vol. 48, no. 5

Volume XLVIII

Students Block Graduation Prayc

Just hours before her graduation was

to begin, graduating senior Leslie Ann

- Bennett won an important court battle to

keep a prayer out of the Granada High

School ceremony. The ACLU-NC, rep-

, resenting Bennett, fought the prayer

issue all the way to the California

Supreme Court.

The June 10 graduation at the Liver-.

more public high school became the

center of a church-state furor when Ben-

nett and ten other members of the gradu-

ating class objected to the inclusion of a

prayer during the annual event. The

prayer was to be composed and

presented by senior Todd Ferro.

The students first asked the gradua-

tion committee to drop the invocation

from this year's event. On June 4, the

graduation committee denied the request

and the students appealed the decision to

the school grievance committee - and

called the ACLU-NC for support.

"We felt that the prayer violated the

constitutional scparation of church and

state,'" Bennett explained. ``I don't want

to stop people from praying, but I don't

think a prayer belongs in a graduation

ceremony."' :

The grievance committee turned them

down and so did Granada High School

Principal Jack Snodgrass but the ACLU

did not.

Coors May

The Adolph Coors Company may not

have access to confidential files and

membership lists of a gay rights

organization active in the nationwide

Coors boycott, according to an order

issued by U.S. District Court Judge

Spencer Williams in San Francisco on

June 8.

The ruling was issued in a lawsuit filed

by Coors in which the giant brewing

company is contending that Solidarity, a

San Francisco-based gay rights organiza-

tion, and other groups are violating the

Sherman Antitrust Act by organizing a

boycott against Coors beer. The Ameri-

can Civil Liberties Union of Northern

California is representing Solidarity.

In October, Coors went to court to

compel Solidarity to provide the com-

pany with the names of all members who

have been active in boycott activities, the

identities of contributors to Solidarity,

minutes of Solidarity's meetings and

other information concerning the group

and its activities. ee

The magistrate ordered most of the in

formation to be disclosed, and also

granted Coors over $5000 reimburse-

ment for the cost of its attorneys asking

for the ruling on the constitutional issues

aclu ne

June-July 1983

Granada High School graduates Diane Brown (1.) and Leslie Ann Bennett fought

to keep a prayer out of their graduation ceremony - and won.

At a heated meeting of the school

board on June 7, ACLU member Stan

Junas of the Earl Warren Chapter

pledged the support of the ACLU to the

students who were willing to fight the

Ue

of privacy and associational freedom.

' "The district court decision

changes all that,'' explained ACLU-NC

cooperating attorney Arthur Brunwasser

who, with ACLU staff counsel Margaret

Crosby, is representing Solidarity in the

$145,000 antitrust suit.

Judge Williams' order remanded the

case back to the magistrate to be con-

_ discovery request."'

prayer.

One of the protesting students, Diane

Brown presented eloquent testimony to

the school board meeting which was

jammed with more than 100 students

Not See Gay Group's Files

sidered in the light of the compelling

constitutional privacy issue. ``The

Magistrate rebuked Solidarity's at-

tempted analogies to prejudicial treat-

ment of members of the NAACP in the

South and the Black Panther Party in the

major Northern industrial cities out of

hand,'' Williams wrote. ``We find this

`skepticism and curt dismissal inappro-

priate in the light of the substantial case

law which counsels great solicitude for

such claims,'' the Court opinion stated.

`Indeed, if membership in the

Republican Party is deemed inviolably

private, then membership in a far less

popular and far more fragile association

should be afforded at least a similar level

of protection."

Judge Williams specified that any

membership information concerning

Solidarity could be ordered released only

if Coors proved a compelling need for

the information that could be achieved in

no other way.

In addition, Judge Williams stated,

`"`The Magistrate would do well to con-

sider, upon the basis of. defendant

Solidarity's arguments, whether [Coors]

has impermissible ulterior motives for its

continued on p. 6

Photo courtesy of Valley Times

iv;

i

A

JISIDVd 6602

J 18191 TaN

JGS WITSOLSIH VINAOSI V2

GITb6 VI NISIINVAS NYS

a

and parents to debate the prayer issue.

That night, the school board voted 3-2

to include the prayer, and the next day,

as promised, ACLU-NC staff attorneys.

Margaret Crosby and Amitai Schwartz

filed a lawsuit in Contra Costa County

Superior Court seeking an injuction to

halt the prayer. The suit was filed on

behalf of senior Leslie Bennett and

Wilbur Miller, a Livermore taxpayer. A

hearing was set for the next day before

Judge Raymond Marsh.

`*`The state and federal Constitutions

erect a wall of separation between civil

authority and religious activity,'' Crosby

told the court. ``Government officials in

Livermore propose to breach that consti-

tutional wall by including a prayer as

part of the official graduation ceremony

at Granada High School.''

In addition, Crosby told the court that

the religious invocation at the graduation

"is not rendered constitutional by the

longevity of the custom, the voluntary

nature of the official event, the cere-

monial nature of graduation or the brevi-

ty of the prayer."

Moreover, the ACLU attorneys ex-

plained, the school officials' decision to

authorize a religious invocation at the of-

ficial school graduation violated the

Livermore Unified School District's own

rules which state in part: ``The auspices

of the public schools should not be used

to express approval or disapproval of a

religion, all religions or the absence of

religion."'

Injunction Ordered

On Thursday afternoon Superior

Court Judge Raymond Marsh agreed

with the ACLU and issued a preliminary

injunction barring the prayer from the

graduation ceremony. But the school

board was not satisfied. On the eve of

the graduation, the board filed an appeal

to the state Court of Appeals.

On Friday, the appellate court voted

2-1 to uphold Judge Marsh's injunction.

Despite the school board's further ap-

peal to the California Supreme Court,

the injunction remained in tact when the

high court refused to act before Friday

6 p.m., when the graduation ceremony

began.

Polarized Community

But as the battle was being fought out -

in the courts, a parallel drama for public

opinion was being waged in the East Bay

community. During final exams and

graduation rehearsals Bennett, Brown

and other student protesters were har-

assed and jeered. ``I've been called an

continued on p. 3

aclu news

june-july 1983

Supreme Court Strikes Down Limits on Abortion

``The U.S. Supreme Court decision in

Akron announced on June 15 is a total

victory for a woman's right to choose. It

is the most far reaching victory on repro-

ductive rights since the Supreme Court's

1973 decision affirming the fundamental

constitutional right to choose abortion,"'

said Janet Benshoof, Director of the na-

tional ACLU Reproductive Freedom

Project. The ACLU had challenged the

restrictions in the Supreme Court.

Today's decision struck down a varie-

ty of restrictions on abortion including

""informed'' consent regulations; paren-

tal consent; mandatory hospitalization;

waiting periods; the disposal of aborted

fetuses; and the presence of two physi-

cians during an abortion. Benshoof ex-

plained, ``The decision resoundingly re-

jects efforts of anti-choice groups to

deny a woman's right to choose by

enacting burdensome and unnecessary

requirements on abortion services."'

Margaret Crosby, staff counsel of the

ACLU of Northern California who has

litigated the major reproductive rights

cases in this state, explained the

significance for California. ``As none of

these particular restrictions were on the

books in California, today's ruling does

- not alter current California law.

""However,'' Crosby said, ``we have

seen repeated and determined efforts by

legislators who oppose reproductive

freedom to burden access to abortion by

proposing laws similar to the ones struck

down in the Akron case by the Supreme

Court. For years we have battled bills in

Sacramento - as many as twenty a term

- which would require mandatory abor-

tion counseling, parental consent or

notification, and required waiting

periods.

"*This ruling sends a message to

Ta Smyser

altos lawmakers (na restrictions on

abortion violate the United States Con-

stitution, and that efforts to frustrate

reproductive choice in the state will be

blocked by the courts,'' Crosby added.

Under present California law, women

have an unqualified right to abortion

(performed by a physician). Second

trimester abortions are performed in

clinics. Doctors are under a legal duty to

save the life of any infant born alive.

Adolescents may obtain abortions with-

out parental consent or notification.

Medi-Cal funding for abortion is pro-

vided to indigent women and teenagers

whose own income is inadequate to pay

for the procedure. Since 1978, the Cali-

fornia Legislature has attempted to

restrict through annual budget cuts

Medi-Cal coverage of abortions to cases

of rape, incest, health endangerment or

fetal abnormality.

After the ACLU challenged these

budget restrictions, the California

Supreme Court ruled in March 1981 that

limitations on public funding of abortion

violated the privacy and equal protection

clauses of the state Constitution. The

state appellate courts fae twice reaf-

firmed that decision in striking down

subsequent budget cuts on abortion

funding.

Governor Perce tan has proposed

similar restrictions for the 1983 Budget

Act; a legislative conference committee is

considering whether to obey the courts

or limit abortion funding for the sixth

year as the Governor would have

them do.

Crosby, who successfully argued the

Medi-Cal funding cases before the Cali-

fornia Supreme "Court, said, ``The

ACLU will continue to fight for full

public funding for abortion. We will go

to court for the sixth time if necessary."'

Crosby noted that ``the California

Governor is not the only opponent of

reproductive freedom in the executive

branch of government.'' The Reagan

Justice Department, she explained, had

filed an amicus brief in the Akron case to

support the restrictive Ohio ordinances.

"The U.S. Supreme Court decision is

also a vigorous rejection of the Reagan

Administration's attempt to persuade

the Court to defer to local legislatures in

construing the Constitution,'' she added.

Letters

My heartfelt thanks to the vigilant

parent of the student at Mission High

School, to Alan Schlosser and to the

ACLU for becoming involved in a `small

but noble victory for the Bill of Rights',

in this odious matter of a loyalty oath,

and the fact that some students were still

being subjected to it in this day and age.

In 1951, when my son started school

in San Francisco, I refused to sign such a

`document', stating that I would not bea

part of any action which was an abridge-

ment of the Bill of Rights.

The San Francisco school system has

no excuse for having these forms around

_ now, especially after the Supreme Court

of the United States decided against

loyalty oaths.

May D. Chote

Los Banos

I frequently find it impossible to relate

to so many of the things that appear in

the ACLU News.

Then, just about the time that I'm on

the verge of despairing of you, you do

something actually useful.

The most recent example was the item

on page one of the May ACLU News

about the settlement you obtained for

the man who was arrested and jailed be-

cause of a court clerk's error entered into

a computer.

Unfortunately, those types of errors

can and will occur. I believe that the set-

come a statutory automatic remedy in.

such occurrences. The one modification

should be that there would be a $1,500

minimum payment, increasing by $500

for each day nat the innocent party is

- detained.

Leonard W. Williams

Sunnyvale

ee e

The January-February issue contains

in the Annual Legislative Report a

brief summary of the Patient Access to

Health Law, AB 610. It incorrectly

states that the bill was amended in the

Senate to limit the inspection of mental

health records to physicians or psy-

chologists.

The law, which became effective

January 1, 1983, allows the health care

provider to decline patient access to

mental health records only if there is

"`substantial risk of significant adverse

or detrimental consequences to the pa-

tient.'' If a patient is denied access to

his or her mental health records on this

basis, the provider must make copies

of the record available to a licensed -

physician or psychologist designated

by the patient.

The California Medical Record As-

sociation has published a manual for

health care providers to assist them in

the implementation of AB 610. It is

available for $30.00 from: CMRA,

5110 East Clinton Way, Suite 102,

Fresno, CA 93727.

Anne Kellogg

President, CMRA

Fresno

New ACLU fiattiaal Legal Director Burt Neuborne (left) made a whirlwind tour tlement that you worked Our snouid Oe

to northern California in May. During his two-day stay, Neuborne spoke at a recep-

tion attended by over 100 ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys about new priorities for

the national ACLU legal program including an emphasis on poverty and civil liberties

and challenges to the Reagan Administration's attempts to control the flow of infor-

mation across national borders. _

At the May 24 ACLU-NC/Mother Jones sponsored ``Evening of Dangerous

Propaganda,'' where three Canadian films labelled `political propaganda'"' by the

Justice Department were viewed by an audience of over 500 First Amendment sup-

porters, Neuborne debated U.S. Attorney Joseph Russonniello about the govern-

ment's use of the Foreign Agents Registration Act to unlawfully stigmatize and cen-

sor foreign films.

Neuborne is pictured here with former ACLU National Executive Director Jack

Pemberton (center) who sits on the ACLU-NC Legal Committee and ACLU-NC

Legal Committee chair Charles Marson.

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 {

Elaine Elinson, Editor Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page iz

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.

aclu news

june-july 1983

ACLU to Join Richmond Police Case

On the same day that Richmond City

Council announced that it would appeal

the $3 million in damages awarded by a

U.S. District Court jury to the families

of two black men shot to death by the

Richmond police, the ACLU-NC Board

unanimously voted to fight the City's

appeal.

`*The defense of this verdict is crucial

- not just in Richmond but statewide,"'

said staff attorney Amitai Schwartz who

will handle the case for the ACLU. ``The

deterrent effect that such a verdict has on

police misconduct throughout the state is

vital to the protection of civil liberties.''

In fighting the appeal, Schwartz will

be working with Oliver Jones and John

Scott, both neighborhood lawyers asso-

ciated with the NAACP, who originally

brought the case to trial. :

On June 3, after a four month trial,

the U.S. District 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 Jones and Scott on

behalf of the families focused qn the

racist and brutal practices of the Rich-

mond police toward the black communi-

ty.

The NAACP attorneys contended that

Richmond Police Chief Leo Garfield

had allowed a group of white officers

known as the ``cowboys'' to abuse the

rights of black Richmond residents. The

two officers responsible for the Roman

and Guillory shootings, Samuel

Dudkiewicz and Clinton Mitchell, were

both among this group of ``cowboys'',

according to testimony by black officers

at the trial.

Jones and Scott also charged that the

police chief had ultimate responsiblity

for a longstanding pattern and practice

of police misconduct.

The jury awarded $1.5 million in

favor of each family against the City of

Richmond, Chief Garfield, and the two

officers involved in the shootings.

After the verdict was returned, Gar-

field lashed out at Judge Aguilar, who

had presided at the trial, the jury, and

the NAACP attorneys. He also resigned

- his post.

``This verdict is the largest of its kind

that we know of under the federal Civil

Rights Act,'' said Schwartz. ``It

represents a three million dollar message

to police departments throughout the

state that they must be held accountable

to higher standards of conduct.

"The ACLU-NC has long been active

in Opposing police abuse,'' explained

Schwartz, who headed the Northern

California Police Practices Project for 4 .

years before joining the ACLU-NC as a

staff attorney. `"Through litigation and

legislation we have tried to check police

misconduct - from the use of choke-

holds, false arrests, harassment of `un-

desirables,' strip search and many other

practices."' -

The ACLU first became associated

- with the situation in Richmond when

Schwartz and staff attorney Alan

Schlosser filed an emergency lawsuit to

obtain a permit for an NAACP march

against police abuse and racism in Oc-

tober 1982. The Richmond Police

Department had denied the permit and

the ACLU attorneys had to take the case

all the way to the federal Court of Ap-

peals before the permit was granted the

night before the demonstration took

place.

: Prayer Blocked continued from p. 1

atheist bitch, a freak and scum by these

so-called Christians,'' Bennett said.

`*They yell it out in a crowd or hiss it in

my ear as they pass by."'

Bennett was told by school officials

that there had been bomb threats before

the ceremony. The Livermore police

added security for the graduation, check-

ing bags and camera cases of relatives

and guests of the graduates.

``How could someone threaten to

blow up 2000 people in the name of

Christianity?'' Bennett asked, ``It's that

kind of hypocrisy that makes me angry."'

The school reported that their own

switchboard was jammed with angry

callers, and someone even called Ben-

nett's employer and demanded that she

be fired or that they would picket her

place of employment.

``Many people assume that northern

California is not a place where such

violent tempers would be raised over an

issue like school prayer,'' noted attorney

Crosby. ``But the events in Livermore in-

dicate just how volatile an issue it is.

``Because matters of faith are deeply

felt, any official government sponsorship

of religion produces divisiveness in a

community. This is why the framers of

the Constitution put church-state separa-

tion as the first clause of the First

Amendment: they feared that mixing

religion and government would threaten

a democracy, which depends on toler-

ance, reason and compromise,"' she ex-

plained.

`*The courageous students at Granada

High who braved a torrent of threats,

outraged public opinion, and isolation

right in the middle of one of the most im-

portant events of their lives are the real -

heroines in this civil liberties battle,"'

Crosby said.

Despite the controversy, the gradu-

- ation ceremony went off without inci-

dent. The 300 graduating seniors as-

sembled on the high school football field

heard a speech by English teacher Jim

Willis reprimanding students for their

hypocrisy and unChristianlike behavior

and warned them not to ``hiss or boo

during the event.'' They heard a solo by

Leslie Bennett and a poem by Todd

Ferro - but no prayer. Both Ferro and

Bennett were cheered as the received

their diplomas.

Though an officially sanctioned

school prayer had been forbidden by the

court, proponents of prayer hired a small

biplane which flew over the ceremony

trailing a banner which read ``God Bless

the Graduates."'

Bennett told the ACLU News that

since the graduation she has received

many letters of support - from a

minister's wife, teachers and administra-

tors from other school districts. ``This

has been very important to me,'' she

said, ``because out of twenty letters, only

two were against us."'

Although the graduation is over, the

legal issue is still not settled. The lawsuit

against the school district is still pending

and its outcome will be significant in

determining the constitutionality of

prayers at graduation ceremonies

throughout the state.

eeu ea e WSS SG

WX | Donald Cunningham

The multimillion dollar federal lawsuit against police abuse in Richmond reflected

community outrage and generated community support. This September 1982 march

in Richmond was denied a police permit until the ACLU went to the Court of Ap-

peals on the eve of the protest.

Inmate's Letter Causes Stir

by Evvie Rasmussen

Can a prisoner write a letter to his

parole board without fear of punish-

ment? The ACLU thinks so - and finds

itself at odds with Folsom Prison of-

ficials who sent a prisoner to isolation

for writing a letter criticizing a member

of the board for ``betrayal.'' The

ACLU-NC is now representing Henry

_ Lee Underwood in his First Amendment

fight against prison officials.

Underwood, a black man doing time

in Folsom Prison, was given ten days in

isolation and nine months in segregation

for writing a letter in September 1978 to

Ruth Rushen, a member of the Com-

munity Release Board that had denied

his parole.

The three-page letter expressed anger

and disappointment at what Underwood

considered a betrayal by a black member

of the Board. ``My whole complaint is

_an old one,'' Underwood wrote, ``one of

blacks selling blacks into slavery. This is

what you've done to me under the guise

of law."

Underwood's letter sparked a disci-

plinary hearing, where the prisoner was

found guilty of violating conduct rules.

The hearing committee concluded that

the letter constituted a physical threat to -

Rushen. When Underwood appealed

that decision he was sent a memo by

Folsom Associate Warden H. Morphis.

"Your entire letter is castigating and

disrespectful in nature,'' Morphis wrote,

but he noted that the only ``threat'' was

a two-sentence passage: ``Your days are

numbered as a parasite. Black people are

no longer going to allow themselves to be

misused and the foul spirit of insects

such as you will no longer be."'

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney

Wendell Goddard disagreed with the

warden. `"`If you read Underwood's let-

ter in its entirety, it is clearly a political

statement with no intended threat to per-

sonal safety."

"Can such a political statement be un-

reasonably interpreted as a threat of vio-

lence?'' Goddard asked. ``Doesn't the

First Amendment protect an individual's

right to make a political statement

without risk of administrative retalia-

tion?" :

When Underwood appealed the deci-

sion a second time, Deputy State Public

Defender Gayle Guynup wrote a letter

on his behalf to the chief of inmate ap-

peals. Guynup noted that the statements

made in the letter were quite similar to

comments Underwood had expressed to

black board members at the time his

`parole was denied.

"`The comments at the hearing and in

the letter may express bitterness, dis-

appointment and a lack of trust in black

members of the board,'' Guynup wrote,

`"`but the comments contain no sugges- .

tion of physical harm."'

In January 1979, the Department of

Corrections denied Underwood's appeal.

Underwood filed suit in U.S. District

Court for violation of his civil rights,

naming as defendants Folsom prison of-

ficials who serve on the disciplinary com-

mittee.

In January 1979, the Department of

Corrections denied Underwood's appeal.

Underwood filed suit in U.S. District

Court for violation of his civil rights,

naming as defendants Folsom prison of-

ficials who served on the disciplinary

committee.

Representing himself, Underwood

asked for a declaration that the defen-

dants' acts, policies and_ practices

violated his rights under the U.S. Con-

stitution and that each defendant pay

him damages.

In 1979 District Court Judge Philip C.

Wilkins dismissed Underwood's suit as

`frivolous.' Underwood appealed to

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit. The appeals court in February

1981 ordered the district court to vacate

continued on.p. 7

aclu news

june-july 1983

4

Voting

Information

Who is eligible to vote?

The by-laws of the ACLU of Northern

California call for the at-large Directors

of the Board to be elected by the general

membership. The general membership

are those members in good standing who

have renewed their membership within

the last twelve months.

The label affixed to this issue of the

ACLU News indicates whether you are

eligible or not eligible to vote on the basis

of when your last membership renewal

contribution was recorded.

If you are not eligible to vote, you may

choose to renew your membership at the

same time you submit your ballot and

resume you membership in good stand-

ing.

If you share a joint membership, each

individual is entitled to vote separtely -

two spaces are provided on the ballot.

How are candidates nominated to run

for the Board of Directors?

The ACLU-NC by-laws permit two

methods of nomination. Candidates may

be nominated by the present Board of

Directors after consideration of the

Nominating Committee's recommenda-

tions. Candidates may also be nominated

by petition bearing the signatures of at

least fifteen ACLU-NC members in

good standing.

Voting

Instructions

Candidates are listed on these pages in

alphabetical order. After marking your

ballot, clip it and enclose the ballot and

your address label from this issue of the

ACLU News in an envelope. Your ad-

dress label must be included in order to

insure voter eligibility. Address the

envelope to:

: Elections Committee

ACLU of Northern California

1663 Mission Street, Suite 460

San Francisco, CA 94103

If you have a joint membership, you

may use both of the columns provided,

and each of the members may vote

separately.

If you wish to insure the confidential-

ity of your vote, insert your ballot in a

double envelope with the special mailing

label in the outer one. The envelope will

be separated before the counting of the

ballots.

Ballots must be returned to the ACLU

office by noon on July 25, 1983.

You may vote for up to ten candi-

dates. The ten candidates receiving the

most votes will be elected.

For your consideration, the following

statements were submitted by the candi-

dates for election to the Board of Direc-

tors.

4 '

1983. ACLU-NC Board

Barbara A. Brenner

Though I seek Board election for the

first time, my ACLU involvement is

long-standing. As a graduate student, I

was an intern for the New Jersey af-

filiate. Thereafter, I was a law clerk and

administrator for the Women's Rights

Project of the Southern California affili-

ate, and a summer legal intern for the_

ACLU-NC.

Concern over increased attacks on

civil liberties - and dedication to the

principle that each of us must do what

we can to stem that tide - prompt my

desire to serve on the ACLU-NC Board.

My goal as a Board member would be to

help build and strengthen the ACLU so

that it can continue and expand its

critical work in defense of the Bill of

Rights.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Jim Morales

As a Latino lawyer who represents

the interests of poor youth, I am keenly

aware of the limitations of the legal

system in protecting politically disen-

franchised groups. Yet I have long

been impressed with the efforts of

ACLU-NC in challenging the excesses

of the government and in assisting

traditionally underrepresented com-

munities.

My involvement with the ACLU-NC

began in 1978 when I was a summer

law clerk. Since then I have worked

with ACLU-NC on improving the ac-

countability of the police and in seek-

ing to stop the harassment of voters

who request bilingual ballots.

If elected to the Board, I would work

to strengthen the strategies used by

ACLU-NC in defending the civil rights

of the various communities in northern

California, and to ensure that the in-

terests of minorities continue to be a

part of the ACLU-NC agenda.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Mary Lou Breslin

I have been active in the disability civil

rights movement for the last eight years

and am currently the Deputy Direc-

tor/Director, Networking and Com-

munity Organizing for the Disability

Rights Education and Defense Fund,

Inc. I am especially eager to serve the

ACLU-NC as a member of the Board in.

order to represent the broad range of

civil rights and liberties issues facing

disabled children and adults. |

Although my primary interest is fur-

thering disabled people's opportunity to

full and equal citizenship, I have a long

standing interest and commitment to

broader civil rights and liberties issues

particularly those affecting women.

As a fundraiser for DREDF, I am

aware of the need for responsible finan-

cial management and development and

would bring that perspective to the

Board.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Steven C. Owyang

I have served on the ACLU-NC

Board since early 1982. I participated

in the Bill of Rights Campaign and cur-

rently chair the Ad Hoc Church/State

Committee. I come to the ACLU with

a background of work in the Chinese

_and Asian American community,

where I have been involved in civil

rights, youth, and political activities. I

am a lawyer, and serve as the executive

officer for the California Fair Employ-

ment and Housing Commission.

Civil rights and civil liberties must be

the concern of all communities, espec-

ially in these times of increased threats

on many fronts. I would work to

broaden the ACLU's base of support,

and to encourage joint efforts between

the ACLU and groups in the various

minority communities.

Incumbent: Yes

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Nancy Davis

I am a co-founder and now Executive

Director of Equal Rights Advocates,

Inc., a law center in San Francisco that

specializes in the law-related needs of |

women. I have served on the board of

the Berkeley Law Foundation and the

advisory board of Women Organized for

Employment.

I am especially concerned about the

variety of ways in which the law impacts

upon those doubly stigmatized in our

society (Third World Women, for exam-

ple). The ACLU provides me with an op-

portunity to serve a constituency beyond

that defined by my day-to-day work and

enriches the latter by keeping me in-

formed about current civil liberties and

other issues.

The ACLU plays a vital role in safe- |

guarding our civil liberties against ever

increasing intrusions from all sides.

Incumbent: Yes

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Leslie S. Paul

Thirty years of activity on local, state

and national levels here in California and

in Massachusetts during the turbulent

years of the Civil Rights Movement and

the Women's Movement and beyond has

given me a sensitivity to the needs and -

aims of ACLU. As a professional fund-

raiser and organizer and volunteer I have

seen the need for a strong, well-funded,

vital organization and I have tried to

meet those needs.

As a Chapter and State Board Mem-

ber in Massachusetts and Marin Chapter

Board Member in California, I have, in

all instances, worked for the betterment

of ACLU in conciousness-raising issues,

legislative lobbying for change and fund-

raising for support and I pledge con-

tinuing, effective activity as an ACLU-

NC Board Member.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Petition

Stanley J. Friedman

This is my second term on the Board

of the ACLU-NC. I have been Chair of

the Legal Committee and served on the

Executive Committee.

I have handled a number of cases for

the ACLU as a volunteer lawyer in-

cluding In re Cox in which the California

Supreme Court ruled public accomoda-

tions were to be equally available to

citizens regardless of race, color, creed or

sex.

I am a member of the law. firm of

Friedman, Sloan and Ross in San Fran-

cisco. As a recent past president of the

San Francisco Bar Association, I worked

with the ACLU for the passage of a

charter amendment establishing the Of-

fice of Citizens' Complaints in San Fran-

cisco.

In 1981, I served as one of the lead

counsel in the lawsuit challenging Propo-

sition 8 in the California Supreme Court.

I do numerous cases involving consti-

tutional issues and therefore have a con-

tinuing interest in the most important

work of the ACLU which is to preserve

and protect our civil rights and liberties

through our litigation process.

Incumbent: Yes

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Frances Strauss

My participation in the life of the

ACLU has spanned three decades. I have

served on the Illinois Division Board;

helped organize the San Francisco Chap-

ter; was its representative to the Affiliate

Board, succeeded by two terms as a

member-at-large; organized the `"Com-

plaint Desk'' (1972); ran the Bill of

Rights Program and Fundraising Cam-

paigns (1973-1979); served on the Affili-

ate's Executive Committee; have been

and am a member of the Budget/Man-

agement and Development Committees.

The current subtle encroachments on

civil liberties - against the courts, pro-

choice issues, preventive detention, etc.,

demand ``eternal vigilance,'' and con-

firm my conviction that the ACLU is ab-

solutely necessary for protecting the Bill

of Rights.

It would be a privilege to again serve

on the ACLU-NC Board.

Incumbent: Yes

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Lawrence Grauman, Jr.

Since 1976 I have been a member of

the Marin Board of Directors (with a

~couple of principled lapses) and was

Chairman of the Marin Board in

1979-80. As a writer, editor and univer-

sity professor I have been engaged with a

variety of civil liberties issues for 20

years. In articles for the Nation, New

Republic, New Leader, Harper's, etc., I

have analyzed such issues as the draft (I

concluded in 1967 that voluntary selec-

tive service was both essential and feas-

ible), fair housing, the rights of foreign

policy dissenters, and freedom of the

press.

From 1974 to 1978 I was an editor of

The Civil Liberties Review.

At U.C. Berkeley, Vassar, San Fran-

cisco State and elsewhere I have taught

First Amendment law and the history of

civil liberties.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Petition

-

Thomas F. Waddell, M.D.

I have held the ACLU in high regard

for my entire adult life. The commitment

the ACLU-NC has demonstrated to pro-

tecting the rights of all citizens has been

clearly in evidence to me since my first

awareness of it.

While having been active in the

Medical Committee for Human Rights,

the Central Committee for Conscien-:

tious Objectors, the Black Panther Free

Medical Clinic (New York), and most

recently the Gay (Olympic) Games, I

have had a substantial and rewarding

relationship with the ACLU.

In view of an increasing threat to indi-

vidual and minority rights, I would be (c)

privileged to serve on the Board of the

organization that has pledged itself to

protect them.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Board of Directors

1 of Directors Elections

-

Marshall W. Krause

As chief counsel for the ACLU-NC

from 1960 to 1968, I handled many

civil and criminal trials and appeals.

During that time, I won five of six

cases heard by the U.S. Supreme Court

including landmarks, Lamont v. Post-

master (mail censorship) and Camara

v. Municipal Court (searching

residences).

I also administered the legal staff,

legal committee and volunteer attorney

program of the ACLU-NC.

Following my tenure at the ACLU, I

taught law at Boalt Hall and San Fran-

cisco State University and worked for

six years as a legal reporter for

KQED's ``Newsroom.'' I am now a

senior partner with Krause, Timan,

Baskin, Shell and Grant in Marin.

I was appointed by Chief Justice

Bird to the Commission on Appellate

Practices and Procedures and serve on

the Board of the Meiklejohn Library. I

was a member of the ACLU-NC Board

from 1973 to 1980, and would welcome

the opportunity to again serve the

organization in that capacity.

Incumbent: No :

Nominated by: Board of Directors

Barbara Brenner

Mary Lou Breslin

Nancy Davis

Marshall Krause

Will Leong

Jim Morales

Steve Owyang

Leslie S. Paul

Frances Strauss

Stanley J. Friedman

Lawrence Grauman, Jr.

Thomas Waddell, M.D.

aclu news

june-july 1983

Will Leong

During the past 6'% years, I have

served as the Executive Director of the

San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Pro-

ject, a program which takes first time

misdemeanor offenders out of the

criminal justice system.

Without a doubt, there are many

critical struggles which lie ahead in the

0x00B080's - unfortunately too many will be

fought to protect the achievements of

the civil rights movements of the past

- decades - rather than forging ahead

with new gains.

During these times the ACLU will

likely have to take a more definitive

role in working with civil rights groups

and minority communities. I hope to

be part of the ACLU-NC Board's con-

tinuing efforts to end racist and repres-

sive actions with the kind of unity

which occured while opposing the

Simpson-Mazzoli Immigration Bill.

Incumbent: No

Nominated by: Board of Directors

BALLOT

Vote for no more than ten Candidates. Joint members use both columns.

Ble

BO sie ea a) a) el

Gly Oe OE ee

a

O

Se 8 ee ee

aclu news

june-july 1983

New Death Law Proposed Strip Search Hearing

A new measure to restore the death penalty and other related pro-

posals in the Governor's anti-crime package indicate a dangerous shift

back to retribution and revenge as the guiding force in our state criminal

justice system.

ACLU Legislative Advocate Daphne Macklin reports from Sacra-

mento that due process and equal justice are swiftly becoming sacrifices

on the law-and-order altar. Below, Macklin describes how the "`war on

crime'' becomes an attack on the constitutional protections which

assure that careful and deliberate measures be taken on behalf of in-

dividuals who have been accused or convicted of criminal misconduct

by the state.

Last month, Governor George Deuk-

mejian introduced his package of anti-

crime legislation. As promised, it in-

cluded a proposal to expedite capital

punishment in California, the Death

Penalty Restoration Act of 1983 (SB

1100 Maddy, AB 1469 Nolan.)

The Death Penalty Restoration Act,

and other similar proposals scheduled to

be heard later this session, are the work

of fierce capital punishment advocates,

among them the Governor himself who

was the author of the 1977 death penalty

law, who think the California Supreme

Court has been ``ineffective'' in dealing

with the backlog of death penalty cases.

These measures attempt to reverse state

court decisions which narrowed the

scope of the Briggs death penalty in-

itiative or that instituted procedural pro-

tections for criminal defendants.

For example, several measures (in-

cluding SB 1100) would reverse the Cali-

fornia Supreme Court decision in People

v. Superior Court (Engert). Engert held

that the phrase ``heinous, atrocious, or

cruel'? was too vague and unclear to

serve aS a definition of a special cir-

cumstance for which the death penalty

might be appropriate. A catch-all term,

the so-called ``HAC special' differed

significantly from other special circum-

stance categories which specifically de-

scribe the victim or the type of felony for

which the extreme sanction may be in-

voked.

Death penalty opponents have already

had some success in beating back this

proposal. As with many of the other

measures in this arena, much of the ac-

tion around this proposal has taken place

in the state Senate. Although SB 1100

did pass the Senate Judiciary, it was sub-

stantially amended and most of the ob-

jectionable portions have been deleted.

The current bill, however, still contains

certain procedural changes which limit a

defendant's ability to contest special cir-

cumstances.

The ACLU will continue to devote

energies to keep this bill - the Gover-

nor's primary vehicle for changing death

penalty procedures - from passing.

Juveniles

e

A less technical but equally significant

issue concerns sentencing guidelines for

minors convicted of capital crimes. Law

and order advocates quickly responded

to the ruling in the Spears case which

held that persons under the age of 18

could not be sentenced to life without

possibility of parole. Unsatisfied with a

statute which provides that juveniles

convicted of first degree murder may be

sentenced to terms of 25 years to life, a

new proposal has been made to explicitly

overrule Spears. Other proposals would

greatly restrict judicial discretion to set:

penalties appropriate to the facts and cir-

cumstances of individual juvenile cases.

These new provisions raise serious ques-

tions of fairness and proportionality:

_ depriving a young person of any hope of

parole or release amounts to a clear dis-

incentive to rehabilitation and would cre-

ate a far more hazardous and brutaliz-

ing prison environment.

Jury Selection

Death penalty proponents have

shrewdly targeted jury selection pro-

cedures as an area ripe for legislative

revision. Under the guise of ``juror pri-

vacy,'' several bills would no longer

allow prosecution or defense counsel to

directly question persons during the voir

dire or juror selection process. Instead,

counsel would make recommendations

to the judge who would then examine the

individual jurors. This method elimin-

ates the benefit of direct questioning

which permits counsel to focus on pos-

sible areas of bias and to evaluate a juror

through a series of related questions and

follow-up inquiries.

Another procedural change in death

penalty cases would decrease the number

of peremptory (unqualified) challenges

of a juror from 26 to each side to ten

(later amended to 16). In addition, a

critical element of the voir dire pro-

ceeding, the sequestered examination of

individual jurors, would be replaced by

an examination in open court and in the

presence of other jurors. While open

proceedings are usually preferred, in all

criminal cases there exists an overriding

interest in the selection of a panel which

has not been tainted by the spontaneous

comments of other potential jurors.

Under these voir dire proposals, indi-

vidual jurors may be influenced by opi-

nions expressed by other persons before

any evidence has ever been presented.

One of the primary vehicles of these

changed procedures for jury selection,

SB 1111 (Boatwright) containing both

judge-only voir dire and a reduction in

the number of peremptory challenges,

recently failed the Senate Judiciary

twice, even in an amended form.

The defeat of several key measures,

however, is only the beginning of this.

protracted fight to preserve constitu-

tional guarantees in the criminal justice

system.

Results in Victory

ichael Miller

ACLU-NC plaintiff Ramona Scott (center) testified before the Assembly Ways

and Means Committee in support of limiting the use of strip searches by police. She is

pictured here with Marlene Penny, also an ACLU plaintiff in a strip search case and

ACLU cooperating attorney Don Brown.

An ACLU-sponsored bill limiting the

use of strip searches by police passed the

Assembly Ways and Means Committee

on June 15 by a vote of 14-3. The bill,

AB 270, authored by Assemblywoman

Maxine Waters,

Assembly floor. -

`*A number of state and federal courts

have already held that strip searches are -

significant, intrusive violations of a per-

son's right of privacy and personal digni-

ty,'' said ACLU legislative advocate

Daphne Macklin. ``The opinions con-

sistently hold that there must be some

reasonable cause to believe a person is

concealing a weapon or illegal substance

before a strip search may be initiated.

Moreover, both women and men must

be afforded some level of privacy during

the search itself - including not having

to disrobe in the presence of members of

the opposite sex or in an area that is open

to public view."'

- Oakland resident Ramona Scott, a

plaintiff in an ACLU-NC lawsuit alleg-

ing strip search abuses by the Oakland

police, testified at the June 15 hearing.

The ACLU-NC has also challenged the

strip search practices of the Fremont

now moves to the.

police on behalf of Marlene Penny and

has filed suit on behalf of two other Bay

Area women who were strip searched

while attempting to visit relatives at the

Martinez Jail. Like the plaintiffs in a-

number of other strip search challenges -

throughout the country, their goal is to

prevent other women from having to en-

dure the humiliation of an unwarranted

search, Macklin explained.

``Assemblywoman Waters and the

ACLU are committed to providing pro-.

tections against unwarranted searches to

all California residents,'' Macklin said.

`"`We have already won a number of

lawsuits and enacted protective legisla-

tion in nearly 15 states.

`*Strip search statutes and regulations

are already working well in large and

small communities in other states. AB

270 represents an overdue progressive

reform in California,'' Macklin added.

At the same hearing, the Committee

passed an ACLU-NC supported measure

restricting the use of chokeholds by

police. That bill, AB 1530 authored by

Assemblywoman Gwen Moore of Los

Angeles, passed by consent (no dis-

cussion) on a 15-5 vote and also proceeds

to the Assembly floor.

Gay Group's Files...........

Solidarity spokesperson Tim Moore

said that the ruling was a ``wonderful

vindication for Solidarity members and

all gays.

"If the magistrate's ruling had held,"'

Moore explained, ``it would have put a

damper on all gay rights organizing.

Judge Williams' order is an important

statement on our right to both be

politically active and to protect our

privacy."'

In addition to remanding the

magistrate's discovery order, Judge

Williams reversed the magistrate's im-

position of sanctions. He stated that the

Court found the `"`sanctions inap-

propriate in light of the serious constitu-

tional issues framed by Solidarity's ap-

peal."'

Brunwasser explained, `"Two very im-

portant principles are established by this

- opinion. First, the district court has

recognized that associational privacy is

such a sensitive and fundamental liberty

that an adversary must satisfy a very

heavy burden of proof to obtain any

details about an _ organization's

members, contributors or political ac-

tivities.

"Second, by vacating the sanctions,

Judge Williams has reaffirmed the right

of access to the federal courts for the

protection of constitutional rights,"

Brunwasser added.

Swartz Joins

New ACLU legislative advocate Mar-

jorie Swartz is no stranger to Sacra-

mento. The native Ohioan first came to

the state capital in 1976 and has become

familiar with the California corridors of

power through a variety of professional

and political activities, most recently as

legislative liaison for the California State

Public Defenders Office.

But it is as a lobbyist for the ACLU

that Swartz feels she has found her real

~ niche. ``I see more expansive oppor-

tunities in working for the ACLU than I

have ever had before,'' Swartz told the

ACLU News.

`For example,'' she noted, ``right

now we are deeply involved with welfare

rights and the protection of due process

rights of welfare recipients. These have

become major issues because of Gover-

nor Deukmejian's so-called welfare

reform package.

`The scope of the work allows us to

work closely with women's groups and

welfare rights organizations - and to

argue our positions with a wide range of

support,'' Swartz said.

Many ACLU issues such as prison

construction and the administration of

criminal justice were also at the center of

Swartz's lobbying work for the state

Public Defenders Office, but, she ex-

plained, the ACLU forum allows her to

"`be more involved in solutions, from a

more credible position.

"The ACLU can - and should -

argue that a major cause of crime is lack

of economic justice,'' Swartz said.

`""When we advocate for welfare rights,

we are also saying that if children are

cared for properly from birth then there

will be less need for prisons to house

them when they are older. That is a more

credible platform to oppose prison con-

struction than just sticking to the con-

fines of criminal justice."'

Before coming to California, Swartz,

a graduate in architecture from Case

Western Reserve worked on several

political campaigns in Cleveland, in-

cluding Howard Metzenbaum's sena-

- torial campaign. In 1975, she was a

volunteer coordinator and office

manager for gubernatorial candidates

opposing Governor James Rhodes, the

man who was responsible for sending the

National Guard to Kent State.

Lobby Team

Marjorie Swartz

`Rhodes' reelection was a turning

point for me,'' Swartz said, ``I decided

to leave Ohio and come to California

where there was a more progressive

political atmosphere."'

She attended McGeorge Law School -

at night and worked at the Sacramento

Public Defenders Office during the day.

In 1979, she was appointed legal counsel

with the Deputy State Public Defender

and represented clients before state

courts including criminal, juvenile, and

civil commitments.

In 1980, Swartz began her lobbying

career with the state Public Defenders -

Office, often working in coordination

with the ACLU in promoting or oppos-

ing legislation concerning due process,

the rights of the accused, and other

criminal justice issues.

One immediate danger Swartz sees is

the Governor's use of the state budget as

a political tool. ``The Governor is using

the deficit as an excuse to turn California

into a `second class state' in regards to

our justice system, Medi-Cal funding,

our welfare system,'' she explained.

Armed with her well-honed legal, poli-

tical and legislative skills Swartz is ready

to fight the Governor all the way.

Swartz joins lobbyist Daphne Macklin

and assistant Sally Smith in the Legisla-

tive Office run jointly by the ACLU-NC

and the ACLU of Southern California.

Former ACLU-NC lobbyist Brent Barn-

hart will continue to serve as a consultant

until the summer.

C) Individual $20 (2)

Your Civil Liberties .

Ignore them

and they'll go st

Join the ACLU

ae allan lala aettataas "al

Joint $30

and an additional contribution of $------_'

( ) This is a gift membership from

Name__ 2

Address

City

ae

Return to ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St., S.F. 94103

By ee om oe oe ee se ee ee se es

Com om om om ow oe Oe Ge Se 2 Gee

Policy on

Board Members'

Responsibilities

The growing involvement and com-

mitment of ACLU-NC Board members

has resulted in the Board's adoption of a

four-page ``job description'' at its June

meeting which details responsibilities of

individuals who serve on the Board.

The ``description of responsibilities of

Board membership'? was approved

unanimously by the Board on the recom-

mendation of the Executive Committee.

' The original proposal was initiated by

the 1983 Board Member Nominating

Committee, chaired by Bernice Biggs, in

order to provide prospective Board

nominees with a written set of re-

sponsibilities that they would be asked to

perform if elected. ~

Biggs noted that the ACLU-NC's

Directors serve a vital function. Aside

from the traditional responsibility of

developing policy, and serving on com-

mittees, ACLU-NC's Directors are re-

sponsible for participating in fundraising

campaigns and taking action on a variety

of issues.

`*The nominees that I spoke to during

our committee deliberations appreciated

receiving specific written information

about what would be expected of them if

they were elected to the Board," Biggs

explained.

that the entire current Board review and

revise our proposal and formally adopt it

as this illustrates their commitment to in-

sure that the ACLU-NC's leadership

strength is maintained,'' she.added.

Davis Riemer,

Board, explained that the policy appears

to be unique among the fifty ACLU af-

filiates across the country.

Riemer also noted that the list of

responsibilities complements existing:

ACLU-NC policy concerning the com-

position of the Board which encourages

minorities, women and candidates with

special expertise and talents to serve.

Inmate's Letter jon:

the earlier judgment and to consider

Underwood's letter and the value of his

First Amendment claims. In February of

this year Underwood asked the ACLU-

NC to take over his lawsuit.

ACLU-NC staff counsel Amitai

Schwartz noted that Underwood's case is

part of an ongoing battle to protect

prisoners' First Amendment rights

against abuse of authority by prison of-

ficials. `"The ACLU has gone to court to

prevent the censorship of prison news-

papers and to stop surveillance of

prisoners' private conversations with

their families and attorneys,'' Schwartz

said.

``Cannot an incarcerated person be

free to write his most serious thoughts to

an official who has the power to deter- _

mine his fate?"'

"This is an ideal First Amendment

case because it is so straightfoward,"'

Goddard added. ``There probably won't

be any facts in dispute. Rather, the issue

is simple: does this letter constitute

speech that is protected by the First

Amendment?'' :

Goddard, who is representing Under-

wood for the ACLU-NC is with the San

Francisco law firm of Athearn, Chandler

and Hoffman.

"It also seemed important |

Chairperson of the ~

aclu news

june-july 1983 |

Meta Kauffman

Meta R. Kauffman, a founding

member of the North Peninsula

ACLU Chapter died on June | after a

lengthy bout with lung cancer. Kauff-

man, a longtime supporter of the

ACLU, was the head of the chapter's

Membership Committee from the in-

ception of the chapter until the time

of her death.

`"`Meta was indefatigable,' said

Emily Skolnick a member of the

North Peninsula Chapter Board and

former affiliate Board member. ``She

had a unique ability to spread her en-

thusiasm around - to do work her-

self and to organize the efforts of

others. This rare quality of Meta's

was a prime reason for the high level

of activity of our chapter's

members,'' Skolnick said, adding that

Kauffman would be deeply missed in

the community.

A native of San Francisco, Kauff-

man attended Stanford University

and made her home in Hillsborough.

In addition to her work for the

ACLU, she was a volunteer at the Mt.

Zion Senior Citizens Center and ac-

tive in many Jewish community or-

ganizations. She is survived by her

91-year old mother, two children and

five grandchildren.

With knowledge of her impending

death, Kauffman requested that

donations be made to the ACLU-NC

and other organizations in which she

was active. ``Meta really put her

house in order before she died,'' said

Skolnick, ``she cared so deeply about

the battle for civil liberties that she

wanted to be sure that she kept con-

tributing to the strength of the ACLU

even after she died."'

Gay Rights Chapter

Membership Notice

ACLU members in northern Cali-

fornia are routinely placed on the

membership lists of local chapters ac-

cording to geographic area. There are

two exceptions: (1) those members

who live in areas where no local chap-

ter is currently organized are identi-

fied as ``at large'? members; (2) any

ACLU member may request to be

part of the only non-geographic chap-

ter in northern California - the Gay ~

Rights Chapter.

The nature of ACLU's

membership records system is such

that when ACLU members move,

they are reassigned to a new chapter.

When Gay Rights Chapter members

have moved, many have been routine-

ly reassigned to a new geographic

chapter, with the result that interested

ACLU members frequently lose

touch with the Gay Rights Chapter.

Any ACLU member in northern

California who wants to be a member

of the Gay Rights Chapter, or who

wants to confirm that she or he is

already on the Gay Rights Chapter

membership roll, should call or write

the Membership Department, ACLU

of Northern California, 1663 Mission,

#460, San Francisco 94103, 415/621-

2493.

aclu news

june-july 1983

Field Committee Report

`Bertram Gross, author of Friendly

Fascism and a well-known critic of Rea-

gan administration policies, led a special

discussion on the causes of crime at the

May 14 meeting of the ACLU-NC Field

Committee.

Gross called on ACLU members to

fight for economic as well as civil rights

and to support the ``Full Recovery and

Full Employment Act'? drafted by

Representative John Conyers (D-Mich)

and Gross.

Dick Grosboll reported that the Pro-

Choice Task Force is carefully watching

legislation on a state and national level

which would make abortion illegal or

`Save the Date _

| October 8 and 9

B.A.R.K.

BOARD MEETING: (Usually fourth

Thursday each month.) Contact Joe

Dorst, 415/654-4163, for information

about July and August meetings.

EARL WARREN

_ CATCH THE A'S AND SUPPORT

THE ACLU: A special fundraiser for

the ACLU Foundation - Wednes-

day, July 27 and Friday, August 12,

at 7:35 p.m., Oakland Coliseum.

Contact Barbara _ Littwin,

415/452-4726 (days).

FRESNO

BOARD MEETING: (Usually third

Wednesday each month.) Contact

Scott Williams, 209/441-1611, for in-

formation about July and August

meetings. :

GAY RIGHTS

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, July 5; Tues-

day, August 2. 7:00 p.m., ACLU,

1663 Mission, San Francisco. Contact

Doug Warner, 415/863-0487.

-ANNUAL MEETING planned for

either Sunday, August 21 or Sunday,

August 28. More details to follow.

MARIN

BOARD MEETING: (Third Monday

each month.) Monday, July 18; Mon-

day, August 15. 8:00 p.m., Fidelity

Savings, Throckmorton Street, Mill

Valley. Contact Alan Cilman,

415/864-8882. :

unavailable; Sarita Cordell of the Right

to Dissent Subcommittee announced that

_ the ``First Amendment Road Show'' will

make its debut in Monterey on July 23.

The Road Show, which will bring basic

information on leafletting, canvassing,

campaigning, petitioning and marching

to activist groups, is being developed by

the Committee for use throughout nor-

thern California.

An update on the Simpson-Mazzoli

anti-immigration measures was provided .

by Andrea Learned, and Judy Newman

reported on the work of the ACLU

Draft Network.

The Committee considered and re-

jected a proposal for a ``Police Account-

ability Project.'' Representatives decided

instead to set up an ad hoc working

' group, headed by Michael Manlin, to

develop proposals for broad-ranging

membership action on the issue of crime

and civil liberties.

The next meeting of the Field Com-

mittee will be held on Saturday, August

13 at the ACLU-NC office in San Fran-

cisco. All chapter representatives are urg-

ed to attend.

MID-PENINSULA

No' chapter meetings scheduled for

July or August.

MONTEREY

BOARD MEETING/PUBLIC FOR-

UM: (Fourth Tuesday each month,

alternating between forums and

board meetings.) Tuesday, July 26;

Tuesday, August 23. Contact Richard

Criley, 408/624-7562.

"FIRST AMENDMENT ROAD

SHOW" - a special seminar on First

Amendment rights to leaflet, petition,

canvass, and campaign: Saturday, Ju-

ly 23. Contact Michael Manlin,

408/899-1000 (days) or Marcia Gallo,

415/621-2494 (days-ACLU-NC).

MT. DIABLO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Thurs-

day each month.) Thursday, July 21;

Thursday, August 18. Contact Bever-

ly Bortin, 415/934-1927.

NORTH PEN

BOARD MEETING: (Second Mon-

day each month.) Monday, July 11;

Monday, August 8. 8:00 p.m. Con-

tact Richard Keyes, 415/367-8800

(days).

SACRAMENTO

BOARD MEETING: (Third Wednes-

day each month.) Wednesday, July

Calendar

Action Alert!

Take a minute to take some action to

defend your civil liberties:

AB 270 (Waters, D-LA), regulates strip

`searches by requiring that police have

some reasonable cause to believe that an

arrestee may have weapons or drugs on

his/her person. This bill has passed the

Assembly Ways and Means Committee

and is expected to be voted on by the full

Assembly before the middle of July. If it

passes the Assembly, the measure then

goes to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Action: Contact your Assembly

representative to urge a ``yes'' vote on

AB 270, then your state Senator to urge

passage in the Senate.

AB 1530 (Moore, D-LA) prohibits and

restricts the use of chokeholds by police.

The use of one hold (the trachea hold)

would be prohibited; the use of the

carotid artery hold would be restricted to

conditions similar to those in which the

use of firearms is permitted. This bill

also moves to the Assembly floor before

the middle of July following passage by

the Assembly Ways and Means Com-

mittee; then, if passed, it goes to the

Senate Judiciary Committee.

20; 7:30 p.m., New County Adminis-

tration Building, 8th and I Streets,

Sacramento. Summer picnic being

considered. Contact Mary Gill,

916/457-4088 (evenings).

SAN FRANCISCO

BOARD MEETING: (Usually fourth

Tuesday each month.) Contact

Chandler Visher, 415/391-0222 (days)

for information about July and

August meetings.

SANTA CLARA

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

each month.) Tuesday, July 5. Con-

tact Vic Ulmer, 408/379-4431 (even-

ings).

SANTA CRUZ

BOARD MEETING: (Second

Wednesday each month.) Wednes-

day, July 13; Wednesday, August 10.

8:00 p.m., Louden Nelson Center,

Santa Cruz. Contact Bob Taren,

408/429-9880.

SONOMA

~ BOARD MEETING: (Usually third

Thursday each month.) Contact An-

drea Learned, 707/544-6911 (days),

for information about July and

August meetings.

STOCKTON

BOARD MEETING: (First Tuesday

sentative to urge a

Action: Contact your Assembly repre-

sentative and ask that he or she vote for:

AB 1530. Also contact your Senator to

ask for support of the bill.

SB 34 (Presley, R-Riverside) makes filing

a "`knowingly false complaint'' about a

police officer a misdemeanor. This

measure is still awaiting hearing in the

Assembly Criminal Law and Public

Safety Committee after passage in

March by the Senate.

Action: Contact your Assembly repre-

"no'' vote on SB 34.

each month.) Tuesday, July 5; Tues-

day, August 2: Contact Bart Harloe,

209/946-2431 (days).

YOLO

CONGRATULATIONS to new

chapter officers: Harry Roth, presi-

dent; Casey McKeever, vice-

president; Michael Laurence, secre-

tary; Cindy Parker, treasurer; Julius

Young, membership coordinator.

BOARD MEETING: Contact Harry

Roth, 916/753-0996 for meeting in-

formation.

~ PRO-CHOICE

TASK FORCE

All reproductive rights activists are

urged to.attend the next meeting of

_ the Pro-Choice Task Force: Wednes-

day, July0x00B06, 7:30 p.m., ACLU-NC,

, 1663 Mission, San Francisco. Contact

Marcia Gallo, 415/621-2494. Bring

stationery and stamps for a ``writer's

cramp"'' party!

RIGHT TO

DISSENT"

SUBCOMMITTEE

Protect your right to know - and

your right to protest: join the Right to

Dissent Subcommittee at the next

meeting: Wednesday, July 6, 6:00

p.m., ACLU-NC,. 1663 Mission, San

_ Francisco. Contact Marcia Gallo,

number above. Plans are now under-

way for the ``First Amendment Road

Show'' seminar series.