vol. 48, no. 7

Volume XLVIII October 1983

High school students in the Mt.

Hee Unified School District

will be able to read Ms. magazine

again without first obtaining a

parent's written permission, as a result of

`a Contra Costa Superior Court decision

removing censorship restrictions on the

magazine.

The August 19 decision by Judge

David Dolgin came in response to a

three-year lawsuit by the ACLU-NC on

behalf of students, parents and teachers

- as well as the Ms. Foundation - chal-

lenging the unconstitutional censorship

of the feminist publication.

The controversy began in 1980 when

the Mt. Diablo School Board, bowing to

an organized campaign by Christian fun-

damentalists objecting to ``moral im-

purity,'' - and ignoring the recom-

mendations of the board's own hand-

picked committee - restricted the maga-

zine. A 3-2 vote on June 26, 1980 - with

the crucial votes coming from board

members who admitted they had never

read an entire issue of the magazine -

allowed Ms. to be used only at high

schools, on the ``reserved'' shelf of the

library, and only by students who could

obtain written permission from both a

parent and a teacher. The teacher re-

quirement was abandoned by the school

' district after the ACLU suit was filed.

aclu news |

s. Magazine Ban Lifted

This restriction was tantamount to

censorship argued ACLU cooperating

attorneys Rochelle Alpert and Jack

Londen of the San Francisco law firm of

Morrison and Foerster and ACLU staff at-

torney Margaret Crosby. |

The ACLU arguments were backed up

by observations from school librarians in

the district who noted that the restric-

tions had virtually eliminated the use of

Ms. by the students. Carolyn Benning,

librarian at Ygnacio Valley High School,

said, ``The policy has effectively killed

the use of the magazine. It discourages

students, and about 50 percent of the

ones who request Ms. don't ever bother

to take the form home for a signature."'

Dennis McCormac, one of the three

male school board members who voted

to impose restrictions (the two women

board members voted against the ban),

said to his knowledge only one of the

district's seven high schools - Mt.

Diablo High in Concord - now

subscribes to Ms.

But librarian Benning clarified the situa-

tion. ``The year the ban was imposed,"'

she said, ``someone gave our school

library a gift subscription to the maga-

zine. Now, a teacher brings us in her

copies. My budget is short, so we take

advantage of these gifts. However, if.

they were to stop bringing in their copies,

I would definitely subscribe to it again."'

Judge Dolgin's ruling, though assert-

ing that parents have rights to exercise

discretion over their own children's read-

ing material, stated that ``neither the

School Board, nor the objecting parents

may exercise this right for ey not

their own.'

In overturning the Board Soles

Dolgin stated, ``The policy adopted by

the School Board of requiring an

affirmative act by a parent of a minor

student to obtain Ms. magazine must be

stricken down because the Board was ac-

ting on behalf of the objecting parents, -

continued on p. 5

ACLU 1983 Annual Conference

AT CHAR

i Mi

pes

B Lair Smyser ore

Korematsu, Hirabayashi and Yasui to be Honored

Gordon Hirabayashi, Fred Korematsu

and Minoru Yasui - three courageous

individuals who refused to obey military

orders leading up to the internment of

120,000 Japanese Americans during

World War II and whose convictions

were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court

- will be honored with the Earl Warren

Civil Liberties Award at the ACLU-NC

eleventh annual Bill of Rights Day

Celebration.

The Celebration, which will be held on

December 4 at the Sheraton Palace Hotel

in San Francisco, is the culmination of

the ACLU-NC's annual fundraising

campaigns. The Bill of Rights Day and

Major Gifts Campaign support virtually

the entire legal program of the ACLU-

NC Foundation. Each year, over 800

supporters make a one-time special tax-

deductible contribution and are

recognized in the Commemorative

Booklet issued the day of the Celebra-

tion. The combined fundraising eee this

year is $230,000.

Naomi Schalit, chair of the Bill of

Rights Day fundraising campaign, said,

`In a period when civil liberties are

under attack, it is vitally important that

the ACLU-NC be able to mount a

comprehensive legal program. The suc-

cess of our fight to defend civil liberties

depends on the success of the Bill of

Rights Day fundraising campaign."'

Fred Korematsu, Minoru Yasui and Gordon Hirabayashi (1.-r.) will be honored at the Bill of

Rights Day Celebration on December 4.

Schalit, a graduate student in jour-

nalism at U.C. Berkeley, is active with

the Right to Dissent Subcommittee and

the San Francisco Chapter. Until recent-

ly, she worked as Program Director at

Mother Jones magazine where she col-

laborated with ACLU-NC Field

Organizer Marcia Gallo in putting on

``An Evening of Dangerous Propagan-

da,'' a joint ACLU-NC/Mother Jones

fundraiser, featuring the three Canadian

films labeled ``political propaganda'' by

the U.S. Justice Department.

The ACLU-NC Board of Directors

selected Hirabayashi, Korematsu and

Yasui as the award recipients on the basis

of both their outstanding personal com-

mitment to the pursuit of justice and

because they represent a wide range of

groups and individuals who, since the

wartime internment, have sought to seek

redress for the brutal government

discrimination against Japanese

Americans.

Each year, for the past eleven years,

the Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award

has been presented toa person or per-

sons who have distinguished themselves

as champions in the battle to preserve

and expand civil liberties.

ACLU-NC Board Chair Davis Riemer |

explained, ``We believe that this for-

midable and honorable trio are out-

standing representatives of what the

struggle for civil liberties and the Bill of

Rights truly means. We are proud to

recognize their persistence over the

course of forty years to correct a basic

violation of civil liberties."'

In January of this year, the Commit-

tee to reverse the Japanese American

Wartime Cases filed a petition in federal

court on behalf of Hirabayashi, Kore-

matsu and Yasui seeking to overturn

their 40-year old convictions.

The petition, which the ACLU-NC is

supporting with an amicus brief, accuses _

top government officials of suppressing,

altering and destroying key evidence in

order to influence the outcome of these

important cases.

Government documents unearthed by

the Committee's attorneys through the

Freedom of Information Act prove that

government officials fabricated the facts

underlying the Supreme Court's finding

of ``military necessity.'' The late ACLU-

_NC attorney Wayne Collins represented

Korematsu in the original case and also

continued on p. 7

aclu news

2 october 1983

Campaign to Save Bilingual Ballots

by Dorothy Ehrlich

ACLU-NC Executive Director

coalition of groups and civic

leaders, San Francisco for Voters

Rights, to campaign against Proposition

O on the November ballot - a measure

which seeks to repeal the bilingual `voting

provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

Proposition O, if passed, would re-

quire the Board of Supervisors and the

Mayor of San Francisco to write to Con-

gress and the President requesting that

action be taken to begin the process of

unraveling Congress's action in 1965 -

and its renewed action of 1982 - in

passing the Voting Rights Act.

If a letter to Congress appears in-

nocuous - the ultimate goal of San

Francisco Supervisor Quentin Kopp, the

author of the measure - is most

decidedly bold: Kopp's stated aim is to

have San Francisco's rejection of bi-

lingual ballots serve as a catalyst for a

nationwide groundswell. ``One day I

said, why don't we start a movement in

San Francisco to abolish bilingual

ballots... if we start it in San Fran-

cisco, the only place I know that has two

foreign languages (Chinese and

Spanish), it'll have an impact,'' Kopp

announced in the press.

This is not, the first time the ACLU-

NC has acted to secure voting rights for

language minorities in northern Cali-

fornia. In 1982, a surreptitious probe of

voters who requested bilingual voting

materials was challenged by the

ACLU-NC. .

While the ACLU-NC's legal challenge

to this investigation of voters, singled out

for exercising a constitutional right to

T he ACLU-NC has joined with a

seek language assistance at the polls, was

lost just this month in federal court, the

California Legislature did respond to this

threat by closing the door on such secret

investigations in the future, by passing

House after widespread opposition:

ACLU-NC members will remember

that in 1965 the Voting Rights Act was

amended to provide for election

materials for certain language minorities,

sca

`Proposition O aims to eliminate bilingual ballots - and democratic participation - in San

Francisco elections.

legislation which requires a court order

for the release of the names and ad-

dresses of voters who have requested

such information.

These official attacks on non-English

speaking voters. go hand-in-hand with

the current campaign in Washington,

D.C. where the discriminatory Simpson/

Mazzoli immigration measure easily

gained the approval of the Senate and

only narrowly escaped passage in the

Richmond March

Rule Appealed

The Richmond ordinance that was

used to prevent NAACP and ACLU

demonstrators from marching in the

streets to protest police abuse in the

black community last. October was up-

held by U.S. District Judge William A.

Ingram on August 19 after ACLU-NC

challenged its constitutionality.

ACLU-NC staff attorney Amitai

Schwartz immediately filed an appeal in

the U.S. Court of Appeals. ``In this day

and age it is difficult to imagine an or-

dinance governing the exercise of First

Amendment rights that is as clearly

in violation of the First Amendment as

`this one,'' Schwartz said.

The Richmond ordinance in question

stipulates that a group wishing to hold a

march must apply for a parade permit

twenty days in advance of the date of the

event. The City Council can waive the

20-day requirement ``if it finds unusual

circumstances in the exercise of its sound

discretion."'

The organizers of last October's

NAACP/ACLU march could not com-

ply with the 20-day requirement as the

march was planned as an emergency

response to the police killing of a black

Richmond resident Willie Drumgoole.

When the permit -was denied by the

police department they attempted to ap-

peal the decision to the City Council, but

were told that the next council meeting

would not be held until after the planned

march.

To obtain the permit for the marchers

Schwartz and staff counsel Alan

Schlosser went to federal court. The re-

quest for a temporary restraining order

was denied by Judge Ingram, and within

a matter of hours Schwartz had to ap-

peal to the U.S. Court of Appeals. On

the eve of the Saturday march, the Court

of Appeals issued an order permitting

the march to take place on the sidewalks.

Over 300 people attended the march

and rally on October 23; there were no

incidents or arrests.

The ACLU challenge to the legality of

the ordinance was still pursued. Accord-

ing to Schwartz, ``The ordinance gives

the City Council complete discretion to

grant or deny a waiver to the 20-day rule

on whatever basis they choose.

`Unfortunately, the judge did not

view the discretion as much of a threat as

the people who wanted to march over the

Drumgoole killing - and who are pre-

pared to march in Richmond in

the future.

"Our appeal represents the classic

challenge to an ordinance which gives a

city council the power to pick and choose

who can demonstrate against city

policies,' Schwartz said.

Schwartz added that he was not sur-

continued on p. 3

following lengthy studies which revealed

that English-only ballots excluded

millions of citizens from informed par-

ticipation in the election process. Con-

gress determined that English-only

ballots constituted a barrier to voting,

similar to literacy tests.

Cities like San Francisco, where the

language minority population is greater

than 5% are currently required to hold

bilingual elections. In San Francisco,

Chinese and Spanish speaking voters

have the right to request bilingual voting

materials. Four to five thousand voters

in San Francisco annually participate in

the election process due to the bilingual

. provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

Jim Morales, Chairperson of the cam-

paign, describes the measure as a ``racist

AR: prove

attack, designed to stop Latinos and

Asians from voting.'' Morales believes

that the campaign against Proposition O

allows minority groups and civil rights

activists in San Francisco to develop a

base and establish a network to work

together on future issues.

Morales, a member of the ACLU-NC

Board of Directors, points to the broad

coalition that the ACLU and others

established in the successful campaign

last year in favor of Proposition A - the

measure which established an Office of

Citizens Complaints. That network is be-

ing revitalized for the fight against Pro-

position O.

ACLU-NC Board member Will

Leong, Treasurer of San Franciscans for

Voters Rights, agrees with Morales,

``Though we face a tough campaign,

Proposition O gives supporters of the

Voting Rights Act an important forum

to educate the public on voting

rights issues."' :

Leong adds that opponents of Prop-

osition O - including the Mayor, 9 out

of the 11 members of the San Francisco

Board of Supervisors and over 30 com-

munity groups - are capable of de-

feating the measure, if voters turn out in

the local election on November 8. ``Our

work is cut out for us, but it is encourag-

ing to recognize that many community

groups have already come forward to

oppose Proposition Oy

Leong said.

Chandler Visher, Chair of the San

Francisco Chapter of the ACLU-NC,

will be asking members to take action to

defeat this measure by taking a leading

role in the local campaign.

``Congress,'' said Morales, `` is

unlikely to begin to repeal the Voting

Rights Act, regardless of the outcome of

San Francisco's November election.

However, the symbolic value of its pas-

sage would be extremely detrimental and

that is why we must speak loudly and

mobilize our best efforts for its defeat.''

For more information or to volunteer

for the campaign against Proposition O,

_please fill out the coupon below.

: | WANT TO PROTECT THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT :

: L] Send me more information about Proposition O. :

: CL] | want to volunteer for "San Franciscans for Voting Rights." :

' Name i

# Address, :

; City Zip i

; Phone (daytime) (evening) :

a

lease clip and mail to ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St., S.F. 94103. Attn.: Prop. o. d

aclu news

8 issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in January-February, June-July,

August-September and November-December

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California |

Davis Riemer, Chairperson Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director {

Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page ig

ACLU NEWS (USPS 018-040)

1663 Mission St., 4th floor, San Francisco, California 94103. (415) 621-2488

`Membership $20 and up, of which 50 cents is for a subscription to the aclu news

and SO cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publication, Civil Liberties.

Elaine Elinson, Editor

aclu news

october 1983

Governor Vetoes Strip Search Bill

Governor Deukmeyjian's veto of AB

270, the measure which would limit strip

searches of persons arrested for minor

offenses, ``indicates a remarkable

insensitivity to the victims of this type of

abuse,'' said ACLU Legislative Ad-

vocate Daphne Macklin.

Together with ACLU lobbyist Mar-

jorie Swartz, Macklin was a prime mover

of the bill authored by Assemblywoman

Maxine Waters. The ACLU helped

engineer its passage in both the state

Senate and Assembly, bringing in victims

of strip searches to testify before key

committees and presenting compelling

evidence from other states which had im-

plemented similar legislation.

After the measure passed the Legis-

lature in September, Macklin and Swartz

wrote a letter to the Governor urging him

to sign the bill into law ``for the protec-

tion of the constitutional rights of all

Californians.'' Noting that the un-

necessary use of strip searches ``most

often affects women who have no prior

criminal record and who pose no threat

to jail security,'' the ACLU lobbyists

wrote, ``women from all over the state

are calling out for some regulation of

this practice."'

Despite widespread support for the

bill, the Governor vetoed the measure on

September 29, stating that ``the measure

would threaten law enforcement's ability

to provide and maintain secure and safe

jail facilities."

The Governor said that although he

was concerned about allegations of un-

warranted strip searches,'' (emphasis

added) he believed that by ``not allowing

for exigent circumstances ... the bill

would place an impossible burden on the

custodians of local jails."'

In a statement issued in response to

the Governor, Macklin said that the

ACLU was "`outraged and deeply disap-

pointed"' over the Governor's veto.

"`The women who came forward to

testify on behalf of the Waters bill

ACLU Halts Threat

_ A letter: from ACLU-NC staff at-

torney Margaret Crosby warning the

state Controller's office that the July 27

order from the Court of Appeal ``ex-

pressly stays enforcement of all limita-

tions on abortion funding in both the

general Medi-Cal appropriation and the

special fund,'' provoked the state Con-

troller to retract an earlier statement that

-when the special abortion funds are

depleted in November, the state would

pay for no more abortions.

On August 11, three weeks after the

ACLU successfully challenged the Legis-

lature's cut off of Medi-Cal abortion

funding and establishment of a highly

restrictive special fund for abortion,

Lawrence Gercovich, legal adviser to

Controller Ken Cory said that a quarter

of the special fund appropriations had

already been spent. The state will pay for

no more abortions, he said, unless the ~

Legislature and Governor augment the

appropriation.

`*We can spend up to $13 million and

that is it,'' Gercovich said, arguing that

the state Constitution permits the con-

troller to spend money only after the

Legislature appropriates it.

But Crosby, who has handled the

showed great personal courage in their

willingness to speak out about a

humiliating experience that has often

been described as a form of rape,'' said

Macklin. ACLU-NC clients Marlene

Penny, a Fremont mother of four who

was strip searched for failure to pay a

dog license fee, and Ramona Scott, an

Oakland bank employee who was forced

to submit to a strip search even though

she told the police officer that she was

menstruating, both traveled to

Sacramento to testify in favor of the bill.

`*The Governor's veto more than sug-

gests a lack of concern or sympathy for

Penny, Scott and others have been strip

searched after having been arrested for

such minor offenses as failing to pay

traffic tickets, license their pets or paint

their houses,'' Macklin said.

Other states including Michigan,

`Virginia and Illinois have enacted laws

that are even more restrictive than AB (c)

270. `"The personal dignity and privacy

interest of the average person with no

prior criminal record and who poses no

threat to the safety or security of a jail

demands a tightly drawn statute - the

exceptions requested by the Governor

create such loopholes as to amount to no

strip search restrictions at all,"'

Macklin said.

`*None of the other state's statutes nor

those regulations adopted as a result of

lawsuits include the kind of exceptions

the Governor is demanding,"' she added.

As the Waters' bill was opposed by a

constellation of police and_ sheriff's

Organizations to whom the Governor

pays close attention, Macklin said it was

not surprising that he vetoed the mea-

sure. ``However,'' she added, ``regula-

tion of strip searching has overwhelming

public support. We hope that this con-

cern will prompt a legislative override of

the veto,'' Macklin said.

Other organizations actively sup-

porting the measure include the National

Organization for Women, the Human

ACLU lawsuits against Medi-Cal cuts

for the last six years, challenged the Con-

troller's interpretation of the court order.

``The Court has stayed both the restric-

tions on kinds of abortions subsidized

under the special account and the provi-

sion of the general Medi-Cal appropria-

tion made in [the 1983 Budget items.]

Thus, under the Court's stay order,

respondents are required to pay for abor-

tions from the general Medi-Cal appro-

priation, as soon as the special financing

account is depleted,'' Crosby stated.

Within two days, Crosby received a

response from the Controller's office

retracting its original opinion. D. Robert

Shuman, an attorney with Cory's office,

wrote, ""This office agrees with the posi-

tion set forth in your letter, i.e., that the

order issued by the Court of Appeal

stays enforcement of all limitations on

abortion funding. Accordingly, should

[the special fund] become exhausted, we

will continue to pay Medi-Cal abortion

claims from the funds appropriated by

the [general fund], pursuant to the Court

of Appeal's order.

Citing ``some initial uncertainty con-

cerning the Court's order,'' Shuman ex-

pressed regret for any inconvenience

Rights and Criminal Law Section of the

California State Bar, Friends Committee

on Legislation and others.

"While a legislative override is diffi-

cult under any circumstances, we are

hoping to mobilize enough pressure on

the Legislature to see this important

measure through. We are encouraging

everyone to write to their state legislators

in favor of the strip search measure so

that when the Legislature reconvenes in

January we will be able to success-

fully move for an override,'' Macklin

concluded.

While an override and possibly new

legislation is being pursued in Sacramen-

to, the ACLU-NC is continuing to repre-

sent victims of strip searches in an at-

tempt to seek both damages and court

orders halting the use of unwarranted

strip searches by local law enforcement

officials.

Richmond March ......0.....:

prised at Judge Ingram's ruling in that

the judge refused to overturn the permit

denial in the first place and had invited

the City of Richmond to file for a sum-

mary judgment in the case.

A decision from the U.S. Court of

Appeals is expected early next year.

Police Verdict

Following the $3 million dollar

damages awarded by the U.S. District

Court to the families of two black men

shot to death by the Richmond police,

Judge Richard Aguilar refused a request

by the City of Richmond for a new trial.

On June 3, after a four month trial,

the U.S. District Court jury returned a

verdict in favor of the families of Johnny

Roman and Michael Guillory who were

killed by Richmond police officers. The

suit brought by Oliver Jones and John

Scott, focused on the racist and brutal

practices of the Richmond police toward

the black community.

The city's request for a retrial was

based on several technical issues and a

claim that the evidence presented at the

trial did not justify a verdict against the

police officers nor the amount of money

awarded to the families of the slain men.

As the retrial request was denied by

Judge Aguilar, the City has announced

that they will appeal the judgment to the

U.S. Court of Appeals.

The ACLU-NC will join Jones and

Scott in fighting the city's appeal of the

verdict. ACLU staff attorney Schwartz.

predicted that the appeal will center on

whether the amount awarded to the

families was justified. The jury awarded

$1.5 million in favor of each family

against the City of Richmond, Police

Chief Leo Garfield and the two officers

involved in the shootings. |

"The ACLU is joining this case be-

cause we feel the award is very signifi-

cant in putting a check on police abuse.

This verdict is the largest of its kind that

we know of under the federal Civil

Rights Act,'' Schwartz said, `"`and it

represents a three million dollar message

to police departments across the state

that they must be held accountable to

higher standards of conduct."'

The City of Richmond's lack of

repentance was evidenced not only by

their immediate appeal of the verdict. -

Shortly after Police Chief Garfield

resigned in the wake of the verdict the

City. Manager appointed his replace-

ment. The new Richmond Chief of

Police is former Deputy Chief Ernest

Clements, a defendant who was found

liable in his supervisory role in connec-

tion with the shooting death of Michael

Guillory.

to Abortion Funds

caused by their earlier statements.

The Legislature's establishement of a

special fund for abortion this year was

intended to circumvent earlier court rul-

ings that Medi-Cal funding must be used

to pay for all medical needs in a non-

discriminatory way. Attorney Crosby

had predicted that the use of this

maneuver would make this year's litiga-

tion - the sixth case in as many years to

preserve funding - even more complex

and difficult than before. ``This recent

dispute over the depletion of the special

fund, and the Controller's threat to ter-

minate all abortion funding in

November, verify that prediction,"'

she said.

Federal Funding

The California funding victory con-

trasts sharply with increased attempts to

cut off the last vestiges of federal

Medicaid funds for abortion. On

September 22, the U.S. House of Repre-

sentatives passed a new version of the so-

called Hyde Amendment, prohibiting the

use of federal Medicaid funds for abor- .

tions - even if the pregnant woman's

life is in danger. The final vote was

231-183.

The debate on the House floor on this

measure produced some of the ugliest

anti-choice comments to be heard in the

chamber to date. Representative William

E. Dannemeyer (R.-CA) advocating

forced childbirth said, ``If we are going

to pay off the national debt, someone

has got to be born to pay the taxes to pay

It Off.

Representative Barbara Milkuski

(D.-MD) immediately took the floor to

respond, ``I am just appalled at what the

last speaker said,'' Mikulski exclaimed.

`1 am shocked to hear that American

women are meant to be breeder reactors

to sustain civilization and pay off the

deficit. I am insulted, insulted.''

The measure now goes to the Senate

Appropriations Committee. ACLU-NC .

Field Representative Marcia Gallo urged

all pro-choice supporters to write to

Senator Wilson, a key vote in this legisla-

tion. `"`Now is the time to contact

Senator Wilson to encourage the use of

federal Medicaid funds for abortion,''

she said.

"The message can be simple: poor

women have a right to equal access to

continued on p. 6

4 aclu news

october 1983

ACLU-NC 1983 Annual Conference

= politics of dissent from the law-and-order Deuk- ;

mejian administration; Author and filmmaker

_ Saul Landau provoked late night discussion with

=his talk on the tension between revolution and

civil liberties in Nicaragua; ACLU-NC Executive

Director Dorothy Ehrlich and Chair Davis Riemer

share a joke under the redwoods: Attorney Bill

Smith (I.) and draft registration resister Ben:

= Sasway explained how the government is selec- |

-{resisters. Center photo: The opening plenary

= "Justice and an Independent Judiciary" was

"Chaired by Alice Beasley (center) and addressed :

by Betty Medsger, author of Framed: The New:

| Right Attack on Chief Justice Rose Bird and the

Courts and ACLU National Legislative Director

John Sh

Conference c

sce

photo: Field Representative

Marcia Gallo (I.) confers with Sid Schreiber and

Marlene de Lancie of the North Peninsula

Chapter, host to the Annual Conference in th

Santa Cruz Mountains

Amidst the redwoods and fir trees of the Santa Cruz moun-

tains, 200 ACLU-NC members and supporters debated and

danced, listened and laughed, caucused and cavorted at the

1983 Annual Conference on October 8 and 9.

The theme of the conference "Take Back Our Rights" em-

phasized the crucial civil liberties issues today - attacks on

the judiciary, the politics of dissent, the impact of

Reaganomics on civil liberties, draft registration, covert action

in Central America, immigrants rights, the effects of the war

on crime, separation of church and state and reproductive

freedom - and through this lens, experts and advocates

discussed how we can best recapture the civil liberties ground

lost in this "era of Reagan" and strengthen what we have

maintained.

The urgency of the issues and the need for ACLU members

to take action to defend our rights was stressed by speaker

after speaker as conference participants looked beyond the

headlines and planned strategies for the future. Coming on the

heels of the Governor's defeat of the strip search bill, the U.S.

Supreme Court ruling against the Akron ordinances which

limited abortion rights, the shelving of the Simpson/Mazzoli

immigration bill, and the House cut off of aid for covert action

in Nicaragua the conference discussions were lively and

vibrant - as ACLU activists sought to arm themselves with in-

formation and ideas to deal with the current issues of the day.

After lengthy and sometimes heated debate, conference

members recouped to the music of Hot Links (a New

Orleans/Mardi Gras band which kept even the most serious at-

tendees dancing until the wee hours of the morning) and the

humor of Christopher Hershey and author Fran Leibowitz ("My

parents convinced me that if | didn't vote | would end up back

in the ghetto in Russia, so | vote - and it must work, because

I'm still here."')

Special thanks for a weekend to remember go to those who

organized and planned the conference: Field Representative

Marcia Gallo and the Executive of the Field Committee Dick

Criley (Chair), Sarita Cordell, Bernice Biggs, Anne Jennings

and Andrea Learned; and to the Conference Crew who kept

everything - from conference literature to spiders in the

cabins - running smoothly: Doug Warner, Linda Baker, Cindy

Forster, Margot Garey, Dick Grosboll, Frederick Arnaud,

Michael Lawrence and Kenneth Train.

Attorney Benjamin (Barney) Dreyfus,

a champion of civil rights for more than

four decades, died on October 3 after a

brief illness.

In 1981, the ACLU-NC _ honored

Dreyfus with its highest award, the Earl

Warren Civil Liberties Award, for his

leading legal advocacy and organizing ef-

forts in support of the Bill of Rights.

A founding member and two-time |

_ president of the National Lawyers Guild,

Dreyfus was one of the few courageous

attorneys to wage an unremitting battle

against the Smith Act during the height

of the McCarthy era. In his defense of

Communist Party members in Los

Angeles, he succeeded in convincing the

U.S. Supreme Court of the Smith Act's

unconstitutionality (Yates v. U.S.) in

1957. The court held that advocating

Communism was not in itself illegal and

that the government could only pro-

secute in cases of direct incitement to

violence. -

For more than 30 years, Dreyfus was a

partner in the San Francisco law firm of

Garry, Dreyfus, McTernan and Brotsky.

His longtime law partner Frank McTer-

nan described Dreyfus as ``one of the

most able, dedicated, competent lawyers

who ever lived. He was incorruptible,

not just financially, but on_ his

principles."'

Barney Dreyfus

Over his long career, including 18

arguments before the Supreme Court,

Dreyfus obtained significant victories to

preserve the independence of the bar, the

right to bail, the diminished capacity

defense, the death penalty, the rights of

labor and civil rights.

When he was honored with the Earl

Warren Civil Liberties Award by the

ACLU-NC, author Jessica Mitford

wrote his tribute. ``The outstanding

quality that Barney brought to the effort

was his ability to enlist the most unlikely

people as allies in the fight. ...He

managed by a rare combination of per-

sonal charm and political acumen to

shove them forward a notch at a time, to

convince them one by one of the dangers

of NOT taking a stand,'' Mitford wrote.

It is that quality identified by Mitford

that helps to explain why Dreyfus is so

widely mourned - in the legal com-

munity and far beyond - as he touched

the lives of somany with his advocacy

and his commitment. ;

The Dreyfus family suggests contribu-

tions to Ploughshares Inc., Building E,

Fort Mason, San Francisco 94123. The

memorial service for Benjamin Dreyfus

will be held at noon on October 24 at the

Herbst Theater, 401 Van Ness Avenue,

San Francisco.

Ms. Ban Lifted continued from p.l

and for no other proper educational or

economic purpose. They thus

significantly affected the right of

children, of non-objecting parents, to

receive protected information."'

In making his decision, Dolgin relied

heavily on the recent U.S. Supreme

Court decision in the ACLU lawsuit Pico

y. Island Trees School Board which held

that the First Amendment does not per-

mit suppression of ideas in the school

library. ``There is no majority decision in

Pico,'' Dolgin wrote, `"but it seems ap-

parent that a majority of the Supreme

Court will ultimately find that a School

Board does not have absolute discretion

to remove a book from the school library

and that a School Board may not remove

books simply because they dislike the

ideas expressed therein. Thus, it is

beyond dispute that the First Amend-

ment applies to School Boards."'

Cooperating attorney Alpert wel-

%omed the decision. `"`Students do not

Jese constitutional rights when entering -

the school house door,'' she said.

Alpert explained that Ms. was not re-

stricted for a constitutionally permissible

reason, but ``simply because the major-

ity on the board - and in their view the

community - objected to the lifestyles

allegedly portrayed, lifestyles considered

to be immoral.

"Indeed any claim that Ms. was not

effectively banned for its controversial

content is refuted by the fact that there

are other publications in the district's

high school libraries that remain unre-

stricted containing the same language

and subject matter which the Board ap-

parently found offensive in Ms."'

The ACLU attorneys, however, ex-

pressed some reservations about the

parental rights aspect of the judgment.

``Parents have a right to control home

reading and to inculcate values in their

children,' said staff attorney Crosby.

- Ms. - Foundation,

``They do not, however, have a right to

keep their high school aged children

from access to views which conflict

with theirs.

"In California, children - not

families or parents - are guaranteed a

constitutional right to an education. Par-

ents can not keep their children unedu-

cated. In our opinion, this means also

that they can not keep their children

from studying certain subjects or from

reading certain library materials,"'

Crosby added.

The ruling was also welcomed by the

publishers of the

magazine, which had joined the local

plaintiffs in the lawsuit on the grounds

that their right to disseminate ideas

through the distribution of the magazine

was violated by the school board's

restrictions. ``We are pleased with the

judge's decision because it means that -

the students won their First Amendment

right to read a magazine that has a

unique and important perspective on

critical social issues,'' said Ms, editor

Joanne Edgar.

`"We also want to thank the communi-

ty for playing such an active role in this

case - without these wonderful

students, teachers and parents stepping

forward for their rights this case could

never have been brought,'' Edgar said.

Another major ACLU book ban

challenge is still pending in the California

Court of Appeal. The ban by Anderson

Union High School District in Shasta

County of five books by Pulitzer Prize

winning author Richard Brautigan is still

awaiting decision. A 1982 judgment

upholding the ban for classrooms and

striking down the ban for the school

library is being appealed by both the

ACLU and the school district. The ap-

pellate court heard arguments in May, -

and a decision is expected in the near

future.

Paterson, Jennings to National Board

(eS 7 S er Tes es eee

In a landslide victory, Eva Jefferson

Paterson was elected to the National

Board of the ACLU. Paterson tallied

over 92,000 votes, a level of support top-

ped by only one other candidate, Na-

tional ACLU Chair Norman Dorsen.

Paterson has represented this affiliate

on the national Board since 1980. In

1982, she was elected to the Vice-chair,

the first black woman to hold that post

in ACLU history. This year, Paterson

ran as a petition candidate in an

election campaign launched at the

ACLU Biennial Conference in June. A

strong and outspoken advocate for af-

firmative action and minority rights,

Paterson chaired the Biennial workshop

on Race Discrimination where several

controversial resolutions on affirmative

action within the ACLU originated.

After a heated debate, the resolutions

were later passed by the full biennial

delegation.

``T am exhilarated by this strong show-

ing of support,'' said Paterson. It is an

affirmation of our commitment to

aclu news

october 1983

affirmative action and to strong minority

representation on the Board. This will

give greater credibility and backing for

ACLU-NC positions on the national

Board," she added.

Paterson will be joined by Anne Jen-.

nings, ACLU-NC's new affiliate repre-

sentative on the Board. Jennings, who

has been the Gay Rights Chapter repre-

sentative on the affiliate Board for three

years, is chair of the Pro-Choice Task

Force of the Field Committee and also

serves on the Legal Committee. "`I, too,

look forward to representing the Califor-

nia point .of view on the national

Board,'' said Jennings. ``Though I don't

think I can follow in Eva's footsteps,

having her there will make things a lot

easier!"'

_ Both Paterson and Jennings will serve

for a three-year term. The national

Board meets quarterly at ACLU head-

quarters in New York and is the highest

governing body of the organization.

Each affiliate sends one representative |

and 30 others are elected at-large.

New Legal Guide for Activists

As the fall political campaign season

goes into full swing, many political ac-

tivists head for the ``modern day town

plaza'? - the shopping center - to

spread their message, gather signatures

for petitions and register voters. Free

Speech Rights at Shopping Centers: An

Activist 's Guide is a new publication fron

the ACLU-NC to inform campaigners of -

their constitutional rights and to guide

them through the complex maze of rules

and regulations which govern free speech

activities at today's shopping malls.

The twelve-page booklet, written in an

easy to follow question-and-answer for-

mat, explains that Calfornians do have

constitutionally protected rights to con-

duct political activity at shopping centers.

Backed up by the legal expertise and ex-

perience of the ACLU, the guide ad-

dresses such commonly asked questions

as ``Can a shopping center make up its

own rules about what a political group

can and cannot do inside a mall?"' `""Can

we ask people for contributions to our

organization?'' and ``Once we apply for

permission to use the mall, can the

manager turn us down because he or she

does not like our political position?"'

The publication grew out of the

ACLU-NC Shopping Center Project,

staffed by attorneys Alan Schlosser and -

Martin Fassler, which successfully

litigated numerous cases against un-

constitutional shopping center regulations

on behalf of a variety of northern Califor-

nia political groups over the past year.

; Order Form

i

Free Speech Rights at Shopping Centers

; An Activist's Guide

0x00A7 Clip and send to ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94103

Name

i

Please send me

copies of Free Speech Rights at Shopping Centers: An

8 Activist's Guide. | am enclosing $

The work of the Project was very suc-

cessful: from Sacramento to Santa Clara

the ACLU won injunctions against holi-

day bans, expensive insurance deposits

and bonds, limitations on soliciting dona-

tions and approaching shoppers and other

burdensome regulations. In addition to

the cases which went to court, the ACLU

won numerous other settlements through

negotiations.

Now, with Free Speech Rights at Shop-

ping Centers, grassroots activists will have

vital information at their fingertips to

help them reach the public at shopping

centers. The ACLU-NC has. also pro-

duced a Lawyer's Guide with sample

pleadings from shopping center cases for

attorneys to use when litigating similar

cases.

5 : ae

: rar | Liberties baa

Peace ete Pee ticuitics

a

(50cent each). Single copies are free.

Address

City.

Zip

2 oD ee ee ee ee oe ee ee oe oe ee oe ee oe ee ee ee te

wae

6 aclu news

october 1983 |

We Get Letters. . .

by Michael Miller

_ACLU-NC Associate Director

Civil libertarians often consider them-

selves a select lot: both our daily ex-

perience and George Gallup confirm that

far too many Americans would not en-

dorse the Bill of Rights on a ballot today.

Most of us in the ACLU have the deep-

seated suspicion that from the President

on down, too many citizens have only

studied the Condensed Constitution

(Readers Digest, 1947.)

_ While civil libertarians, out of em-

pathy. or self-protection or both, argue

that everyone's liberties are linked in a

vital way, most Americans believe in

their own rights and freedoms while fail-

ing to support the rights of others. An

unfortunate and dramatic confirmation

of this suspicion now comes as ``hate

mail'' to our office in response to a re-

cent ACLU-NC membership recruitment

letter.

Usually, the ACLU tries to mail our

-membership invitations to ``similar and

right thinking'' individuals. We obtain

names by trading or renting ``liberal''

lists from other organizations; for ex-

ample, leading environmental, con-

sumer, and anti-nuclear groups, and

from listener-sponsored radio, left-of-

center magazines and political cam-

paigns. (This is not to say that all ACLU

members come from these categories,

only that these lists generate the most

profitable response to our membership

mailings.)

In August, we mailed 50,000 letters

concerning deaths by drowning of 10

Spanish-surnamed farmworkers. Each

had been fleeing federal Immigration

and Naturalization Service agents and

ran into a river or canal in California's -

central valley. The letter goes on to ex-

plain that these tragic deaths are not un-

common and result from the INS prac-

tice of raiding fields and factories with

little legal documentation and no pro-

cedures aimed at avoiding injury and loss

of life - in short, with almost total

disregard to constitutional guarantees

concerning search and seizure. The

ACLU is involved in a major lawsuit

challenging this practice.

Mail recruitment is always a test - of

letters, of lists, of timing. We chose to

highlight these drownings because they

poignantly illustrate an immediate life

and death situation, as few ACLU cases

do. The response in terms of new

members has been fairly good, but not

great. But what is perhaps even more

significant is that this test revealed a

deeply rooted racist strain among some

of the members and subscribers to those

liberal organizations and publications to

which we mailed. It is the discovery (or

reminder) of this racism, even among

those individuals with whom we may

-share other common political values,

that tells us once again that civil liber-

tarians are special. In fact, those ACLU

members who received this mailing

because their names cropped up on other

lists, responded very positively to the let-

ter, even renewing their member-

ships which were not yet due.

Whenever we send recruitment letters,

some hate mail always comes back in the

membership envelopes. Silent protestors

just send back an empty envelope, per-

haps knowing that we must still pay

postage. Others pen brief obscenities on

our reply coupons. Usually, the subject

matter of the letter is not relevant to the

hate mail we get back. There are always

a few ``Nazi lovers'? or ``Remember

Skokie'? comments.

But, the hate response to this mailing

was different: disagreeing with the

ACLU's most basic premises, many re-

spondents, for apparently the most racist

of reasons, believe that these Hispanic

farmworkers are a subclass beyond the

reach of the Constitution and common

compassion.

Here are a few examples I set aside

while opening this mail each day:

e "I never heard such tripe. No one

brought these guys into the USA...

Why don't you ACLU do-gooders spend

some of your time and money instructing

these poor picked on workers to stand

and take it like men instead of scurrying

like rats. I think your motives are

suspect.'"'

e "If they were innocent why did they

run!?"'

e "Not one illegal alien is welcome

here. We should shut, seal our borders."'

e "TI believe the U.S.-Mex border

should be turned into a free-fire zone

and any surviving prisoners locked up in

concentration camps in the South West

U.S. desert for ever. Civil liberties for

Americans - yea. For illegals - No."'

e "Civil liberties are extended to

citizens and lawful residents."'

/@ `Foreigners don't belong here

anyway."'

After reviewing these letters, I'm lost

for a response. No Jerry Falwell wrote

those letters - unless there is a corps of

Moral Majoritarians hiding out as spies

on mailing lists of our favorite liberal

organizations and publications - a com-

forting, but unlikely explanation.

Even among ACLU members im-

migration policy is a much debated sub-

ject, but not in the racist terms of the ex-

amples quoted above.

I'm waiting for a new video game -

"Border Guard.'? Why shoot at im-

aginary aliens from another planet, when

for a quarter you can shoot at video ver-

sions of real people in our backyard?

But I'm Already

a Member...

Many current ACLU-NC members

continue to receive mailings from us in-

viting them to join the ACLU. Many

write to ask, ``Isn't this a waste of

money? Can't the computer eliminate

this duplication?"'

Yes, a computer match can eliminate

this duplication, but until recently the

costs appeared to be too high. Even now, -

in smaller mailings, the computer match

costs will be prohibitive.

Success or failure in direct mail re-

cruitment for new membership is often

measured in pennies for the cost of each

letter and fractions of a percentage point

return for each mailing.

In the future, the ACLU-NC will at- -

tempt to eliminate duplicate mailings to

ACLU members. The costs benefits may

be insignificant - but keeping the good

will of our members is_ equally

important.

If you continue to get duplicate mail-

ings, why not pass these on to a friend?

M.P.M.

EMISSARIES,

Oxstrirted By King Festeres Syrdecate

THE. CARRCORT: COSERVER

ME. YOUIR RICH, YOUR FAMOUS, YOUR NOBEL LAUREATES, YOUR RUSSIAN POETS AND POLISH

YOUR RESPECTABLE WHITE ANTI-SOVIETS VEARNING TO BREATHE FREE..."

Are You Now or

Have You Ever Been... ?

`*Do you know or have you ever advo-

cated, taught, believed in, or knowingly

supported or furthered the interests of

communism?'' The question may ring

familiar from some time in the not-too-

distant past but not many of us would

expect to have to answer that question

for a government official today. Nor ex-

pect to be punished for refusing to

answer.

Charles Peter Duncan refused to

answer that question - and for his re-

fusal he was not allowed to become a

naturalized citizen of the United States.

The ACLU represented Duncan when

he appealed the Immigration and

Naturalization Service denial to the U.S.

Court of Appeals, but in August, the

Ninth Circuit upheld the INS denial of

~ citizenship.

ACLU cooperation attorney Edward

Anderson, who is handling the Duncan

case with ACLU-NC staff attorney

Amitai Schwartz and the ACLU of the

National Capitol Area, said ``According

to the INS, Mr. Duncan must waive his

constitutional rights in order to obtain

citizenship. But, waiver of constitutional

rights cannot be a precondition of

citizenship."'

Schwartz explained that although the

freedom of association, the court did not

address the serious constitutional issue

- but denied the appeal on technical

grounds. |

``We are deeply disappointed that the

court did not reach the constitutional

issue in this case,'' he said, ``and the

ACLU would welcome someone else in a

similar position stepping forward so that

we could challenge this violation of First

Amendment rights."'

Duncan is a native of Great Britain,

who has been a lawful permanent resi-

dent in the U.S. since 1971. He is mar-

ried to an American citizen and, at the

time of his citizenship application, was

employed as a physical oceanographer at

the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory at

U.C. Berkeley.

Duncan first applied for naturaliza-

tion in Virginia where he provided all of

the information required by the INS ex-

cept for answers to four questions on the

Biographic Information Form which he

found objectionable. According to

Anderson, ``The four questions which

Duncan refused to answer - concerning

prior criminal activity, membership in

organizations, belief in communism, and

moral character - seek information

which the government has no right

to demand.

"The INS concedes that Duncan's

First and Fifth Amendment rights may

be violated if he is required to answer

these questions, but asserts that Duncan

must give up these rights to `give effect'

to INS procedures,'' Anderson said.

_ The technical grounds on which the

court upheld the INS ruling was based

on the fact that Duncan had been

previously refused citizenship by the INS

when he applied in the state of Virginia

- also for refusing to answer the same

offensive questions - but had not ap-

pealed the decision. He reapplied with

the INS in California, and was again

refused, and this time the court based its

decision on the ``doctrine of issue pre-

clusion,"' i.e., that as Duncan had not

appealed the Virginia ruling, his appeal

of the California ruling was invalid.

Schwartz told the ACLU News that

the ACLU is interested in representing

another person who, like Duncan, ob-

jects to answering the four questions in

the Application to file Petition for

Naturalization but who, unlike Duncan,

has not applied and been refused pre-

viously. The ACLU could then make a

clear constitutional argument without

the court addressing only the preclusion

issue, he explained.

"`The question of addressing how an

application for citizenship can maintain

his constitutional rights is a vital one,"'

said Schwartz. ``The ACLU is commit-

ted to challenging this violation."'

Abortion Funds

continued from p. 3

abortions and, since Medicaid funds can

be used for any other `medically neces-

sary service,' it is discriminatory to deny

the use of those funds for abortions."

Gallo noted that the Senate vote on

the amendment could come as early as

the first week of October and that

telephone calls would be extremely effec-

tive on such short notice.

The ACLU, the National Abortion

Rights Action League, and many other

national organizations, are actively op-

posing the measure.

aclu news

october 1983

Immigration Bill is Shelved for '84 Session -

The announcement by House Speaker

Thomas ``Tip'' O'Neill that the Simp-

son/Mazzoli bill (H.R. 1510, the Immi-

gration Reform and Control Act of

1983) would not be pushed through the

House of representatives this year be-

cause of its discriminatory effects was

welcomed by leading civil liberties and

minorities rights activists at a press con-

ference on October 5 sponsored by the

Bay Area Committee Against Simpson/

Mazzoli Bill (BACASM).

Bill Tamayo, an attorney with the

Asian Law Caucus and co-coordinator

of BACASM, said, ``The Speaker's

statements confirm what the opposition

movement has said over the last two

years - the bill is discriminatory and

repressive and should not be passed."'

Tamayo explained that this is a

``cautious"' victory. The bill was a bi-

partisan-sponsored piece of legislation

which gained overwhelming support in

the Senate (passing 76-18) and had sub-

stantial backing by the Reagan Ad-

ministration, he said. But the Congres-

sional thrust to `do something about the

immigration problem' and to continue

blaming undocumented workers for

economic problems are sure indicators

that other immigration bills similar to

Simpson/Mazzoli will be reintroduced.

ACLU-NC Executive Director

`Dorothy Ehrlich noted the importance of

educational and organizing work at local

level as instrumental in defeating the bill.

"The National Mobilization against the

Simpson/Mazzoli bill brought over 100

civil libertarians and immigrants rights

activists for an intensive week of lobby-.

ing September 20-23,'' she said. `"This

massive representation from all over the

country - armed with thousands of let-

ters and mailgrams from others who (c)

could not make the trip - made an im-

pressive showing on Capitol Hill.

~From the Bay Area over 4000

signatures were gathered and hundreds

of mailgrams sent to Congress expressing

opposition. More than 50 mailgrams

came from ACLU members who signed

authorization forms allowing the

ACLU-NC to send a Public Opionion

Message to Congress on behalf of op-

ponents of the bill.

But Ehrlich also warned that despite

the shelving of Simpson/Mazzoli for this

legislative session, the same forces

behind this discriminatory legislation are

continuing to operate in other arenas and

`"`we must be prepared to fight them

there as well.'? Ehrlich noted that the

ACLU is still in federal court challenging

violations of employees' and employers'.

Bill of Rights Day opejon..

wrote amicus briefs in the original

Hirabayashi and Yasui cases.

Fred Korematsu, who was born and

_ raised in Oakland,-was arrested-in 1942

for violating Civilian Exclusion Order 34

by failing to report to an Assembly

Center. After spending several years in

county jail, federal prison and the Tan-

foran and Topaz relocation centers, he

returned to the Bay Area where he now

works as a draftsman.

Gordon Hirabayashi, spent 312 years

in county jails and federal prisons for

violating the military curfew imposed on

all persons of Japanese ancestry as well

as the Exclusion Order. Currently a pro-

fessor at the University of Alberta in

Canada he has published numerous

scholarly works on the subjects of

Japanese Americans and Japanese

Canadians.

Minoru Yasui was the first of the three

petitioners arrested for violation of the

military orders. He was a practicing at-

torney in Portland, Oregon when the

March 1942 curfew order was imposed.

He spent 9 months in solitary confine-

ment in Multnoma County Jail as well as

several months in the Mindoka Reloca-

tion Camp.

Chairman of the National Redress

Committee of the Japanese American

Citizens League since 1971, Yasui is the

executive director of the Denver Com-

mission on Community Relations.

`In honoring these three courageous

fighters, we also reaffirm the actions by

former ACLU-NC Executive Director

Ernest Besig and counsel Wayne Collins

of almost half a century ago when they

committed the ACLU to work against

the unjust internment of innocent

Japanese Americans,'' said Riemer.

`*As we join in this current effort to

insure that such a travesty of justice will

never happen again, we _ honor

_ Hirabayashi, Korematsu, and Yasui and

their tenacity and their vision.''

The Bill of Rights Day Celebration

will be held at the Sheraton Palace Hotel

in San Francisco on Sunday, December

4; program from 5-6 p.m. (reception

from 4-5). Tickets for the event are

$10.00 and are available from the

ACLU-NC office. Send in the form

below or call Nancy Bien at

415/621-2488.

Bill of Rights Day Celebration

: Ticket Order Form

E : :

| :

" Please send me _ tickets at $10.00 each.

: | am enclosing a check for $

i Name

, Address :

ee: Zip __ Phone

l

i Please make checks payable to the ACLU-NC Foundation and mail to the

EBill of Rights Day, 1663 Mission St., S.F., CA 94103. Please enclose a

4 stamped, self-addressed envelope.

rights during the Operation Jobs raids by

the Immigration and Naturalization Ser-

Sandra Gutierrez - `INS has stepped

up arrests"'

vice in 1982 and is currently campaigning

against Proposition O, a San Francisco

ballot initiative to undermine the Voting

Rights Act by eliminating bilingual ballot

materials.

Sandra Gutierrez, Director of the

Father Moriarty Central America

Refugee Program, and Ignacio de la

Fuente, Business Agent for the Interna-

tional Molders and Allied Workers Local

~News Flash!

164 also cautioned against ``celebrating

the defeat of Simpson/Mazzoli without

recognizing that discrimination against

immigrant workers is heightening."'

"In San Francisco, the INS has in-

creased the number of its Investigations

and Deportaton personnel and is ap-

prehending more people on the streets,

many of whom are Salvadoran

refugees,'' Gutierrez said.

"Despite the Operations Jobs fiasco,"'

said de la Fuente, "SINS agents are

continuing to conduct immigration raids

of worksites, and has implemented

`Operation Cooperation,' a forerunner

of the employer sanctions program

codified in Simson/Mazzoli."' De la

Fuente's Molders Union is the lead plain-

tiff in the legal challenge to the INS

stemming from the Operation Jobs na-

tionwide raids on factories and fields in

1982.

The BACASM spokespersons noted

that the Congressional Hispanic Caucus

played an instrumental role in voicing

opposition to the bill in Washington.

They also concurred that it was unlikely

that the bill would be revived in 1984 as it

is an election year and neither the

- Reagan Administration nor the

Democrats want to alienate Hispanic

voters by promoting a bill which is wide-

ly acknowledged to be discriminatory

against Hispanics.

Korematsu Conviction

Reversed After 40 Years

Just as the ACLU News was going to

press, the U.S. government moved for a

reversal in the landmark Japanese

American internment camp case of

Korematsu v. U.S.

In response to documented allegations

that high government officials lied to the

U.S. Supreme Court in cases upholding

the legality of the World War II evacua-

tion and internment of over 120,000

Japanese Americans, the U.S. Depart-

~ ment of Justice on October 4 asked the

Federal District Court in San Francisco

to reverse the 40-year old conviction of

Fred Korematsu.

Korematsu, now 62, was convicted in

- 1942 of defying the government's

evacuation and internment orders. He -

was represented in his original appeal by

Wayne Collins and the ACLU of Nor-

thern California. =

`*This is a victory for me and for the

120,000 Japanese Americans who were

locked in concentration camps,'' said

Korematsu at a San Francisco press con-

ference on October 5 announcing the

reversal.

"TT remember 40 years ago being

shackled and put into prison for being

Japanese. I had no trial, no hearing. I

said then, and I say now, that I was not

guilty of anything."

Korematsu, Gordon Hirabayashi and

Minoru Yasui filed petitions for a writ of

coram nobis in January, alleging mis-

conduct by government officials. The

petition, supported by newly discovered

government documents, charged that top

government officials intentionally sup-

pressed, altered, and destroyed key

evidence in order to obtain a favorable

ruling by the Supreme Court.

""We alleged misconduct and the

government capitulated,'' said Dale

Minami, lead attorney for Korematsu.

"In effect, the government has admitted

that there was no military necessity for

the evacuation and internment,'' he

added.

Although the government has not yet

responded to the petitions of

Hirabayashi and Yasui, attorneys for the

petitioners stated that ``as the identical

petitions were filed, the government will

probably make similar motions in the `

other two cases."'

ACLU-NC_ Executive Director

Dorothy Ehrlich, speaking at the press

conference, pledged that the ACLU

would continue the fight that it launched

40 years earlier on behalf of Korematsu

"because the issue is never over. We

must remember,'' Ehrlich said, ``that the

danger of the government punishing one

group of people based solely on their

race or national origin is still possible to-

day unless we maintain our vigilance and

our actions against this unconstitutional

and discriminatory practice."

ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys

Stephen Bomse and Andrea Peterson of

Heller, Ehrman, White and McAuliffe

who had worked with the team of

lawyers on the Korematsu petition also -

attended the press conference.

Korematsu said that although he was

very happy that his conviction was

cleared, there is still more to be done.

"`We must ensure that this will never

happen again to any American just be-

cause he looks different from others.

``L.am still fighting.''

aclu news

october 1983

_ First Amendment Show Hits the Road

by Naomi Schalit

The First Amendment Road Show

made its debut in Monterey County on

August 6th. The show was designed by

the Right to Dissent Subcommittee to

equip activist groups with information

about the rules, regulations and permit

requirements which increasingly are im-

pediments to exercising First Amend-

ment rights, and was cosponsored by the

Monterey chapter of the ACLU.

`Over 20 activists from all over

Monterey County attended the four-

hour workshop, representing farm-

workers rights organizations, the nuclear

freeze movement, the League of Women

Voters and reproductive rights ad-

vocates. :

ACLU-NC Staff attorney Alan

Schlosser opened the workshop with an

"overview of the First Amendment, con-

centrating on public activities like peti-

tioning, marching, leafleting, picketing,

canvassing and fundraising.

*"As expected in a period of height-

Ory

LT

3

Ye

ened political repression, many of the

groups represented had had difficulties

at one time or another doing these ac-

tivites,'' said Monterey Chapter chair

Richard Criley who played a key role in

organizing the Road Show. ``That's one

reason there was such high attendance.''

The second section of the program

was geared to helping groups resolve

problems they might expect to encounter

again in the future. All participants

received a folder which contained copies

of applicable Monterey county and city

ordinances. Michael Manlin, attorney [

3. FREQUENCY OF ISSUE

and Monterey chapter board member,

guided workshop participants through a

reading of the ordinances, paying par-

ticular attention to ambiguous passages

which could be - and have been - used

by hostile public officials to obstruct

groups and individuals in the free exer-

cise of their First Amendment rights.

Eleven other chapters have scheduled

the First Amendment Road Show for

their communities. Beginning with San

Francisco on October 29, workshops

will be presented to activist and political

action groups throughout Northern Cali-

fornia during the following four months.

If you are a member of an organization

which would benefit from attending one

of these workshops, please consult the

Calendar on p. 8 or call Marcia Gallo at

the ACLU Office, 415/621-2494.

Naomi Schalit, a graduate student in

journalism at U.C. Berkeley, is a

member of the Right to Dissent Sub-

committee.

US. Postel Service

IT AND CIRCULATION

STATEMENT OF OWN!

ACLU_NEWS | 9/21/83

3B. ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION

PRICE

monthly/bimonthly

a, COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS OF KNOWN OFFICE OF PUBLICATION

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission, Suite 460, San

COMPLETE MAILING ADDRESS OF

ACLU-NC, 1663 M

El Elinson

, ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission, Suite 460, San Francisco,

adres)

iA (Name and Complete Mailing Address

PIES (Net Press Run) 17,834 18,000

16,833 16,971

16,833 16,971

501 546

17,334 17,517

500 483

united, spoiled after printing

TOTAL (Sum of E, Fl and 2-should equal net press run shown in A} 17,834

18,000

3S MANAGE!

17 = SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF EDITOR, PUBLISHER, BUSINES:

(certify that the statements made by Z e: A

me above are correct and complete x hin Gleys0or ditor

Ps Form a508 (See instruction on reverse}

B.A.R.K.

BOARD MEETING: (Usually fourth

Thursday each month.) Thursday,

October 27; Thursday, November 24.

Contact Joe Dorst, 415/654-4163, for

meeting time and place.

EARL WARREN

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday, Oc-

7:30 p.m., Sumitomo. Bank,

Oakland. Contact Rose _ Bonhag,

415/658-7977.

FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW: Saturday, November 19 in

Oakland. A special seminar on your

rights to leaflet, petition, canvass and

campaign. Contact Len Weiler,

415/763-2336.

FRESNO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday, Oc-

tober 19; Wednesday, November 16.

5:30 p.m., 906 N Street, Fresno. Con-

tact Scott Williams, 209/441-1611.

HUMAN RIGHTS DAY - Satur-

day, December 10. Join ACLU,

WILPF, and others at this special

event in Fresno. Contact Howard

Watkins, 209/486-7633.

GAY RIGHTS

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, November 1,

7:00 p.m., ACLU, 1663 Mission, San

Francisco. Contact Doug Warner,

415/863-0487.

for the 1983 Bill of Rights Campaign,

which supports the work of the

ACLU Foundation of Northern Cali-

fornia. Members interested in volun-

teering to take part in Gay Rights

tober 19; Wednesday, November 16. |

JOIN OUR TELEPHONE NIGHTS |

Chapter-sponsored ``Phone Nights`

- Tuesday, October 25 and Wednes-

day, November 16 - should contact

Doug Warner, number above, or

Marcia Gallo, ACL U-NC,

415/621-2494,

MARIN

BOARD MEETING: (Third Monday

each month.) Monday, October Lys

Monday, November 21. 8:00 p.m.

Fidelity Savings, Throckmorton

Street, Mill Valley. Contact Alan

Cilman, 415/864-8882.

MID-PENINSULA

BOARD MEETING: (Usually last

Thursday each month.) Thursday,

October 27, 8:00 p.m. in Palo Alto.

Contact Harry Anisgard,

425/853-9786.

MONTEREY

ANNUAL MEETING / AWARD

DINNER: Saturday, October 15 at

the Santa Catalina School, Monterey.

1:15 p.m., social hour; 2:00 p.m. din-

ner; $15./person. Presentation of

1983 ``Ralph Atkinson Civil Liberties

Award"? to Representative Leon

Panetta. Contact Richard Criley,

408/624-7562.

MT. DIABLO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday, October

20; Thursday, November 17. Contact

Eva Gilmartin, 415/935-0257.

NORTH PEN

BOARD MEETING: (Second Mon-

day each month.) Monday,

November 14, 8:00 p.m. Contact

Richard Keyes, 415/367-8800 (days.)

(days).

FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW has been rescheduled, from

October 22 to Saturday, December

10, in San Mateo. Contact Richard

Keyes, number above, or Marcia

Gallo, ACLU-NC, 415/621-2494.

SACRAMENTO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday,

November 16, 7:30 p.m. New County

Administration Building, 8th and I

Streets, Sacramento. Contact Mary

Gill, 916/457-4088 (evenings).

FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW: Saturday, November 12 in

Sacramento. Join our special session

on free speech/political activity,

covering petitioning, leafletting, can-

vassing, and campaigning. Contact

Corley at 916/448-1993 (evenings), or

Marcia Gallo, 415/621-2494.

SAN FRANCISCO

BOARD MEETING: (Fourth Tues-

day each month.) Tuesday, October

25; Tuesday, November 22. 6:00

p.m., ACLU, 1663 Mission, San

Francisco. Contact Chandler Visher,

415/391-0222 (days).

FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW: Saturday, October 29 in San

Francisco. Learn more about your

rights to canvass, campaign, petition

and leaflet. Contact Sarita Cordell,

415/647-4691 (evenings) or Marcia

Gallo, 415/621-2494.

SANTA CLARA

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, November 1,

`Community Savings in San Jose.

Contact Steve Alpers, 408/241-7126

_ SANTA CRUZ

BOARD MEETING: (Second Wed-

nesday each month.) Wednesday,

November 9, 8:00 p.m., Louden

Nelson center, Santa Cruz. Contact

Bob Taren, 408/429-9880,

SONOMA

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday, October

20; Thursday, November 17. 7:30

p.m., Center for Employment Train-

ing, 3755 Santa Rosa Avenue, Santa -

Rosa. Contact Andrea Learned,

707/544-6911 (days).

STOCKTON

BOARD MEETING: (Second Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday,

November 10. Contact Bart Harloe,

209/946-2431 (days). hey

FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW: Saturday, November 5 ir

Stockton. We'll discuss First Amend-

ment rights to leaflet, petition, cam-

paign and canvass - contact Bart

Harloe, number-above, or Marcia

Gallo, 415/621-2494.

~YOLO COUNTY

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday, October

20; Thursday, November 17. Contact

Harry Roth, 916/753-0996.

HEAR ARTHUR KINOY AT KING

HALL on Friday, October 14. Kinoy,

Rutgers University law professor,

noted civil rights advocate, and

author of Rights on Trial: Odyssey of

a People's Lawyer, will speak at 12:00

noon on U.C. Davis campus. There

will also be a reception that evening,

from 5:00 to 7:00, in Sacramento.

Contact Luke Hiken, 916/322-9185

or Margot Garey, 916/758-3771.