vol. 31, no. 2

American

Civil Liberties

Union

Volume XXXII

SAN FRANCISCO, FEBRUARY, 1966

speakers.

_ versity of California.

Annual Meeting March 20

Caleb Foote, Visiting Professor of Law and Crimi-

nology, University of California, Berkeley will be the

main speaker at ACLUNC's general membership meeting

to be held at the Hall of Flowers, Golden Gate Park, San

Francisco, starting at 7:30 p.m. Sunday, March 20, 1966.

"Civil Disobedience and the Rule of Law" will be the

topic of Prof. Foote's address. It will be followed by com-

mentaries by Prof. Charles Muscatine, Department of

English, U. C. Berkeley and Prof. Robert Cole, School of

Law, U. C. Berkeley, both of whom are presently serving

on the Board of Directors of the ACLUNC.

Free parking is available and the Hall of Flowers is

convenient to public transportation. General admission is

$1.00, student, $0.50, payable at the door.

All ACLUNC members are urged to attend and to

bring their friends to what promises to be a very inform-

ative discussion on a timely issue by highly qualified

Prof. Foote was a conscientious objector during World

War Il, Prof. Muscatine was a leader in the fight against

the University of California loyalty oath, and Prof. Cole

is a distinguished member of the law faculty at the Uni-

Sacramento Housing Authority

Eviction of

Tenant Leaders

Enioined -

Superior Court Judge Frank G. Finnegan of Sacramento

last month granted a preliminary injunction to preyent the

eviction of two tenants from the River Oaks Housing Project

of the Sacramento Housing Authority without any reason

being given. The two tenants are Ray Ortiz and Elton G.

Fields, who asserted they were

being evicted solely because of

their leadership in tenants' ac-

tivities.

Both men and their families

received notices to vacate their

apartments by November 30. In

each case, the Housing Project

administrators refused to say

why their leases were being

terminated and insisted they

Pacifist Given

Hon. Discharge

From Reserve

The Army has granted an hon-

orable discharge to Private David

Alan Arnold of Oakland who was

faced with an undesirable dis-

charge in a suitability proceeding

in 1963. Such proceedings were

brought after Arnold informed

his superiors in May of 1963 that

he had become a pacifist and

would no longer be willing to

bear arms,

`Arnold disavowed the loyalty

oath he took when he was in-

ducted into the National Guard

at the age of 174% and refused to

sign a new one. He also returned

his draft card to his draft board.

The suitability hearing was

eancelled after the ACLU inter-

viewed in his behalf, The Union

took the position that Arnold's

discharge should reflect the char-

acter of his active service and

since that service was honorable

he should not be threatened with

an undesirable discharge. It

agreed, however, that Arnold was

no longer suitable material for

the Army.

In December, 1963 Arnold was

transferred to the inactive re-

serve and, consequently, was sub-

ject to active duty only during

an emergency. Having fulfilled

his reserve obligation he has now

received an honorable discharge

even though he was no longer

willing to bear arms.

didn't have to give a reason even

though the project was a public

one.

Memorandum Opinion

In a memorandum opinion,

Judge Finnegan pointed out that

the statute "set out basically the

requirements for eligibility to

occupy the public housing units.

It must be assumed that the

plaintiffs at least at the time

they commenced occupancy un-

der their lease, had been deter-

mined to be eligible by meeting

statutory requirements. The

position of the Housing Author-

ity is different from that of a

private landlord, and its discre-

tion must be exercised within

the framework of the letter and

spirit of the statute which au-

thorizes its existence and deter-

mines its functions. The conten-

tion of the Housing Authority

that it may terminate plaintiff's

tenancy by serving a fifteen-day

notice in accordance with the

terms of its lease was answered

in Housing Authority vs. Cor-

dova, 130 Cal. App. 2d Supp.

883. That case held in effect that

the Housing Authority may

terminate the lease on the num-

ber of days' notice required by

the lease only if it has a valid

reason for doing so, and that

reason must have a reasonable

connection with the purposes set

out in the Housing Authority

Act." j

Notice Must Give Reason

Judge Finnegan therefore de-

cided that "prior to initiating an

action in the proper court to

evict tenants,

served with a notice specifying

the reason for the termination

of their tenancy or a violation of

the lease by the tenants so that

they will have an opportunity

then to have the court determine

whether or not the action on the

part of the Housing Authority is

-Continued on Page 3

they should be |

Number 2

Campaign

For Dirksen

Amendment

Under the guidance of Whit-

aker and Baxter, a well-known San

Francisco public relations firm,

a Committee for Government of

the People has been formed to

bring about adoption of the Dirk-

sen amendment on legislative ap-

portionment,

Issue Revived

The Dirksen proposal was

turned down by the Senate last

year but by a political maneuver

the issue was revived and is once

again before the Senate for con-

sideration. The purpose of the

Committee is to drum up nation-

wide public support to secure the

seven votes by which the pro-

posal was previously defeated. A

two-thirds vote of the Senate is

required, The amendment would

then have to be approved by the

House.

Reapportionment Goes On

In the meantime, fifteen state

legislatures have been entirely

reapportioned and elected on a

population basis. Twenty-four

other states have adopted reap-

portionment plans. And by next

fall the new legislators in these

states will be elected on this

basis.

If Congress adopts the pro-

posal, it will still have to be

ratified by three-fourths of the

state legislatures which may be

quite unfriendly to its provisions.

Committee Chairmen

In announcing formation of the

Committee, Senator Dirksen de-

clared that "The chairmen are

members of Congress and of both

political parties." They are Sens.

Frank Church (D) of Idaho,

Spessard L, Holland (D) of Flor-

ida, Roman L. Hruska (R) of

Nebraska, Frank J. Lausche (D)

of Ohio, Hugh Scott (R) of

Pennsylvania, and Reps. Richard

H. Ichord (D) of Missouri, Carle-

ton J. Kind (R) of New York,

William M. McCullock (R) of

Ohio, B. F. Sisk (D) of Cali-

fornia, and William M, Tuck (D)

of Virginia.

Women for Peace

Bureaucratic Paralysis Ends

dr. Plotk

Clearance

The security case of Dr. Sheldon C. Plotkin came fo an

end last month almost four years after it started. The De-

fense Department ruled that the granting of a security clear-

ance to Dr. Plotkin at the secret level "is clearly consistent

with the national interest." The decision was handed down

by a letter to Ernest Besig dated

January 10, four days before the

deadline fixed by U.S. District

Court Judge George B. Harris of

San Francisco on December 1 in

an unprecedented ruling.

Court's Ruling

Judge Harris had ordered the

Defense Department either to

grant Dr, Plotkin a_ security

clearance as applied for, on or

before December 15, or to fur-

nish a Statement of Reasons as

to why it was being denied. The

Defense Department wasted no

time in doing the latter because

on the very day Judge Harris-

made his ruling in San Francisco,

a Statement of Reasons was

mailed from Washington to Dr.

Plotkin and, on December 13, the

latter mailed his written answer.

A hearing was held in San

Francisco on January 3. that

lasted from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

The agency's hearing officer

came all the way from New York

City while the attorney for the (c)

Defense Department came from

Boston. A transcript of the

hearing became available the

next day.

One Government Witness

The Government produced only

one witness, a former neighbor of

the Plotkins, who now resides in

Phoenix, Arizona. She was called

to support the Government's al-

legations that Dr, Plotkin had

made statements opposing the

Cuban embargo as well as the

removal of missiles from Cuba.

The witness testified that she

and her husband were present

in the Plotkin home to partici-

pate in the taking of pictures by

Sunset Magazine photographers.

While preparations were being

made by the photographers she

claimed there was a conversation -

relating to Cuba, which lasted a

minute or two. She couldn't re-

late the exact conversation but

she gained the impression that

Public Transit Enjoined

From Refusing Vietnam Ad

Superior Court Judge Cecil Mosbacher of Alameda coun-

ty has issued a preliminary injunction enjoining the Alameda-

Contra Costa Transit District and Metro Advertising, which

handles the District's advertising, "from refusing to accept

or to display, as a paid advertising copy on the motor buses

run by said District, the adver-

tisement" presented by Frances

Wirta, chairman, and Madeline

Duckles, vice-chairman of the

Berkeley-Oakland Chapter of Wo-

men for Peace on September 10,

1965:

The advertisement reads as fol-

lows:

"Mankind must put an end to

war or war will put an end to

mankind."

President John F, Kennedy

Write to President Johnson:

Negotiate Vietnam,

Women for Peace

P.O. Box 944, Berkeley

Reasons for Rejection

The advertisement was reject-

ed by the District on October

6, 1965 pursuant to a resolution

adopted by "a standing commit-

tee of the Board of Directors of

the District" setting forth its

policy with respect to paid ad- -

vertising on its equipment. The

resolution stated that the Dis-

trict "accepts only commercial

advertising for the sale of goods

and services, except that political

advertising will be accepted in

connection with and at the time

of a duly called election being

held within the boundaries of the

District...

ACLU Contentions

The ACLU, through its attor-

neys Joseph Grodin of Neyhart

Grodin in San _ Francisco,

volunteer ACLU attorneys, and

its staff counsel Marshall W.

Krause, contended that refusal of

the District, a-public entity, to

accept the advertisement con-

stituted an unconstitutional

abridgment of the right of free

speech under the Federal and

State constitutions, as well as a"

denial of equal protection of the

laws,

Appeal Due

The Transit District has in-

structed its attorneys to appeal

the decision to the California Dis-

trict Court of Appeal,

Dr, Plotkin was not happy with

the "blockade." In substance she

remembered him exclaiming "Oh,

no, not like this. Isn't this some-

thing." She gave NO testimony

about Dr, Plotkin saying any-

thing about missiles or about the

embargo. She also testified she

didn't know the difference be-

tween a blockade and an embar-

go.

"Frequent" Visitors

The witness was also called to

testify that Dr, Plotkin had "close

association" with two relatives

(a husband and wife) who are

alleged to have objectionable

political associations, especially

in the past. She claimed they had

been "frequent" visitors but she

could not say how frequently. In

fact, she couldn't say whether

she had seen the husband visiting

the Plotkins as many as 7 or 8

times in five years. It is interest-

ing to note that during the past

fifteen months these relatives

-Continued on Page 4

Presidio M.P.

Objects to Viet

Nam Sticker

Last December 12 a Palo Alto

motorist traveiling through the

San Francisco Presidio received

a traffic citation for driving 35

miles an hour in a 25 mile an

hour zone, She was also accused

of "cutting two feet across yellow

line on curve."

In addition, the citation bore

the following statement: "Subject

had `Get out of Viet Nam' Sticker

on vehicle and refused to take it

off." Indeed, according to the

driver, the M.P. offered not to

_ give her a ticket if she would

remove the sticker from her

bumper. When she declined to do

so he took her to his superior

officer who also demanded that

she remove the sticker. Once

again she declined to do so.

The driver of the car did not

contest the citation but asserts

she should be able to drive on a

public road through the Presidie

without demands being made

upon her by Military Police that

she remove stickers of which they

do not approve. The ACLU has

presented the entire matter to

the Commanding Officer for con-

sideration,

Typist-Clerk

Wanted

The ACLU has a job opening

for a typist-clerk. The principal

responsibility of the position is

maintenance of the ACLU's mem-

bership records-entering mem-

bership contributions in the cash

`book and on file cards, cutting

Elliott stencils on an electric type-

writer, operating the Elliott ad-

dressing machine and doing gen-

eral office work. The work is

largely routine.

The starting salary is $365 per

month, The ACLU pays hospital-

ization premiums up to $100 per

year .Office hours are from 9 to

5 with V2 hour for lunch. Annual

leave is earned each month of

employment.

Anyone desiring to apply for

the job should `phone the Execu-

tive Director, Ernest Besig, at

EXbrook 2-1816 for an inter-

view,

w

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

563 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105, EXbrook 2-4692

~ Subscription Rates

Twenty Cents Per Copy

Two Dollars a Year

p 151

Ralph B. Atkinson

Dr. Alfred Azevedo

Albert M. Bendich

Leo Borregard

Rey. Richard Byfield

Prof. Robert Cole

Prof. John Edwards

Rey. Aron S. Gilmartin

Evelio Grilio

Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross

Albert Haas, Jr.

Howard H. Jewel

Ephraim -Margetin

Honorary Treasurer:

Joseph S$. Thompson

Honorary Board Member:

`Sara Bard Field

Mrs. Gladys Brown

Mrs, Paul Couture

John J. Eagan

Joseph Eichler

Morse Erskine

Dr. H. H. Fisher

Mrs. Margaret C. Hayes

Prof. Ernest Hilgard

Mrs. Paul Holmer

Mrs. Mary Hutchinson

Richard Johnston

Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

CHAIRMAN: Prof. Van D. Kennedy

VICE-CHAIRMEN: Rabbi Alvin I. Fine

Helen Salz

SEC'Y-TREASURER: Richard DeLancie

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig

GENERAL CGUNSEL: Wayne M. Collins

STAFF COUNSEL: Marshall W. Krause

ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: Mrs. Pamela S. Ford

CHAPTER DIRECTOR: Mrs. Marcia D. Lang

Committee of Sponsors -

John R. May -

Prof. John Henry Merryman

Pref. Charles Muscatine

Rey. Robert J. O'Brien

Prof. Herbert Packer

Clarence E. Rust

John Brisbin Rutherford

Mrs. Alec Skolnick

Gregory S. Stout

Stephen Thiermann

Richard E. Tuttle

Donald Vial

Richard J. Werthimer

Roger Kent

Mes. Ruth Kingman

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

Norman Lezin

Rey. Robert W. Moon

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Prof Hubert Phillips

Prof. Wilson Record

Dr. Norman Reider

Prof. Wallace Stegner .

Mrs. Theodosia Stewart

Rt. Rev. Sumner Walters

San Lorenzo Valley Schools

Gideon B

The ACLU protested last month against the proposed

distribution of Gideon Bibles in the schools of the San

Lorenzo Valley Unified School District in San Cruz county.

The request was presented by Roy Parsons, a business man

of Santa Cruz, who said a plan had been devised in consul-

tation with a board committee to

use "a table in the hallways."

Beginning Point

Mr, Parsons is quoted as saying

that the Gideon Bibles "have a

definite influence on children.

They won't cure all ills, but they

do good for the children." He ex-

pressed the hope that the board

would approve the Gideons' re-

quest "because we would like to

have San Lorenzo Valley as a

beginning point for distribution

to schools all over Santa Cruz

county."

Stanley Stevens, chairman of

the Santa Cruz County Chapter

ACLUNC, urged that the request

be turned down because the

California Education Code bans

distribution of seetarian or de-

nominational publications in pub-

lic schools.

Board Motion

The board adopted a motion to

"approve Gideon distribution of

the Testaments from a neutral

place and in a manner approved

`by Superintendent Richard R.

Ficke] but before any distribu-

tion is made, the county counsel

would be asked for an opinion."

"A neutral place' was net de-

fined. e

The Superintendent said that

"regardless of the opinions, it is

still up to the school board to go

ahead and decide what to-do and

to accept the consequences if

they are determined to be

legal."

Legal Opinions

The County Counsel promptly

advised the Superintendent that

distribution of Gideon Bibles in

the public schools was illegal and

ACLU NEWS

February, 1966

Page 2

ibles

Ernest Besig, ACLU executive

director, reminded Dr. Fickel in

a letter that on June 10, 1955 the

Attorney General of California

had ruled that, "The Gideon

Bible may not be distributed

through the public school sys-

tem." In that opinion, the ACLU

director noted, "the Attorney

General relied upon the unani-

mous decision of the New Jersey

Supreme Court in 1953 in Tudor

v. Board of Education. ". . . the

state or any instrumentality

thereof," said the court, "cannot

under any circumstances show a

preference for one religion over

another. Such favoritism ., . must

be disapproved as a clear viola-

tion of the Bill.of Rights of our

Constitutions."

In concurring in this holding,

the Attorney General of Califor-

nia went on to say that "Even if

no child were compelled to ac-

cept such a Bible, nevertheless -

the use of the public schools for

distribution purposes would in-

dicate state endorsement and

would constitute a religious pref-

erence."

State Constitution

In its letter to Dr. Fickel the

ACLU alse pointed out that the

State Constitution guarantees

"The free exercise and enjoy-

ment of religious profession and

worship, without discrimination

or preference."

The ACLU letter did acknow-

ledge that the religious books of

all faiths may be placed in school

libraries "for library purposes."

In acknowledging receipt of

the ACLU's letter, Dr. Fickel de-

elared, "legal opinion is being

sought." He did not indicate it

"would be followed,

Letters. 2.

... tothe Editor

di Tullie Case

Editor: The following resolu-

tion was passed at the December

6, 1965 Chico Democratic Club

meeting: ee

WHEREAS: the direction of

the current trial of Professor

Edmond di Tullio of Chico State

College has shifted from the

original charge of profanity to

(1) an apparent. persecution of

his personal views regarding the

foreign policy of the United -

States in Southeast Asia; (2) an

investigation of his teaching abil- |

ities in the classroom; and (3)

an apparent challenge to the in-

tegrity of the whole State Col-

lege Educational System in Cali-

fornia:

BE IT RESOLVED: that the

CHICO DEMOCRATIC CLUB ex-

press its grave concern over this

threat to Professor dj Tullio's

civil liberties: and this threat to

the California State Colleges by

contributing forty dollars ($40)

te the Northern California Civil

Liberties Union for Professor di

Tullio's defense -Sybil I. Lun-

din, Secretary.

ACLU Bias

Editor: Kudos for your answer

to John M. Prausnitz. I support

ACLU precisely for its particular

bias, a diagonal cutting through

lines of resistance to the in-

dividual human beings right of

dignified hearing and appeal.-

Richard E, Smith, Redding.

Editorial Cemment

Editor: I compliment Mr.

Prausnitz upon his excellent

statement concerning objectivity

and the News which appeared in

the December, 1965 issue. I, too,

have been a subscriber for sev-

eral years, and have deplored the

recent trend toward editorializ-

ing which has been all too ap-

parent in its columns.

The editor defends his resort

to conjecture and surmise on the _

ground that in instances where

information concerning actions

of which he disapproves is not

available to him, "we are forced

to speculate' as to the facts.

Hence, he argues, for instance,

that where an attorney for a

school board, in opposing the

distribution of a particular circu-

lar at an educational institution,

failed to cite authority in sup-

port of that position, the News

was justified in stating that the

attorney "apparently . be-

lieves" that that institution "is

above the law." :

`In the first place, it is an at-

torney's obligation to take posi--

tions on behalf of his chent ir-

respective of his personal be-

liefs. Furthermore, it is paradox-

ical, to say the least, for the ed-

itor of an organ of the ACLU,

without any facts whatsoever

concerning the attorney's intent

or state of mind, to accuse him

of believing in (and advocating)

anarchy. Surely, if speculate we

must, it is more likely than not

that the attorney's announeed po-

sition is in harmony with his in-

terpretation of the law, howso-

ever that interpretation may dif-

fer from Mr. Besig's. :

As a matter of fact, I have al-

ways believed that the attribut-

ing to persons of lawful motives,

in the absence of evidence to the

contrary, is a large part of what

the ACLU is all about. I hope I

have been correct. -Ernest M.

`Fhayer, San Francisco.

Nete: The article in question

related to a response received by

the ACLU to its inquiry to Super-

intendent Harold Spears as te

why two students were prohib-

ited from distributing: literature

opposing the Government's Viet-

nam position on the City Cellege

campus, Dr, Spears referred the

letter to Irving G. Breyer, Legal

Adviser, for a response. Mr.

Breyer declared as follows: "You

are quite correct in your state-

ment that Assembly Bill 2548

excludes junior colleges from

Section 8454 of the Education

Code (prohibiting distribution of

propaganda on the premises of

any public school). However, in

my opinion, this does not mean

Refusal to Shave

earded Man Granted _

Unemployment Insurance

The California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

on January 24 reversed the decision of a referee denying un-

employment insurance te Peter E. Webber of Paynes Creek,

California, because he turned down a job which would have

required him to shave off his beard. The Board never reached

the question whether Webber had

"sood cause' in refusing the

position. It merely decided that

"An outright and unequivocal

offer of work" had not been made

by the employer and such an

offer is essential before there

can be a refusal of work" and,

in this case, such an offer had

not been made,

Webber applied for a state

position as a forest fire crewman

with the Mineral Ranger Station

of the United States Department

of Agriculture's Forest Service.

He was offered the position "on

the condition that he shave off

his beard." This he refused to do.

The Forest Service claimed

that "a beard is an added hazard

when working close to a forest

fire, as many of us can verify

who have sustained singed eye-

brows and hair. Also, it is more

difficult to maintain cleanliness

under field conditions with limit-

ed opportunity to wash, if one is

unshaven."

Webber didn't appeal from the

Forest Service's ruling but he

did object when he was disquali-

fied for unemployment insurance

and declared inelgible for bene-

fits for five weeks "on the ground

that he without good cause had

Burns Committee

Subpeenas

Katz Case File

The Burns Committee (Califor-

nia Senate Fact-Finding Commit-

tee on Un-American Activities)

last month served a subpoena

upon President Clark Kerr of the

University of California requir-

ing him to produce the Univer-

sity's file on the appointment of

Dr. Eli Katz as an Assistant Pro-

fessor. Dr. Katz had announced

in December that he would ac-

cept.an appointment as Assistant

Professor of German at the Uni-

versity of California, Berkeley.

The appointment becomes effec-

tive next July 1. He is presently

teaching at Western Reserve Uni-

versity in Cleveland.

The Regents were apparently

taking a coneiliatory attitude

toward the request for the Uni-

versity's records since Dr. Kerr

indicated after meeting with

them that he would try to find

out precisely what they wanted.

On the other hand, it is highly

doubtful whether Dr. Kerr can be:

compelled to furnish his records

to the committee.

Under the State Constitution

the University is protected

against political interference in

its affairs by having responsi-

bility for its operation placed in

the Board of Regents. Of course,

the Legislature must produce the

money to finance the University

and that is why the Regents try

to be cooperative when `their

authority is invaded by the Legis-

lature, At the same time, it is

rather curious that a committee

aimed at protecting the State

from subversive activities should

itself be subverting the State

Constitution by intruding inte an

area where it has no authority.

that it is mandatory for all items

to be distributed at a junior col-

lege but makes it discretionary

with the administration.

"The administration of City

College of San Francisco has

taken the position that the cir-

cular under discussion is a type

of propaganda which weuld not

be conducive to the best interests

of the College to have distrib-

uted. It is upon this basis that

permission has been denied."

Incidentally, the ACLU News

has never limited the expression

of opinion to an editorial column.

refused an offer of suitable

work."

ACLU Position

The ACLU insisted that Web-

ber has a right to resist govern-

mental pressures to change his

personal appearance by shaving

his beard. It is true that Webber's

beard may make it more difficult |

for him to find a job, but so

would outspoken and extreme

political opinions or religious

opinions, neither of which could

be made the basis for denying

unemployment benefits. On the

other hand, the Referee decided

that "the claimant's objection to

removing his beard is no more

reasonable than if he had an

objection to wearing a hard hat

during the performance of serv-

ice as a firefighter."

Webber was represented by

Marshall W. Krause, ACLU staff

counsel, and volunteer attorneys

_ Donald Webster and Henry Saun-

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_1964.batch ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1965.batch ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1966.batch 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_1999 ACLUN_1999.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 ders. :

pus Action

For Rebert Pate

The ACLUNC is continuing its

campaign to get a new trial for

Robert Bryan Pate who was con-

victed of first. degree kidnaping

and sentenced to life imprison-

ment in the Nevada courts. The

Pate case came under the juris-

diction of Northern California

when he was transferred to San

Quentin prison as part of the

prisoner exchange program, Ef-

forts to get the merits of his

case considered by federal courts

in California failed when the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

held that Pate must first exhaust

his possible remedies in Nevada

before seeking federal relief |

even though he was incarcerated

in California.

Nevada Hearing

Volunteer attorney Arthur

Brunwasser filed a writ of ha-

beas corpus with the Nevada Su-

preme Court and that court is-

sued an order to show cause why

Pate should not be freed and

set the matter down for a hear-

ing before a district court judge

in Carson City, Nevada in Janu-

ary. At that time it was

argued that Pate was deprived

of his constitutional rights when

`the court at his preliminary

hearing refused to appoint coun-

sel for him and was also de-

prived of his constitutional rights

when he was allowed to. plead

guilty to the crime without any

inquiry as to his mental state

even though, just a few days be-

fore the alleged crime was com-

mitted, the same judge before

whom he pled guilty had found

him mentally ill and committed

him to a mental institution.

Brutal Treatment

Pate's story is one of great

tragedy. He was first incarcer-

ated in the Nevada State Peni-

tentiary where he was kept

naked in a eave dug into the

side of the mountain and tear-

gassed through the cell window

when he would not keep quiet.

He attempted suicide several

times by slashing his wrists and

other methods but was not suc-

cessful. The brutality at the

Nevada State Penitentiary was

exposed by an investigating com-

mission and the warden of the

penitentiary was fired along

with many of the guards and as-

sistants. When Pate was trans-

ferred to a mental institution he

escaped and is alleged to have

committed the acts for which

he was charged.

nnucH

Speech."

Sacramento Valley C

Aecting Fob: 270x00B0

The annual membership meeting and election of of fi-

cers of the Sacramento Valley Chapter of ACLUNC will

be held Sunday, February 27 at 8 p.m. in Room 194 of

the Physical Science Building on the University of Cali-

fornia Campus, Davis. The Physical Science Building is

on the East edge of the campus by A Street.

Marshall W. Krause, ACLUNC staff counsel, will be

the main speaker. His topic will be, "Why Not Try Free

1p.

Man Wearing

Pacifist Button

Denied P.O. Job

The San Francisco Post Office

recently turned down an appli-.

cant for temporary employment

because he was wearing a button

bearing a symbol for peace. He

was informed that the Post Of-

fice couldn't hire anyone with

his principles. The applicant

complained to the ACLU which

asked the Postmaster to investi-

gate. At the same time,

gested that an applicant's opin-

ions "on the subject of war and

peace are irrelevant to his quali-

fications as a Post Office em-

ployee."

Inspector Replies

The ACLU received a response

from J. H. Van Meter, Inspector

in Charge of Post Office, last

month which declared that they

had submitted "the case to our

superiors" and had received the

following answer:

"It is not the policy of the

Post Office Department to deny

an applicant employment he-

cause of his political beliefs or

principles. Consequently, it

would not be appropriate to

deny an applicant employment

because of the fact that he was

wearing a pacifist badge.

Controversy

"Employees are expected to

conduct themselves during and

outside of working hours in a

manner which will reflect favor-

ably upon the Postal Service.

Employees may not while on

duty engage in activities which

will involve the Post Office De-

partment in a controversy. Con-

sequently, it would: be appro-

priate for a postmaster to pro-

hibit his employees from wear-

ing any badge or pin which

might tend te involve the De-

partment in a controversy."

Mr. Van Meter then went on

to say that in the particular case,

"our Employment Office felt

that the badge could cause. a

controversy and Mr. was

not selected for temporary em-

ployment."

Curious Reasoning

This is curious reasoning. Even

if we assume that the Post Of-

fice could limit the wearing of

buttons by employees while on

duty this man was merely an

applicant for employment and he

wasn't subject to any regulation

which appears to have been non-

existant anyway.

The ACLU will now ask a local

Congressman to secure a further

ruling on the matter from the

Post Office Department in Wash-

ington,

it sug- -

ACLU Opposes

Ban on Nameless

Phone Messages

The ACLU Board of Directors

voted last month te oppose a

proposal by the Pacifie Tele-

phone and Telegraph Co. that the

California Public Utilities Com-

mission approve a regulation re-

quiring all recorded public an-

nouncements to include the name

of the organization or individual

responsible for the service and

the address at which the service

is provided. Failure to comply

would be cause for termination

of the service. ;

Nation-wide Effort

Company action was at the re-

quest of the parent American

Telephone and Telegraph | Co.,

which has asked all of its sub-

sidiary companies to end the

practice in question. Its action

sprang from Congressional jhear-

ings in Washington which "ex-

posed" recordings by right-wing

organizations.

The regulation would exclude

such public service announce-

ments as the time and the

weather, but it would not exclude

Dial-a-Prayer service or any other

privately owned recorded mes-

Sage service.

Berkeley Case

The ACLUNC's Berkeley-

Albany Chapter intervened' with

the Commission for Fred E.

Huntley of Berkeley, who has a

program that would be affected

by the regulation. Reed H. Bem-

ent, volunteer ACLU attorney,

informed the P-.U.C. that the

ACLU opposed the propesal as

infringing upon the right of free-

dom of speech, which includes

the right te make anonymous

statements. He cited a 1960 de-

cision of the U.S. Supreme Court

striking down a Los Angeles ordi-

nance which forbade the distribu-

tion of anonymous leaflets. (Tal-

ley v. California, 362 U.S. 60)

Hearings Due

The letter to the P.U.C, re

. quested an opportunity for the

ACLU and others to be heard

in opposition to the proposed

regulation before it teok any ac-

tien, Thereafter, the Commission

announced that in view of the

opposition to the propesed regu-

lation it would conduct public

hearings. The time and place of

the hearings have not been an-

nounced.

Present Policy

`Under present Telephone Com-

pany policy, the name and ad-

dress of the sponsor of any

anonymous recorded announce-

ments is given out en request.

The new rule would make that

information part of the message.

Correction

Last month's story on the case

of Everett diTullio, who was con-

victed in the Chico cbscenity

trial, carried the statement that

California Penal Code section 415

insofar as it prohibits the use of

vulgar, profane and indecent

language within the presence or

hearing of women or children in

a loud and boisterous manner

"has been used but once in the

history of California law and that

use was in 1881." We regret that

the foregoing statement was in-

accurate, :

A more accurate statement is

the one that appears in the

ACLU's application for a Writ

of Prohibition wherein it is

stated: "There is only one re-

ported case in California dealing.

with the portion of section 415

here involved. This is Ex Parte

Foley, 62. Cal. 508 (1881), where

the validity of the statute was

not challenged but only its ap-

plication in an incorporated

town. The Court held the statute

did apply in an incorporated

town, but did not discuss the

validity of. the statute."-Editor.

JOHN EDWARDS

Professor cf English at San

cisco State College, who was elected

to ACLUNC Board of Directors for a

Fran-

three-year term begms Novem-

ber 1, 1965.

Credentials

Issue in U.C.

e eo

Sit-in Cases

The ACLUNC Board of Direc-

ters voted last month to request

the State Board of Education to

determine as a matter of policy

that participation in the Sproul

Hall sit-in is not properly a

ground for the denial of a teach-

ing eredential.

The ACLU's request was trans-

mitted by letter to the State

Board through Neil Horton,

volunteer ACLU attorney, Thus

far, the Credentials Committee

has granted credentials to several

persons involved in the sit-in

demonstration but has also turn-

ed down two applications.

Neil Horton's letter asserted

that "The Credentials Committee

is attempting to use its power to

punish ... applicants for their

political beliefs rather than

evaluate their qualifications to

teach."

At another point in his letter,

Mr. Herton declared that `The

issue intrinsic in the Credentials

Committee's recommendation of

denial (of credentials to two

teachers) is no less than whether

that Committee shall sit as .a

board of thought control with the ~

power to deny entrance to the

teaching profession to-those who

have been arrested for acts of

non-violent political protest and

whose political views differ from

those of the Committee."

Semi-Nudes and Booklet

A somewhat puzzled Redwood City jury was given the

chance last month of deciding whether or not the San Mateo

District Attorney had proved beyond a reasenahble doubt that

Conrad Chance,

"obscene" within the meaning of

the law and, if so.

Chance knew they were obscene.

The. result of the jury's deliber-

ations will come too late for in-

clusien in this issue of the

NEWS, but readers may put

themselves in a similar position

by contemplating the statutory

definition of "obscene": "Qb-

scene" means that to the average

person, applying contemporary

standards, the predominant ap-

peal of the matter, taken as-.a

whole, is to prurient interest, i.e.,

a shameful or morbid interest in

nudity, sex, or excretion, which

goes substantially beyond custem-

ary limits of candor in descrip-

tion or representation of such

matters and is matter which is

utterly without redeeming social

importance."

Harassment

Chance and one of his sales-

men, Kerwin, were arrested in

June of 1965 on eleven counts of

exhibiting "obscene" matter in

the store. The arrests came after

`a campaign of harassment in

which police officers attempted

to dictate to magazine sellers in

the area what wares were per-

missible to sell.

The case started on January

10th when ACLU staff counsel

Marshall W. Krause, acting as

attorney for the men, moved to

dismiss the. complaints on the

ground that each of the eleven

items were protected by the First

Amendment as a matter of law

and therefore could ee be "ob-

scene."

Nine Counts Dismissed

Municipal Court Judge Lyle

Edson granted the motion as to

eight of the items, holding either |

that they were not utterly with-

out redeeming social importance

or did not appeal to the prurient

Applicants `for Medicare

rer Oath Required

Of Minority Gr

AD

Some two million persons will be required to sign a dis-

claimer oath in order to qualify for benefits under the Fed-

eral Government's Medicare Program. The two million are

apparently being treated differently from the majority be-

cause their benefits are financed out of the Treasury's gen-

eral funds. The law does not re-

quire disclaimer oaths -of the

17 million persons over the age

of 65 who have coverage under

Social Security or railroad re-

tirement. The benefits cover a

substantial part of the costs of

hospital care.

Text of Gath

The disclaimer oath required

of the minority group reads as

follows: "I certify that I am not

now, and during the last 12

months have not been a member

of any organization which is re--

quired to register under the In-

ternal Security Act of 1950, as

amended, as a Communist-action

organization, a Communist-front

organization, or a Communist-in-

filtrated organization."

A Walnut Creek doctor, not

covered by social security, has

thus far declined to fill out the

application form because of the

disclaimer oath. Her protest to

the Social Security Administra-

tion last October brought a re-

sponse from Commissioner Rob-

ert M. Ball a couple of months

ago that "We are giving your re-

quest our attention and will be

in touch with you again as soon

as possible."

Nothing further has been heard

from the Commissioner but .an

Associated Press story out of

Washington on December 16 said

the Welfare Department had an-

nounced the disclaimer would be

required since it is a specific

provision of the law. The story

also notes that "The provision

attracted no attention at the time

the complex Medicare anc Social

Security revision bill was before

Congress."

Since the Social Security Ad-

ministration has now apparently

taken the position that it has no

choice but to require the dis-

elaimer oath, the only remedy

outside of a change in the law

would seem to lie in a court test.

Authority for such a suit was

granted the local branch of the

ACLU at the January meeting of

its board of directors. Persons

subject to the oath wishing to

challenge it should contact the

ACLU ofice without delay.

ex-preprieter of an "adult" beok and maga-

_ tine store in that city, exhibited two items which were

whether

interest. These items were two

male nudist magazines, and six

booklets appealing . to - fetish

sexuality, "Tortured Male",

"Bondage Pen Pals', "Chastise-

ment Correspondence", "Man-

Acled Slave", and "All Tied Up."

The district attorney voluntarily

dismissed.an additional count and

this left two counts to try in-

volving just Mr. Chance and deal-

ing with 12 photos of semi-nude

girls and a _ booklet entitled

"Bound Correspondence" pur-

porting to be a collection of let-

ters from people who like to be

tied up and find `sexuality en-

hanced by this practice.

Experts Testify

Considerable testimony was

taken from prosecution witnesses

who included two ministers, a

priest, a bookseller, a librarian,

-and three police officers. The de-

fense has had the aid of several

highly qualified expert witnesses

who have given freely of their

time for the battle against censer-

ship. These include psychiatrist

Norman Reider, author and re--

viewer Anthony `Boucher, psycho- ..-

logist John Marquis, ook deal-

ers Fred Krupp and Harold Spiel-

berg, Reverend Clay Caldwell of

the United Church of Christ, and

Boston University Professor of

Theology Robert Trees.

Eviction oF.

loeeet Led ice

Coltinied soe Page i-

unlawful or arbitrary."

The suit by Lawrence K.

Karlton of Sacramento, a volun-

. teer attorney for the ACLUNC,

was supported by an affidavit

from each of the plaintiffs out-

lining the formation of a ten-

ents' group called the River

Oaks Housing Committee.

"There are 402 units in the

River Oaks Housing Project.

Forty-five percent of these units

had joined ... when a meeting

was held August 30, 1965. At ~

this meeting the Steering Com-..

mittee was authorized to go to

a meeting of the Housing Au-

thority and petition that certain

policies and practices of the

Housing Authority be discussed |

with this organization. of peeple

who live in the housing project.

Rabble-Reusers

"A member of the Authority

said he was not interested in

hearing from a bunch of rabble-

rousers. On October 7, 1965, the

tenants' Committee met and

agreed that a more formal peti-

tion be prepared, that a copy of

the petition be given to each

member of the Authority and to

all candidates for the City Coun-

cil, and to members of the

Neighborhood Council who re- . :

' side in the River Oaks Housing -.

Project and further that candi-

dates for City Couneil be sent a

questionnaire in which to ex-

press their opinions concerning

the grievances of the tenants.

" . . We have learned that

some tenants in the housing

project have been told by em-:

ployees of the Housing Author-

ity that `if you (tenant) join that

Housing Committee you = be

evicted.' "

ACLU NEWS

February, 1966

Page 3

Free Speech Issue

The Georgia legislature's ouster of Representative-elect

Julian Bond from his seat in the state House of Representa-

tives because of his pacifist position on the Vietnam war is

being challenged by the Ameriean Civil Liberties Union as

a major free speech issue. Charles Morgan, Jr., director of

_ the ACLU's Southern Regional

Office, has filed in the Federal

District Court in Atlanta,:a class

action asking for the creation of

a three-man federal court to rule

that. the ouster violates constitu-

tional rights. The action. was

~~ taken on behalf of Mr. Bond, the

Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.,

who is a registered voter in the

136th legislative district which

Bond was elected to represent,

and Mrs. Arel Keyes, also a voter

-in that district, against James

"Sloppy" Floyd, W. Jones Lane,

and David J. Newton, members

and officers of the Georgia

House.

`Guilty of Treason'

After hearings were held by a

Special House committee,

Georgia legislature voted on Jan-

uary 10 (184-12) to expel Mr.

Bond, a Negro pacifist, from its

membership because of his crit-

icism of U.S. military action in

Vietnam. Rep. Lane, who _ini-

tiated the move to bar Bond,

stated: `Anyone who gives aid

and comfort to the enemies of

the United States or the enemies

of the State of Georgia is guilty

of treason", Bond, who is com-

munications director of the Stu-

dent Non-Violent Co-ordinating

Committee, has supported a

SNCC statement denouncing U.S.

action in Vietnam and expressing

sympathy with those "unwilling

to respond to a military draft."

Mr. Bond said that as a pacifist

he opposed the draft and thought

others who felt the same way

should seek legal alternatives,

such as Red Cross or civil rights

work. He said that he did not

consider his position to be ad-

vocacy of draft evasion.

Right to Speak

Speaking at the House hearing

as Mr, Bond's counsel, Mr. Mor-.

gan vigorously denounced the

body's action, telling the state

legislators that "(if) Mr. Bond

_ has committed treason, then the

proper place for Mr. Bond to be

tried is in a court of law. But

that is not what this is all about.

The issue here is the right of

every Georgian to speak."

Eight Points

The ACLU is basing its case

on eight different grounds,

rooted in the provisions of both

the United States Constitution

and the Georgia Constitution.

Contending that Mr. Bond was

penalized for his expression of

opinion and for his membership

in SNCC, the Union said the

legislative move infringed on the _

First Amendment guarantees of

freedom of speech and assembly.

And, asserts the civil liberties

group, Bond's trial by a legisla-

tive body violated the Fifth

Amendment, providing that

"(no) person shall be held to

answer for a capital or other in-

famous crime unless: ona pre-

sentment or indictment of a

grand jury,' and the Sixth

Amendment, guaranteeing a trial

by jury to-the-accused: :

The Union's argument alleged.

the breach of four further pro-

visions of the U.S. Constitution:

the 13th Amendment, barring

ACLU NEWS

February, 1966

Page 4

the -

slavery; the 14th Amendment,

protecting the individual from

abridgement of his rights by the

state; and the 15th and 19th

Amendments, prohibiting denial

of the vote for reasons of race

(15th) or sex (19th), (The Rev.

Martin Luther King, Jr., and

Mrs, Arel Keyes, have entered

the suit on these last two

counts, since they were both ef-

fectually denied their vote by

the ouster of their elected rep-

resentative.)

Georgia Constitution Vague

In addition to its arguments on

the basis of the U.S. Constitu-

tion, the Union is arguing that

Article 3, Section 7, paragraph

1 of the Georgia Constitution,

which was used against Bond, is

unconstitutionally void for vague-

ness, both on its face and in its

application to Bond. That provi-

sion states that each House of

the state legislature shall be the

judge of the election returns and

qualifications of members, and

that it "shall have the power to

punish for disorderly behavior

or misconduct by censure, fine,

imprisonment, or expulsion."

Protest by Ga. ACLU

A protest against the barring

of Bond from his House seat was

issued by the ACLU of Georgia.

The affiliate stated: "Disagree-

ment over U.S. laws or policy

cannot be made the basis for

ousting a duly elected public of-

ficer from office. We would have

precious few legislators if this

were the case, since many of

of them shouted defiance of the

constitutional decisions of the

U.S. Supreme Court only a few

years ago. Individual members

of the ACLU may not agree with

Mr, Bond's characterization of

our policy in Vietnam as aggres-

sion. However, this is not a re-

levant consideration, since what

is at stake is the free speech

guarantee of the First Amend-

ment to the U.S, Constitution...

Although some of the statements

of Mr. Bond may have been in-

temperate, we are afraid that we

Shall never see the millenium in

American politics when the is-

sues are discussed in tones of

measured moderation , . ."

Special Election

The Student Non-Violent Co-

ordinating Committee has urged

Georgia Governor Carl Sanders

to call a special election to fill

the vacant legislative seat. Stat-

ing that he will probably run

again, Bond noted that he had

little chance of being re-elected

in time to serve in the current

40-day session. Dr, King's South-

ern Christian Leadership Con-

ference will reportedly work for

Bond's candidacy, in a campaign

which would focus sharply on the

Vietnam protest issue, Twenty-

three U.S. Congressmen have

given their support to Bond's

ease in a telegram to Gov. Sand-

ers, which stated: "We strongly

protest the denial to Julian Bond

of his seat in the Georgia House

on the basis of the unpopularity

of his political views on one of

the great issues confronting our

nation."

Dr. Plotkin

Wins Security

Clearance

Continued from Page 1-

have lived 450 miles from the

Plotkins.

"Discussion Unlimited"

Besides the testimony of its

one witness, the Government also

introduced evidence with respect

to "Discussion Unlimited," a

forum established in Los Angeles

about 34% years ago. The Govern-

ment claimed Dr. Plotkin had

attended this forum four or five

times and been on its mailing

list; it charged the forum was

"a Communist-sponsored organi-

zation which has regularly pre-

sented in open forum meetings

speakers of pronounced radical

views including a number of well-

known Communist Party leaders."

To show the character of the

forum, the Government intro-

duced

eight of its programs, even

though it wasn't claimed that Dr.

Plotkin had attended the par-

ticular meetings or that there

were not Many more programs.

(For example, it didn't introduce

a program disclosing a debate

between Congressman Utt, Re-

publican, and Congressman

Brown, Democrat.)

-

Newspaper Evidence

The Hearing Officer also

allowed in evidence photocopies

of stories appearing in the Los

Angeles Times and the Herald-

Examiner reporting how the Los

Angeles Board of Education had

granted the use of a high school

auditorium for a Discussion Un-

limited forum in which Dr, Ap-

theker, a Communist, was a par-

ticipant. The Government didn't

claim that the newspaper reports

were accurate, that Dr. Plotkin

had any relation to them or that

he had attended the particular

program. In some way, the stories

were supposed to prove the

character of the organization,

Investigative Garbage

The hearing officer accepted

the foregoing exhibits into evi-

dence under a regulation which

provides that "records compiled

in the regular course of business,

or other physical evidence other

than investigation reports as

such, may be received and con-

sidered subject to rebuttal with-

out authenticating witnesses, pro-

vided such information has been

furnished by an_ investigative

agency pursuant to its responsi-

bilities. in connection with as-

sisting the Secretary of De

fense, .."

Also admitted into evidence by

the hearing officer under the

same regulation was a typed

report on Discussion Unlimited

of unknown origin, It attempted

to show that certain named. per-

sons assertedly associated with

_ the venture had Communist con-

nections and the HCUA was cited

as authority for this information.

Right of Confrontation

In 1959 the U.S. Supreme

Court in the Greene case ruled

that an applicant could not be

denied a security clearance under

procedures which denied him the

right to confront and cross-ex-

amine his accusers. The Govern-

ment contends that its present

regulations satisfy the require-

ments of the Supreme Court, Un-

fortunately, the Supreme Court

hasn't had an opportunity to pass

judgment on them.

By stipulation, at the Govern-

ment's request, previous testi-

mony given by Dr. Plotkin and

one of his witnesses in a 1958

security hearing, where relevant,

was admitted into evidence,

Other evidence in the hearing

consisted of Dr, Plotkin's own

testimony and that of his wife

and another witness.

At the hearing, Dr, Plotkin was

represented by Ernest Besig,

executive director of the

ACLUNC, In the court proceed-

ing he was represented by David

B. Gold of San Francisco, a

volunteer ACLU attorney.

into evidence seven or

Security Proceeding

Relatives In

iry

A security hearing was held in San Francisco last November

in a so-called hostage case. It involved an employee of Kaiser

Aerospace and Electronics in Palo Alito, who had applied for a

"Secret" clearance. Both he and his wife are refugees from

Poland and have relatives there. Both are American citizens,

as is their son. The Government

asserted that the presence of

relatives in Poland may subject

the applicant to "coercion or

pressure."

Four Elderly Sisters

The Statement of Reasons,

setting forth the grounds for re-

fusing a security clearance, de-

clared that the applicant's four

elderly sisters "reside in Poland,

a nation whose interests may be

inimical to the interests of the

United States.' The Statement

also alleged that the applicant

"for a number of years provided

and continues at the present time

to provide substantial financial

support ...in amounts currently

exceeding $1200 a year." |

It was also charged that the

applicant and his wife "corre-

spond frequently and regularly

with your relatives and send nu-

merous packages of clothing and

medicine to them."

Visited Relatives

Moreover, it was alleged that

the applicant visited his `"rela-

tives in Poland for 10 days in

April 1963." The fact is, however,

that the trip was made only after

consultation with and approval

of the Security Officer at Kai-

ser's.

In addition to the charges in-

volving his own relatives, his

wife's relatives were also the

subject of charges. First, it was

alleged that his wife's mother

and brother "reside in Poland,"

and then it was charged that his

wife "corresponds regularly and

frequently with her aforesaid

relatives and sends them pack-

ages of clothing and medicine."

Interest in Poland

The applicant was also charged

with manifesting "a strong and

continuing interest in Poland and

Polish events" by _ :

"(1) the fact that you main-

tain extensive correspondence

with friends and acquaintances

living in Poland." (The applicant

answered that his correspondence

"consists of Christmas and birth-

day greetings to a few aunts and

two or three old friends."

Polish Newspapers

*(2)0x00B0 You subscribe to two

Polish newspapers. .. ." (The

newspapers are published in

London and Paris and both are

banned in Poland.)

"(3) During 1963 you received

the Polish magazine `Prezekroj,'

published in and sent to you

The first right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible

from. Warsaw, Poland." (His an-

swer was: I did receive a

Polish magazine, unsolicited. I

had it discontinued-as soon as I

`discovered who the sender was.

It is a weekly review covering.

everything from short stories to

postage stamps and the theatre.

Political information seems to be

soft-pedaled.)

Friends of Polish Origin

"(4) Your social and organiza-

tional interests in the United

States have been largely limited

to association with persons of

Polish origin or, background."

(The applicant answered: I am a

loyal United States citizen, but,

typically, I tend to associate with

persons of similar origin and

background. None of them are

sympathetic with Communism or

the Communist regime in Po-

land.)

Victim of Auschwitz

One of the applicant's four sis-

ters was imprisoned and tortured

by the Gestapo in the concentra-

tion camp at Auschwitz. Another

sister was imprisoned at the

height of the Stalin period in

Poland because she had a brother

in the United States.

The applicant himself served

with the Polish forces in Poland,

France and England during

World War IL... %

No Government Disapproval

If the Government doesn't

want refugees holding security

clearances to correspond with

relatives and friends in the land

of their birth, or to send them

food, clothing, medicine and

money, it should tell them so.

And, it can't complain about vis-

its to their homeland if such vis-

its are with their approval, un-

less there has been some mis-

conduct,

- Black Mark

The applicant will undoubtedly,

receive a.security clearance but

he will have experienced the.

anguish of having to defend him-

self and, forever after .he .will.

have a black mark on his record. .

The hearing took place in San,

Francisco and took .more than

one day. The applicant was rep-

resented by Ernest Besig, execu-

tive director of the ACLUNC. ~

The Statement of Reasons was

served on the applicant last June.

No decision is. expected until:

March or April. :

JOIN TODAY

B 151

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION .

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron Membership 0. 6 2s ik se oes ce ts ss 8 LOO

sustaining Membership 62.2.) ..22..........05. 0.

Business and Professional Membership Be eee le

Family Membership .

222608 e@ 8 e@ 8 (c) (c) @

50

25

Associate Membership 5.,.22-25..........2:-.5..:0x00B0 10

Annual Membership =... .....6-. 6... 7

Student Membership ...

ee ee see eee ee eG eove eee eee o 2

ACLU News Subscription "2... 2.4.37. . : $2.00

NAME...

ADDRESS. .

TELEPHONE NUMBER......-....:

CSCC HTHHH HEHEHE HEHHSTHHHHOHHHEHHSHH LECH OHHH HTHHHR TH OCEEERHEOHOS

oe eee eee FOF FFF FHHHHHHEEH HHH HHH LOH LH OTHE HOOD

soe AME. ENCLOSED 3.5...

503 Market Street

San Francisco, 94105