the

floor. All members and friends

of the ACLU in the county are

invited to attend.

New Ruling in

John Mass Case

Continued from Page 1-

House Committee on Un-Amer-

ican Activities.

Of course, the loyalty issue is

irrelevant at this point because

-when a school department fails

in dismissal proceedings against

a teacher it is under a legal duty

to reinstate him.

It is hoped that a speedy ap-

peal will gain Mass his full back

salary and the reinstatement te

which he is clearly entitled.

-M.W.K.

The United States Supreme Court was urged last month

to reverse its position of "balancing the competing private

and public interests at stake" in cases involving the First

Amendment. At the same time the high court was asked to

establish a new rule of "cogency" in determining whether

Congressional investigating com-

mittees can require witnesses to

disclose information concerning |

political affiliations.

Amicus Curiae Brief

The argument was set forth in

a friend of the court brief filed

by the American Civil Liberties

Union. The brief called for a re-

versal of the 1960 contempt of

Congress conviction of Edward

Yellin, a graduate engineering

student, who had declined to

answer questions put to him by

the House Committee on Un-

American Activities on the

grounds that his rights under the

First Amendment were being vio-

lated.

New Ruling Sought

The civil liberties organization

urged the Supreme Court to up-

set its rulings in the Barenblatt,

Wilkinson and Braden cases in

which the Court said that a wit-

ness' right under the First

Amendment not to answer ques-

tions by the HUAC as to his Com-

munist associations, must be bal-

anced against the public's-need to

maintain national security. The

high court ruled that in this sit-

uation the public's need out-

weighed the individual's First

Amendment claim.

Concept Fallacious

"We respectfully submit," the

ACLU stated, "that the underly-

ing concept of a `balance' of inter-

ests is fallacious, partly because

there is no room in the First

Amendment for such balancing,

partly because even if balancing

were appropriate the scales are

unduly weighted if one considers

the issue to be one of public ver-

sus private interest."

No Absolutes

The ACLU emphasized it was

not urging "dogmatic assertion of

absolutes" and situations can be

"envisioned in which unrestricted

freedom of expression might re-

sult in the denial of another basic

right guaranteed by the Constitu-

tion, such as the right of a fair

trial?

After noting that the protection

of the First Amendment of "the

right te remain silent about af-

filiations, political, religious, or

otherwise" must be affirmed in

the light of various Supreme

Court decisions over the years,

the ACLU asked the Court, "Is

that right protected against in-

quiry by all government agents,

and if not, against which?"

A difference must be drawn,

the brief asserted, between the

compelling answers in a law suit

and in an inquiry by a legislative

~ committee. In the former, it con-

tinued, the public interest is

served in the administration of

justice which is superior to the

public interest in free association

and the right not to disclose. The

ACLU questioned, however,

whether the public interest in all

inquiries by legislative commit-

tees was so great as to outweigh

its interest in free association.

Legislative Purposes

The ACLU reminded that the

purpose of bodies such as the

House Un-American Activities

Committee is to recommend leg-

islation, not to establish facts

about specific people or occur-

renees. When a legislative com-

mittee has already gathered

enough material for its purposes

from willing witnesses, the brief

said, the "cogency" of a recalci-

trant witness's testimony must

be considered. Only if this testi-

mony is considered absolutely es-

sential for legislative purposes,

should the answer be compelled,

it said, or punishment inflicted.

"Cogent Interest"

Pointing to the `dangers of the

Communist conspiracy" is not a

sufficient excuse, the ACLU

noted. While these dangers may

justify the formation of a Con-

gressional investigating commit-

tee, it added, they are `"`a far cry"

from being sufficient to require

disclosure of political affiliations

from unwilling witnesses. The

"cogency of the need for the par-

ticular answers requested, not

the impertance of the general

subject under investigation" is

what must be borne in mind, it

said. "For what a court will do if

our suggestion is deemed accept-

able would be to study the rec-

ord, not only with regard to the

particular witness, but the en-

tire record relating to the back-

ground, to see what information

the Committee had obtained and

was generally available. Ordinar-

ily enough information for leg-

islative purposes is gathered from

willing witnesses. That certainly

has been the case with the House

Un-American Activities Commit-

tee. Only if a study of the whole

record shows a `cogent interest'

in obtaining answers to the par-

ticular questions put to the re-

calcitrant witness should answer.

be compelled-or punishment in-

flicted."

Yellin Case

In the Yellin case, the Commit-

tee had asked questions relating

to membership in the Communist

Party and "colonization" of the

steel unions by the Communist:

Party. The hearings, held in Gary,

Ind., were public, a previous re-

quest for a hearing in an execu-

tive session having been denied

by a Committee staff member.

The ACLU brief noted `that

Yellin's attorney at the trial

sought to establish that the Com-

mittee already had so much rele-

vant material when it questioned

Yellin that "its interest in an-

swers to the questions put was

trivial."

Government's Contention

The government's contention,

the ACLU added, that "the in-

quiry was necessary because the

Committee knew nothing about

the activities of the Communist

Party in Indiana is also beside

the point. Indeed, the claim is

disingenuous in the light of the

many pronouncements about the

Communist Party which have

emanated from Congress. For the

"issue is not, as the government

would have it, whether petitioner

could offer material for `new in-

vestigation' but whether there

was `cogent' need for it in view

of what was already known. And

of that there was no evidence

whatever."

First Amendment Case

Yellin refused to answer the

committee's questions on the

grounds that they interfered with

his freedom of speech, belief and

association. He was indicted and

convicted of contempt in 1960.

The U. S. Court of Appeals up-

-Continued on Page 4

ACLU NEWS

JANUARY, 1963

Page 3

tee

Christmas Observances

rea's Publ

ems

cent Schools

The County Counsel of Napa county recently ruled that

public schools may present `a Christmas program so long as

the religious aspects of such a program are not used primarily

as a means of religious instruction or as a vehicle for public

worship."

The County Counsel did not

indicate whether he was thereby

approving a presentation of the

Biblical story of the nativity, but

Superintendent Piercey C. Holli-

day accepted it as permitting the

program scheduled for the Phil-

lips Elementary School which in-

volved "students pantomiming

scenes of Christmas (whatever

that is) with the singing of ap-

propriate Christmascarols." (Are

Christological songs appropri-

ate?)

~ Recognizing a Holiday

In explaining his position, the

County Counsel said he thought

"it possible that a school program

may have religious significance

and yet not violate the religious

restrictions of our Constitution.

-..A Christmas program ... has

religious significance, but it is

not necessarily the type of activ-

ity prohibited by our Constitu-

tion. .. . In the case of.a Christ-

`mas program... the State is not

undertaking the responsibility of

providing religious training for

the child; it is merely recogniz-

ing that the Country as a whole

is experiencing a holiday season

and offering the children an op-

portunity to participate in that

holiday season at school with

their classmates. Whatever re-

ligious significance Thanksgiving

Day, Christmas and other pro-

grams have is determined by the

religious attitude that the child

brings to the program; that is,

what he has learned in his

church or home.

Must Be "Properly Conducted"

"No doubt any of the programs

mentioned could be carried to

extremes which would offend

our Constitutional guarantees.

But a Christmas program which

is properly conducted would

seem to be at most an incidental

and not a material encroachment

upon the separation of the

church and State."

If the County Counsel had

given an example of a "proper"

Christmas program or if he had

ruled specifically on the program

that was being offered at the

Phillips school, the opinion

would, at least, be informative

and possibly provide some clear

guidance for the school authori-

ties.

Religious Songs

At the same time, the County

Counsel also gave an opinion on

"whether State music texts may

properly contain selections of a

religious nature." He ruled they

may "so long as such selections

are not used for religious pur-.

poses." Of course, that's a pretty

vague ruling. If "Onward Chris-

tian Soldiers" appears in a music

text, does the County Counsel's

opinion mean that it can be sung

at a graduation exercise?

The ACLU will examine fur-

ther into the program given at

the Phillips school and seek clari-

fication of the County Counsel's

opinion.

Frederic Burk Program

With respect to the singing of

religious songs in public schools,

the ACLU received complaints

last month that a special Christ-

mas singing program for all pu-

pils was being held at Frederic

Burk School, which is connected

with San Francisco State College,

and which has a substantial en-

rollment of Jewish children. The

songs ranged from `Deck the

Halls with Boughs of Holly" to

the Christological songs such as

"Silent Night," all enthusiastic-

ally led by a teacher who re-

portedly laments the fact that

prayers and Bible reading are

ACLU NEWS

JANUARY, 1963

Page 4

not permitted in California

schools. The ACLU has suggested

that the Christological songs are

offensive to the religious beliefs

of some.children and ought to

be dropped.

Also, last month the ACLU

protested to Dr. L. R. Rann of

the Hayward Union High School

District .against a community

program presented by the stu-

dents at San Lorenzo High

School. The program was both

secular and religious. The re-

ligious part. was in the nature of

a pageant accompanied by a

recitation of the story of the

birth of Christ taken from the

King James version of the Bible.

The ACLU declared that the pro-

gram violated both the State and

Federal Constitutions and urged

that an opinion be secured from

the district's legal advisor. -E.B.

"The Blessings of

Liberty' On |

KRON-TV Sun.

The final four programs of the

University of Michigan Televi-

. sion Center's series "The Bless-

ings of Liberty" will be shown

on KRON-TV Sundays at 2:30

p.m. during January.

The program on January 6 is

entitled "An Oath at St. Ed-

munds," and deals with the his-

tory of liberty from the Magna

Carta to the Declaration of In-

dependence. The January 13 pro-

gram called `Certain Unalien-

able Rights,' features Prof.

Dumas Malone, biographer of

Thomas Jefferson.

The program of January 20 is

entitled "The Bill of Rights."

Prof. Alfred Kelly of Wayne Uni-

versity will discuss the past and

present of the first ten amend-

ments. The final program, on

January 27, deals with "A World

of Rights." Prof. Inis Claude, Jr.,

of the University of Michigan

will discuss the United Nations'

Universal Declaration of Human

Rights.

The Board of Directors of the

ACLU of Northern California

recently adopted a resolution ex-

pressing its appreciation to

KRON-TV for presenting the se-

ries.

ACLU Urges

Court To Reject

Balancing Test

Continued from Page 3-

held the conviction. After initial

argument last year, the Supreme

Court ordered reargument this

fall.

At the time of the Committee

hearing, Yellin was a senior at

the Engineering School of the

University of Colorado: He later

received a fellowship grant at the

University of Illinois. In March,

1961, he received a loan-grant

from the Ford Foundation and a .

grant from the National Science

Foundation. After speeches in

Congress by HUAC members at-

tacking the NSF grant it was re-

voked.

The ACLU brief was prepared

by Osmond K. Fraenkel, one of

its general counsel.

Chapter

Conference

ACLU members residing in

the Bay Area, Sonoma and

Stanislaus counties and ether

sections of aorthern California

without chapters, are welcome to

participate in the ACLU's first

chapter conference to be held'

at the Press and Union League

Club, 555 Post St., Sam Francis-

ACLU membership

Free Speech

Has lis Day

in Paradise

The heat's been on civil liber-

ties in Paradise (the one located -

in California). Seething charges,

denials and counter-charges. of

"un-American" teachings, educa-

tional materials and organiza-

tions have filled the air for the

past months. Local butt of most

of this furor, Mrs.

Franklin, a high school teacher,

has sued the American Legion

Americanism Committee and

several individuals for $850,000.

Subsequent to the charges made _

against her, Mrs. Franklin was

announced as a 1962 winner of

the Freedom Foundation's award

for outstanding classroom teach-

ing.

ACLU Target

The ACLU has also been one

of the targets. To give both

critics and supporters an oppor-

tunity "to find out about this -

controversial group," the Para-

dise Town Meeting Inc. spon-

sored an ACLU meeting. In the

early publicity Town Meeting

president, Jim Haldeman, specif-

ically invited "those who de-

nounced the ACLU" as well as

civil libertarians.

When Haldeman applied for

use of the Veterans Memorial

Hall, the custodian gave him an

okay - normally constituting of-

ficial permission. This time, how-

ever, the Hall's holding commit-

tee vetoed the permit, giving as

an excuse "that a meeting of this

nature could develop into de-

bates, thereby causing a public

disturbani@e. ...

"Our memorial halls," the com-

mittee said, "are meant to be a

memorial in memory of those

who have given their lives for

our country and the uses of such

halls should be for services

where there will be no ill feeling

or public repercussion from its

use."

Appeal Taken

Appealing this denial to the

Board of Supervisors, Haldeman

noted that in the past he had

been able to secure use of the

hall "at least 30 times by merely

calling up the custodian." The

Board referred the question to

the Butte County administrative

officer, George Gaekle. He

cleared the air for free speech

in Paradise, declaring he saw no

reason why an ACLU program

could not be held in the Memo-

rial Hall.

On November 30, 175 people

crowded the hall to hear about

"Tne Current State of Civil Lib-

erties." Edward Beechert, chair-

man of the ACLU's Sacramento

chapter, was the speaker. After

his presentation of the ACLU

program and_ objectives, Jim

Lueas and John Livingstone, also

members of the Sacramento

chapter, joined him to answer

questions. The floor was open

to any issue but those relating to

personalities. They came fast and

thick-on are we a Republic or a

Democracy, Roger Baldwin's

"communist affiliations," prayers

and Christmas observances in the

public schools, the 1950 Tenney

Committee report against the

ACLU and why the ACLU op-

poses loyalty oaths.

Enthusiastic Meeting

The discussion was clear and

enthusiastic. Different points of

view were exchanged directly

and without incident. In a de-

tailed front-page story on the

meeting, The Chico Enterprise

observed that it "was virtually

an anti-climax to the furor engen-

dered."

As a result of the meeting,

in Butte

County increased almost 25 per-

cent. Four new members joined.

-J.H.

C0, February 2, 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 -

p.m. Such registrations will be

limited and handled on a first-

come, first-served basis. If you're

interested, please contact the of-

fice immediately. The eight

chapters have each been invited

to send 10. delegates.

Virginia

Naturalized Americans

"S

ae ahel

The American Civil Liberties Union last month chal-

lenged the constitutionality of the provisions of the 1952

Immigration and Nationality Act which decree loss of citizen-

`Ship for naturalized Americans because of a continuous pe-

riod of residence abroad-3 years in the land of their birth,

' five years in another country.

The civil liberties group dis-

closed a friend of the court brief

filed in `the United States Su-

preme Court in behalf of Angeli-

ka L. Schneider, who was de-

_prived of American citizenship

after three years of residence in

Germany where she was born.

The Facts

Mrs. Schneider, who became

an American citizen through

derivative naturalization in

1950, resided here continuously

from 1939 to 1954. In 1956, when

she married a German lawyer,

she went to live in Germany.

Her two sons, born there, were

registered as Americans. In 1957

she came to the United States

for a six-weeks visit which the

lower courts did not consider a

sufficient break in the continu-

ity of her foreign stay.

Thousands Expatriated

Noting that within the last ten

years, 15,709 naturalized Amer-

icans have been expatriated, the

ACLU terms this an "encroach-

ment upon the rights of Amer-

ican citizens" guaranteed by the

Fourteenth Amendment, and an

"unconstitutional discrimination

which was neither contemplated

nor favored by the draftsmen of

the Constitution."

The brief argues that constitu-

tionally "there is only one cate-

gory" of American citizehs; that

the naturalization envisioned by

the Constitution was one "which

when validly achieved would

place the naturalized citizen on

an equal footing with the native

born.=.."; and that "Congress

has no power to discriminate

against naturalized citizens by

depriving them of their citizen-

ship under circumstances which

would not result in such loss by

native born citizens."

Only One Kind of Citizen

In support of its arguments

the ACLU cites the provision of

the Fourteenth Amendment that

all persons born or naturalized

in the United States are citizens

of the United States; and the

fact that the Constitution, in Ar-

ticle Ii, puts but one "narrowly

defined limitation upon the

rights of naturalized citizens'"-

ineligibility for the office of

President. "No other distinctions

between native and naturalized

Americans," the brief states,

"are constitutionally proper."

Earlier American History

Referring to earlier American

history, the ACLU points out

that in Colonial days natural-

ized citizens were granted all

the privileges of the native-born.

In 4859, under President Bu-

chanan, and again in 1873, under

President Grant, the equality of

rights of native and naturalized

citizens was reasserted. It was

in 1940, by the Nationality Act

of that year, that expatriation

was decreed for naturalized citi-

zens living abroad for prescribed

periods. These provisions were

reenacted in the 1952 Immigra- |

tion and Nationality Act.

Foreign Policy Considerations

The brief dismisses the argu-

ment offered in favor of the

1952 Act, that our foreign policy

considerations demand it., No

"reasonable need" for discrimi-

natory treatment of naturalized

citizens, it argues, can be proved

on the basis that difficulties with

foreign states have resulted from

their residence abroad. It con-

cludes that such discriminatory

treatment is "arbitrary and vio-

lative of due process." It states.

further that compared with the

expatriation laws of 84 other

countries throughout the world,

ours rank high as the "most

severe and unyielding."

Equality of Citizenship

Noting that our expatriation

laws have evoked widespread

criticism, the ACLU refers to

critical statements made by

President Eisenhower, Adlai

Stevenson and Ruth Shipley,

former Chief of the Passport

Division, pointing up the injus-

tice of these laws. It says in con-

clusion that the 1952 Act "strikes

at one of the basic tenets of our

republic-the equality of natur-

alized and native born citizens.

It should be invalidated as un-

constitutional legislation."

The brief was submitted,to the

high court by Jack Wasserman

and David Carliner, ACLU co-

operating attorneys of Washing-

ton, D.C.

Official Vote

On Prop. 24

The California Secretary of

State reported last month that

the Louis Francis Amendment,

Proposition 24, had been rejected

by a margin of 949,830 votes.

The final vote was: Yes, 1,978,-

520; No, 2,928, 350.

The first right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible.

JOIN 1 TODAY

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron' Membership 2 2. 2.65 os oa sce e ee ca cine G100

Sustaining Membership ..

oeweoeeeveeee*e GF eeGeH OOH HHO 50

Business and Professional Membership ........-s0+00 25

Family Membership OF OO 0 OOO 00-007 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_1963.batch 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 50: O10: (0 0100) (c) 80 6-00, 090 `12

Associate Membership ........-05.- 6.5... 5 ss 10

Annual Membership ......

ooeeeveoeve Ge eeoevee7e ee 0 O @ 6

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

ACLU: News Subscription ...2...cseccoceessess+- 92,00

NAME 9CCSHOHOHSLCHSCHEHRHOHSSEHHHTHOHHOHHHEHHHOHOHHOHHEHEHEHROHTHEHOHHEHTEHEHD

ADDRESS eee FFRHO EFS HOHHESHSHEHHHHHEHTHHEHHOHHHSHHHHHHOHE HHH OCHOKRHOHOEHOS

TELEPHONE NUMBER.

eo eeeeee eee Foe

AMT. ENCLOSED.......206

503 Market Street

' San Francisco, 5