vol. 32, no. 8

American

Civil Liberties

Union

Volume XXXII SAN FRANCISCO, AUGUST, 1967 Number 8

Halvonik's Legislative Report Army Political

Case Won Before

Some Successes

As Adjournment

Of Session Nears

Faithful readers of this column have by now conceived a

grudging admiration for Senator Robert J. Lagomarsino (R-

Ventura). His legislative progeny in such diverse fields as

obscenity and juvenile law have kept ACLUNC alert and

on its toes.

With S.B. 936 Lagomarsino

outdid himself, As orginally in-

troduced 936 would have denied

the services of the public de-

fender to defendants posting a

$1,000 bail bond. Any defendant

fortunate enough to raise the

$100 needed to acquire such a

bond would be put to the choice

of securing his release or having

an attorney. Under Lagomarsi-

no's plan he could not have both

freedom and a lawyer. This

proved a bit much even for a

Senate not inclined to coddle

persons accused of crime; S.B.

936 came to the Assembly with

the denial of counsel provision

struck.

Debtor's Prison

When the bill was heard be-

fore the Criminal Procedure

Committee its principal innova-

tion authorized a judge to order

a convicted indigent to pay for

Urge Political

Freedom for

State Employees

Prof. Albert M. Bendich testi-

fied last month on behalf of the

ACLUNC Board of Directors be-

fore the President's Commission

on Political Activity of Govern-

ment Personnel. He limited his

testimony to Section 12 of the

Hatch Act which applies to State

and local employees.

The ACLUNC board took the

position that government employ-

ees should be allowed the full-

est political freedom, and that

they should be fully protected

against coercion for political pur-

poses from whatever official

quarter where advancement or

retention in public service is

threatened.

The basic rationale of the.

Hatch Act, said Prof. Bendich,

is that "by eliminating the politi-

cal rights of public employees

we eliminate the possibility of

their. abuse. That is neither true

nor rational.

"By eliminating the fundamen-

tal rights of public employees

we inflict the worst abuses on

them and ourselves. It is like

saying that we will prohibit all

sexual activity in order to pro-

tect ourselves against abuses

such as forcible rape. While it

is true that eliminating sex will

eliminate abuses of it, it is not

true, that we couldn't limit leg-

islative concern to the abuse-

as we do in the case of forcible

rape."

Prof. Bendich concluded that

Sec. 9(a) is unconstitutional.

"For," said he, "unless specific

abuses can be shown to exist,

and that there are no alterna-

tives for reaching them which do

not cross protected First Amend-

ment territory, and that there

is nevertheless an overriding and

compelling need to so deal with

them, and the method proposed

' is the least onerous one avail-

able, the First Amendment pro-

hibits it from being done."

the services of the public de-

fender as a-condition of proba-

tion. There was more to this pro-

vision than an understandable

desire to replenish the public

eoffers, A basic tenet of the

philosophy currently fashionable

in Sacramento is that the poor

will only give the proper respect

to that for which they pay and

that such votive offerings are

morally uplifting. In this case

failure to participate in the mo-

rally uplifting experience would

result in imprisonment. If fear

is equated with respect it makes

good sense. But going to jail for

not paying a lawyer smacks of

debtor's prison, something pro-

scribed by the Constitution.

Additionally, such a law would

cause many indigents to forego

their. right to counsel in order to

avoid the burden of another

debt. 936 was killed in commit-

tee when William Ketchum de-

fected from his conservative Re-

publican colleagues to oppose

the measure. Ketchuni found a

different flaw in the bill. Only

those found guilty would have

to pay, he observed, and there

was something basically unfair

about payment being contingent

on loss of the case.

Obscenity -

Assemblyman John Knox (D-

Richmond) helped defeat the

Reagan - Lynch - Finch obscenity

package (S.B. 78 and 79 author-

ed by Lagomarsino) and then of-

fered A.B. 1664 which makes it

unlawful to "pander" to the

prurient interest of a juvenile.

His bill was opposed by the At-

torney General at its first hear-

ing but that opposition soon

evaporated and 1664 eventually

passed the Assembly by a 75-0

vote. When the bill reached the

Senate Judiciary Committee new

opposition had developed, 1664

was now opposed by the District

Attorneys and Peace Officers As-

sociations. For an obscenity bill

it had unusual opponents and the

Judiciary Committee was placed

in the untenable position of

either voting against an anti-

pornography law or voting

against. the district attorneys.

`The irrepressible Lagomarsino

had a solution. He moved to

amend the bill by striking it in'

its entirety and substituting in

its place the language of S.B. 79.

The amendment was adopted

and tthe committee then `took

1664 "under submission."

'The probable outcome of these

parliamentary ploys is that there

will be no new obscenity legi

lation this year. Ss

Anti-Communist Bill

The Assembly Education Com-

mittee has interred the most di-

rect threat to academic freedom

proposed this session. S.B. 734

(Whetmore) would have prohi-

bited speakers invited to cam-

puses from "undermining patri-

otism" and "indoctrinating" stu-

dents in "communism." Its 10 to

6 defeat may in part be attribut-

able to an exposition of the bill

-Continued on Page 4

Appeal Board

An honorable discharge was

granted last month in an Army

security case that has been pend-

ing for a dozen years. ~

The case arose in 1955 when

the inductee received security

charges alleging that he refused

to sign loyalty forms, "main-

tained a sympathetic association

with the Communist Party or

members thereof" since 1951,

and maintained "a close, continu-

ing association, which it appears

will be renewed" with his uncle,

who was asserted to be "an ac-

tive member and official of the

Communist Party," and with a

named individual "who in 1945

was a member of the Polk-Van

Ness Club of the San Francisco

County Communist Party."

"General" Separation

A Field Board hearing was

held at Fort Ord a month before

his scheduled separation at which

the inductee freely testified. His

separation form thereafter de-

scribed the character of his sepa-

ration as "General Under Hon-

orable Conditions," and he was

transferred to the Army Reserve

to complete six years of reserve

duty. :

_ An appeal was taken from the

"General" separation to the

Army Discharge Review Board.

The ACLU argued that under

the Supreme Court's ruling in

the Harmon case any discharge

must reflect the character of

the service. On January 20, 1958

the individual was informed

that his appeal had been denied.

Second Appeal

Several months ago the individ-

ual again appealed to the ACLU

for assistance and another. ap-

peal was filed with the Army

Discharge Review Board. The

ACLU's Washington office ar-

ranged for counsel to appear be-

fore the Board but after a "pre-

liminary review" the Board said

it would issue the honorable dis-

charge and an appropriate cer-

tificate was received on June 1.

Charles Bricker

C. O. Case

Submitted To

Federal Judge

On July 19 and 20 the case of U.S. v. Charles Bricker

was tried before Federal District Judge Alfonso Zirpoli.

The issue was whether Bricker violated the law in failing

to report for induction into the United States Army as or-

dered by his local draft board. .

Conscientious Objector

Bricker was represented by

ACLUNC staff counsel Marshall

W. Krause because of the feel-

ing of the ACLU Board of Direc-

.tors that he had been denied

- due process of law in the consid-

eration of his claim to be a con-

scientious objector on religious

`grounds to military service. If

convicted, Bricker could be sen-

tenced to as much as five years

in jail. At the conclusion of the

evidence, Judge Zirpoli request-

ed that legal memos be filed

on the points raised by the

case and scheduled the matter on

his calendar for September 1 for

decision.

Due Process -

The ACLU claims Bricker

was denied due process of law

in at least three respects. First,

Bricker had been a member of

the United States Army Ready

Reserve for a period of time

before he realized he was a con-

scientious objector. When it be-

came clear to him that his con-

science could no longer allow

him to participate in the Army

Reserves, he applied for a dis-

charge as a C. O. under Army

regulations. As is required by

these regulations, Bricker's appli-

eation was submitted to the Di-

rector of Selective Service who

stated that if Bricker had ap-

plied before his local Selective

Service board he would not have

been classified as a conscientious

objector. The Army then said

that in view of this recommenda-.

tion Bricker's application for

discharge would be denied.

Selective Service Policy

`At the trial, Bricker's attor-

ney stated that he would prove

by the testimony of Lt. General

Executions Stayed Until Aug. 10.

ACLUNC Intervenes in

Calif. Death Row Test Case

Judge Robert Peckham, of the Federal District Court in

San Francisco, has ordered a stay of all executions in Cali-

fornia, The stay will remain in effect at least until a hearing

to be held on August 10th.

The stay was ordered as the result of a petition filed by

Joshua Hill and two other death

row inmates on behalf of them-

selves and "others similarly sit-

uated." The petition attacks Cali-

fornia's capital punishment law

on the grounds that: (1) The

death penalty is imposed without

standards or guidelines, a viola-

tion of due process and equal

protection of the laws; (2) the

lack of standards results in sen-

tence by whimsy and, in certain

cases, produces cruel and un-

usual punishment; (3) the ex-

clusion from juries in capital

eases of persons opposed to the

death penalty violates due pro-

' cess and equal protection of the

laws and violates the constitu-

tional guarantee to a fair trial

by an unbiased and representa-

tive jury; and, (4) the denial of

counsel to condemned indigents

after they have exhausted their

appeal to the California Supreme

Court violates due process and

the equal protection of the laws.

ACLUNC's Role

There has been some confusion

as to ACLUNC's role in the suit.

A suit on behalf of all the in-

mates in death row was being

considered by the ACLUNC staff

before a similar suit was filed in

Florida. News of Florida suc-

cess gave impetus to the idea

and attorneys representing con-

demned men were contacted and

urged to participate in such an

undertaking. At the same time

ACLUNC board member Gerald

Marcus contacted those respon-

sible for the Florida suit and

representatives of the NAACP

Legal Defense Fund came from

New York to confer with staff

counsel Marshall Krause and as-

sistant staff counse] Paul Halvo-

~ nik and attorneys representing

row inmates. At that meeting a

decision to file the suit was

made. A problem was also noted.

ACLUNC has a long standing

policy against joint action with

other organizations in conduct-

ing its business. Participation by

the Legal Defense Fund might

mean that ACLUNC would not

be able to participate directly in

the suit until and unless its pol-

icy were changed. This would

not prohibit ACLUNC from aid-

ing in the preparation of the

-Continued on Page 3

Hershey, the Director of Selec-

tive Service, that it was his gen-

eral policy to deny all such appli-

cations regardless of merit and

had been such at the time Brick-

er's application was _ denied.

Judge Zirpoli refused to hear

this testimony on the grounds

that it would be "irrelevant."

The ACLU argued it would

be quite relevant because,

where administrative discretion

is granted to a particular offi-

cial, if he exercises that discre-

tion in an arbitrary manner an

applicant for discretionary relief

is clearly denied a fair decision.

Certified for Induction

After Bricker's request for dis-

charge from the Reserves had

been denied on the basis that it

was General Hershey's opinion

that he would not qualify as a

conscientious objector, he de-

clined to cooperate further with

the Reserves. Under applicable

regulations he was certified to

-Continued on Page 2

Pat Noonan

Cc. O. Case

Stalled |

In another attemnt te attack

the procedures of the Armed

Forces in handling claims of

persons who have become con-

scientious objectors after enter-

ing into the~ Armed Forces

(whether by enlistment or induc-

tion), the ACLU filed suit last

month on behalf of Patrick

James Noonan, a private in the

United States Army.

Noonan is a devout Roman

Catholic whose discharge as a

C. O. was recommended all the

way up the chain of command,

including a lieutenant general

commanding the Third Army.

However, the Director of Selec-

tive Service, when asked for his

recommendation, stated that Noo-

nan would not be classified as a

conscientious objector by the

Selective Service System and on

that basis the Army denied the

request for discharge.

Noonan's suit was filed in the

Northern District of California

but Federal Judge Louis Burke

ruled that since Noonan had

been transferred to New Jersey .

he was actually in custody in

that jurisdiction and not in the

Northern District of California

and thus the suit could not be

heard. The national office of the

ACLU has promised to take over

the suit in New Jersey where

Noonan has gone pursuant to

his orders.

Noonan is only one of many

persons who have been arbi-

trarily denied discharges by the

action of the Director of Selec-

tive Service. Information avail-

able to the ACLU indicates that

at least a thousand such dis-

charges have been denied on the

~

Director's recommendation and -

that none have been granted

since early 1966. Before that

date about 80% of the applica-

tions were granted. There is ob-

viously a policy decision which

has been made precluding such

discharges. Such a decision

seems to be arbitrary in view

of Department of Defense regu-

lations providing for such dis-

charges in proper cases.

C.O. Case Submitted

To S.F. Federal Judge

Continued from Page 1-

his local draft board for induc-

tion. :

However, Bricker had filed

with his draft board a Form 150,

which is an application for ex-

emption from military service

as a conscientious objector, and

requires of a person who gets

it two years of alternative service

in civilian work of national im-

portance. The local board re-

fused to grant Bricker a C. O.

classification and placed him in

Class 1-A. 2

Friend Exclude

As was his right, Bricker re-

quested a personal appearance

before the local board and the

~ request was granted. However,

the rules of the Selective Service

System prohibit an attorney from

appearing with the registrant at

the personal appearance and give

discretion to the local board

(without any standards for its

exercise) as to whether a friend

shall be allowed to accompany a

registrant at the local board

appearance. Bricker did bring

along a friend for the purpose

of substantiating his sincerity

and helping him recollect what

occurred at the personal appear-

ance since no transcript is taken

of the proceedings. The clerk of

the local board refused to let

Bricker's friend into the room

where the personal appearance

hearing was held without giving

any reason.

Answers Too Long

During Bricker's personal ap-

pearance the members of the lo-

cal board, three businessmen

who have served on the local

board for many years and volun-

teer their time, told him that

his answers to the Form 150

questions were too long and that

they had not had time to read

them. When Bricker tried to get

from them any fact or reason

why they did not think he was

sincere in his conscientious ob-

jection, they refused to give him

any. Bricker was retained in 1-A

classification after his appear-

ance before the local board. It

is this series of events which

provides ACLU's second ground

for challenging the due process

of Bricker's induction.

No Memory

Two members of the local

board and the clerk of the local

board were called as witnesses

at Bricker's trial by the defense.

All the witnesses claimed that

they had absolutely no memory

of the appearance of Bricker be-

fore them and could give no in-

formation as to what happened.

The chairman of the local board

stated that in the twenty years

that he had been a board mem-

ber he could not recall ever

voting to give anyone a con-

scientious objector classification.

Seeger Decision |

As a part of the Universal

~Military Training Act, Congress

has provided that a person who

is conscientiously opposed to

military service shall not be

`required to be inducted into the

Armed Forces. The recent de-

cision in the United States v.

Seeger held that a person did

not have to have orthodox reli-

gious beliefs or attachments in

order to qualify for a C. OQ. ex-

emption and that neither the

courts nor the draft boards could

inquire into the truth of reli-

gious beliefs, but were limited

to the question of whether those

beliefs were truly held by the

registrant.

Rights of Appeal

Congress has also provided

that a person denied C. O. clas-

sification by a local draft board

is entitled to an appeal and to a

hearing before a Department of

Justice hearing officer on his

claim. (The new draft law, re-

ACLU NEWS

AUGUST, 1967

Page 2

cently passed by the Congress,

eliminates this right to appeal

and Department of Justice hear-

ing.) Bricker filed a notice of

appeal from the decision of his

local board but was never given

a Department of Justice hearing

since the appeal board found

that he was a member of the

Reserves and therefore entitled

to a "lower" classification of

1-D, as a reservist. Bricker was

a reservist at this time because

he was still waiting for the de-

cision of the Army on his appli-

eation for discharge as. a con-

scientious objector. -

Government's Contentions

The government argues that

Bricker was not entitled to an

appeal om his C. O. claim because

the 1-D classification was more

desirable and had been ad-

ministratively denominated as a

"lower" classification. It also

claims that once Bricker was re-

ported for failure to perform his

reserve duties, the Selective

Service System was required to

induct him "regardless of his

classification" under its own

regulations.

ACLU Response

The ACLU insisted that these

contentions are in violation of

the clear intent of Congress that

no person who is a conscientious

objector be inducted into the

military service and that a per-

son who claims to be a conscien-

tious objector has the right to

an appeal to press his claim. The

denial of an appeal right is the

denial of due process of law.

It is these questions which

Judge Zirpoli will rule upon

when he announces his decision

on September 1.

Sacramento

Ordinance

Unconstitutional

The Superior Court of Sacra-

mento County on June 7 declared

unconstitutional a Sacramento

ordinance regulating sound am-

plifying equipment. The ordi-

nance required, among other

things, that "The volume of

sound shall be controlled so that

it will not be audible for a dis-

tance in excess of four hundred

(400) feet when operated from

stationary sound amplifying

equipment... . "The ordinance

specifically excluded from its

prohibitions amplifying equip-

ment used "in connection with

the exhibitions of or participa-

tion in outdoor sports such as

baseball, football,

and motorcycle racing at the

location where such sport is

taking place for the benefit of

spectators and participants."

"The effect of the Sacramento

County Ordinance," said Judge

Elvin F. Sheehy, "is to permit

the promoter of sporting events

the unlimited right to make

broadeasts in connection with

those events while denying a

similar right to persons who are

conducting constitutionally pro-

tected religious services. On its

face, the ordinance therefore

violates the equal protection

clause of the United States Con-

_ stitution because it makes a pal-

pably unreasonable classification

of sound broadcasts."

The case involved Daniel D.

Brown, an evangelist and a mem-

ber of a touring evangelical

group known as the MUSICAL

HARTS, who were conducting

services at Arden Way and Avon-

dale under a tent set up for that

purpose. On September 17, 1966,

at ten o'clock, Brown was

charged with violating the ordi-

nance in question by amplifying

voice and music beyond the 100

feet permitted by the law.

The tent that was being used

was 125 feet long. If the ordi-

nance had been obeyed it would

was charged was

tional. Recognizing the impor- .

horseracing -

State Supreme

Court Gets

Di Tullio Case

The State Supreme Court was

asked last month to prevent a

second trial of former Professor

Edmond Everett diTullio on a

charge of using "vulgar, profane

or indecent language" in the0x2122

presence of women or children.

DiTullio was a history pro-

fessor at Chico State College in

the fall of 1965 when he mod-

erated a meeting in the Chico

Town Plaza on the United

States' policy in Vietnam. Two

days after the meeting, he was

arrested and charged `with the

crime described above. After a

long trial, in which he was repre-

sented by ACLU's staff counsel

Marshall W. Krause,

was convicted, but his conviction

was reversed on appeal by the

Butte County Superior Court.

Constitutional Issues

Although the Superior Court

found gross trial errors which

prevented diTullio's jury trial

from being fair, it did not accept ~

the ACLU's position that the

statute under which diTullio

unconstitu-

tance of the constitutional is-

sues, the Superior Court agreed

to certify the case to the District

Court of Appeal in Sacramento

and did so, but that court re-

fused to accept the certification.

Since the original trial was in

an "inferior" court, no further

appeal was possible.

Prohibition Sought

A petition for habeas corpus

and prohibition was then filed

with the District Court of Ap-

peal seeking to prevent a sched-

uled new trial of the charge.

The District Court of Appeal

also denied this petition and so

a new petition has been pre-

_pared and filed with the State-

Supreme Court seeking to pro-

hibit the trial.

The petition now before the

State Supreme Court points out

that diTullio is charged under

a portion of the "disturbing the

peace" statute which is inde-

pendent of the traditional breach

of the peace law. It attempts to

prevent audiences which contain

women or children from hearing

"vulgar, profane or indecent

language." This provision came

into the law in 1878 and has

never been discussed in any re-

ported California case.

_ Contentions

The ACLU position is that a

law requiring public speakers to

conform to the special sensibili-

ties of particularly sensitive per-

sons is a violation of - First

Amendment freedom of speech

protections. In addition, the

ACLU points out that the lan-

guage of the law is unconstitu-

tionally vague and _ over-broad

and inhibits the exercise of free- -

dom of speech, since speakers

do not know what will be con-

sidered to be "vulgar or profane

or indecent."

New Trial

If the State Supreme Court

does not agree to hear the legal

issues prior to trial, the diTullio

case will have to be tried again.

However, this time the trial will

be before a judge of the Super-

ior Court and not a retired high-

way patrolman as was the case

in the first trial.

have meant that persons beyond

the 100 foot mark would not

have been able to hear the serv-

ices.

Judge Sheehy granted a

writ prohibiting prosecution of

Brown. He was represented by

Lawrence K. Karlton of Sacra-

mento, the Legal Coordinator of

the Sacramento Valley Chapter

of the ACLUNC.

diTullio

Book Review:

The Challenge to American

Freedoms:

World War | and the Rise of the

American Civil Liberties Union

By DONALD 0. JOHNSON

Univ. of Kentucky Press, 1963-$5.00

Civil libertarians may not be surprised by the revelation

in Professor Donald 0. Johnson's prize-winning book that

the civil rights movement is but 60 years old. However, many

people still regard the movement as dating back to the rati-

fication of the Bill of Rights. Not so; for historically many

Americans have rested on the

laurels of the Founding Fathers,

taking their constitutionally

guaranteed civil liberties for

granted and at times coming ter-

rifyingly close to forsaking these

treasured rights. This is one of

the sober messages of The Chal-

lenge to American Freedoms by

Professor Johnson of the Sonoma

State College History Depart-

ment.

Receiving the coveted Missis-

sippi Valley Historical Associa-

tion award for the finest book in

American History in 1962, John-

son's work, subtitled, World War

One and the Rise of the Ameri-

ean Civil Liberties Union, fills -a

glaring void in recent American

histography by detailing the ori-

gin and the early development

of the American Civil Liberties

Union. While the Nineteenth

Century witnessed shocking viola-

tions of civil liberties, such as

the enforcement of the Alien and

Sedition Acts, the persecution of

the Mormons, the suspension of

habeas corpus during the Civil

War, the harassment of labor

unions and the conviction of an-

archists in the Haymarket Square

riot, nothing bordering a nation-

al hysteria concerning internal

subversion was ever manifested.

World War I was another mat-

ter. The hyper-patriotism and

the war hysteria resulted in flag- .

rant abuse of civil liberties. A

few liberals, pacifists, and social-

ists banded together in their op-

position to the war and treat-

ment of conscientious objectors

forming the National Civil Lib-

erties Bureau, a foreruner of the

ACLU.

The shining light in the civil

liberties movement and the vig-

orous leader of the NCLB and

the ACLU was Robert Nash Bald-

win. Johnson points up Baldwin's

contribution to the cause of civil

liberties including his vigorous

objection to the inhuman punish-

ment of conscientious objectors,

`censorship of mail, conviction of

political dissentors and persecu-

tion of the I.W.W. This constant

pressure had its affect and some

reforms were made in the Justice

~ Department.

Members of the Wilson admin-

istration, namely Attorney Gen-

erals Thomas W. Gregory and A.

Mitchell Palmer, and Post Master

General Albert Sidney Burleson,

come out badly in Johnson's

work. Woodrow Wilson acceded

to the many violations of civil

liberties including mail censor-

ship (confiscation of anti-war

literature) by supporting his

Secretaries who were directly in-

volved. The tarnished escutcheon

of the "enlightened" Wilson ad-

ministration is all but demol-

ished by Johnson as he analyzes

its civil rights record with regard

to the First World War and the

Palmer raids.

Utilizing both a topical and

chronological approach Profes-

sor Johnson devotes separate

well-documented chapters to the

Espionage and Sedition Acts, the

Red Scare and the Political Pris-

oners Controversy. Within these

concluding chapters, the relent-

less opposition of Baldwin and

`the NCLB to the violation of

civil liberties is sharply drawn,

culminating in the establishment

in December, 1919, of the Amer-

ican Civil Liberities Union with

a much larger budget and staff

and singularly devoted to the

protection of civil liberties.

This work is not the usual pon-

derous historical monograph.

-Continued on Page 3

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

ERNEST BESIG .. . Editor

503 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105, 433-2750

- Subscription Rates -- Two Dollars a Year

Twenty Cents Per Copy

151

Ralph 8B. Atkinson

Dr. Alfred Azevedo

Mrs. Judith Balderston

Albert M. Bendich

Leo Borregard

Albert Culhane

Mrs. Natalie Dukes

Prof. John Edwards

Howard A. Friedman

Robert Greensfelder

Rev. Aron S. Gilmartin

Evelio Grillo

Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross

Francis Heisler

Neil F. Horton

Howard H. Jewel

Honorary Treasurer:

Joseph S$. Thompson

Honorary Board Member:

Sara Bard Field -

Mes. Gladys Brown

Mrs. Paul Couture

Mrs. Margaret C. Hayes -

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

John J. Eagan

Joseph Eichler

De. H. H. Fisher

Prof. Ernest Hilgard

Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California -

CHAIRMAN: Prof. Van D. Kennedy

VICE-CHAIRMEN: Rabbi Alvin I. Fine

Helen Saiz

SEC'Y-TREAS.: John R. May

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig

GENERAL COUNSEL: Wayne M. Collins |

STAFF COUNSEL: Marshall W.. Krause

ASST. STAFF COUNSEL and LEGIS. REP.: Paul Halvonik

ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: Mrs. Pamela $. Ford

CHAPTER DIRECTOR: Mrs. Marcia D. Lang

Committee of Sponsors

Mrs. Paul Holmer

Mrs. Mary Hutchinson Prof. Wallace Stegner

Morse Erskine

Prof. Wilson Record Norman Lezin

Dean Robert A. Keller

Prof. David Levin

Gerald D. Marcus

Ephraim Margolin

Prof. John Henry Merryman

Robert L. Nolan, M.D. |

Prof. Robert M. O'Neil

/ Clarence E. Rust

John Brisbin Rutherford

Mrs. Alec Skolnick

Stanley D. Stevens

Stephen Thiermann

Cecil Thomas

Donald Vial

Richard J. Werthimer

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Mrs. Theodosia: Stewart

Rt. Rev. Sumner Walters

Richard Johnston

Roger Kent

Mrs. Ruth Kingman

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Rev. Rober? W. Moon

Or, Norman Reider

Prof Hubert Phillips

Lenore Kandel's Poems

S. F. `Love

Book Appeal

Under Way

After a five week jury trial of the three booksellers who

sold Lenore Kandel's

"Love Book," the jury returned a

verdict of guilty and the trial Judge, Laurence S. Mana,

refused to set the verdict aside. Two of the defendants were

sentenced to pay $50 and a third was sentenced to pay a

$100 fine. Attorneys for the de-

fendants, Staff Counsel Marshall

Krause and Volunteer Vasilios

Choulos, are taking an appeal

from the verdict to the Appellate

Department of the Superior

Court.

Average Person Rule

The outstanding fact concern-

ing the way the case was tried

was Judge Mana's interpreta-

tion of the law which required

that Miss Kandel's slender book

of poems have social importance

for the average person. This

unique interpretation of the First

Amendment was vigorously op-

posed by ACLU Counsel on the

basis that it was not only sup-

ported by no court decision but

eould reduce the material pro-

tected by the freedom of speech

clause to that which the average

person could understand and

find meaningful. Of course, this.

would deprive experimental and

specialized literary expression of

constitutional protection, a re-

sult which the ACLU feels the

First Amendment was intended

to avoid.

Zruthful Description

The trial of the action was

marked by a clear clash of val-

ues between those who feel that

a truthful and honest description

of love-making is dirty and

disgusting and those who would

grant a poet freedom to write

about this important human ex-

perience in terms which are

meaningful to her. Expert wit-

nesses for the prosecution stated

that the average person was

disgusted by truthful description

of love-making and would not

see social value in such truthful

description. Experts for the de-

fense stated that more such

frankness and honesty is re-

quired if we are to understand

and appreciate our own sexual

impulses.

Nom Readers

The jury, which consisted of

ten women and two men, was

chosen by the attorneys for the

prosecution and defense after

questioning a large number of

potential jurors. Unfortunately,

most of them were not interested

in reading or literary subjects,

never read themselves because

they were "too tired" and had no

appreciataion of or interest in

intellectual matters. The few per-

sons who did do some reading

were removed by the prosecutor

but the defense could only suc-

ceed in removing the worst of

the vast majority of non-read-

ers.

Poet's Testimony

Witnesses for the defense in-

cluded Miss Kandel, who gave a

spirited and dignified explana-

tion of her poems and strength-

ened the case by her firm

World War | and

Rise of the ACLU

Continued from Page 2-

While it is solidly documented,

the lively, lucid, and hard-hitting

prose style of Professor Johnson

makes this book easy and absorb-

ing reading. A twenty-two page

essay on sources will please the

historical scholar and indicate

conclusively to all the thorough |

and meticulous research of the

author. This book should be re-

quired reading for all Americans.

-Theodore Grivas, Ph.D., Pro-

fessor of History, Chairman, De-

partment of History, Sonoma

State College.

response to the bitter cross-

examination of Assistant District

Attorney Frank Shaw, Professor

Thomas Parkinson of the depart-

ment of English of the Univer-

sity of California and Professor

Robert Brophy of the De-

partment of English of the

University of San. Francisco,

both of whom praised the

thought and expressiveness of

the poems and gave high marks

to the social importance of the

communication.

Psychiatrists

Also testifying for the defense

were psychiatrists Edwin F. Al-

ston and James Stubblebine, the

latter being in charge of San

Francisco's mental health pro-

gram. Both psychiatrists were

emphatic about the value of the

Love Book's theme as reaching

toward a truthful understanding

of human sexuality. Also testi-

fying for the defense was an ex-

perienced marriage counsellor,

Dr. Gerrold Smith, who empha-

sized the need for communica-

tion between married persons

and felt that the "Love Book" .

was a means of helping estab-

lish such communication. Dr.

`Harry Scholefield, minister of

the First Unitarian Church in

San Francisco, and Rabbi Joseph

Glazer, of the Union of Ameri-

can Hebrew Congregations, tes-

tified concerning the moral and

spiritual values of the book, and

the wife of a minister, Mrs. Nina

Beggs, testifed as to the impor-

tance of the book from a wom-

an's point of view.

Two Witnesses Barred

Two defense witnesses were

not allowed to testify, Chronicle :-

columnist Arthur Hoppe because

he was "unqualified" on the

question of communication to

"average persons," and Mrs. Mar-

garet Krebbs who was called

"unqualified" because she was

not a professional person. _

Prosecution Witnesses

On the prosecution side, in

addition to the police depart-

ment's obscenity squad, Officers

Maloney and Wiener, testimony

was heard from Val King, a col-

umnist for the Catholic paper

"The Monitor," Mrs. Boyd Puci-

nelli, a "civic leader," Dr. Vuk-

sanik, a Psychiatrist at St. Mary's

Hospital, a Catholic Priest, Fa-

ther Armstrong, who was a

"youth leader," Mrs. Gayle Pot-

ter, a literary expert who never

read books, but relied on re-

views, Dr. Carl Howie, a Presby-

terian Minister, and Father

Hauk, a former President of the

University of Santa Clara, who

was offered as an expert witness

on literary matters. Even grant-

ing all these witnesses the

utmost of good faith and expert-

ness, their testimony merely es-

tablished a difference of opinion

as to the value of the ideas

expressed in "The Love Book." '

A difference of opinion is a

dangerous ground upon which to

base censorship.

Argument Against Censorship

However, the jury and the

trial judge have spoken and

now the question remains for

appellate courts. The verdict in

the "Love Book" case is one of

the strongest arguments for no

censorship laws since it shows

the difficulty of overcoming the

strong community prejudice

against outspoken ideas violating

moral taboos, even if those ideas

are truthful and of value.

'more

randum pointed out that the -

Free Speech

Victory for

Calif. Lawyers

In a little-noticed action last

month the Supreme Court of

California unanimously entered

a brief order on its minutes stat-

ing: "The proposed amendment

of Rule 2, section a, of the Rules

of Professional Conduct, ap-

proved by the Board of Gover-

nors of the State Bar of Cali-

fornia, is disapproved." This

action of the Supreme Court of

California curtly denied the at-

tempt of the Board of Gover-

nors of the State Bar to enforce

a rule which would have made it

unethical for lawyers to write -

books or articles or make state-

ments or give interviews or to

participate in radio or television

broadcasts where "the natural

and primary purpose or effect"

is to "aggrandize the name of

the member of the State Bar or

to extol such member's promi-

nence in the legal profession or

skill in the practice of law... ." -

This rule was offered for approv-

al to the State Supreme Court

in the guise of a regulation of

solicitation of employment but

was really directed toward such

leading self-extollers as Melvin

Belli, Louis Nizer, Jake Ehrlich,

and Vincent Hallinan.

Little Opposition

An exception would have been

provided by the rule for books

and articles written "without

self-laudation by such member or

comment on his professional

ability." As to both the rule and

the exception, the ACLU filed

a vigorous protest with the

State Supreme Court in the form

of a memorandum against adop-

tion of the rule. This memoran-

dum and the letter of one lawyer

were the only opposition filed

to the adoption of the rule.

Gag on Lawyers

The ACLU's memorandum

pointed out that under the guise

of preventing alleged solicitation

of legal business the State Bar

proposals seek to regulate the

way lawyers expose themselves

to the public and seek to put a

gag on lawyers as citizens. Even

importantly, the memo-

rule would put a gag on commu-

nications from lawyers to the

general public about the practice

of the profession of law and pre-

vent much valuable information

from reaching the public. The

memorandum stated: "This at-

tempt to intimidate the Bar, to

narrow the scope of public ex-

pression of its members, to turn

them into time-serving, govern-

ment-fearing individuals should

be resisted with every ounce of

strength of the organized Bar;

instead it is proposed by the

State Bar. y

Vague and Imprecise

The ACLU memorandum

pointed out that the proposed

rule was extremely vague and

difficult to apply which was a

constitutional violation of itself

because, in the area of freedom

of expression, regulation must

be precise so that persons are

not intimidated from exercising

their rights of freedom of ex-

pression by the fear that some

regulation might be violated.

State Bars Brief

In response to the ACLU mem-

orandum, the State Bar of Cali-

fornia filed a 143-page brief

justifying its position and urg-

ing the State Supreme Court to

either approve the proposed rule

or suggest such amendments

which would permit its approval.

By its sharp rejection, the Su-

preme Court has now indicated

that any rules in this area are

unwelcome. Needless to say, the

State Bar already has adequate

rules governing the solicitation

of legal business by advertising

or other unethical means.

Obscenity Issue

Certiorari

Petition Filed -

In Chance Case

The conviction of Conrad Chance for violation of Cali-

fornia's anti-obscenity law was taken to the Supreme Court

of the United States last month with the filing of a petition

for a writ of certiorari by ACLU staff counsel Marshali W.

Krause. The high court was asked to review Chance's con-

viction on one count of an 11-

count complaint against him in

Redwood City Municipal Court

after the Appellate Department

of the San Mateo County Super-

ior Court affirmed the conviction

and refused to certify the case

to any higher court. The con-

viction came after a jury trial in

1965 and involved the possession

of 12 photographs of semi-nude

women. Chance was found not

guilty of 10 other alleged anti-

obscenity law violations.

ACLU Contentions

In Chance's petition before the

high court the ACLU makes

these arguments: 1. Recent de-

cisions of the United States Su-

preme Court have found similar

material to be protected by the

First Amendment to the United

States Constitution. There is no

rational basis upon which the

material for which Chance was

convicted can be distinguished

from this material which has

been "cleared" by the U.S. Su-

preme Court (nor is there any

ACLU Intervenes

In Calif. Death -

Row Test Case

Continued from Page 1-

_ pleadings and since an execution

`was imminent it was agreed that

policy considerations would be

deferred. When it came time to

file the pleadings ACLUNC

bowed out of the suit because of

policy reasons and limited itself

to an amicus curiae status.

A.G.'s Appeal Denied __

Judge Peckham issued his stay

on July 5th. The Attorney Gen-

eral, on July 7th, petitioned the

U.S. Court of Appeals to vacate

the stay order. The hearing on

the Attorney General's writ was

set for July 10 and an execution

was scheduled for the following

day. Only a week-end was avail-

able for preparation of a re-

sponse to the Attorney General's

action. Paul Halvonik spent that

week-end with five other attor-

neys, Jerome Falk, Roy LEisen-

hardt, Harry Kreamer, Gary Ber-

ger and Professor Anthony Am-

sterdam, preparing a 72-page

brief which was presented to the

Court a little more than an hour

before the case was argued, Pro-

fessor Amsterdam argued the

case masterfully before the Court

of Appeals and the Attorney

General's writ was denied forty

minutes after the Court had ad-

journed.

Policy Decision

At its meeting of July 13 the

ACLUNC board voted to make

an exception to its policy against

joint action for purposes of the

death row suit, The action, how-

ever, was limited by two condi-

tions: "(1) no assumption of the

exceptionally heavy financial

costs, and (2) ACLUNC's con-

trol of the litigation." Inciden-

tally, the New York based Legal

Defense Fund apparently has a

grant that enables it to take on

this case. The way may now be-

cleared for full and direct par-

ticipation by ACLUNC.

Between now and August 10

memoranda on various procedur-

al questions are being filed with

the Federal District Court. Oral

argument on the procedural ques-

tions will occur at the August 10

hearing.

rational basis by which the ma-

terial on which Chance was

acquitted by the trial court could

be distinguished from the mate-

rial on which he was convicted).

This leaves the area of obscenity

subject to chance judgment,

whim and caprice, a situation

which will encourage self-cen-

sorship and irrational applica-

tion of the law. _-_-

Illegal Action

2, Since it is undisputed that

the Chance case involves no

problem of selling to minors, in-

volves no assault on privacy by

exposing persons to something

which they do not want to see

and -has no evidence of "`pander-

ing" sexuality by advertising or

other means, then recent Su-

preme Court decisions require

that for willing, adult buyers of

printed materials or photographs,

the only punishable sale or exhi-

bition is that which has tradi-

tionally fallen outside the pro-

tection of the First Amendment,

namely, "that which is so closely

brigaded with illegal action as to

be an inseparable part of it."

Right of Privacy

The petitioner urges the Court

to come back to a "clear and

present. danger test" and to pro-

tect a right of privacy for an

adult who wishes to possess and

read material, whatever its na-

ture. The petition points out that

petitioner's store was restricted

to adults and dealt exclusively in

sex-oriented materials so that

the only persons who entered

were those who desired to pur-

chase these materials. The

petition' argues that the govern-

ment's power to circumscribe

the right of privacy-to be let

alone in what one reads-can

only exist where there is a com-

pelling governmental interest re-

quiring some modification of this

Tight. Since there is no such

compelling interest in prevent-

ing adults from having access

to what they wish to read and

view, there is no justification

for punishing Mr. Chance.

Community Standards

3. The petition points out that

the trial court prevented the in-

troduction of evidence of con-

temporary community standards

to show that the pictures of

semi-nude women were similar

to those freely available in

dozens of stores in the commu-.

nity and to anyone who wanted

to purchase a "girlie'' magazine.

It also points out that the issue

of what is admissible to show

contemporary community stand-

ards is.a troublesome constitu-

tional point which has been

before the Court on many occa-

sions but never decided.

Erroneous Instructions

4. Lastly, the petition points

out that certain errors in jury

instructions deprived the peti-

tioner of constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court is very

closely divided on the issue of

whether obscenity laws are

valid and when it recon-

venes in October the vote

of the new Justice, Thurgood

- Marshall, may either signify a

green light for further prosecu-

tions or an end to legislative at-

tempts to identify and control

"obscenity."

ACLU NEWS

AUGUST, 1967

Page 3

Membership

Campaign

Sets Records

Pressed by the need to expand

its membership and _ financial

base in order to carry out its ex-

panded program of activities,

ACLUNC raised its campaign

goal for the second year in suc-

cession. This year's goal was

set at 800 new memberships. The

goal was exceeded by exactly 100

(including individual and family

memberships) of which 236 are

students. San Francisco led all

areas and chapters in terms of

hew memberships and financial

- contributions, For the fourth suc-

cessive year the campaign was

characterized by a noteworthy

number of new student member-

ships, the steepest rise this year

being in San Francisco.

Chapter Progress

Among the chapters Marin

and Sacramento made the most

notable gains. In the case of Ma-

rin it was the result of the first

broadly based organized effort in

several years. Gains recorded by

Sacramento and Santa Clara

were largely due to their loca-

tion in areas of expanding popu-

lation, In Sacramento they could

also be ascribed to a pre-cam-

paign drive to recruit local col-

lege teachers. The Davis area of

the Sacramento Chapter was

thoroughly worked by Mr. Lee

Watkins, who also persuaded

humerous inactive members to

rejoin. The Santa Clara, Santa

Cruz and Sacramento chapters

were handicapped by delays in

getting organized, recruiting vol-

unteers, and by changes in the

personnel of their boards and

committees. :

Despite excellent local organ-

ization and heroic effort by the

chairman and volunteers, Mid-

Peninsula was unable to match

its record gains of 1965 and 1966.

However, because of their hard

work a very large number of

inactive members were reacti-

vated. The Berkeley / Albany

Chapter, also very well organ-

' ized, surpassed the record it set

last year.

Declines in Fresno, Sonoma

The new Fresno Chapter suf-

fered a decline as compared with

~ last year, and the Sonoma Coun-

ty group which last year had

"surged ahead so dramatically as

to raise the expectation that it

could be chartered as a chapter,

slumped. The failure to match

last year's gains was not for lack

of leadership, enthusiasm, or ef-

fort, but most likely the result

of the distances between commu-

nities which place difficult bar-

riers to communication and viti-

ate the necessary sense of unity.

The Mount Diablo Chapter which

was in a situation of crisis a few

months preceding the member-

ship drive, managed to organize

for the drive and to register a

slight gain. It faces an uphill

course for the next year or so.

The Monterey

Chapters continue to struggle

against a generally unsympa-

thetic community attitude. -Al-

though both, along with some

other chapters, fruitfully reac-

tivated "dead" and dormant

members.

Non-chapter Areas

Oakland, Richmond/El Cerrito

and Hayward/Livermore are dif-

ficult, if not hostile areas in |

which to attempt membership

recruitment. Considering that

only one person took overall re-

sponsibilty for the membership

drive in Oakland it did almost as

well as last year.

In that part of Southern Ala-

meda County comprised of Hay-

ward, Livermore and environs

ACLU overcame the fact that

membership in it was an issue in

at least one heated local cam-

ACLU NEWS

AUGUST, 1967

Page 4

and Stockton

embers is shown in parentheses next to the column of total mem-

Results of 1967 Membership Campaign

(March 13-June 30, 1967)

Note: 1. Membership figures include family members. The totals, therefore, do not reflect the number of new individ-

ual members. The number of new student m

berships.

2. Only the names of chairmen and volunteers who undertook overall responsibility for the campaign within

chapters and specified areas are given. They were: assisted by volunteers, too numerous to list, whose efforts

are deeply appreciated. ae :

Non-Member New Subscribers

New Memberships Contributors to NEWS Total

Chapters No. (Students) Dollars No. Dollars No. Dollars `Income

Berkeley/Albany .............. 179 (81) $1360 3 11 6 12 $1383

Fresno og 18 (3) -179 - - 1 2 181

Marin 232 62 ( 5) 603 3 10 4 8 621

Mid-Peninsula .................... 70 = (22) 536 2 11 1 2 549

Monterey _....... ee 9 (- 43 os - on - 73

Mount Diablo .................... 26 ( 4) 290 1 2 1 2 294

- Sacramento ...........2.........--- 67 "(1 549 1 10 oe - 559

Santa Clara occ 480x00B0 (18) Shr 4 22 ro 4 357

Santa: Cruz ce 21 6 -( (Y).- 98 - ~- 2 4 202

Stockton 263 os. ( I} -. 3 - ee a - 31

Non-chapter areas and miscellaneous

Hayward, Livermore ........ 26 ( 2) 204 2 5 1 2 261

Oakland ........... ee 43. (10).- 369 4 85. 1 2 406

Richmond/El Cerrito ........ 14 ( 2) 135 _-_ - 1 2 137

San Francisco ___................ 244 ( 64) 2068 10 639* 6 12 2719

San Mateo County ............ 26 ( 8) 222 3 8 1 2 232

Sonoma County _............... 15 ( 3) 128 1 10 1 2 140

Miscellaneous ..-................. oa 4) 221 1 1 1 2 224

Out of State 20... 5 ( 2) 29 - _ - - 29

TOTAL 26 900 (236) $7596 32 $744 29 $58 $8398

*Includes a $600 contribution.

Membership Chairman

Mrs. Doris Mendell

Mr. Russell Grove

Mrs. Edith Freeman

Mr. Harry Lewenstein

Mr. William Perry

Dr. Jack Lewis

Mr. Hans Poppe/Mr. Lee

Watkins

Mrs. Evelyn Lages

Mrs. Margaret Lezin

Mrs. Marjorie Phillips

Mr. Jim Crockett/Mr, Rob-

ert Freis

Miss Nancy Sisler

Mr. John Ungaretti

Mrs. Eileen Keech

Office aided by Mrs. Keech

Prof. Sam Bullen

Office aided by Mrs. Keech

paign. In fact because of the ef-

forts of its two co-chairmen, a

slight gain was registered.

Another Difficult Area

The Richmond/El Cerrito area

is another inhospitable area for

ACLU recruitment in which

members or people sympathetic

to our aims and activities are

burdened with other commit-

ments. The drive there was

handled by a high school student,

assisted by four school mates

who chose to remain anonymous

rather than incur the disapprov-

al of their parents.

In Butte County interest in

ACLU was mute in 1967 despite

the diTullio case which agitated

Chico in 1965. Indeed, once again

there was trouble in Paradise

when ACLU became an issue in

a local election.

Indispensable Volunteers

In summary, the 1967 mem-

bership drive was gratifying in

that the goal was exceeded and

just surpassed (by two) the rec-

ord established last year, and in

that financially it set a new high,

running $967 more than last

year.

ACLUNC is greatly indebted

to the many volunteers who as-

sisted in the drive, both in the

San Francisco Office and in the

chapter and. non-chapter areas.

Special thanks are due to the

Berkeley/ Albany Chapter and its

office volunteers, headed by Mrs.

Vivian Tait, for the great assist-

ance given the Branch Office in

getting out various mailings. Be-

cause of the Chapter's help the

Branch was able to stay on

schedule.

Membership

At Record

High of 7150

As the NEWS goes to press

the branch membership has

climbed to a record high of 7150, ~

or 325_more members than at

the same time last year. In addi-

tion, there are 216 separate sub-

scribers to the NEWS and a

total mailing list of 7366.

Not included in the current .

membership figures are about

900 persons whose memberships

expired during the past six

months. Because of the branch's

expanded program their sup-

port is sorely needed.

- the

California Legislative

Session Nears End

Continued from Page -

given by its most avid supporter,

John Collier (R-Los Angeles).

Collier said it was his opinion

that any "commie" invited to a

campus would be certain to "in-

doctrinate" iand that `commu-

nist" should be broadly inter-

preted to include "Fabian Social-

ists." His remarks lent credence

to John Dunlap's (D-Napa) con-

tention that the bill would be

used ito stifle any unpopular ex

pression.

Juvenile Rights

A,B. 1095, a "Bill of Rights"

for juveniles, has passed the

Senate Judiciary Committee and

been sent to the Senate floor.

Although it received a 68-0 vote

in ithe Assembly its author, Craig

Biddle (R-Riverside), had to ac-

cept two important amendments

before he could garner sufficient

votes to get it out of the Senate

Committee. Those amendments

were the deletion of a provision

`requiring accusations against ju-

veniles to be proven beyond a

reasonable doubt and a provision

that would have required ju-

venile hearings to be conducted

according to the same rules of

evidence used in criminal trials.

The most crucial parts of the

bill remain intact. They provide

for admonitions about constitu-

tional rights when the juvenile

is in custody; the appointment of

counsel whether or not the ju-

venile is indigent; and a free

transcript of the hearing for the

indigent juvenile.

Mental Health

The Lanterman-Petris mental

commitment reform bill (A.B.

1220) has met with a great deal

of opposition in the Senate Gov-

ernmental Efficiency Committee.

At this writing its chances of

survival are slim. The point in

contention is not so much its

libertarian commitment philoso-

phy as its financing provisions.

Until compromises can be reach-

ed with various counties about

finances mental commitment re-

form will languish.

Fifth Amendment

A.B. 1817 .(Murphy) would

have permitted a prosecutor to

- comment on a defendan't refusal

to submit to a chemical test to

determine whether he was under

influence of alcohol.

ACLUNC opposed this measure

contending that there were many

valid non-incriminatory reasons

for such refusals and that pro-

secution comment would force a

defendant to take the witness

stand to explain his refusa] thus

waiving his privilege against self-

incrimination. The bill passed

the Criminal Procedure Commit-

tee when tthe usually libertarian

Walter Karabian (D-Monterey

Park) joined Murphy and his fel-

low Republicans in support of

the mesaure. It was the first

time in this session a bill infring-

ing on a constitutionally protect-

ed right received the endorse-

ment of the Criminal Procedure -

Committee. The story has a hap-

py ending: A.B. 1817 was killed

on the Assembly floor.

Bills Vetoed ;

Two bills authored by Assem-

blyman Alan Sieroty (D-Beverly

Hills) have been vetoed by Gov-

ernor Reagan. Sieroty's legisla-

tion would have removed the ar-

chaie prohibition of employment

of aliens by the state and by con-

tractors working for the state.

Last year an opinion regarding

the constitutionality of the pres-

ent Jaw was requested of the At-

torney General. ACLUNC sub-

mitted a memorandum to the of-

fice of the Attorney General ex-

plaining tthe legal basis for its

view that the present alien pro-

hibition law violates the equal

protection guarantees of the

The ftrst right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible

AMERICAN CIVIL

Federal Appeals

Court to Hear

Army C.O. Case

The ACLU on July 19 asked

the U. S. Court of Appeals to

decide whether a civilian court

can hear the case of an Army

Private who had been denied a

discharge as a conscientious ob-

-_jector by the Army.

Appealing the decision of the

U.S. District Court in New Jer-

sey, the ACLU on behalf of

David W. Brown, contends that

the lower court did have juris-

diction to hear the case and that

the Army violated its own regu-

lations by not discharging Brown,

a devout Methodist.

Brown, now in the hospital at

Ft. Dix for failure to obey an

order to put on his uniform, has

twice filed for a C.O. discharge.

His claim as a C.O. has been

supported by Methodist chap-

lains. After his application was

turned down the second time,

Brown, feling that the wearing of

a uniform violated his beliefs,

went on a fast which lasted

for three weeks after which he

was hospitalized and fed intra-

venously.

Fourteenth Amendment. The

opinion was shelved while Sie-

roty's bills progressed through

the legislature. Now that his bills

have been vetoed any reason -

for delaying further the Attor-

ney General's opinion have dis-

appeared and it should be forth-

coming -Paul N. Halvonik

JOIN TODAY

offeqges 151

LIBERTIES UNION

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron Membership .22.2..00...4... 2s $100

Sustaining Membership. ....... 0... 1. 3. an me 50

Business and Professional Membership .............. 25

Family Membership ..... ae ere 15

Associate Membership... ... 2.2 ee a 10

Annual Membership ...:......5 ae. 8

Student Membership ................2. oe 3

ACEU- News) Subseription ..8...5 0-23... $2.00

NAME

ADDRESS and ZIP: CODE.

TELEPHONE NUMBER...

ec eee meer sree ere eer eee eee eo eee

AMT ENCLOSED

$03 Market Street

San Francisco, 94105