vol. 51, no. 4

aclu news

Volume LI

June/July 1986

No. 4

ACLU Fights for Minors' Rights

Teens Will Not Be Reported for

Voluntary Sex

he state Court of Apeal ruled on

; : May 21 that health professionals

do not have to report adolescents

engaged in voluntary sexual activity to law

enforcement agencies, in opposition to an

Attorney General's opinion of the child

abuse reporting law. ACLU-NC attorney

Margaret Crosby called the decision a

"vindication of adolescents' right to

privacy."

The ruling came in response to a lawsuit

filed by the ACLU-NC and the Adolescent

Health Care Project (AHCP) of the

National Center for Youth Law challenging

Attorney General John Van de Kamp's

1984 opinion declaring all minors under

14 who engage in sexual activity to be

child abuse victims who must be reported

to the police.

The suit was filed in 1985 on behalf

of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of

California and two doctors who work with

teenagers.

The unanimous opinion, written by

Justice Harry Low, prohibits the Attorney

General and all district attorneys statewide

from enforcing the Child Abuse Reporting

Law "in so far as the law applies to

voluntary, consensual behavior among

minors under the age of 14, bearing no

indicia of actual sexual or other abuse. . . ."

Crosby noted, "The court ruled that

while the state has a compelling interest

in learning about real child abuse, it has

no interest in learning about nonabusive,

consensual sexual activities. Now teenagers

cant be forced to choose between their

privacy and their ability to obtain health

care," Crosby added.

The Attorney General's interpretation

of the law required all health practitioners,

child care workers and social workers to

report voluntary sexual activities of minors

in their care or be subject to penalties of

up to $1000 or six months in jail.

The Court noted if minors are unable

to get the care they need on a confidential

basis, they will be deterred from seeking

care. "The confidentiality of the medical

treatment would vanish by reporting

`intimate personal information to state

agencies," the opinion states.

Right to Care

Crosby said that the testimony of health

professionals indicated that thousands of

minors would have been deterred from

seeking necessary health care if the

reporting law had been enforced.

At the request of the ACLU-NC and

the AHCP the Court had granted a stay

of the reporting requirement in September

1985.

see p. 6

citizenship requirement.

Honor Student's Hard Road

Salinas high school Alma Marquez, pictured with her teacher George Shirley,

will get the honors she deserves - because the ACLU helped lift a U.S.

Courtesy of the Monterey Herald

"This decision recognizes that teenagers

in California should be able to get

contraceptives, prenatal care and abor-

tions, and treatment for sexually transmit-

ted diseases without fearing that their

names will be turned over to the police,"

said Crosby.

Continued on page 5

Pro-Choice Groups Fight Parental Consent Bill

A. distinguished panel of pro-choice

activists held a press conference at the

ACLU-NC office on June 11 to raise public

alarm about a dangerous anti-abortion

measure traveling swiftly through the state

Legislature.

The bill, SB 7/ AB 2549, would require

teenagers to have written parental consent

or appear before a judge to obtain

permission to have an abortion.

ACLU Sacramento lobbyist Daphne

Macklin noted, "Anti-choice groups have

always focused on denying choice to the

most vulnerable sectors of society-in this

case, young women."

Charging that the bill will have a

dangerous impact on teenagers, Reverend

Larry Morkert of San Francisco's St.

John's Lutheran Church, said, "Despite its

proponents claims-this bill will be

divisive to the family. Teenagers will be

again forced to find dangerous, illegal ways

to deal with the already painful decision

of having an abortion."

The original measure, SB 7, has been

defeated twice in the Assembly. In a

blatant attempt to bypass the rules of the

Assembly, the bill's author, Senator Joseph

Montoya made an attempt to pull the bill

to be heard on the full Assembly floor.

The maneuver failed, and now, once again,

Daphne Macklin (center), ACLU Sacramento lobbyist, San Francisco NOW president

Helen Greico (left) and CARAL's Jo Arlin, voice opposition to bills blocking teen

access to abortion.

opponents of abortion rights are attempt-

ing to manipulate the legislative process

by hijacking another bill AB 2459, and

amending it to include the same restrictive

language of SB 7.

AB 2459, with its SB 7 amendments,

passed the Senate on June 9. It will be

heard in the Assembly in the near future.

Jo Arlin, Executive Director of the

California Abortion Rights Action League

(CARAL) said, "The opponents of

abortion rights are playing a fast and loose

game in Sacramento to prevent minors

from obtaining safe and legal abortions.

We must alert the public to this dangerous

game."

Michael Miller

Kate Michelman, executive director of

the National Abortion Rights League,

noted that it was ironic that this bill to

deny access to abortion was being pushed

through the California Legislature just as

the U.S. Supreme Court, "in a most

eloquent and strong opinion," reaffirmed

a woman's right to choose.

Michelman called that morning's 5-4

U.S. Supreme Court Thornburgh decision

"one of the most exciting decisions since

Roe v. Wade."

"The intention of the anti-choice forces

`is simply to overturn Roe v. Wade,"

Michelman said, "thus, they will continue

to try to get restrictive state laws-around

minors' access, contraception and abor-

tion-passed and to continue to bring

them to the U.S. Supreme Court." She

described California's SB 7 as just such

an attempt. :

All the press conference speakers voiced

their concern about the widespread

problem of unintended teenage pregnancy.

But, as Arlin noted, "Laws such as SB

7 will not enhance family communication,

they will not provide assistance for minors

during a difficult period, they will not deter

teenagers from seeking abortions, and they

will not give parents absolute authority

over a minor's decision to have an

abortion."

aclu news

2 June/July 1986

Affirmative Action on the Threshold

by Dorothy Ehrlich

ACLU-NC Executive Director

he U.S. Supreme Court's consid-

Lev of three major affirmative

action cases during the current

term has sparked the local Coalition on

Civil Rights to focus on developing a

special strategy to educate the media and

the public on the important issues before

the highest court-specifically, the key

questions of numerical goals and

timetables.

The Coalition, which was formed last

winter, is composed of ten Bay Area civil

rights and public interest law organizations.

It sponsored a successful conference in

January, Civil Rights on the Rebound,

which attracted hundreds of civil rights

"organizers. ACLU-NC staff counsel Ed

Chen represents the ACLU on the

coalition, which is chaired by ACLU

national Board Vice-Chair Eva Jefferson

Paterson.

According to Paterson, the decisions on

these affirmative action cases may affect

civil rights cases for years to come. "If

the Court agrees with the Administration's

arguments limiting affirmative action,

then these cases may combine to form a

20th century equivalent of the Dred Scott

decision-rolling back much of the

progress that has been made toward the

desegregation of our society."

The Cases

However, so far, with one case decided,

the Administration has not fared too well.

In a May 19 decision in Wygant v. Jackson

_ Board of Education, the Court affirmed

the constitutionality of voluntary affirm-

ative action by public employees, but held

that in that case race-based layoffs went

too far.

The two other cases before the Court

represent a range of formulas designed to

remedy discrimination. They are:

cent* A court-approved settlement that

- remedies historic and admitted discrim-

ination against blacks and Latinos in

hiring and promotions in the Cleveland

Fire Department (Local No. 93 v. City

of Cleveland).

0x00B0 A series of court orders and contempt

findings designed to increase minority

membership in New York City's

sheetmetal workers' union (Local 28 v.

EEOC).

In both cases, as well as in Wygant,

the Justice Department argued as amicus

curiae that such affirmative action plans

discriminate against whites. The Depart-

ment also charges that any remedy for

discrimination should be extended only to

individual, identifiable victims of job bias

and not to groups that have suffered

historical and societal discrimination.

Goals and Timetables

At issue is the pivotal question of goals

and timetables which serve as concrete

enforcement and measurement standards

for the success of affirmative action

progress.

The Administration claims that the 1984

U.S. Supreme Court decision in Memphis

Firefighters v. Stotts prohibits all affirm-

ative action in the form of numerical goals.

Six U.S. courts of appeal, however, have

disagreed with the Administration, ruling

that the Stotts decision-which dealt with

a lower court override of a seniority system

designed to protect an affirmative action

plan-is restricted to court interference

with a bona fide seniority system. Jim

Wheaton of Public Advocates believes

that, "The Wygant opinion, although it

does not directly address it, shows that

Hunter Heads Gay Rights Project

Nan Hunter, ACLU attorney and gay

rights activist, spoke at a May 29 reception

at the ACLU-NC honoring her appoint-

ment as Staff Counsel to the newly

launched National ACLU Lesbian and

Gay Rights Project.

Hunter acknowledged the important

work of the ACLU-NC affiliate in putting

gay rights issues high on the national

agenda and noted that the new national

Project will help marshall resources to

heighten the impact of specific civil

liberties battles. She cited the current

s Georgia sodomy case as a measure to

strengthen "principles of sexual privacy

which demands national attention.

99

Hunter stresseed that one of the main

at least six and perhaps all nine create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh the

justices also disagree with the

Department."

ment of Justice has sent letters to 51 public

employers who had either voluntarily

negotiated or entered into court-ordered

`If the Court agrees with the Administration, these cases may

form a 20th century equivalent of the Dred Scott decision."

In addition to its intervention in

affirmative action litigation, the Depart-

efforts of the national Project will be to

-. monitor and discourage any public

reaction to the AIDS epidemic which

entails civil liberties violations.

Gay Rights Chapter

Membership

If you are a member of the Gay

Rights Chapter, please check to see"

that the 3-letter code "CNG" is printed

above your name on the ACLU News

mailing label. If not, please notify

ACLU-NC Membership Department

to double check that you are listed

as a Gay Rights member. We want

to make sure that you receive all the

Chapter notices and_ special

announcements.

lf you are an ACLU member in

Northern California and would like to

Join the Gay Rights Chapter, call or

write the ACLU Membership Depart-

ment at (415) 621-2493, 1663

Mission Street, San Francisco,

94103. Please mention your mem-

bership number ocated on the

newsletter mailing label.

ACLU Honors

Paterson; Law Firm

T= pillars of the ACLU-NC,

attorney Eva Jefferson Paterson

and the law firm of Heller, Ehrman,

White and McAuliffe, were honored with

the NAACP Legal Defense and Education

Fund Pro Bono Legal Services Award on

May 27.

Paterson, who is Vice-Chair of the

National ACLU Board of Directors,

served many years on the ACLU-NC

Board. Deputy Director of the San

Francisco Lawyers Committee for Urban

Affairs, Paterson litigates civil rights

impact cases. Former ACLU-NC Board

member Robert Harris presented Paterson

with the award. :

Heller, Ehrman, White and McAuliffe

serve as General counsel to the ACLU-NC,

advising the organization on all legal and

financial matters. The San Francisco firm

has also provided numerous cooperating

attorneys for ACLU-NC cases ranging

from prison searches to libel defense for

political activists to the famed Korematsu

case challenging the World War II

internment of Japanese-Americans.

Charles Clifford, senior partner and

former President of the State Bar of

California, accepted the award on behalf

of his firm.

Skolnik

mily Marks Skolnik, an ACLU-NC

leader for three decades, was

honored with the Meta Kauffman-

Roy Archibald Civil Liberties Award by

' the North Peninsula Chapter at a

champagne brunch on May 5.

Skolnik helped found the North Pen

Chapter in the 1950s and represented the

Chapter on the ACLU-NC Board.

The event included a keynote speech by

attorney Doron Weinberg on the role of

an independent judiciary in protecting the

Constitution.

affirmative action plans, urging them to

modify or invalidate their plans because

they included goals and timetables. Only

one out of the 51 respondents expressed

interest in revising its affirmative action

plan by eliminating numerical goals.

~ Paterson noted, "The Administration's

goal is to convince the public and the

courts that affirmative action is reverse

discrimination and does not further

equality in our society. Yet, without the

goals and timetables requirement, affirm-

ative action programs would lack any

enforcement mechanism and any oppor-

tunity to measure progress."

Milton Mayer

ilton Mayer, noted writer and

civil rights fighter who was

honored with the Ralph Atkin-

son Civil Liberties Award by the Monterey

ACLU Chapter, died at his home in

Carmel in April.

The author of nine books and countless

articles and essays, Mayer was also a

professor of social theory at universities

in Chicago, Paris and Berlin.

A staunch pacifist, Mayer refused to

be inducted into the Army during World

War II, preferring to face a prison term.

At the height of the McCarthy era, Mayer

challenged the government over a non-

communist oath required for passport

applicants. Noted Monterey ACLU

attorney Francis Heisler represented

Mayer.

Richard Criley, president of the

Monterey Chapter, said that Mayer's death

is a grave loss to civil liberties and social

activism. "When liberal writers were

paying their dues to the devil during

McCarthyism, Milton, with beautiful

consistency hit red-baiting on the head.

He possessed a way of explaining hard

issues in everyday terms," Criley said.

The Monterey Chapter's tribute to

Mayer stated, "Each of us who knew him

through his spoken or written words was

challenged and changed by that encounter.

We celebrate his contributions to peace

and human freedom at home and abroad,

which continue to influence with a life of

their own."

Nancy Pemberton, Chairperson

Elaine Elinson, Editor

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

Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director cs

Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page a

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 aes to the aclu news

and SO cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publicati

i

n, Civil Liberties.

aclu news

June/July 1986 3

Immigration Reform

A Danger to Rights

By Cynthia Forster

ACLU-NC Immigration Working Group

n April 3, a quarter-page ad in

the San Francisco Chronicle

asked "Tired of San Francisco

traffic? Don't just sit there and fume. You

can act now to reduce California's

overcrowding. What do you think has

caused our traffic jams? Here's what:

California's population grew by almost

600,000 people last year... Most of this

due to immigration." Readers were told

to call Congress and urge passage of the

Simpson/Rodino Bill, scheduled for the

House Judiciary Committee in mid-April.

The ACLU has fought the Simpson/

Mazzoli/Rodino measure for three years

because of its dangerous implications for

workers and immigrants' rights. Both the

Senate and House versions of the bills are.

far more dangerous than the failed bills

of earlier years.

Opposition Dismissed

The bi-partisan momentum behind the

bills is so great that much opposing data

has been cast aside, including a report from

the President's Council of Economic

Advisors showing that immigrants. bolster

the nation's economic well being.

The Senate version introduced by

-Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY) passed in

September. The House bill, under the new

and formidable guidance of Judiciary

Chair Peter Rodino (D-NJ), will go to

the full Committee for a vote perhaps as

early as this month; a House floor vote

is expected shortly thereafter.

The centerpiece of the so-called

immigration reform measure is employer

sanctions-penalizing employers for hiring

undocumented workers. The ACLU,

minority rights groups and chambers of

commerce all oppose sanctions because

they make employers double as police.

In order to avoid charges of discrim-

ination, sanctions may also require some

sort of national identification system, like

passbooks for citizens, the ACLU has

warned. Because of the three-year debate

on this issue, such discrimination has

already become a reality: citizens have

been denied jobs because they look

"foreign," even though nothing has passed

into law.

Both the House and Senate agree on

increasing budgets for law enforcement,

even theugh abuses by law enforcement

officials-from FBI harassment to

beatings and death-are already on the

Nicaraguan Officials

Barred from Bay Area

he Reagan Administration has

targeted California in its latest

attempt to stem the free flow of.

ideas. In a surprise move on May 23 the

U.S. State Department restricted Nciara-

guan officials from traveling to San

Francisco and the 9 surrounding counties

and Los Angeles and the 6 surrounding

counties.

ACLU-NC executive director Dorothy

Ehrlich called the move "an attack on the

First Amendment rights of Californians."

Two Bay Area events, a June 6

appearance at the College of Marin by

Nicaraguan Ambassador Carlos Tunner-

man and a June 25 poetry reading by

Cultural Attache Roberto Vargas, have

already been canceled because of the State

Department restrictions.

In an interview with the ACLU News,

State Department spokesperson Gregory

Lagana offered an explanation for the ban.

"The Sandinistas have restricted U.S.

officials from the cities of Bluefields and

Puerto Cabezas," he said, "and this is a

simple case of reciprocity. These two cities

are roughly comparable to the Bay Area

and greater Los Angeles."

When asked why there were compara-

ble-given that the entire population of

Nicaragua could fit several times over in

these California regions-Lagana said,

"They are both on.the coast-as are

Bluefields and Puerto Cabezas-and they

are as far away from the capitol as you

can get."

As the two Nicaraguan cities were cited

by the Nicaraguan government as part of

the "war zone," the ACLU News asked

Lagana if California also fit in that

category. "There is no substantive reason

why the California cities were chosen," he

said, "just reciprocity."

Susan Benda of the national ACLU

Washington Office said, "Although the

State Department can and does restrict

foreign officials from traveling freely in

the U.S., there seems to be no precedent

for a city-specific ban such as this one."

The restrictions brought a barrage of

criticism from solidarity and cultural

exchange groups who have hosted many

Nicaraguan officials in the past. "The

voices of Nicaraguan leaders have been

an important part of a fruitful dialogue

for peace and understanding between our

two peoples," said Nina Serrano of Friends

of Nicaraguan Culture. "We are outraged

that the Reagan Administration has

targeted our communities in cutting off

this dialogue."

Many activists were skeptical about the

timing of the travel restrictions. Congress

is again about to vote on President

Reagan's $100 million request for the

contras, and this new State Department

action is seen as silencing debate and

information in an area which has been

strongly opposed to contra funding in the

past.

The ACLU affiliates of Northern and

Southern California are joining other

California groups in calling on Congres-

sional, state and city officials to oppose

the restrictions. There is discussion about

a Congressional letter opposing the

restriction, to be signed by Representatives

from the affected areas.

ACLU members are urged to write or

call your Member of Congress, Senators

and city officials asking that the restrictions

be withdrawn. Letters should also be

directed to the Nicaragua Desk, State

Department, 2201 C St. NW, Washington,

D.C. 20520; phone 202/647-2205.

YouR Poon, Your,

HuppLED Masses YEARNING

To BREATHE FREE, (HE

WrRercHED REFUSE OF YOUR ag

TEeeMING SHORE, Senp |

THESE THE HOMELESS "MemPesT-

Frese 1S (MS, Sb ki My

L-ArAP RESIDE THE Gocven Lec "

Roske/Sholin, ASDF

rise. In a thinly disguised assault on the

sanctuary movement, both Houses

support increased penalties for "harboring

and transporting illegal aliens."

Key unresolved conflicts between the

House and Senate versions are anti-

discrimination provisions to offset criti-

cisms of employer sanctions: the cut-off

date for "legalization," and the temporary

workers program.

Hostage Workforce

Controversy over the temporary workers

program is probably the only issue that

can halt passage of the bill. Large

agricultural growers depend on a cheap,

deportable workforce and are fighting

hard in Congress to make sure they still

have one.

According to national ACLU lobbyist

Wade Henderson, "The guest worker issue

is at the center of the political debate over

immigration reform.

"In fact, Attorney General Meese

recently announced the Reagan Admin-

istration's support for a massive guest

worker program. It was a blatant attempt

to tip the political balance in favor of

Western agricultural interests, and it has

made genuine reform even more of an

illusion," Henderson said.

ACTION

ALERT

NOW is the time to let Congress know

you oppose the Simpson/ Rodino Bill.

For more information, flyers, peti-

tions and mailgram forms, contact the

Immigration Working Group, ACLU-NC,

1663 Mission St., San Francisco, CA

94103; or call (415) 621-2494.

HELP WANTED

STAFF ATTORNEY

The ACLU-NC is expanding its legal

staff. The ACLU is seeking a staff counsel

to work full-time in its San Francisco

Office; the staff counsel would work

closely with the three other staff counsel

and two legal assistants.

Qualifications: This position requires

an attorney with at least two years

litigation experience and membership in

the California State Bar (or must pass

the February 1987 California Bar

Examination).

Compensation: Salary depending on

experience, minimum rate: $31,000 per

annum; generous benefits.

Application: Applications, consisting

of a resume and letter of application,

should be addressed to Staff Counsel

Search, address below. Please apply by

July 9.

DEVELOPMENT

DIRECTOR

The ACLU-NC is seeking a Develop-

ment Director to coordinate a diverse and

successful fund raising program. The

20,000-member ACLU-NC has an

annual budget of $1,000,000; fund-

raising programs include Major Gifts,

Phonathon, Foundations and Direct Mail.

Qualifications: Applicants must have

minimum three years directing volunteer-

based fund-raising programs; five years

full-time fund-raising experience; strong

management and organizational skills;

experience with micro-computers data-

base managements.

Application: Submit resume and

cover letter to Development Director

Search as soon as possible. There is

an open deadline-qualified candidates

will be interviewed immediately upon

receipt of application.

Send applications to: ACLU-NC,

1663 Mission Street, Suite 460, San

Francisco, CA 94103.

The ACLU is an affirmative action

employer. Women, people of color,

lesbians, gay men, disabled persons and

people over 55 are encouraged to apply

for both positions.

Pa

aclu news

4 June/July 1986

1986 ACLU-NC

Board of Directors

- Elections

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 the year and

month in the top line when your

membership expires. You are eligible

to vote unless your membership has

expired.

If you are not eligible to vote, you

may choose to renew your membership

at the seam time you submit your ballot

and resume your membership in good

standing.

If you share a joint membership, each

individual is entitled to vote separ-

ately-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 nomi-

nated by petition bearing the signatures

of at least fifteen ACLU-NC members

in good standing.

Voting Information

Ballot 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

address 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, California 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 confiden-

tiality 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 ballot.

Ballots must be returned to the

ACLU office by noon on August 1,

1986.

There are ten candidates running to

fill ten vacancies on the Board. You

may vote for up to ten candidates.

For your consideration, the following

statements were submitted by the

candidates for election to the Board of

Directors.

Ballot

| Vote for no more than ten candidates. Joint members use both columns. Please

| read voting instructions before completing ballot.

| Lorraine K. Bannai

| Barbara A. Brenner

| Mary Lou Breslin

| Milton Estes

| Charlotte Fishman

! Anne Jennings

! Marshall W. Krause

1 Jim Morales

! Fran Strauss

Bill Tamayo

CN) a

LORRAINE K. BANNAI

At this time, when hard won civil

liberties are facing constant assault, the

continued visibility and hard work of the

ACLU are needed more than ever. The

ACLU of Northern California has been

a leader in the struggle against discrim-

ination of all kinds and an effective

advocate for the freedom of choice and

advocacy.

It is significant to note that only 40 years

ago, this affiliate stood virtually alone

among civil liberties organizations, when

it undertook to represent Fred Korematsu

in challenging the World War Il internment

of Japanese Americans. Korematsu v.

United States has stood for all of these

years as a blot on our constitutional

history. Recently, the ACLU-NC joined the

effort to challenge that opinion and I had

the pleasure of working with its staff and

attorneys as a member of Mr. Korematsu's

litigation team. If elected to the Board,

I hope to contribute to the affiliate's

involvement in issues affecting the welfare

of minority and immigrant communities,

as well as to its other progressive work

in defending constitutional rights.

BARBARA A. BRENNER

I am currently a member of the

ACLU-NC Board of Directors and Chair

of the Development Committee. I work

closely with staff, other board members

and ACLU supporters to help build the

financial base that is so critical to the

success of the organization. I also serve

on the Legal and Legislative Committees,

participating in the development of ACLU

policy on evolving civil liberties issues.

ACLU-NC has recently undertaken the -

major expansion in program necessary to

the protection and expansion of civil

liberties. This undertaking is critical to the

continued vitality of civil liberties in

Northern California and throughout the

country. I hope to be reelected to the Board

so that I can work toward these goals.

MARY LOU BRESLIN

I am very pleased and honored to have

been nominated for the Board of Directors

of the ACLU of Northern California. I

have served as a member of the Board

since 1983, working on the Jamison

. Attorneys' Fees Committee, the Budget

Management Committee and the Major

Gifts Campaign.

I firmly believe we have never faced

more serious challenges to civil liberties.

The continued work of the ACLU to

defend and expand these liberties is

urgently needed, now more than ever. As.

an administrator and fund-raiser, I have

worked for the past ten years with

organizations seeking social change

through law and policy reform. Therefore,

I will continue to bring management and

financial planning skills to the organization

as well as contribute to the ACLU's

growing involvement with disability issues.

MILTON ESTES

I am honored to have been nominated

for election to the Board of Directors. Civil

liberties and human rights have been a

life-long concern; the fragility of these

rights requires constant vigilance.

I have served for six years on the Marin

Chapter Board and for the past year have

been the chairperson. I have also served

as the Marin representative to the

Affiliate, have served on the Development

Committee of the ACLU-NC for two

years, on the Jamison Fee Committee, the

AIDS Committee and helped draft the

ACLU-NC AIDS policy. In addition, I

served as a delegate to the national ACLU

Biennial in 1985.

I have also been active in Central

America anti-intervention work and am

a member of Bay Area Physicians for

Human Rights and Physicians for Social

Responsibility.

aclu news

June/July 1986 5

CHARLOTTE FISHMAN

I have been involved in civil liberties

issues for many years and have worked |

with the dedicated ACLU-NC staff since

1979. As a result I have enormous respect

for the work of the ACLU-NC and feel

honored to have been nominated for its

Board of Directors.

As an attorney I have worked both

locally and nationally to protect the

constitutional rights of minorities, partic-

ularly in the areas of immigration and

employment discrimination. Before becom-

ing an attorney I taught philosophy, did

research on medical ethics and was

actively involved in women's health issues,

including teenage pregnancy counseling.

I believe that the ACLU-NC's already

strong organizational voice on behalf of

minorities and in support of individual

dignity deserves support and

encouragement.

ANNE JENNINGS

I have served the ACLU-NC in various

capacities over the past several years. Since

1979 I have been on the Board of the Gay

Rights Chapter, and as my Chapter's

representative to the Affiliate Board since

1980.

Iam currently the ACLU-NC represent-

ative on the National ACLU Board.

I was the first chair of the Pro-Choice

Task Force, serving from 1981 to 1985.

I am now chair of the Field Committee;

I also chaired the Ad-Hoc Committee that

developed the ACLU-NC AIDS policy.

The ACLU plays a vital role in

safeguarding civil liberties and minority

rights. I want to continue to participate

in this important work by serving the

ACLU-NC as an at-large Board member.

MARSHALL W. KRAUS

It has been my pleasure to have been

associated with the ACLU-NC for many

years, first as a staff attorney and now

as a returning member of the Board of

Directors. My association with the

ACLU-NC has taught me a lot concerning

what people, what organizations and what

thoughts are being squeezed in our current

society. No matter how hard we fight, there

seems to be an increasing number of such

concerns.

My background and experience help

evaluate the many demands on our

organization and make our resources as

useful as possible in protecting civil

liberties. I am open to new paths and new

directions in protecting civil liberties but

will never forget our core commitment to

a free society open to political change with

a government responsive to the needs of

each citizen.

JIM MORALES

During the past three years, I have

served on the Board of Directors and on

the Executive, Personnel, Legislative and

Nominating Committees. Although my

Board work is a small part of the overall

effort, I am proud to have been involved

with the expansion of the organization and

the successful efforts to protect civil

liberties.

The next three years will require

increased Board activitism. Changes in the

California and federal courts suggest that

the ACLU's clients will increasingly face

unsympathetic judges and a constricted

view of the Constitution.

Since 1979, I have represented poor

children as a staff attorney for the National

Center for Youth Law. I also serve on the

Executive Committee of the Latino

Democratic Club and on the S.F Citizens

Committee for Community Development.

FRAN STRAUSS

It would be a privilege to serve another

term on the ACLU-NC Board. _

My past experiences include being a

founder of the San Francisco Chapter and

serving, for a time, as its representative

to the Affiliate Board. Among other past

activities: forming our ongoing Counseling

Desk; organizing what has become our

traditional Bill of Rights Day fundraising

and Celebration; serving on substantive

and organizational committees.

Currently I serve on the Executive,

Development, Budget/ Management and

Bill of Rights Program Committees. To

be an active participant in the development

and growth of this affiliate has been

wonderfully rewarding.

"Eternal vigilance IS the price of

liberty." The erosion of our national and

state political lives today demands

continuous hard, ardent work-which this

organization does do remarkably and must

continue to do.

BILL TAMAYO

Since 1982 I have worked closely as co-

counsel and advocate with the ACLU on

issues affecting the rights of immigrants

and refugees. It has been an honor and

an excellent experience to be affiliated

with an organization that has steadfastly

maintained its vigilance to protect the civil

rights of all.

The next few years will pose tremendous

and often complex challenges to the

ACLU. While our views at times might

not seem in step with others, our goal is

to make the defense of civil rights a popular

idea, the norm for all. During my brief

period on the Board, I have witnessed the

dedication and commitment of dozens of

dynamic, hardworking people. To continue

to serve with this body would be a great

opportunity and privilege.

Reporting Law

Continued from page 1

Attorney Abigail English of the

Adolescent Health Care Project noted,

"The Court's opinion provides important

protection of the rights of adolescents to

obtain the health care which they urgently

need."

Both attorneys said that the Court was

very aware of the realities of the situation:

that there is an epidemic of teen pregnancy

and sexually transmitted diseases.

Crosby said that organizations like

Planned Parenthood had been doing

outreach work for years to get sexually

active teenagers into clinics for counseling

and health care. "If Planned Parenthood

were required to report names to the

police, years of work would be destroyed,"

she commented.

The court left unresolved the duty to

report sexually active adolescents under

14 whose partners are over 14. "We are

disappointed that the court failed to clarify

this issue. We believe that the reasoning

of the court's opinion would compel the

conclusion that these adolescents should

also be entitled to confidential health care,"

Crosby said.

Pro-Choice

Pamphlets

reaffirmed a woman's constitu-

tional right to abortion, anti-

choice activists have dramatically

stepped up their war against a

woman's right to choose. Vowing to

stop abortion by forcibly closing clinic

doors, they threaten to end access

to abortion by bombing, death threats,

burglaries and physical harassment

of clinic patients and personnel. .

In response to this crisis, the

Reproductive Freedom Project of the

ACLU has just published a new

booklet Preserving the Right to

Choose. The 50-page booklet, prima-

rily for the use of clinic personnel,

describes how to protect abortion

services against these disruptive

activities. The pamphlet also provides.

guidelines for assessing the scope of

First Amendment protection of disrup-

tive activities.

To order: Send $2.00 per brochure

to Preserving the Right to Choose,

Publications Department, ACLU 132

W. 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036.

E::: as the U.S. Supreme Court

In light of new state and federal

court rulings, the ACLU-NC has just

published an updated version of the

brochure How Do | Make My

Choice?: Questions and Answers

about Abortion, Birth Control, Ster-

ilization, and Other Reproductive

Rights in California.

This easy-to-use brochure has

`been of assistance to clinics, health

care and social work professionals,

schools and women of all ages since

its first publication 3 years ago.

To order: Single copies are free

(bulk orders are $10 per 100) and are

available from: Publications Depart-

ment, ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission Street,

San Francisco, CA 94103.

aclu news

G June/July 1986

ACLU Lawyer Wins

False Arrest Case

lawsuit challenging the false arrest

Ag ACLU attorney John Crew by

San Francisco police officers led

to changes in police arrest procedures

approved on June 2 by U.S. District Court

Judge Samuel Conti.

The new procedures were agreed to in

a settlement between ACLU-NC staff

attorney Edward Chen and the San

Francisco City Attorney and approved by

the San Francisco Police Commission.

The reason Crew was arrested-refusal

to show ID to the police-can no longer

be cause for arrest, according to the new

regulations.

John Crew was arrested in September

1984 as he was monitoring the widely

publicized police street sweeps in Hallidie

Plaza. His arrest came only hours after

the ACLU publicly called on then San

Francisco Police Chief Cornelius Murphy

to halt the sweeps.

Crew, who was taking notes about the

street sweeps in order to further document

newspaper accounts, was asked by the

police if he was a reporter. When he told

them he was not, two officers asked Crew

for identification; he refused to give them

any.

At that point, Crew was handcuffed,

pat searched and taken to the Hall of

Justice for booking.

The ACLU filed suit on behalf of Crew

in September 1985.

Crew was delighted with the settlement,

particularly the limits that it places on

police street sweeps. "The police often see

themselves as untouchable, especially with

respect to street people and others who

are unlikely to challenge their authority.

'"These new regulations will restrict

police officers from carrying out uncon-

stitutional street sweeps," he said.

New Regulations

ACLU-NC attorney Chen explained

that under the terms of the court-approved

settlement, San Francisco police officers

may not arrest a person solely for refusal

to identify himself or herself. Such a

refusal "is not unlawful," the regulations

State.

In addition, the new regulations will

preclude the kind of street sweeps that the

ACLU was investigating in the first place,

according to Chen. "Police efforts to sweep

the streets of so-called undesirables in

response to merchant complaints are

forbidden by the new regulations, absent

individualized suspicion of criminal

activity," he said.

Chen cited a section in the regulations

which states, "All persons have the right

to use the public streets and places so long

as they are not engaged in specific criminal

activity. Factors such as race, sex, sexual

preference, age, dress, unusual or dishev-

-eled or impoverished appearance do not

alone justify even a brief detention."

In addition to the new regulations, the

settlement also provides payment of $4900

from the City to Crew as well as the

expungement of his arrest record.

Marquez Goes to Girls' State

Continued from page I

Salinas high school junior who

A` selected to attend the pres-

tigious Girls' State Summer

Program-and then rejected because she

is not a citizen-will be able to attend

after all, thanks to her tenacity and the

support of the ACLU-NC.

Alma Marquez, a farmworker's daughter

who came to the U.S. from Mexico at

the age of nine months, was chosen several

months ago to attend the American

Legion Auxiliary's annual Girls' State

conference in Sacramento in July. But

when administrators learned that Mar-

quez, who has the highest grade point

average among all the girls in her class,

was not a U.S. citizen they withdrew the

invitation.

"At first I thought there was nothing

I could do," said 17-year-old Marquez.

"But my brother Luis, who is the president

of the student body, told me that girls

should not have to be citizens to attend

Girls' State."

With the help of her angry and

sympathetic government teacher, George

Shirley, Marquez contacted the Monterey

Chapter of the ACLU-NC. There,

attorneys Michael Manlin and Michelle

Welsh, together with ACLU-NC staff

counsel Alan Schlosser, prepared a lawsuit

to help Marquez get her rightful place at

Girls State.

Welsh explained, "We strongly believed

it violated Alma's civil rights not to let

her participate simply because she is not

a U.S. citizen. In the first place, in most

areas of civil rights, citizens and non-

citizens have equivalent rights and

responsibilities.

"Secondly, a minor like Alma is not yet

eligible to apply for citizenship, even

though she intends to do so when she

becomes 18. This restrictive rule catches

her in the middle of her parents' choice

and her minor status," Welsh said.

The ACLU attorneys worked all

weekend on the lawsuit and Monday

morning, June 10, received a call from the

American Legion Auxiliary that Marquez

would be allowed to attend after all.

Change of Policy

"We are thrilled and delighted with their

decision," said Manlin. "It is to the credit

of the American Legion Auxiliary that

they decided to change their policy and

do the right thing."

Girls' State Director Anita Ratten said

that the national Auxiliary will be asked

to change their rules to eliminate the U.S.

citizenship requirement.

Marquez's principal at Alisal High

School called a press conference the day

following the decision and announced that

Marquez would be attending the program

in July in which students assume the roles

of elected officials and run a make-believe

government.

Marquez said at the press conference,

"I learned you can make the system work

if you try." This one Girls' State participant

has already learned-and taught-some

important lessons about law and

government.

-Legal Briefs

Aerial Search OK'ed by High Court

Soy \ ` 7 2

ne Sa Zz oo

: SUPREME COURT

ae APPROVED

S(R)]) AERIAL HOME

SURVEILLANCE

UNIT.

:

Rome SUBSTANCES CONTERE,

(ye

D/A VANVERAL FRmE55 HAIL

"HENRY! THE NARCS ARE BACK IN THE GERANIUMS !'

May 21 U.S. Supreme Court

Asien allowing police to conduct

warrantless aerial surveillance of

private residences "greatly diminishes our

rights to personal privacy," according to

ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan Schlosser,

author of an amicus brief in the case.

In a5-4 opinion in the case of California

v. Ciraolo, the high court ruled that Santa

Clara police acted properly when they

hired an airplane to fly over the back yard

at 1000 feet after receiving an anonymous

tip that marijuana was being grown there.

The police were unable to see the yard

from the ground because of a fence around

the property. The law is clear that the

police cannot use a ladder to peek over

a fence to gather evidence without a

warrant.

Past court rulings have held that police

usually must obtain search warrants before

searching private homes; in rulings going (c)

Press Libel Suit

n June 9, ACLU-NC cooperating

Qiers Arthur Brunwasser

argued before the California

Supreme Court that two San Francisco

reporters should not be subject to a multi-

million dollar libel judgment for an article

they wrote in the San Francisco Examiner

in 1976.

In April 1979, a jury awarded a $4.6

million libel judgment against reporters

Raul Ramirez and Lowell Bergman and

the Examiner as a result of a suit brought

by two city police officers and a former

District Attorney. The suit was brought

in response to a series of articles published

in 1976 about a controversial Chinatown

murder trial. The Examiner articles

back 60 years, yards were always

considered part of the home.

The resident was represented by

ACLU-NC Board member, attorney

Marshall Krause. "This decision is a major

cutback of privacy rights," Krause

explained. "I feel a back yard is considered

by most people to be a private area and

should be treated like a home."

"This ruling implies that there is little

difference between one's backyard and the

public street," added Schlosser. We drive

cars on public streets and we expect the

police to watch. We sunbathe, consume

alcohol and engage in family activities in

our backyards and we expect to be left

alone.

"This decision ignores the fact-

embedded in the Fourth Amendment-

that we live our lives with a reasonable

expectation of privacy, especially in our

own homes and yards," Schlosser added.

reported that the three city officials had

persuaded witnesses to give false testimony

in a case in which a 19-year-old Chinatown

youth was convicted.

The ACLU-NC entered the case on

appeal, with Brunwasser and ACLU-NC

staff attorney Margaret Crosby represent-

ing Bergman and Ramirez.

When the Court of Appeal upheld the

judgment in October 1985, Brunwasser

said, "This decision sets a very dangerous

precedent. The trial judge denied the

reporters a fair trial by seriously limiting

their ability to tell the jury facts they had

discovered which contributed to their

belief in the truth of their article.

"Moreover, the trial court admitted

evidence about Bergman's personal life and

political beliefs, and this was swept under

the rug:as `harmless error," he added.

aclu news

Anti-Draft Ads

Banned on Buses

he ACLU-NC filed an appeal in

: the California Supreme Court on

March 28, seeking to overturn an

appellate court ruling prohibiting political

advertising on city buses.

According to ACLU-NC cooperating

attorney James L. Kaller, if the ruling is

not reversed, it will have very dangerous

implications for free speech rights of

political groups and individuals-espe-

cially those without access to large

financial resources-throughout the state.

In 1981, the Fresno branch of Women's

International League for Peace and

Freedom (WILPF) contracted to place 45

placards on the Fresno City Transit buses

concerning draft registration. The placards

showed a picture of armed soldiers and

said:

"Why is this the only job our government

has to offer 19-20 year olds? THINK

BEFORE YOUR REGISTER FOR THE

DRAFT"

Only four days after the placards were

posted, the Fresno City Manager ordered

the placards removed from the buses and

destroyed. He argued that this action was

justified because a local ordinance

prohibited "political" advertising on buses.

In addition, he claimed, the words "think

before you register for the draft" are not

Salvadoran

_ Asylum

oung civilian urban males in El

Salvador are members of a social

group singled out for persecution

by the government of El Salvador and

therefore should be granted political

asylum in the U.S. The ACLU affiliates

of Northern and Southern California are

asserting this argument as amici curiae in

a lawsuit, Trujillo vy. INS, in the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals.

The ACLU is also contending that all

Salvadorans in the U.S. who fled the civil

strife of their homeland are entitled to

protection under international refugee law,

and that they may not be forcibly

repatriated to El Salvador until the

hostilities and massive human rights

abuses in the country cease.

The original lawsuit was filed by San

Francisco attorneys Marc Van der Hout

and Patti Blum on behalf of Salvadoran

refugees at San Francisco's Father

Moriarty Central America Refugee

Program. The refugees are seeking

political asylum under the 1980 Refugee

Act; despite the massive documentation

- of human rights abuses in El Salvador,

less than 3% of Salvadorans who seek

asylum in the U.S. are granted it.

The ACLU brief argues that the Court

must take cognizance of international law

and, wherever possible, should construe

U.S. laws to conform with their interna-

tional counterparts.

constitutionally protected because they

advocate non-registration, a federal crime.

The ordinance in question is Fresno

Municipal Code Section 2-2809(c) which

prohibits "political" advertising on city

buses. After WILPF members unsuccess-

fully protested the ordinance and the

removal of their placards at two City

Council meetings, the peace group took

the City to court. =

After a trial without a jury, the Fresno

Superior Court decided that the ordinance

did violate the California Constitution.

However, the court also ruled that the city

buses need not carry WILPF's draft

placards because the message was not

constitutionally protected speech.

With the assistance of ACLU Fresno

Chapter members Mary Louise Frampton

and Howard K. Watkins, WILPF came

to the ACLU-NC for an appeal of the trial

court judgment. But the Court of Appeal

did not address the legality of the

placards-rather, on February 18, the

appellate court reversed the trial court and

upheld the constitutionality of the

prohibitive ordinance.

"The Court of Appeal's opinion in this

case seriously misstates California consti-

tutional law and is inconsistent with prior

decisions of California courts," argued

Kaller who, along with staff attorney Alan

Schlosser, is representing WILPF in the

high court.

"Moreover, unless the Supreme Court

reverses this ruling, it can be cited as a

precedent throughout the state. The effect

will be to encourage other municipalities

to discourage free speech by enacting or

maintaining ordinances. which ban

political speech in a variety of public

places," Kaller explained.

The ACLU is arguing that the Court

of Appeal, in deciding that public buses

are not "public forums," did not use the

high standard of free speech protection

required by the California Constitution,

relying instead on a lesser federal standard.

"In California," Kaller explained,

"commercial speech may not be favored

over political speech-and that is exactly

what the Fresno ordinance does."

The ACLU-NC is also asking the

Supreme Court to overturn the trial

court's ruling that the WILPF message

is not constitutionally protected speech, an

issue the appellate court did not reach.

"In that the placards do not clearly

advocate lawless action nor are likely to

produce lawless action, the words "Think

before you register for the draft' are

constitutionally protected speech," Kaller

said.

Bill Passes Assembly

The bill to prevent patient dumping,

AB 3403, passed the Assembly on June

10. The bill, a joint product of the

ACLU-NC and _a coalition of health

and civil rights groups, now goes to

the Senate Health Committee. A

hearing is scheduled there in late June.

Supporters are urged to phone and

write the Senate Health Committee,

California State Senate, Capitol

Building, Sacramento 95814, CA.

June/July 1986 7

Disabled Children Lose

Privacy of Files

the Sacramento Superior Court ruled

that children who receive funding for

treatment of developmental disabilities

must allow records of their intimate

personal behavior to be placed in a

centralized computer system.

I: a brief opinion issued on May 12,

The ACLU-NC had challenged such

intrusive record-keeping in a_ lawsuit,

White v. Department of Development

Services, filed in March 1985. Two

developmentally disabled children and

their parents were represented by

ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys Mark

White, Anna M. Rossi and Margaret

Corrigan of the San Francisco law firm

of Rogers, Joseph, O'Donnell and Quinn

and the ACLU-NC staff attorney Margaret

Crosby.

The ACLU-NC contended that the

manner in which the children's records are

maintained in the files of the state

Department of Developmental Services

(DDS) violates their constitutional and

statutory rights of privacy.

Attorney White explained, "The sub-

mission of the reports with client-

identifying information creates the

unnecessary risk that the client's highly

sensitive and personal information-such

as medication, toilet training, level of

bladder and bowel control, self-injurious

behavior, etc.-will be made accessible to

others outside of the developmental

disability services system, including

prospective employers, educators and

other governmental agencies."

- The lawsuit was filed after the DDS

changed its regulations in 1984 requiring

that the children's evaluation forms, known

as CDERs (Client Development Evalua-

tion Reports), be marked with the child's

name, rather than in code as was done

previously.

The court determined, despite the

ACLU-NC objections, that there was a

"compelling state interest" in storing the

information with the child's name on it.

"The Court further finds that attempting

to provide adequate care by less intrusive

means, i.e, without maintaining client

names, would not work," Judge Fred W.

Marler Jr. stated.

Abuse of Information

The mother of one of the child plaintiffs,

spoke of her own reluctance to submit a

CDER for her child knowing that it would

no longer be confidential. "Unjustified

access to the information contained in the

CDER undeniably would prevent him

from overcoming the difficult hurdles he

already faces in our society as a person

with developmental disabilities.

"As a parent and a citizen deeply

concerned about the rights of the disabled,

I can only add that any abuse of this

information to my child's detriment would

be an ironic and tragic result of a system

supposedly intended to enhance the

opportunities of developmentally disabled

persons to lead more independent,

productive and normal lives within their

communities," she said.

As children are required to have the

CDERs on file, refusal to submit one

could result in a cut off of funding for

their treatment.

White said, "Given the serious conse-

quences-both to the children's privacy

and to their future treatment-we will

appeal this decision to the Court of

Appeal."

Judiciary Committee at Work

he Independent Judiciary Commit-

: tee, the newest project of the Field

Committee, has grown by leaps and

bounds since its formation 6 months ago.

"Faced with the sobering prospect of an

unprecedented partisan campaign against

some of the current California Supreme

Court Justices, and a November 1986

retention election already badly marred by

deceit and demagogy, ACLU chapter

members have organized themselves and

their communities to fight back," said

Field Representative Marcia Gallo.

Since January, community forums,

membership meetings and educational

debates on the independence of the

judiciary have been held in Berkeley,

Davis, Marin, San Mateo and Santa

Clara; five in a series of six forums have

been organized by the San Francisco

Chapter.

Independent Judiciary Committee

Chair Richard Criley said that local

coalitions have formed in half a dozen

other cities, with ACLU leaders playing

critical roles in the efforts.

The Committee meets monthly in the

affiliate's San Francisco office to plan and

evaluate its work. Hundreds of copies of

the new ACLU-NC brochure Setting the

Record Straight: The Independence of the

Judiciary have already been distributed

throughout northern California (to order

the brochure, see below ).

In April, representatives from 12

Continued on page 8

Judiciary Brochure

he ACLU-NC's new brochure

: Setting the Record Straight:

The Independence of the

_ Judiciary demystifies the abstract

concept of an independent judiciary

and shows how it is the very

cornerstone of the protection of our

most basic rights.

The 8-page easy-to-read pamphlet

outlines the roots of the judicial

system, California's retention elections,

how the Court determines what cases

to take and rulings, and limitations on

the Court's ability to respond to (even

| unfounded) criticism.

This pamphlet is a must for ACLU

members who are concerned about

keeping our courts independent.

Single copies are free of charge;

bulk orders are $5.00 for 50. Write

to: Independent Judiciary Committee,

Francisco, CA 94103; for bulk orders,

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission Street, San |

call 415-621-2578.

aclu news

S June/July 1986

1986 ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA CONFERENCE

"Working for Justice in the '80s:

All of Us, or None"

Friday, August 8 through Sunday, August 10

SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY, SONOMA

Sponsored by the ACLU of Northern California Field Committee

Plenary Session: Keynote Speakers

"Economic Justice and Civil

Liberties"

Edward Asner

"Emerging Issues in Civil Rights"

Angela Blackwell staff Attorney, Public Advocates, Inc.

"Militarization of US Society"

Milton Wolff Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade

"Tbe November California Supreme

Court Retention Election"

The Hon. Nick Petris California State Senator

Plenary Session: Roundtable Discussion

"AIDS and Civil Liberties"

Workshops 0x00B0 Privacy, Pornography, Immigrants

Rights, Dissent, Racial Violence, Choosing Children,

Judicial Elections...and More

The Conference Site:

Sonoma State University is located in Rohnert Park (just outside of Cotati)

in Sonoma County, California. It is situated in the heart of the California wine

country, approximately a one-hour drive from San Francisco. Conference

members will have access to the campus pool and other recreational facilities,

and our housing will be in two-bedroom apartments, each with its own living

room and bathroom facilities.

Sonoma State University is wheelchair accessible.

REGISTRATION FORM

(Conference Registration Deadline: July 25, 1986)

Name(s)

Address

Zip

Telephone: (Day) (Evening)

I/We enclose $ LC] conference registration.

I/We would like to arrange for childcare (1

(number/ages of children)

for 1) housing/meals

CONFERENCE COSTS |

Conference Registration

Weekend: 9-90 $25.00

Lodging/Meals: :

(A) Two nights lodging, private room with bath, double occupancy, six meals;

use of grounds and recreational facilities ...................0.cc cece cece cece cence $65.00

(B) One night lodging; taree'meals te $32.50

(Cy Young people (ages 2-14) two nights:.......... 2 $50.00*

One NIGH 7 $25.00*

AGeS 2 cnOUNdC no charge

"Includes childcare throughout conference except at mealtimes and overnight

Please return this form, with your payment to:

Marcia Gallo, Annual Conference, ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission Street #460, San Francisco,

CA 94103. (You may also use VISA or MASTERCARD-phone Constance Maxcy at

415-621-2488.)

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

| One Day, 23 a ee ee $15.00

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

|

Sa es ne ee

oe a

Board Meetings

B.A.R.K. BOARD MEETING: (Usually

fourth Thursday) Volunteers are needed to

staff hotline. Contact Florence Piliavin,

415-848-4752.

EARL WARREN BOARD MEETING:

(Third Wednesday) Contact Beth Wein-

berger, 415-839-2743.

FRESNO BOARD MEETING: (Usually

third Wednesday) Contact Sam Gitchel for

details: 209-486-2411 (days), 209-442-094]

(evenings).

GAY RIGHTS BOARD MEETING:

(Usually first Tuesday) No meeting Tuesday,

July 1. Tuesday, August 5, 7:00 pm. ACLU,

1663 Mission Street, #460, SE Watch for

notice of Annual Membership Meeting

tentatively scheduled for Sunday, August 17,

3-5 pm, 1515 Edith Street, Berkeley. Watch

for Gay Rights Chapter booth at the

Lesbian-Gay Rights Freedom Day Parade,

Sunday, June 29. Call Doug Warner for

more information: 415-621-3900.

MARIN COUNTY BOARD MEETING:

(Third Monday) Citicorp Savings, 130

Throckmorton, Mill Valley. Contact Milton

Estes, 415-383-6622 (days). Marin Commit-

July 8, 7:30 pm at West America Bank,

Strawberry Shopping Center, Mill Valley.

Tuesday, August 12, 7:30 pm at Citicorp

Savings, 130 Throckmorton, Mill Valley.

Contact Milton Estes, 415-383-6622 (days).

MID-PENINSULA BOARD MEETING:

(Usually last Wednesday) Contact Harry

Anisgard, 415-856-9186.

MONTEREY BOARD MEETING: (Usu-

ally fourth Tuesday) Tuesday, July 22 and

August 26, 7:30 pm, Monterey Library,

Pacific and Jefferson Streets, Monterey.

Contact Richard Criley, 408-624-7562.

MT. DIABLO BOARD MEETING:

(Usually third Wednesday or third Thurs-

day) Contact Andrew Rudiak, 415-932-5580.

NORTH PENINSULA BOARD MEET-

ING: (Second Monday) Contact Sid

Scheiber, 415-345-8603.

SACRAMENTO VALLEY BOARD

MEETING: (Usually second Wednesday)

Contact Jerry Scribner, 916-444-2130.

tee for Independent Judiciary: Tuesday, -

Field Program Calendar

SAN FRANCISCO BOARD MEETING:

(Usually fourth Tuesday) Tuesday, July 22,

6:00 pm, ACLU, 1663 Mission Street, #460,

San Francisco. No meeting in August.

Contact Suzanne Donovan, 415-642-4890.

SANTA CLARA BOARD MEETING:

Annual Board Meeting, Tuesday, July 1,

7:00 pm, Executive Conference Room,

Community Bank Building, 111 West St.

John Street, San Jose. Special Dinner

Board Meeting, Tuesday, August 5, 6:00 pm

at Dom and Aurora Sallitto residence,

16790 Frank Avenue, Los Gatos. Board

members please RSVP to Aurora Sallitto

at 408-356-3280. For further information

contact: Michael Chatsky 408-379-4611.

SANTA CRUZ BOARD MEETING:

(Second Wednesday) Contact Bob Taren,

408-429-9880.

SONOMA BOARD MEETING: Contact

Andrea Learned, 707-544-6911.

STOCKTON BOARD MEETING: (Third

Wednesday) Contact Eric Ratner,

209-948-4040 (evenings).

YOLO COUNTY BOARD MEETING:

(Fourth Thursday of each month) Contact

Larry Garrett, 916-758-1005.

Field Committee

Meetings

PRO-CHOICE TASK FORCE: Wednes-

day, July 9, 6:30 pm, ACLU, 1663 Mission

Street, #460, SE Contact Marcia Gallo,

415-621-2494.

IMMIGRATION WORKING GROUP:

Thursday, July 17, 6:30 pm, ACLU 1663,

Mission Street, SE Contact Marcia Gallo

or Cindy Forster, 415-621-2494.

INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY: (Usually

first Saturday of each month.) July 12, 10:30

am, ACLU, 1663, Mission Street, #460, SE

Contact Marcia Gallo, 415-621-2493. For

local contacts, please see article p. 7.

DRAFT OPPOSITION NETWORK:

Contact Judy Newman, 415-567-1527.

Judiciary Committee

Continued from page 7

Chapters were trained to speak on the

importance of preserving the independence

of the judiciary by Drucilla Stender

Ramey of the San Francisco Bar Asso-

ciation. Committee members will be

speaking to a wide range of community

groups throughout northern California.

"The response from ACLU members

has been terrific," said Criley. "They see

through the rhetoric of those who are

playing on the public's fears about crime

for their own political interests. The ACLU

membership is rallying behind the need

to insure that this third, independent

branch of our government is not sold to

the highest bidder."

_ ACLU members who wish to partic-

ipate in this effort are urged to come to

the Independent Judiciary Committee

meetings contact the person in your

area listed below:

BERKELEY

Tom Sarbaugh 415/ 428-1819

CONTRA COSTA

Andrew Rudiak 415/932-5580

FRESNO -

Sam Gitchel 209 / 486-2411

MARIN

_Jack Butler (eve.) 415/453-0972

MONTEREY

Dick Criley 408 / 624-7562

OAKLAND

Rose Bonhag 415/658-7977

SACRAMENTO

Marcia Levy (eve.) 916/393-8399

SAN FRANCISCO

Suzanne Donovan

_SAN MATEO

Sid/Sara Schieber

SANTA CLARA

Bob O'Neil

SONOMA

Lucy Forest

YOLO

Julie Hayton

and

ACLU-NC Office

Contact Marcia Gallo

415/641-0984

415/345-8603

408/377-6864

107 | 525-9062

415/849-4398

415/621-2494