vol. 46, no. 6

ow

Chapter/Board Conference see p.8

Volume XLVI

Court Prevents Abortion Fund Cut

Ruth Holbrook

On July 29, the California Supreme

_ Court issued a stay preventing the Legis-

lature's cut-off of Medi-Cal abortion

funding, in response to the fourth ACLU

lawsuit challenging the budget cuts in as

many years. :

The stay, signed by five of the justices

with Richardson and Broussard dissent-

ing, means that funding for Medi-Cal

abortions will not be cut off for the 8000

women a month who depend on it, at

least until the final. disposition of the

case. The Legislature's 1981 Budget Act

would have terminated the funds on

August 15.

On August 6, the high court trans-

ferred the ACLU suit, CDRR v. Cory,

to the Court of Appeal. The appeal

court will hear the case on October 27.

Calling the latest restrictions on Medi-

Cal funds for abortion "a naked act of

defiance on the part of the Legislature,"

August-September 1981

ACLU-NC staff attorney Margaret

`Crosby announced the latest suit, filed

on July 16.

Speaking at a press conference at the

ACLU, Crosby said, "Fully aware that

it was violating the highest law of this

state, the California Legislature has en-

acted, for the fourth consecutive year,

stringent limitations on Medi-Cal fund-

ing of abortion.

"These statutory restrictions mirror,

word for word, legislation struck down

by the Supreme Court as violative of the

California Constitution," she said.

On March 20, 1981 the California

Supreme Court ruled inthe ACLU case

CDRR vy. Myers that the Legislature's

1978, 1979, and 1980 Budget Act limita-

tions on Medi-Cal funding for abortion

were unconstitutional and in violation

of the privacy of women seeking to

exercise their constitutional right to

Police Harass Sacramento Demo

Sacramento police videotape demonstrators on a march against racism.

The

marchers were also frisked, searched by a metal detector and individually

photographed-in violation of their rights.

Sacramento police used an arsenal of

chilling and abusive tactics last year to

harass, intimidate, discourage and deter

a totally lawful protest march, accord-

ing toa ACLU lawsuit filed on July 9, in

Sacramento Superior Court.

The suit claims that without any

justification, participants ina November

1980 "March Against Racism" were

subject to police detentions, metal

detector searches, body frisks, individ-

ual mug shots, intensive videotape sur-

veillance, and a police escort intended

to prevent spectators from joining the

"march.

For these "police services" the City of

Sacramento sent the march sponsors,

the International Committee Against

Racism (INCAR) a bill for $789.32.

According to the ACLU complaint,

the Sacramento police violated the

marchers' constitutional rights of free-

dom of speech and association, privacy,

and freedom from unjustified detentions

and searches. The plaintiffs are seeking

an injunction prohibiting the police

from a repeat performance, destruction

Continued p. 6

choose an abortion.

The 4-2 decision, authored by Justice

Mathew Tobriner, stated, "Once the

state furnishes medical care to poor

women in general it cannot withdraw

part of that care solely because a woman

exercises her constitutional right to have

an abortion."

Solely because of that decision, and

court orders issued during the ACLU's

three-year litigation, abortion funding

has been available to over 100,000

women-including 27,000 teenagers-

per year who have had abortions in

California.

However, on June 15, the state legis-

lature again passed a Budget Act which

limits Medi-Cal funds for abortion solely

to situations where the woman's life or

health is in danger, where the pregnancy

results from rape or incest, where the

pregnant woman is a teenager whose

parents have been notified, or where the

pregnancy would result in the birth of a

child with severe and congenital ab-

normalities.

Backlash

According to ACLU-NC Executive

Director Dorothy Ehrlich, the Legisla-

ture's backlash on abortion rights was

not unforeseen.

"The ink was hardly dry on the Cali-

fornia Supreme Court decision uphold-

ing the right of all women-regardless

of economic status-to choose an abor-

tion, when anti-choice proponents scur-

ried to reverse the constitutional man-

date," Ehrlich commented.

"No fewer than nine pieces of legisla-

tion-ranging from a state version of

the so-called Human Life Amendment

to obstructive reporting requirements-

were introduced in the state capitol, de-

signed to circumvent the provisions of

the decision," she added.

Ehrlich stated that the ACLU is pre-

pared to litigate any of the Legislature's

proposals which infringe on a woman's

right to reproductive freedom.

Governor's Veto

When Governor Brown signed _ the

Budget Act into law on June 28, he

vetoed the Schmitz Amendment, an un-

precedented addition to the appropria- _ ?

tions bill which would have prohibited

state officials from obeying a court

order-such as disbursing Medi-Cal

funds for abortion-over objections of

the Legislature.

However, Brown left intact the severe

restrictions of the Medi-Cal abortion

funding that the court had ruled uncon-

stitutional, stating that he presumed

further court action would resolve the

question.

No. 6

Crosby said, "This lawless .ct by our

lawmakers is reminiscent of another un-

happy chapter in this country's history

' -the effort by Governor Faubus of

Arkansas to frustrate the school inte-

gration mandated by the courts in Brown

v. Board of Education."

ACLU-NC staff attorney Margaret

Crosby announces the filing of a new

suit to maintain abortion funding at a

July 16 press conference.

Stating that "the scope of legislative

authority does not and cannot embrace

the concept of nullification of contro-

versial decisions of the judiciary,"

Crosby added, "The Legislature, in an

imperial fashion, has established itself

aS a super-court with power to veto

court rulings found distasteful by a

majority of the legislators." |

Also speaking at the press conference

was Lori Ingram, Coordinator of the

petitioner Committee to Defend Repro-

continued on p. 7

Board

Elections

The following candidates were

elected to the ACLU-NC Board of

Directors. The new Board mem-

bers will begin their term in Sep-

tember and will serve for three

years. (An asterisk indicates that a

member is an incumbent.)

Bernice Biggs

Gordon Brownell

Marlene Delancie*

Jerome B. Falk, Jr.*

Eleanor Friedman

Sylvan M. Heumann*

Oliver Jones

Charles Marson*

Nancy Pemberton* |

Hila

a aclu news

- aug-sept 1981

ACLU Calls for Civilian Review

by Michael Ungar

The atmosphere was charged in a

packed Supervisors' Room at City Hall

when the ACLU joined with other local

organizations to support proposals to

place civilians in charge of investigating

complaints against the San Francisco

police force. The public hearings were

sponsored by Supervisor Harry Britt on

July 15 and July 22 to determine the

need for a civilian review of police

misconduct.

The testimony, frequently disrupted

by heckling from the crowd and shouts ~

for order from the podium, clearly

marked the lines of a bitter confronta-

tion between those who are dismayed

by police actions and those who are

supportive of current police practices.

_ The hearings before the Select Com-

mittee on Crime and Violence were

-convened against a background of alle-

gations of excessive police force and sub-

sequent whitewashing by the Police

Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB).

The ACLU asserted that a civilian

check on police actions was consistent

with fundamental constitutional provi-

sions. As ACLU-NC Executive Direc-

tor Dorothy Ehrlich told the Commit-

ee, "The Bill of Rights was meant to

protect the people from the abuse and

overuse of government power... and

there is no- greater area. of contact

between the people and government

than when the government serves its

police function."

ACLUstaffattorney Amitai Schwartz,

co-author of the San Francisco Bar

Association's proposed guidelines for

the addition of civilians to the police

- investigative bureau stated, "The inci-

dence of police power abuse is not a new

problem, nor is the present situation

one where the police were caught with-

out warning." Attorney Schwartz re-

counted for the committee the history of

ACLU Complaint Desk counselor

Margery Chiosso testified about the

numerous calls she receives about police

_abuse in San Francisco.

the popular but frustrated effort to in-

state civilian police investigators since

the early seventies.

A presentation before the inquiry by

ACLU Complaint Desk counseler

Margery Chiosso revealed the extent of

complaints of excessive police force in

San Francisco. A volunteer on the ACLU

Complaint Desk since its establishment

ten years ago, Chiosso testified that "the

most common single complaint we re-

ceive is that of police abuse."

"These complaints have come froma

great variety of people-people who are

angry and frustrated because they feel

they can't get help anywhere," Chiosso

said.

Chiosso estimated that the ACLU re-

ceives about 500 calls a year about San

Francisco police misconduct. "I believe

that the people who call the ACLU rep-

resent only a small percentage of people

with similar complaints," she said.

Letters

I received the the May 1981 ACLU

News on June 9. This delay in receiving

means | have missed the events that |

have been interested in. I] wonder how

many others have this same problem?

_ Also, any letters I may want to write to

legislators recommended by your paper

lack impact because they would be too

late.

Please do what you can to remedy

this problem. Thank you for your time.

Cecilia Hurwich

Berkeley

I sincerely apologize to Ms. Hurwich

and other ACLU-members who have -

received the News late over the past sev-

eral months. Though we are a small

publication we are still dependent on

many outside links in the chain of the

newspaper production: we receive our

mailing labels from the national ACLU

membership department on the East

Coast, and-up till now-we have had

our typesetting, printing, and mailing

done in Marin County. This year we

have had some particularly trouble-

some delays at various points of the

production process which have been

impossible to remedy from the ACLU-

ae ER EER OB BBN BR RR i, a ERAT OR A BE BEES EY ee PORTS

NC office. We very muchregret that this

has meant the News is being received

very late by some readers.

Inan attempt to rectify this situation,

we have taken the bold step of changing

our typesetting, printing, and mailing to

in a 5-block radius of the ACLU-NC

office. We hope that this will give us

much more control over the whole pro-

cess and that readers will receive the

ACLU News when it is still news.

Again, I apologize to all readers for

past delays. The Editor.

euro66

I would like to express our thanks to

the ACLU for the splendid work you

have done in connection with the West

- Coast visit of the Turkish State Folk

Dance Ensemble whose performances

were canceled because of unjustified

acts perpetrated in violation of the con-

stitutional rights of those who wanted

to see the Ensemble.

Weare also grateful for the fine article

in the ACLU News (June-July, 1981).

Please accept our best regards.

Talat S. Halman

Ambassador for Cultural Affairs

Permanent Mission of Turkey to the

United States

Hilary Crosby

Charges "Police Bureau Ineffective"

The ACLU's call for the incorpora-

tion of civilian investigators in the police

department was echoed by a diverse

composition of interests such as the

~NAACP, Coalition for Human Rights,

the Public Defender's Office, and the

San Francisco Bar Association. Local

citizens who had personally experienced

brutal treatment from the police also

testified about their experience.

Ineffective IAB

Most of the testimony focused on the

ineffectiveness of the [AB-the official

body currently responsible for the in-

~ vestigation of complaints about police

harassment. The IAB has been accused

of mishandling complaints filed in its

office and neglecting to forward them to

the Police Commission. Although they

would not constitute a "final" Civilian

Reivew Board, the civilian investigators

would be employed by the Police De-

partment to ensure that complaints reach

the Police Commission for arbitration.

Many concluded that the police are

simply not able to objectively review

other police actions. As San Francisco -

attorney Vincent Hallinan succinctly

stated, "Going to police officers to in-

vestigate other police officers isan exer- |

cise in futility."

Opposition to civilian investigators

came primarily from police quarters.

objection of the Chief of Police to hire

one civilian investigator to perform

duties that would be spelled out by the

Commission-at some later date.

ACLU-NC staff counsel Amitai

Schwartz said that this proposal fails to

address the real problems. "It is incon-

ceivable that anyone can believe that

one civilian will be capable of cleaning

up the present system which has proved

to be inefficient, expensive and sloppy,"

he said. S

- Schwartz added that the ACLU views

this action by the Commission as a

"non-decision" which makes affirma-

tive steps by the Board of Supervisors

critical.

ACLU Letter

In an effort to spur action by the

Supervisors, the ACLU-NC senta letter

to all San Francisco members and 15,000

other residents in San Francisco urging

them to "help stop police brutality in

San Francisco" by supporting the estab-

lishment of the Office of Citizens

Complaints.

In the letter, Exccuuve Director

Dorothy Ehrlich wrote that the prop-

osal for civilian investigators into police

misconduct "has won overwhelming support

in the city's minority communities, where

the problem is most deeply felt and has

won strong support from neighborhood

groups and most public officials."

"The record of the IAB is clearly

scandalous -- especially in San Fran-

cisco where we are justly proud of our

Police brutality

in San Francisco.

Now, there's a way to stop it...

Chief Cornelius Murphy, while ac-

knowledging the need for some minor

reforms in the operation of the IAB,

claimed that he had "seen nothing" that

warranted-a radical reorganization of

police investigative procedure.

President of the Police Officers As-

sociation Robert Barry vehemently de-

clared that police credibility remains un-

scathed. He said that the current

proposals for civilian investigators would

further intimidate officers on duty and

serve to "tie police officers' hands more.

so criminal attorneys can get criminals

back out on the street."

The police were not unanimous in

their opposition to civilian review, how-

ever. Rodney Williams, speaking for

Officers for Justice, a predominantly

black patrolman's organization, told

the committee, "Asa professional police

officer I have nothing to fear from pro-

fessional investigators."

Following the public hearings, the

Police Commission voted 3-2 over the

long tradition of sensitivity to individ-

ual rights," Ehrlich wrote.

Ehrlich urged that all residents con-

tact Mayor Dianne Feinstein and Super-

visor John Molinari to express their

strong support for civilian investigators

in an Office of Citizens Complaints.

She warns that the Police Officer's

Association has tried to flood the Mayor

and Supervisors with calls against the

Office of Citizens Complaints, and asks,

"Don't let your public official believe

that the Police Officer's Association

speaks for the public."

The letter, which was financed by the

San Francisco Chapter of the ACLU,

has already drawn numerous responses

from concerned citizens who have-con-

tacted the Supervisors in support of civ-

ilian investigators.

The issue is still pending before the

Board of Supervisors and members are

encouraged to continue to voice their

support of the Office of Citizens Com-

plaints to the Mayor and Board Presi-

dent.

Elaine Elinson, Editor

issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in January- Tehran: 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

. Drucilla Ramey, Chairperson Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director

Marcia Gallo,

ACLU NEWS (USPS 018-040)

1663 Mission St., 4th floor, San Francisco, California 941 03. (41 5) 621-2488

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

and 50 cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publication, Civil Liberties.

Chapter Page g

aclu news

aug-sept 1981

Tearful Homecoming for Children Kidnapped by USS.

by Jennifer Werner :

Two ie. io were kidnapped,

spirited away to another state and hid-

den under the inviolable cover of the

U.S. Marshal's Federal Witness Protec-

tion Program for almost two years,

were reunited with their father as a

result of an ACLU lawsuit.

On June 3, after months of mysterious

phone calls, delay tactics and legal man-

euvers by the government, the children

were surrendered upon a few hours'

notice in the San Francisco office of

ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys Eph-

raim Margolin and Andrea Biren.

"It was a very emotional reunion. The

father and children embraced and cried.

`Melissa Salmeron brought her father a (c)

flower," said Margolin.

The children, Bobby Salmeron, 12,

and Melissa Ann Salmeron, 11, were

kidnapped by the U.S. Marshal's Serv-

ice August 24, 1979, while playing in

their grandmother's yard in Richmond.

"Not one letter, note, telephone call,

or message came through from the chil-

dren in the year and a half following

their abduction," Margolin said.

In January, 1980, Margolin and Biren

filed a petition for a writ of habeus cor-

pus in U.S. District Court in San Fran-

cisco, claiming that the children were

denied their inherent right to maintaina

natural parent-child relationship, their

First Amendment rights to associate

_ with their father and their Fifth Amend-

ment rights to liberty and family life.

The petition claimed: the children

should be returned to their father Robert

Salmeron, a 32-year-old oil refinery em-

ployee, who had been granted legal and

physical custody of them by the Contra _

Costa Superior Court. .

The ACLU petition was filed against

the U.S. Marshal's Service because it

was suspected that the children were

with their mother and her boyfriend,

Mikel Jennings. In est 1979, Jen-

nings agreed to testify for the U.S. gov-

ernment in the Hell's Angels RICO drug

and racketeering trial in San Francisco

in exchange for entrance into the U.S.

Marshal's Witness Protection Program.

The Federal Witness Protection Pro-

gram, started in 1970 under the Organ-

ized Crime Control Act, provides new

identities to those who might be endan-

gered if they turn state's witness.

By late August, 1979, Susan Salmeron,

Mikel Jennings and the Salmeron chil-

dren were in the custody of the U.S.

Marshal and out of the state.

It wasn't until April 1980 that Special

Assistant U.S. Attorney Billie Rosen

confirmed that the children were par-

ticipants in the Federal Witness Pro-

tection Program. Until then Salmeron

worked with eyewitnesses to the kidnap-

ping and the Contra Costa District At-

torney in an attempt to learn what had

happened to the children and where

they were.

"There were several levels of impro-

priety in this case," Margolin said. "The

first was the kidnapping. If the kidnap-

ping was a mistake, then there was a

failure to investigate when the kidnap-

_ ping was brought to the attention of the

U.S. Attorney's Office. And finally,

there was a failure to respond and to do

anything about these mistakes or inten-

tional wrongs for a year and a half,

Margolin said.

In February, U.S. District Court Judge

Samuel Conti removed the case, Sal-

meron v. Gover, to the U.S. District

Court in Washington, D.C. when he

determined the children were not pone

held in his jurisdiction.

When he transferred the case to Wash-

ington, D.C., Judge Conti noted that it

would be unfair to force petitioners to

go from jurisdiction to jurisdiction until

they hit upon the district where the chil-

dren were being held.

"The government next showed cal-

lousness beyond cavil," said Margolin.

Robert Salmeron of Richmond fought hard fo get his children back from the

U.S. Marshals.

"A Deputy U.S. Attorney in Washing-

ton, D.C. filed a hypertechnical motion

to dismiss on the grounds the case was

brought in the wrong forum."

In her opposition to the motion,

Biren contended the government was

playing a "shell game" with the children.

"Then a so-called U.S.Attorney called -

to make a deal-`I will return the child-

ren if there will be no money coming out

of the hide of the United States for what

it has done.' It was unconscionable,"

Margolin said. .

The terms of the settlement were that

the children would be returned to their

father on the condition the father waive

any rights he may have in a civil dam-

ages suit or a civil rights action against

those responsible for the kidnapping.

"Of course we consented to the extor-

tionate agreement because getting the

children back was the most important.

However, it is questionable whether con-

sent is valid as it was clearly obtained

under duress, and there is no way in

School Bus Driver Wins Job Back

A school bus driver who was fired by

the Carmel Unified School District be-

cause he refused to drive after certain

hours on religious grounds has been re-

instated in his job and awarded $43,000

in back pay by U.S. District Court

~ Judge William Orrick as a result of an

ACLU-NC lawsuit.

Charles Pina, a Seventh Day Advent-

ist, was employed as a school bus driver

for the Carmel Unified School District

from 1967 until November, 1974. Be-

_ cause of his religious beliefs, he could

not work on the sabbath observed by

Seventh Day Adventists which is cele-

brated from Friday at sunset until Sat-

urday at sunset.

During the school year there are sev-

eral Fridays in which the normal school

bus route extends after sundown. For

several years, Pina had made arrange-

ments with his supervisor for a substi-

tute driver to be employed on those

- occasions.

However, in November of 1974, his

supervisor refused to make such ar-

rangements and instead required that

Pina drive the route or resign. Rather

than offend his religious beliefs, Pina

resigned-and then filed a charge of dis-

crimination with the Equal Employ-

ment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act

makes it unlawful for an employer to

SCHOOL BUS

discriminate a BAltRt anemployee on the

basis of his or her religion, and requires

that an employer, short of "undue hard-

ship," make "reasonable accommoda-

tions" to the religious needs of its em-

ployees.

In 1978, the EEOC issued its notice of

right to sue under Title VII and Pina

looked to the Monterey Chapter of the

ACLU for legal assistance.

According to ACLU staff attorney

Amitai Schwartz, "The Monterey Chap-

ter, and particularly attorney Francis

Heisler, recognized this complaint as a

clear and blatant violation of the Civil

Rights Act and helped Pina begin legal

proceedings."

The bulk of the litigation, including a

lengthy trial in federal court, was

handled by ACLU-NC cooperating at-

torney Nicholas B. Waranoff of the San

Francisco law firm Jacobs, Sills and

Coblentz.

After hearing evidence from Pina and

from the Carmel Unified School Dis-

trict, Judge Orrick ruled on June 17 that

Pina had proved three necessary require-

ments under the Civil Rights Act: that

__ he held a bona fide religious belief, that

his employer had notice of his religious

which consent can be given for minors,"

Margolin said.

Margolin said that there are possible

grounds to declare the whole Federal

Witness Protection Program unconsti-

tutional.

"Congress cannot authorize kidnap-

ping without notice to the parent, with-

out judicial review of the procedures

_. used, without some clear responsibility

/ In-anyone to be accountable for their .

actions or responsive to questions," he

added.

"The result in this case, via my affi-

davit, is being used by the ACLU in

- similar cases in Missouriand New York

to show judges that, despite everything

the government says to the contrary, the

Marshals and the U.S. Attorney work-

ing together have the power to return

children," Margolin said.

"The law should not suffer a situation

in which there is governmental power to

abduct children but no governmental

power to return them," he concluded.

beliefs, and that he was discharged for

refusing to comply with an employment

requirement because it was contrary to

his religious beliefs.

Judge Orrick stated, "[The Carmel

Unified School District] violated the

law by failing to reasonably accommo-

_ date the plaintiff's religious observance

and practice, which they could have

done without undue hardship."

He ordered that Pina "be reinstated

to his former position with the same

seniority rights he would have enjoyed

had he never been discharged."

In addition, Pina was awarded back

_ pay of $43,000 as well as attorney's fees

~ of $25,000 for the ACLU.

Help Wanted

EXPERIENCED VOLUNTEER

needed to reorganize the ACLU-NC

subject files. The subject files are the

backbone of our work and are used

not only by ACLU staff but by law-

yers, students and researchers from

all over the Bay Area. Right now they

are badly in need of attention. If you

are interested, call Louise Billotte at

(415) 621-2493.

aclu news.

aug-sept 1981.

Legal Department Bolstered by Interns...

by Doug Warner

Three law students from Bay Area

law schools have joined the ACLU-NC

Foundation's legal staff as summer in-

terns. The students work under the

supervision of ACLU-NC staff attorneys.

Becky Ceniceros, recipient of the Sarah -

Bard Field Internship, is a third year

_law student at Boalt Hall. She received a

degree in psychology from U.C. Davis,

and did research in the State Depart-

~ment of Social Services on the impact of

Proposition 13 before beginning law

school. A native of Tracy, California,

Ceniceros has also worked asa law clerk

at the Center for:Independent Living

and in the legal department of the local.

carpenters' union.

This summer, Ceniceros is working |

ona variety of ACLU cases. Under the

_ supervision of ACLU staff attorneys

she prepared a memo for the City At-

torney's office on the current proposal

to hire civilian investigators to handle

complaints of police misconduct; re-

searched the law regarding tort claims

for damages in the ACLU's pending

strip search cases; and has updated re-

search for the re-argument before the

Supreme Court of DeLancie v. Mac Don-

ald, challenging unconstitutional jail

surveillance.

Tammy Edmonson, recipient of the

Ralph Atkinson Internship, is a third

year student at Hastings College of

_Law. A San Francisco native, she grad- |

uated from S.F. State in 1979 with a

degree in political science. Edmonson's

life-long interest in civil liberties was

demonstrated as a junior high school

student. After her class studied the his-

tory of the Soviet Union, Edmonson

answered an exam question-"We

should be proud to be Americans be-

cause we have so many freedoms."-as

"False." Her answer was graded as in-

correct, Edmonson complained, and

she was required to write an essay

explaining why the answer should be

false. (Her grade was changed as a

result)

~ Edmonson has oe wanted to work

for the ACLU, and decided to become a

lawyer after she attended the Ruchell

Magee trial (arising out of the Marin

Civic Center shootout) and was subjected |

to intrusive searches and other indig-

nities as a spectator.

Currently, Edmonson is working on

the ACLU suit against the Hilltop Mall,

which seeks to insure First Amendment

rights to petition, leaflet, and solicit

funds at shopping centers.

John Crew, recipient of the Hastings

ACLU Internship, is also a third year

student at Hastings. A native of south-

ern California, Crew received a degree

in social policy from Northwestern Uni-

versity. As an undergraduate, Crew

worked at the Illinois ACLU affiliate,

and completed an anthropological study

of the ACLU. His experience at the IIli-

nois affiliate motivated him to enterlaw

school. Last summer, Crew worked for -

Alan Westin, former editor of the na-

tional ACLU publication Civil Liber-

ties Review, at the Educational Fund

for Human Rights in New York. There,

Crew helped organize a clearinghouse

of employees' rights litigation from

around the country.

This summer, Crew is working on the

ACLU suit against the Sacramento

police arising out of illegal police harass-

ment and surveillance of a march against

racism last year.

... Student Volunteers Take on Many T asks

The ACLU-NC has had the help of

eight student interns this summer in

addition to the three legal interns. Stu-

dents with a wide variety of educational

-backgrounds-public administration,

Photo: courtesy JACL

journalism, social work, etc.-can often

find an internship at the ACLU which

will both enhance their studies and pro-

vide invaluable assistance to the ACLU

Tule Lake, Manzanar, Gila River

staff. Students who are interested in

work-study, internship for academic

credit, or volunteering should contact

Marcia Gallo at the ACLU-NC office.

This summer, students have come

from all over the country to work ona

variety of ACLU-NC projects. Readers

. will note that several interns have writ-

ten stories for this issue of the ACLU

News.

Hearings for Redress

former Japanese-American internees at

these and ten other "relocation" centers testified before the Commission on War-

_ time Relocation and Internment of Civilians in San Francisco on August 11, 12 and

13. Berkeley attorney Wayne Collins, son of ACLU attorney Wayne Collins who

argued Korematsu before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1943, testified on behalf of the

ACLU-NC before the Congressional appointed Commission.

Collins drew wide applause from the audience of 500 when he spoke of the case

on behalf of the "renunciants," Japanese-Americans who were forced to renounce

their American citizenship while interned in the camps. Collins also told the little

known history of the Peruvian Japanese who were forcibly brought to this country

by the U.S. government as part of a plan to trade them for American POW's in

Japan. When the trade fell through the U.S. attempted to deport the Peruvians on

the grounds that they had "entered the country illegally as they had no papers."

Tina Ash, political science major at

San Francisco State, works on the Com-

plaint Desk advising and referring call-

ers seeking legal advice.

Matthew Connor, comparative liter-

ature senior at Dartmouth College, is

working with the Field Program com- |

piling voting records of the northern

California legislators on pro-choice

issues.

Thomas Cote, political philosophy

major from Michigan State University,

is working in the Membership Depart-

ment classifying new members and writ-

ing a history of the past membership

drives.

Leslie Norton, a sophomore in com-

parative literature at Yale University, is

working with the Field Program cata-

loguing information on pro-choice is-

sues to be distributed to ACLU-NC

chapters and other organizations. _

Alice O'Driscoll, a freshman in jour-

nalism at Humboldt State University, is

working in the Public Information De-

partment on the clipping files and the

ACLU News.

Michael Ungar, a senior in political

science at Reed College, is spending his

second summer as a volunteer in the

ACLU Public Information Department

covering events for the ACLU News

and compiling background information

on state and national legislation.

Douglas Warner, a third year law stu-

dent at Boalt Hall and a former legal

intern at the ACLU, is working with the

Executive Director updating and revis-

ing the ACLU-NC policy Guide.

Jennifer Werner, a senior in journal-

- ism at San Francisco State University,

is in the Public Information Depart-

ment preparing press packets on the

Medi-Cal abortion funding suit and isa

contributor to the ACLU News.

In addition to their specific projects,

all of the students have provided tre-

mendous help in moving and settling

_ the ACLU-NC into our new office space.

Research for this article was done by

Thomas Cote.

Law Internships

The student internships-funded

by work-study agreements and spe-

cial ACLU endowments-are awarded

to law students with special interests.

_ in legal work relating to civil liberties.

The Hastings ACLU Internship is

made possible by a special endow-

_ment which provides a stipend for a

Hastings Collge law student to spend

the summer working for the ACLU- (c)

NC. The Sarah Bard Field Internship

was named in honor of the long-time

civil libertarian and poet, who was

Honorary Chair. of the ACLU-NC

Board during the 0x00B030's. Field was a

leading advocate of women's rights |

and sufferage in the early part of the

~ century. The Ralph Atkinson Intern-

ship is named for the late chairperson

of the ACLU-NC Board from Monte-

rey who devoted much of his life to

civil liberties work.

Where There's a Will...

The defense of civil liberties is a

never-ending task. No one genera- |

tion can secure liberty to all persons

for all times. But each generation

owes the next all the assistance it can

give.

A bequest to the ACLU in your

will is the finest possible way to

express your concern that constitu-

tional rights be protected for future

generations.

Bequests to the ACLU Founda-

tion of Northern California are tax-

exempt and are very simple to add to

an already existing will.

For information on how to makea

bequest to the ACLU Foundation of

Northern California, call or write

Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Direc-

tor, ACLU Foundation, 1663 Mis-

Sion St., San Francisco, 94103.

There's a Way

-Do you contribute to the United

Way? If you wish, your contribution

can be earmarked to support the

ACLU's work on behalf of civil lib-

erties.

All you have to do is ask for a

United Way Donor Option Plan form

which is available to all donors. List

the ACLU Foundation of Northern

California on this form to receive .

your donation.

United Way initiated the donor

option plan several years ago for

individuals who wish to contribute to

particular non-profit agencies.

Personal Patients' Records Seized

by Michael Ungar

A patient whose personal medical rec-

ords were confiscated by a state investi-

gator during the investigation of her

psychiatrist for Medi-Cal fraud is being

supported in her suit against the state by

ACLU-NC. An amicus brief filed by the

" ACLU-NC and the Northern California

Psychiatric Society argues that the pa-

tient's constitutional right to privacy

was violated by the search.

Although the California courts have

recognized many substantive and pro-

cedural safeguards of confidential rec-

ords when the state has sought to obtain -

them without the use of a search war-

rant, no state court has yet determined

how those safeguards are applied when.

Dr. Yates included files containing pa-

tients' biographical information as well

as general patient diagnoses. Dr. Yates

asserted that the confiscated medical

records included "data of a particularly

private nature which most patients would

prefer to keep confidential."

A former patient of Dr. Yates, ficti-

tiously named Jane Doe in order to pro-

tect her privacy, claimed that her rights

under the California Constitution were

violated by the state's seizure of the

_ medical records and filed suit in Ala- -

meda County Superior Court in an

ber, 1979 =

The ACLU amicus brief, filed in the

Court of Appeal in April by staff coun-

sel Amitai Schwartz and cooperating

attorney Neil Horton argues that the

a search warrant is employed in the

seizure of privileged psychiatric records.

In July 1979, a warrant was obtained

by Bruce Naylor, an investigator for the

Department of Justice, to search the

entire office and confiscate all profes-

sional documents of a psychiatrist, Dr.

James Yates, suspected of fraudulent

billing practices. -

The materials taken from the office of

by Alice O'Driscoll

A petition to ban women from super-

visory jobs at a California Youth Au-

thority facility is being challenged by

the ACLU and Equal Rights Advo-

cates, Inc. as sex-discriminatory.

In a 1980 habeas corpus proceeding,

the San Joaquin Superior Court ordered

the removal of female correctional offi-

cers from positions involving the super-

vision of male wards in the living areas

of the Karl Holton School in Stockton,

an institution of the California Depart-

ment of Youth Authority.

The superior court found that employ-

ment of female guards in the living areas

(including showers, dressing and toilet

areas) violated the boys' right to privacy.

However, an amicus brief prepared

by ACLU-NC staff attorney Margaret

Crosby and Equal Rights Advocates

staff attorney Donna Hitchens, claims

that the presence of female correctional

- officers in the living areas of the school

does not violate the privacy of the male

wards. Moreover, they argue that fed-

eral and state discrimination law re-

quire that female guards continue to be

assigned to the central observation post .

and that accommodations be made to

protect the male wards' right to privacy.

The amicus brief, written on behalf of

Women in Criminal Justice-North, and

the Association of Black Correctional

_ majority of the wards"

plaintiffs right to privacy as defined by

Article I, Section | of. the California

Constitution was violated by the state

investigator.

According to a 1970 California Su-

preme Court ruling, the disclosure of

confidential psychotherapeutic com-

munications invades a patient's consti-

tutional rights. Disclosure of such con-

` fidential information can be required

`Women Guards Sue over Job Discrimination

Workers, requests the Court of Appeal

to reverse the lower court ruling, both

- because it does not allege violation of

constitutionally protected privacy rights

and because the relief requested would

unlawfully discriminate against women

correctional personnel.

According to Hitchens, the petition' S

emphasis is not on protecting the in-

mates' privacy from intrusion, but in-

stead focuses on the sex of the intruder.

However, Hitchens said, "If our so-

ciety has a clearly discernible standard

with respect to these intimate bodily

functions, it is that they are not usually

performed in the presence of observers

of either sex.

"There are many problems inherent

in the judiciary's crystallizing its own

conception of social mores into constitu-

tional law," she added.

The ACLU/ERA brief states that

"the record does not indicate even thata

favor banish-

ment of the female correctional staff.

After the superior court's decision,

the Youth Authority offered to install

screens in the living areas of the facility

to increase the wards' privacy, but the

court refused to modify its order.

In an almost identical case in New

York, Forts v. Ward, 1980, the Court of

Appeals found the district court had es-

tablished that reasonable accommoda-

tions could protect both the privacy

only to fulfilla compelling state interest,

and then only in a manner narrowly

drawn to fulfill that interest.

The California Legislature has also

affirmed that the need for confidential-

ity in the successful treatment of a pa-

tient has precedence above any state

_ Interest. The Evidence Code, enacted in

1965, extended statutory privilege to the

psychiatrist-patient dialogue.

The ACLU contends that the court

which issued the search warrant failed

to adhere to the psychiatrist-patient

privilege as recognized by both the state

high court and the Legislature. The

lower court did not ascertain whether

the privilege was waived by the patient

whose files were taken nor did it deter-

mine whether statutory exception ap-

plied; instead, the court gave a license to

the state to seize whatever it wanted,

regardless of the patient's right to privacy.

Furthermore, the ACLU claims the

warrant was overbroad and violated -

Article I, Section 13 of the state consti-

tution. In this instance, "probable cause"

did not extend to the confidential rec-

ords of Dr. Yates. The investigator did

not confine his search to the records "

necessary for the investigation of the

psychiatrist's alleged improper billing

- procedures, such as appointment books,

canceled checks, income statements, and

check registrars. The exposure of life

histories and private thoughts of Dr.

Yates' patients went far beyond the

state's immediate interest.

Cooperating'attorney Neil Horton as-

serts, "There is every reason to expect

that the problem posed in this case-the

use of a search warrant to seize priv-

ileged records in the hands of third

_ party witnesses-will recur with in-

creased regularity as law enforcement

officers test the outer reaches of Zurcher

v. Stanford Daily.

In that case, the Palo Alto police

raided the offices of the Stanford Daily

in search of evidence concerning stu-

dent disorders. In 1978, the U.S. Su-

_ preme Court upheld that search-under-

taken with a warrant-providing a green

light for police to conduct searches for

sensitive information held by persons

who are not themselves criminal suspects.

Horton said that should the court -

rule in favor of the plaintiff, "its impact

would not only encompass psychiatrists'

records, but those of doctors and lawyers

. and others in possession of consti-

tutionally protected information."

`

rights of female inmates and the employ-

ment rights of male personnel.

According to a statement prepared by

the California Youth Authority on the

impact of the lower court order, women

in three employment classifications of

the Youth Authority would be directly

and adversely affected. In addition, the

Youth Authority report noted, female

employees seeking higher classifications

would be at a disadvantage to appli-

cants who had more experience in super-

vising the wards' living areas. -

The report concluded the court order

will "effectively. block the entrance of

females into almost 40% of the positions

available in this department," and that

females applying for lower classifica-

tions will also be at a disadvantage to

their male counterparts, who could later

be assigned to a wider variety of duties

within the Youth Authority.

aclu news

aug-sept 1981

Alameda DA Barred

from Searching

| Subscribers List

The privacy rights of 5000 subscribers

to The Republican newspaper have been

protected by a Court of Appeal decision

in July agreeing with ACLU-NC amicus |

arguments.

The unanimous decision, | in the case

_ of Vail v. Superior Court, assured that

the names and addresses of the sub-

scribers to the Alameda based inde-

pendent newspaper would not be dis-

closed to the Alameda County District

Attorney who is pursuing a consumer

fraud case against the publisher of the

newspaper, vacating a lower court order

for disclosure.

The ACLU-NC amicus brief, pre-

`pared by cooperating attorneys Mary

McEachron and Stephen Brick, both of

the San Francisco law firm of Orrick,

Herrington and Sutcliffe, argued that

such disclosure would be in violation of

the state and federal guarantees of pri-

vacy and would undermine the principle

of protected freedom of association.

The Court of Appeal decision, au-

thored by Presiding Justice John T.

Racanelli, asserted, "The right of associ-

ational privacy is firmly embedded with-

in the framework of protected constitu-

tional activities presumptively immune

from governmental interference."

Though such a right is not absolute,

Racanelli wrote, "the state's burden of

demonstrating justification for com-

pelled disclosure is a particularly heavy

one," and was not met in this case.

The opinion also noted that "Coinci-

dent with the claimed associational in-

terest, such nonlitigant subscribers also

enjoy a constitutionally protected right

to receive and read written publications

of their own choosing as well as to the

privacy of their personal libraries."

Tyete

. + Grants un.

+ +; to trade the ou. |

-a Oakland resident who .

the .cw.ican League in stolen bases

with the A's in 1974 and 1976.

" us off "the

va explained, "He

us In some areas, like bases-

-caling, but he just didn't get on

enough to compensate for areas in

which he hurt us.

"This is a good time to make a

change. Why wait till September? We

need more offense. Martin can drive

in some runs for you. He also

you better defense `because'

if North and Moffitt are not

claimed by other major league

teams for $1, they will continue to

draw salaries from the Giants.

Vion $210,000 contract runs out

" lowing the 1982 seasc Lg S stron

Wes terminates this By wasn't an especia

pop. vith his teammates, 4

lot of otu.. wiants didn't seem both-

ered by his departure. "No comment"

was the most common reaction when

players were asked about the events

of the day.

North wore out his wo

tting only .221 in 46 games, by

custing the Giants three games with

poor fielding and by exhibiting an

abrasive attitude that left Robinson

fearful of benching the moody veter-

abe "I'm pot surprised," Jack Clark - -

The manager seriously consid- aig. "They'd been trying to trade

ered benching North, but was wary gilly. We've got to be better off with

of possible repercussions and the 4 guy in the lineup who can hit 20

morale effect a demoted North pomers and drive in 80 runs.'

might have on the club. Clark was referring to the 23

The minuses simply didn't out: homers and 73 RBI posted by Martir

ane. cost us two games With the Chicago Cubs last ye ~

Martin, batting .24*

and one in Atlanta," Robin-

"The ball he misjudged welcomes the onr

"Med us. If we had temporary. -

`4 have been - groom`

"t after pie

In vacating the superior court order

for disclosure, Racanelli sited that there

was no issue raised to justify "an other-

wise limitless invasion of the privacy

and other implicated rights of a host of

anonymous college students who may

have elected to receive and read The

Republican."

Cooperating attorney Stephen Brick

told the ACLU News, "It is most signifi-

cant that the court reaffirmed the asso-

ciational right of privacy established (c)

in the federal courts.

"In addition, the opinion recognizes

_ that the right of privacy extends to what

one chooses to read-this has not pre-

viously been directly articulated by the

_ courts," Brick said.

aclu news

aug-sept 1981

- Sacramento Police Harass Anti- Racist Demonstrators -

Continued from p. 6

of the police photographs and records

of the event, plus damages.

The plaintiffs are represented by

ACLU staff attorney Alan Schlosser

and Sacramento ACLU cooperating

attorney Mark Merin. Plaintiffs include

INCAR and several of its members, a

by-stander who wanted to join the march

but was prohibited, and Clifford Ander-

son, a taxpayer, who is chairperson of

`the ACLU's Sacramento chapter.

. According to the ACLU suit, an at-

mosphere of criminality and menace

was cast over the INCAR march at the

very outset by the police requirement

that each marcher be subject to a metal

detector search before the march began.

The prospective marchers were forced

to enter a roped off area of Southside

Park, and line up for over an hour as the

police passed a metel detector over the

body of each marcher. If the metal de-

tector was triggered, the marcher was

subject toa pat-down frisk. In addition,

each marcher was photographed by

police as they went through this search

procedure.

According to the ACLU complaint,

police stationed on vans, rooftops, and

in the streets photographed and video-

taped the march and a number of spec-

tators. Police officers surrounded the

march and physically barred spectators

form joining the totally peaceful gath-

ering.

"The price of participating in the

march was a high one--being searched

in public as a criminal, having to

undergo the humiliation of lining up to

be searched and photographed by the

police, and the fear of having a police

record just for going on a march. And

then, adding insult to injury, the city

sent the victims a bill for `services

rendered,' " said attorney Schlosser.

~ The ACLU contends that police con- -

duct created the impression with spec-

tators that INCAR might actually

engage in illegal activity-when INCAR's

actual purpose was to communicate

their views to the community and gain

support for the organization.

Schlosser added, "One would be

hard-pressed to devise a more effective

tactic for interfering with and discourag-

ing the exercise of First Amendment

rights of free speech and freedom of

association."

The suit seeks a preliminary injunc-

tion which would prohibit the police

. from engaging in similar types of harass-

ment of marchers. The suit also seeks to

prohibit the police from using or dis-

seminating any photographs and video-

tapes taken at the march, and to have all

police records erased of any references

to individuals participating in or ob-

serving the march.

On the issue of the bill for police

services, the ACLU contends that such

Legal Services Still Under the Rea- -gun

by David Sweet

Though the Senate and House have

voted to extend the life of the Legal

Services Corporation, President Reagan

is still expected to abolish it with an

executive veto. The 7-year-old Legal

Services Corporation (LSC), which dis-

penses federal funds for legal aid for the

poor, has been a subject of controversy

since Reagan proposed to slash its bud-

get to zero last March.

In a show of unprecedented unanim- .

ity, the nation's legal establishment ral-

lied to save the LSC. Before the House

voted on the LSC last June, the New

York Lawyers Committee to Preserve

Legal Services collected 3,000 signa-

tures and submitted a 100-page "brief"

to Congress opposing Reagan's pro-

posal. Also that month 578 California

state and federal judges, representing

almost half the California judiciary, fol-

lowed suit.

Failing to capture the two-thirds ma- _

jority needed to override a Reagan veto,

the House voted 245-137 to keep the

LSC going for two years. The House

presented to the Senate a watered-down

-_ version of the LSC, probably to soften

the Administration. It voted to prohibit

LSC lawyers from filing class action

`suits; to ban LSC lobbying; and to pro-

hibit LSC from engaging in abortion

and school busing litigation and defend-

ing undocumented aliens. The most

heated debate concerned the legal rights

of homosexuals. The House voted 281-

124 forbidding the LSC "to promote,

defend, or protect homosexuality."

During the last week of July, when

the House and Senate approved Rea-

gan's $35.2 million budget cut, the House

provided no funds for the LSC under

the budget-cutting package, but adopted

a separate measure that would provide

$482 million for the next two. years.

. Pending in the Senate is a bill authoriz-

ing $300 million for the next three years.

The LSC grew out of the Legal Serv-

ices program initiated by the Office of

Economic Opportunity in 1965 in re-

sponse to the heavy caseloads volunteer

attorneys of the private bar could not

handle for the poor. Formally estab-

lished in 1974, the LSC now funds 320

legal service programs and maintains

1200 neighborhood offices throughout

the country. These programs service |.2

million people living below the poverty

line in cases ranging from housing and

consumer disputes to welfare problems

and divorce proceedings. It employs ap-

proximately 5,000 lawyers, 2,500 legal

workers and thousands of clerical

workers.

Reagan's opposition to the LSC dates

back to his days as Govenor of Cali-

fornia. The Administration has sug-

gested that legal aid for the poor should

be met by the states with the social serv-

ice grants it proposes to give them.

However, many social welfare programs,

having lost direct funding, will be com-

peting for a from these block

grants.

In San Francisco nad Alameda Coun-

ties, close to 50,000 clients were repre-

sented by the LSC last year. Eva Jeffer-

son Paterson, Vice Chair of the ACLU-

NC and Assistant Director of the Law-

yers Committee on Urban Affairs, has

heard that in anticipation of Reagan's

veto, legal services groups in the Bay

Area have placed a moratorium on new

clients.

Voicing skepticism over Reagan's sup-

port of block grants, Paterson stated,

"You can't expect the private bar to fly

in like Superman. It's already over-

worked as it is."

Sacramento police used a heavy escort and intimidating surveillance to prevent

bystanders from joining a march against racism.

charges are never warranted in relation

to First Amendment activities and that

the City of Sacramento should be pro-

_ hibited from attempting to collect the

bill.

The suit also as both punitive and

compensatory damages.

Firm Loses Multi-Million $ Libel

Bid Against Campaigners.

A development corporation's claim

that it had been defamed by citizens

- who had campaigned throughthe media -

and the ballot box against the company's

construction plans was rejected by the -

California Supreme Court in June.

~ The court held that the campaigners'

_ remarks were political opinion protected (c)

by the First Amendment and could not

- therefore be libelous.

The ACLU entered an amicus brief,

written by ACLU-NC cooperating at

torney Stephen Bomse of the San Fran-

cisco law firm of Heller, Ehrman, White

and McAuliffe, in support of the defen-

dants in the joint cases, Harris and

Ruden v. Superior Court and Okun v.

Superior Court.

"The decision, though a limited one,

was a bright spot ina frightening climate

of the use of libel suits as a political

weapon to chill political expression,"

said ACLU-NC Executive Director Dor-

_othy Ehrlich.

Ehrlich was referring to the growing

use of libel suits by large corporations

and police and government officials to

silence political opponents. She cited

the current suit against the NAACP by

the San Francisco Police Officers Asso-

ciation for $50 million after the civil

rights group protested police brutality

at a press conference and five libel ac-

tions stemming from political action in

the Santa Cruz area as examples of this

menacing practice.

The high court's decision in Harris

and Ruden v. Superior Court and Okun

v. Superior Court thwarted an effort by

Maple Properties, a southern California

development company, to sue the Presi-

dent of the League of Women Voters

and 1000 other Beverly Hills residents

who campaigned to prevent the com-

pany's acquisition of municipal land for

the construction of private condomin-

iums.

. The case began i in 1978 when the Bev-

erly Hills City Council agreed to give to

Maple Properties a parcel of city-owned

land adjoining the company's construc-

tion site in a land exchange.

Because of citizen opposition to the

Council zoning ordinance allowing the

property company to develop condo-

miniums, a referendum was placed on

the ballot by the Council. Public opposi-

tion to the zoning ordinance was strong,

and it was defeated at the polls.

The company, after being denied ac-

cess to the public property by the elec-

torate, claimed that it had been defamed

by the opponents' campaign. They filed.

suit against the campaigners, seeking

damages for the loss of the construction

project, loss of reputation, and punitive

damages-totally over $60,000,000.

The company based its lawsuit on

statements made by the opponents in

letters to the newspapers and in other

_ campaign statements which questioned

the motives and self-interest of the devel-

opment corporation management and

certain Council members.

The ACLU-NC supported `the cam-

paigners' defense, because, according to

Ruth Holbrook

staff attorney Alan Schlosser, "The use

of libel suits to attack and inhibit per-

sons who take an active and outspoken

role in political campaigns is a growing

threat to freedom of speech and politi-

cal expression."

The ACLU brief argued that both the

federal and state constitutions protect

speech made to influence government

policy and that this protection is partic-

ularly important during election cam-

paigns.

The court dismissed almost every

count of libel against the activists and

reaffirmed "that the First Amendment

protects even sharp attacks on the char-

acter, motives or moral qualifications of

an individual who voluntarily injects

him or herself into a public contro-

versy..,.."

The Mecca However was some-

what disappointing in that it limited its

scope to the particulars of the case. As

attorney Bomse noted, "The court did

not break any new ground in the area of

libel and political expression.

"The message, nonetheless, to be de-

rived from this decision indicates that

the court will look very hard at whether

(political) speech is libelous or whether

it is a statement of opinion that is pro-

tected by the Constitution," Bomse

added.

aclu news

aug-sept 1 oP

ACLU Arguments at Supreme Court

_ by Alice O'Driscoll and Michael Ungar -

he Calkfcani Supreme Court sched-

uled special hearings in August to con-

sider three ACLU cases originally argued

last year. The Court's unusual summer

session was held to deal with a backlog

of cases created by the departure of Jus-

tice William Clark to the State Depart-

ment and the death of Justice Wiley

Manuel. With only five justices remain-

ing on the bench, the Court was unable

to reach a conclusive four-member ma-

jority in several decisions, including

three cases argued by the ACLU-NC in |

late 1980.

The ACLU-NC cases, ACLU v. Deuk-

mejian, DeLancie v. McDonald, and

Bailey v. Loggins (ACLU amicus), were

heard before the full court, including

the newly appointed justices Allen Bros:

sard and Otto Kaus.

State Secrets

In the first test of the state's Public

Records Act before the California Su-

preme Court, the ACLU is asking that

parts of California police intelligence

files be opened up for public review as a

check of intelligence-gathering activities

of the state Attorney General's Office

(ACLU v. Deukmejian).

Sacramento Superior Court Judge

Frances Newell Carr had_ previously

ruled that the ACLU could have access

to the files of the Law Enforcement In-

telligence Unit and the Interstate Organ-

ized Crime Index after personal iden-

tities and information from confidential

_ sources have been deleted.

At the August 3 hearing, ACLU-NC

staff attorney Amitai Schwartz told the

court that the Public Records Act "puts

the burden on the agency to prove infor-

mation must remain confidential."

Deputy Attorney General Anthony

Dicce countered that disclosure of intel-

ligence information was too restrictive

and potentially damaging to police in-

vestigations.

Justice Tobriner remarked that the

Superior Court was "trying to prevent

abuse" that might result if the Attorney

General's office were immune from re-

view of its intelligence-gathering activ-

ities.

Schwartz cited a report on terrorism

recently released by the Attorney Gen-

eral's Office as an example of the breadth

of activities that the agency was claim-

ing fell under its investigative jurisdic-

tion.

In the report, the Attorney Gener

held responsible "this state's unique

composition of various ethnic groups,

foreign nationals, and home-grown po-

litical extremists" for "a wide range of

illegal terrorist and extremist activities

such as murder, assault, extortion, and

civil disturbance." The report also noted

"a significant increase in the activities of

domestic extremist groups in the form

of rallies and demonstrations." (Empha-

sis added.- Ed.)

- Jail Bugs

On August 5, ACLU-NC staff coun-

sel Alan Schlosser argued that the San

Mateo County Sheriff's practice of cov-

ert electronic monitoring and recording

of conversations between prisoners await-

ing trial and their visitors as well as

between detainees themselves violates

the California Constitution's guarantee

' of privacy (DeLancie v. McDonald).

Schlosser asserted that the monitor-

ing of prisoners' conversations was not

instituted for security purposes but was

used to gather evidence against those

waiting to appear in court.

The implementation of electronic sur-

veillance-used to listen in on even the

most intimate discussions between de- |

tainees and their families-allowed pros-

ecutors "unbridled discretion," Schlos-

ser told the court. "Jailers can listen out

of boredom, curiosity or whim. The op-

eration of surveillance is, in essence, a

lawless system which adheres to no writ-

ten standards," Schlosser said. -

The unhindered practice of eavesdrop-

ping effectively denied any claim to pri-

vacy by presumptively innocent persons.

Justice Newman, referring to the fact

that regulations on monitoring in the

state prisons are more stringent than the

procedures governing conduct in the

county jail, declared, "Even convicted

felons have more privacy than pre-trial

detainees." :

San Mateo Deputy District Attorney

David Levy claimed that the jail surveil-

lance was recognized by lawas necessary

for reasons of security and that prison-

ers have no right to privacy. Detainees

lack grounds for challenging abuses in

the county's surveillance system, he

argued.

Chief Justice Rose Bird fired her own

salvo by asking Levy why a detainee

should not be allowed to demonstrate in

a trial that prison surveillance was not

maintained for security reasons but

rather to gather evidence against him or

to entertain the prison guards.

"What recourse does.a detainee have

Meanwhile, at the United States Supreme Court

pi

An MOWER.

Rese

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIL

PREGNANT. AS LONG and YOU ARE FOOR,

WWCENTIVE JUSTICE.

WHAT KIND OF

without any constitutional rights?" the

Chief Justice queried.

Censorship

On August 6, the ACLU argued as

amicus curiae in Bailey v. Loggins that

prison officials do not have the right to

censor the contents of a newspaper put

out by inmates.

The -case originated in 1978 ica

_ articles in the Soledad Star-News were

suppressed by the Associate SECU

tendent of Soledad Prison.

Michael Snedeker, attorney for for-

mer prison newspaper editor Artie Bai-

ley told the justices, "As agents of the

state, prison administrators have no

right to censor the paper except for rea-

- sons of prison security.

- Justice Richardson asked what the

_ difference was between a private corpo-

ration when it determines the contents

of a paper it publishes and when the

state, as publisher, exercises that same

power.

Snedeker responded, "The difference

between a private company and the

state is that the power of the state to

enforce its views has always been lim-

ited .. . this is the root of our govern-

ment."

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney

Zack Taylor argued that the Depart-

ment of Corrections' contention that

the taxpayers should not have to foot

the. bill for prisoners' writings served

only to distract the court from its con-

sideration of the fundamental First

- Amendment Issue.

Abortion Funds

Continued from p. 1

ductive Rights. CDRR, which was one

of a coalition of plaintiffs in the prior

cases, warned that the Legislature's ac-

tion would force poor women to return

to times past when abortion was the

leading cause of maternal deaths in this

country.

"Implementation of restrictions on

_. Medi-Cal coverage of abortion would

have a profound and disastrous effect

on the lives of the poor," Crosby added.

"Every day, more than 200 indigent teen-

age girls and women would be denied

safe and legal surgery fort termination of

unwanted pregnancies."

"The 1981 Budget Act restrictions are

patently unconstitutional. The Legisla-

ture was fully aware of the fact that the |

abortion funding restrictions violated

the California Constitution," Crosby

said.

"The principle to be dicated: in this

proceeding lies at the foundation of a

democracy: that no government official

is unrestrained by the constitution . . .

And the legislature of California is not

above the law," Crosby concluded.

Typewriters Needed

The Coalition Against the Death

Penalty is still looking for typewriters

for death row inmates. Anyone wish-

ing to donate a typewriter should

contact: Marlene De Lancie at (415)

621-2493.

ag Ge

8 aclunews -

aug-sept 1981

Guns reproductive freedom as "of

intrinsic importance to civil liberties"

and noting the current legislative mea-

sures designed to weaken or destroy

that freedom, the new Field Committee

unanimously chose.a pro-choice cam-

paign as its primary focus for the com-

ing year. The 1981 ACLU Conference,

scheduled for October 2, 3, and 4 will

launch the pro-choice campaign with

presentations by leading authorities on

reproductive rights and repressive legis-

lation as well as special "how to" work-

shops on developing grassroots cam-

_paigns (see conference ad this page).

The Field Committee also decided to

prepare for a future campaign on the

"National Security State" to deal with

issues such as the removal of restrictions

on the FBI and CIA, limitations on the

Freedom of Information Act and the

Senate subcommittee on Terrorism and

Subversion.

Peter Hagberg, Board representative

from the Berkeley-Albany-Kensington

Chapter, was elected as the interim

chairperson of the Field Committee,

which held its first meeting on June 27.

Thirteen of the 15 ACLU-NC chapters

were represented at the meeting.

~ Pro-Choice Task Force

The Pro-Choice Task Force, set up

by the Field Committee to implement

the campaign, is currently being chaired

by GayRights Chapter representative

Anne Jennings. The Task Force met on

July 23 to hear ACLU-NC staff attor-

| ney Margaret Crosby report on the cur-

rent status of reproductive rights in the

_ courtroom and in the legislature. Mt.

Diablo Chapter representatives Beverly

and David Bortin outlined organizing

methods used in their chapter to build

an ACLU pro-choice presence in their

community. The work of the Monterey

Chapter in structuring a county-wide

Reproductive Rights Coalition, reported

by Dick Criley, was highlighted as an

example of effective issue-based coali-

tion building.

At a second meeting on August 12,

Task Force members concentrated on

defining existing resources and develop-

ing local networks with the aim of co-

ordinating chapter action with broader,

affiliate-wide efforts. To that end, a

resolution was adopted that each Task

Force member recruit at least five acti-

_ vists from his or her chapter area to

attend the upcoming annual conference.

The next meeting of the Task Force

will be on September 15.

Right to Dissent Subcommittee

_ The Right to Dissent Subcommittee,

chaired by Sonoma County Chapter rep-

resentative J.R. Rubin, met on August 4

to discuss ways of informing and organ- ~

izing ACLU-NC members on the "Na-

tional Security State." The subcommit-

tee discussed the resurgence of McCar-

thyism-in the form of governmental

easing of post-Watergate restrictions on

intelligence agencies, attempts at resur-

recting HUAC-like inquisatorial com-

Committee Targets Pro-Choice Work calendar

mitiees, and new PSCCUINY measures

aimed at suppressing political expres-

sion and activity.

Rubin reported on the Sonoma Coun-

ty Chapter's efforts to have nine city and.

county councils adopt resolutions op-

posing the repeal of current safeguards

against FBI and CIA abuses.

Subcommittee members agreed to

use the ACLU News to alert members to

the need for specific action on state and

federal legislative measures on these

_ issues.

The Right to Dissent Subcommittee

will meet on September | at 7 PM at the

ACLU-NC office in San Francisco.

1981 ACLU-NC Conference

The annual ACLU-NC Conference

- will be the springboard for wider mem-

bership participation onthe Pro-Choice

Campaign and National Security State

monitoring work.

In addition to presentations by lead- -

ing authorities on the two issues, work-

shops will be held to help members

develop grassroots campaigns. The "how

to" workshops will include sessions on

lobbying, media work, network build-

ing and other organizing skills.

NCARL Speaker

*"NO MORE WITCHHUNTS"-A

report from Washington, D.C. on

Civil Rights/Civil Liberties in the

Reagan Era by ESTHER HERST,

National Committee Against Repres-

sive Legislation.

Brcecocoocococvesecoes,

Chapter/Board Conference

Name

our choices -- heard.

(R) reproductive rights

(R) repressive legislation

(R) organizing strategies

~ Workshops will examine:

(R) using local media

~ @ coalition building

@ advocacy

@ techniques for organizing

~

COUNT ME IN - Please send registration information to:

We'll hear from leading authorities on:

Address .

City

Zip

Phone

Clip and return to Marcia Gallo, `ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St.,

DP OOHOSOSSHLHDDOS OLHOOOOOSEOOSSSLHSSOSELLS OHO DHOS HOS OHSS HO SOO SOOO HIHEL SOG H08 090000088

Join with the ACLU Beard members, staff and activists from through-

out Northern California to discuss how we can make our voices -- and

Poet and acthor Alice Walker

will read from a selection

of her work, including

a recently-published

~ short story "The Abortion."|

Seecccecccococcocoooccoooooocsoceoooosoococooooooosoooooooscoeeoooooooooooooty

CHILDCARE PROVIDED

WHEEL CHAIR ACCESSIBLE

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18

San Francisco, CA 94103

(R)

@

DEADLINE FOR REGISTRATION:

Garrett, 916/427-4990.

moot

CHAPTERS

B-A-K

BOARD MEETING: August-Thurs-

day, August 27-8:00 p.m. 1509 Hearst

Avenue, #205, Berkeley; September-

Thursday, September 24, 8:00 p.m.,

42 Plaza Street, Berkeley. Contact:

Eileen Keech, 415/848-0089.

Earl Warren

ANNUAL MEETING: Saturday,

September 12-6:00 p.m. 8039 Shay

Drive, Oakland. Contact: Darleen

Coppersmith, 415/522-8112. GUEST

`SPEAKER: BOB KENNY, Head of

Fremont Local, Professional Air

`Traffic Controllers Organization

(PATCO). |

Marin

BOARD MEETING: Monday, Sep-

tember 21-8:00 p.m. Fidelity Savings,

Throckmorton Street, Mill Valley.

Contact: Len Karpman, 2

Ps

Monterey

SPEAKER: ESTHER HERST-"NO

MORE WITCHHUNTS"0x2122. Thurs-

day, September 17-8:00 p.m. Morse

Auditorium, Monterey Institute for.

International Studies, 440-Van Buren

Street, Monterey. Contact: Richard

Criley, 408/624-7562.

North Pen

BOARD MEETING: Monday, Sep-

tember 21-8:00 p.m. Allstate Savings

Community Room, 1820 Grant Ave-

nue, San Mateo. Contact: Richard

Keyes, 415/367-8800.

San Francisco

SPEAKER: ESTHER HERST-"NO.

MORE WITCHHUNTS"0x2122. Wednes-.

day, September 16-7:30 p.m. Admis-

sion $2.50. Firemen's Fund Audito-.

rium, 3333 California at Presidio

Avenue, San Francisco. Contact:

Miriam Rothschild, 415/346-7350.

Santa Cruz

BOARD MEETING: Wednesday, |.

September 9-8:00 p.m. Louden Nel-.

son Community Center, Santa Cruz.

Contact: Bruce Cooperstein, 408/

425-8671.

SPEAKER: ESTHER HERST-"NO_

MORE WITCHHUNTS0x2122. Tuesday,

September 15-7:30 p.m., Branciforte

Junior High, Melrose and Poplar Ave-|

nues, Santa Cruz. Contact: Robert

Taren, 408/429-9880.

Sonoma

BOARD MEETING: Thursday, Sep-

tember 17-7:30 p.m. Center for Em-

ployment Training, 3753 Santa Rosa }

Avenue, Santa Rosa. Contact: Wayne

Gibb, 707/523-1155.

Yolo County

BOARD MEETING: Thursday, Sep-

tember 17-7:30 p.m. Contact: Larry