vol. 51, no. 6

aclu news

NON PROFIT

ORGANIZATION

POSTAGE

PAID

Permit No. 4424

San Francisco, CA

Volume LI

October/November 1986

No. 6

Bill of Rights Day Celebration

Sanctuary Nun to Be Honored

Bot

Sister Darlene Nicgorski-Sanctuary Trial defendant.

Drug Tests Halted

The first California court order halting

company-wide drug testing of employees

was issued on October 6 in a lawsuit brought

by the ACLU-NC and the Employment Law

Center on behalf of workers at a Bay Area

oil refinery.

Contra Costa Superior Court Judge

Edward Merrill issued the Temporary

Restraining Order (TRO) which put a halt

to the drug tests, to the termination or

suspension of employees who refused to take

the test, and to the dissemination of any

information gained from the tests until a

hearing is held on December 9.

Over one hundred refinery workers took

the test under threat of losing their jobs,

and three employees were fired for refusing

to take the test.

According to ACLU-NC staff attorney

Alan Schlosser who is handling the case

_with John True of the Employment Law

Center and ACLU-NC cooperating attor-

neys Robert Weppner and Barbara Brenner,

"In the midst of the barrage of publicity

from Washington and Sacramento promot-

ing the virtues of drug testing, workers at

Pacific Refining have had the courage to

raise in court the real issue-that urinalysis

testing is a blatant violation of individual

privacy as protected by the California

Constitution. The superior court order is

hopefully a first step in the fight to stop

this new method of intrusion into peoples'

private lives.

"We hope that this lawsuit will help bring

the real issue to the attention of the public-

namely, that testing is a humiliating and

degrading experience, and that the tests are

totally incapable of indicating anything

about impairment on the job," Schlosser

said.

"Politicians and employers may be

overestimating the willingness of the

American public in the long run to give

up their precious right of privacy at the

workplace," he added.

Company-Wide Testing

The Pacific Refining Company in -

Hercules, which employs about 125 workers,

announced its intention to implement a

company-wide policy of testing everyone of

continued on p. 3

ister Darlene Nicgorski, an outspoken

Sanctuary Movement worker who

was convicted of "conspiracy" to

shelter Salvadoran and Guatemalan

refugees after a nine-month trial in Tucson,

will be honored with the Earl Warren Civil

Liberties Award at the fourteenth annual

Bill of Rights Day Celebration.

The keynote speaker will be constitutional

law expert Laurence H. Tribe of Harvard

University Law School.

The Celebration, which will be held on

December 7 at the Sheraton Palace Hotel

in San Francisco, is the culmination of the

ACLU-NC's annual fundraising campaigns. .

Each year, for the past fourteen years,

the Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award has

been presented to a person or persons who

have distinguised themselves as champions

in the battle to preserve and extend civil

liberties.

The Board of Directors selected Sister

Darlene Nicgorski because of her "leadership

as an advocate and organizer in support

of human rights for the poor, for undoc-

umented workers and for Central American

refugees."

The Board also noted Nicgorski's

"courage and the courage of your co-

defendants throughout the Sanctuary Trial

in Tucson, Arizona...a powerful, symbolic

illustration of the importance of the First

Amendment's guarantee of freedom of

religion and freedom of speech."

Nun as Refugee

Nicgorski's sanctuary work came to

national attention in January 1985 when

the U.S. government indicted her and 15

others for federal conspiracy charges of

aiding Central American refugees, but her

human rights efforts started long before that.

The Milwaukee-born Nicgorski entered

the order of the School Sisters of St. Francis

in 1966 and spent several years working in

a childcare center in rural Mississippi and

an inner city housing project in Omaha,

Nebraska.

In 1980, Nicgorski answered a call from

her religious order to set up a pre-school

in Guatemala. Nicgorski knew little about

the situation in Central America, but

quickly became aware of the extreme

poverty and repression by the Guatemalan

Army as the peasants began to organize.

"I was in Guatemala less than six months

when a tragic event took place-our pastor,

Father Tullio Maruzzo, was brutally

murdered after celebrating mass," Nicgorski

explains. "Under death threats, we were

forced to abandon our convent and the

preschool I helped start."

She herself became a "refugee" in

Chiapas, Mexico and worked with Guatem-

alan refugees in the camps that had been

set up in Mexico. "I met Guatemalan

Indians who fled with whatever they could

continued on p. 7

ACLU-NC Voting Card

Vote NO on Proposition 63

Proposition 63, the English-Only initiative, is a divisive proposal which breeds

bigotry and intolerance. This measure-which would add an amendment to our

state Constitution-is so far reaching that it could eliminate multilingual emergency

services, bilingual education, and many other programs which facilitate the

assimilation of new immigrants and ensure the health and safety of us all.

Vote NO on Proposition 64

Proposition 64-the LaRouche-backed AIDS initiative-is an_ ill-conceived

measure which, by stigmatizing persons suspected of having the AIDS virus, would

actually contribute to the spread of AIDS. Overwhelmingly, public health and medical

professionals oppose Proposition 64 because it would damage our ability to control

AIDS and violate the rights of those most vulnerable to the disease.

Vote FOR an Independent Judiciary

The ACLU-NC condemns the current campaign against certain members of

the California Supreme Court as an attack on the independence of the judiciary.

While we affirm our position of making no endorsements in elections for public

office, we encourage all voters to keep our courts independent and strong.

aclu news

2 oct./nov. 1986

Congress Passes Immigration Bill

he U.S. Congress passed in rapid,

sweeping fashion the controversial

Simpson Rodino Immigration Bill

on October 16 after nearly five years of

debate.

"Far trom being 4d reform bill, the

Simpson Rodino bill represents a major

setback for civil rights," according to Bill

Tamayo, Chair of the National Network for

Immigrant and Refugee Rights and

ACLU-NC Board Member.

All major civil rights organizations have

consistently opposed the legislation on the

grounds that it will result in employment

discrimination, particularly against Hispan-

ics, Asians and Caribbean blacks, through

the imposition of employer sanctions.

As the bill in its various permutations

went through the House of Representatives, -

Senate and joint Conference Committee in

late September and early October, the Bay

Area Committee to Defend Immigrant and

Refugee Rights, of which ACLU-NC is a

leading member, held a series of press

conferences and a rally at the federal

building to protest its passage.

The new law makes it a criminal offense

to hire undocumented workers, and

increases the Border Patrol by 50 percent

over fiscal years 1987 through 1989. It

establishes a new guestworker program

designed to guarantee poweful Western

growers a steady supply of cheap, migrant

labor to harvest "perishable crops." The law

also includes a legalization program that.

ACLU-NC Field Representative Marcia Gallo-consistent opposition to employer

sanctions.

allows undocumented persons who entered

the United States before January 1, 1982

to apply for legal status.

"Rent-A-Slave"

Under the guestworker program, 365,000 -

foreign workers will be admitted into this

country each year. Those who worked for

90 days each year for the last three years

will be allowed to apply for temporary

resident status. After one year, they would

apply for permanent resident status.

Workers who worked for 90 days in this

country between May 1985 and May 1986

will have to be temporary residents for two

years before applying for permanent

resident status.

The guestworker program was a compro-

mise to loosen a deadlock which threatened

to defeat the bill in September. Growers

claimed that without a cheap, foreign

workforce, their fruits and vegetables would

rot in the fields. Labor advocates contend

that growers could easily exploit guest-

workers, and capitalize on their "temporary"

status to stifle unionizing efforts and pay

unfair wages.

"This bill talks about protecting American

Jobs, but allows 350,000 foreign workers into

this country in what is a `rent-a-slave'

program," according to attorney Francisco

Garcia of the Mexican American Legal

Defense Fund. "Workers won't be able to

complain about abuses without facing

deportation."

Board Officers

At its September meeting, the ACLU-NC

Board of Directors selected its officers for:

19865-87. They are: Nancy Pemberton,

Chair; Anne Jennings, Vice-Chair (Field

Committee chair); Davis Riemer, Vice-

Chair (Development Committee chair); Jim

Morales, Vice-Chair (Legislative Committee

chair); Steve Mayer, Vice-Chair (Legal

Committee chair) and Les Schmidt,

Treasurer. Additional members of the

Executive Committee will be Barbara

Brenner, Mary Lou Breslin, Marlene De

Lancie, H. Lee Halterman, Howard

Moore, Steve Owyang, and Frances

Strauss.

Brenner was selected as the ACLU-NC

representative to the national ACLU Board

of Directors, replacing Jennings, who

ACLU-NC Board

Nancy Pemberton

Chair

completed her three-year term.

ller

M ichael Mi

Demonstrators at S.F. Federal Building following House passage of Simpson Rodino

Bill.

Discrimination

Although the new law establishes a

process to legally challenge discrimination

which results from employer sanctions, it

allows employers to give preference to

citizens over legal permanent residents

(greencard holders) and other non-citizens

without liability for discrimination.

"The House and Senate have basically

codified the racist, anti-immigrant sentiment

that has been brewing in recent years," says

Tamayo. "The rise in racial violence,

especially against Asians and Latinos, is a

direct reflection of that sentiment."

Leading civil rights groups have consis-

tently charged that the bill was founded on

false principles that immigrants are harmful

to the national economy and culture.

At a press conference on October 10, after

the House passed the Conference Committee

compromise bill, civil rights advocates

voiced fierce opposition to the bill. "The

Reagan administration has set up immi-

grants as scapegoats for the problems of

this country," said Eva Jefferson Paterson

of the San Francisco Lawyers Committee

for Urban Affairs and Vice-Chair of the

national ACLU.

ACLU-NC Field Representative Marcia

Gallo stated, "Today, sadly, we see a

willingness in Congress to put aside

concerns for the privacy, equal protection

and due process rights of workers and

employers in this country." The ACLU has

consistently opposed immigration reform

legislation which relies on employer

sanctions and violates constitutional rights

and civil liberties.

Although the bill has passed, concerted

lobbying against the legislation in Northern

California succeeded in gaining six votes

against the bill among regional Congres-

sional Representatives. Representatives

voting against the final bill included Boxer,

Burton, Chappie, Dellums, Edwards, and

Mineta. Dellums and Edwards were the

only two who opposed the bill before it went

to the Conference Committee two weeks

earlier.

Civil rights advocates are expected to

raise constitutional challenges to the new

law. "We will be looking very carefully at

the various provisions of the bill for possible

challenge in the courts," says Garcia.

According to Tamayo, "The civil rights

community must step forward to challenge

the abuses committed against all immi-

grants-documented and undocumented-

and to expose the racist, xenophobic, and

anti-labor premises upon which this law

rests."

-Richard Bell

Computer Equipment

Needed

The ACLU-NC would welcome your

donation to our effort at computer-

ization! We especially need:

cent additional draft (dot matrix) printers,

serial interface preferred (c)

e IBM PC or compatible computers

In kind donations to the ACLU-NC

Foundation are _ tax-deductible.

(Because of proposed changes in tax

law, it may be more advantageous to

donate these items before the end of

1986.)

To donate computer equipment,

or for more information, please call

Tracy Brown at the ACLU-NC,

415-621-2493.

aclu news

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

August-September and November-December

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Nancy Pemberton, Chairperson Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director i

Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page a

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

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

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

Elaine Elinson, Editor

S

and

=

3

=~

9

5

=

me

aclu news

oct./nov. 1986 3

Court Orders Halt to Drug Tests

continued from p. 1

its employees for "alcohol, drugs, and

controlled substances" in May 1986. The

company held meetings where employees

were told that the testing did not result from

a safety problem at the refinery. The testing

policy did not specify any control of

information gained from the testing, nor any

means of challenging the results.

On October 1, without any warning, the

testing began. According to Dana Jemison,

a female technician at the refinery, "A

woman who I had never seen before

watched as I unfastened my pants and sat

down on the toilet seat. The entire

experience was insulting, humiliating, and

embarrassing in the extreme. I felt as though

I was being treated as though I was not

human, perhaps a head of cattle. .

"The only reason I submitted to this

dehumanizing experience was because I

understood that I would be fired if I did

not comply, and I cannot afford to lose my

job," said Jemison.

Three employees who refused to take the

test were indeed terminated. One of them,

Edmond Wilson, a refinery technician with

four years of employement at the plant, said,

"I asked [the Operations Supervisor]

whether I could be allowed to take an

unsupervised urine test on the premises and

retain half the sample for later testing by

a laboratory of my choice. I asked whether

I could take a blood test rather than a urine

test, since blood testing was more accurate."

The supervisor refused all Wilson's requests

and told Wilson that he was terminated.

A fourth employee, refinery technician

Randy Price, was suspended by the

company. He had been absent the day of

the testing and came back to work with

a letter in hand from the ACLU-NC advising

the employer that the tests were unconsti-

tutional. As a result of Judge Merrill's order

and a subsequent court argument on

October 10, Price was reinstated in his job;

however, the company chose to suspend him

with pay.

Privacy Rights

The ACLU-NC and the Employment

Law Center are challenging the drug testing

policy as a violation of the workers' privacy

as protected by the California Constitution.

"The invasion of privacy inflicted by

urinalysis testing goes far beyond the

extraction of bodily fluids," said attorney

True. "The employees were required to carry

out this intensely private act under the

watchful gaze of a stranger, and also

involved the private parts of the body.

Pacific Refining Company's drug testing

policy is a good example of the very sort

of overbroad and unnecessary information

- gathering that Article 1, Section | of our

state Constitution was designed to prevent."

The ACLU has challenged drug testing

in a number of other states. In New Jersey

and Arkansas, the ACLU won rulings

against drug testing of public school

students. Mandatory urinalysis of teachers

in Long Island, New York and prison guards

in Iowa has also been declared unconsti-

tutional in ACLU cases. The ACLU-NC is

currently a friend-of-the-court in an appeal

from a federal court ruling in San Francisco

which upheld the Federal Railroad Admin-

istration testing program involving over

200,000 workers.

Speakers include:

Sacramento

later than November 17.

FORUM

Drug Testing in the Workplace:

What Are Your Rights?

Walter Johnson, San Francisco Labor Council

Daphne Macklin, ACLU Legislative Advocate,

Nick Nichols, National Treasury Employees Union

additional speakers to be announced

Saturday, November 22; 10:30 am - 1:00 pm

ACLU-NC Offices / 4th Floor

1663 Mission Street (between South Van Ness and 13th Street)

San Francisco

The forum is free of charge but space is somewhat limited. To reserve

your seat, contact Marcia Gallo at the ACLU-NC, 415-621-2488 no

Sponsored by the ACLU-NC Right to Dissent Committee.

SH eo san

YBLLE

Z

ACLU Speaks Out

Against Drug Testing

ACLU-NC Executive Director Dorothy

Ehrlich testified against drug testing before

the state Legislature's Select Committee on

Drug and Alcohol Abuse in San Francisco

on October 14.

The special hearings come in the wake

of Governor Deukmejian's September

executive order for drug testing of almost

250,000 state workers, which itself followed

President Reagan's order for mandatory

testing of federal workers.

The following are excerpts from Ehrlich's

testimony:

"The American Civil Liberties Union

opposes indiscriminate urine testing because

we feel it is unfair and unreasonable to force

millions of American workers who are not

even suspected of using drugs, and whose |

job performance is satisfactory to submit

to degrading and intrusive urine tests on

a regular basis. In particular, we believe:

The California Legislature should take

the leadership to quell rather than

aggravate the current drug hysteria and the

rush to dispense with civil liberties with

short-term solutions. The Legislature

should prohibit public and private employers

from implementing intrusive drug testing

and instead seek constructive and effective

ways of dealing with drug usage.

The only legitimate interest of an

employer is in the job performance and

safety of its employees. Drug tests do not

measure job performance or current

impairment. The employer has no legitimate

interest in the off-hours lives of its

employees, information which drug tests

may reveal.

Prohibitive legislation would minimize

the numerous lawsuits that are bound to

arise if drug testing continues to be

implemented without restraint. Restrictive

legislation, prohibitions or restricted tests

would .ultimately save taxpayers and the

state money which would otherwise be

wasted on litigation.

Drug testing violates the state and federal

Constitutions. The courts have consistently

invalidated mandatory random drug testing

under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S.

Constitution.

The California Constitution provides an

even greater right to privacy under Article

1, Section 1. In order to be lawful, the

employer must establish it has a compelling

need for such testing and that there are no

other less instrusive way of meeting that

need. Since the employer's only interest is

in job performance-which drug testing

does not measure-drug testing violates the

Constitution in almost all instances.

At the very minimum, the Legislature

should adopt legislation similar to the San

Francisco ordinance which limits drug

testing to employees whose duties imme-

diately endanger lives and safety, and only

upon individualized reasonable suspicion

of impairment.

It is crucial that in responding to what

is pictured as a national drug crisis, the

Legislature allow time for reflection on its

serious civil liberties implications. In a case

the ACLU recently filed challenging blanket

company-wide drug testing by a Bay Area

employer, the workers' declarations about

the humiliating and degrading experience

they underwent create a vivid and very

human side of this supposed remedy. (See

story p. 1.)

-Humiliation, degradation, invasion of

privacy, loss of constitutional rights-these

are the recurring themes that we are already

hearing from employees and that we will

hear more and more if the Legislature does

not act in a reasonable, thoughtful manner.

Reflection and perspective always reveal

that it is possible to meet a danger while

remaining faithful to our traditions. This

is surely such an instance. The war on drugs

need not be a war on our constitutional

rights or values."

aclu news

4 oct./nov. 1986

Lega.

Challenge to Academic

FKreedom.at S.F. State

The ACLU-NC filed a lawsuit on

September 30 in San Francisco Superior

Court defending free speech and academic

freedom for faculty and students at San

Francisco State University. The lawsuit

challenges the University administration's

unprecedented decision to bar faculty and

students from attending a guest lecture given

by the controversial Rabbi Meir Kahane

on October 28, 1985. Kahane, a member

of the Israeli Knesset, founder of the Jewish

Defense League and head of the Israeli

Kach Party, is viewed by many as a political

extremist.

Dr. Dwight Simpson, a plaintiff in the

case and a professor of International

Relations for 18 years at San Francisco State

University Administration. "I was shocked

by the actions of the San Francisco State

University Adminstration. They have

violated constitutional rights guaranteed

under the First Amendment, and they have

negated long-standing and universally

accepted campus practices concerning

academic freedom. This crude and gross

assault on fundamental liberties cannot be

allowed to go unchallenged."

A graduate seminar on Israel/Palestine

(International Relations 740); and an upper

division introductory course on Middle

Eastern politics (International Relations

320). At the beginning of the term, as had

been his custom for approximately 15 years,

Professor Simpson made plans for outside

speakers to give lectures to supplement the

curricula of the courses described above.

During the fall semester of 1985, Professor

Simpson arranged for the following

speakers, among others, to give lectures to

his classes: John Rothman, President, World

Zionist Organization (West Coast); Leni

Brenner, authority on Revisionist Zionism;

Yaacov Sella, Israel Consul General (San

Francisco); Dr. Michael Nabti, Director of

Information Office, League of Arab States

(San Francisco); and Ismail Abdel-Moety,

Egyptian Consul General (San Francisco).

Professor Simpson opened his lectures to

all interested members of the University

community, and the administration permit-

ted these lectures without imposing any

restrictions on attendance.

In September 1985, Professor Simpson

invited Rabbi Meir Kahane to give a guest

"I cannot stand by while academic freedom is under attack by

those who would suppress the constitutional rights of students

to hear all points of view-even the most odious."

According to ACLU-NC staff attorney

Edward Chen, "As part of academic

freedom, professors must be given discretion

to teach courses as they see fit. The

University administration should not be

permitted to intervene in classroom affairs

because of its dislike of a controversial

speaker or subject."

Controversial Nature

The lawsuit (Simpson v. SF State) alleges

that the unprecedented closure of the lecture

was motivated by the controversial identity

of Kahane and the content of his message

and not justified by University policy or

security needs. The ACLU alleges that the

University administration deviated from its

long-standing practice of permitting

professors to exercise their academic

judgment in inviting, on occasion, guest

speakers to lecture at classes which are open

to University students, faculty, and staff.

These lectures with an enlarged audience

are designed to enhance discussion by

providing a broad diversity of viewpoints.

This practice has been common on campus

for over ten years with the consent of the

administration.

The suit seeks an injunction preventing

the University from interfering with

academic freedom and discriminating on the

basis of the identify and viewpoints of guest

lecturers. It also seeks damages for violations

of plaintiffs' constitutional and statutory

rights. .

Mid-East Lectures

As part of his fall semester. schedule in

1985, Professor Dwight Simpson was

teaching two courses on the Middle East.

lecture to his two classes and informed the

University administration of his invitation.

It was not until October 23 that the

administration indicated that Professor

Simpson's invitation to members of the

campus community to attend the Kahane

lecture would be denied.

Rabbi Kahane spoke at the University

as scheduled on October 28 to approximately

40 students enrolled in Simpson's two

International Relations classes. However,

several individuals, including International

Relations Professor Marshall Windmiller,

students, and reporters for the campus

newspaper, Golden Gater, were denied

admission to the Kahane lecture by campus

police.

Chen explained that the restrictions

imposed upon the lecture were not

adequately justified by legitimate security

needs. "The University had borrowed police

from other campuses, had resources from

the San Francisco Police Department

available, and utilized a metal detector at

the entrance to the lecture room," he said.

"This exclusion deprived the campus

community of an educational opportunity

and the class exposure to an unrestricted

diversity of viewpoints. Professor Simpson

was not permitted to teach his class in the

manner in which he desired. The rights of

each of the plaintiffs to free speech,

academic freedom, and due process were

thereby violated," added Chen.

Professor Windmiller, a member of the

San Franicsco State faculty for 27 years and

a plaintiff in the lawsuit said, "San Francisco

State's record of academic freedom has been

a source of great pride to me. I cannot stand

by while that freedom is under attack by

those who would suppress the constitutional

rights of students to hear all points of view,

"Bugs" Ordered Out of

Youth Authority

Electronic eavesdropping devices in the

chapel of the California Youth Authority

in Stockton violate the juvenile inmates'

right to religious freedom according to a

California Supreme Court October 9 ruling.

The ACLU-NC had filed an amicus brief

in the case, Arias and Bolton v. CYA.

The surveillance system was installed in

1981, but never connected because of

protests from inmates and chaplains about

its effect on religious freedom.

The opinion, written by Chief Justice

Rose Bird, stated that the mere presence

of the bugging devices in the chapel "has

had and will have a chilling effect on the

wards' exercise of religion."

Religious Privacy

Justice Bird wrote, "The record discloses

no effort by the Youth Authority to design

a security system that could accommodate

the special privacy of the wards' religious

practices." or take "measures which might

be less intrusive upon religious practices

San Quentin 6

Wins Appeal

Johnny Larry Spain, a former Black

Panther Party member who was convicted

for murder in the notorious San Quentin

6 trial, had his conviction thrown out by

U.S. District Court Judge Thelton Hender-

son on September 22 because Spain had

been shackled with chains during his trial.

"Such unjustified use of conspicuous

restraints is unconstitutional," Judge

Henderson stated, noting that Spain had

not been given "the opportunity to show

he would behave appropriately if treated

with dignity."

"This decision says. ..we are

going to have courts where a

black man cannot be chained

to the floor during a trial for

no reason at all."

The ACLU-NC filed an amicus brief ,

supporting Spain's habeas corpus petition

arguing that the shackling and the improper

even the most odious."

The suit was brought only after the

administration refused to respond to

requests by Professor Simpson and other

faculty to discuss and negotiate an

acceptable policy.

Charles R. Breyer and Rebecca J. Foust

of Coblentz, Cahen McCabe and Breyer are

ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys in this

lawsuit.

within the chapel.

"In the absence of a more substantial

showing that the Youth Authority has -

explored the effectiveness of less intrusive

alternatives and found them to be ineffective,

this court cannot hold that the sound

monitoring system is truly necessary for

institutional security," the opinion stated.

ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan Schlosser

who wrote the ACLU friend-of-the-court

brief, was pleased, but not surprised, by the

decision, "That private communications-

even for incarcerated persons-within a

religious chapel are included within the zone

of privacy protected by the California

Constitution is self-evident.

"Moreover, the Penal Code makes it

explicit that imprisonment does not

eradicate the rights of privacy in conver-

sation with a religious advisor," he added.

In 1982, Schlosser successfully argued -

before the California Supreme Court that

electronic surveillance of adult inmates? jail

conversations was unlawful in the case of

DeLancie v. MacDonald.

eee

meen

Prisoner.

conduct between the trial court judge and

juror who had prejudicial opinions about

the Black Panther Party denied Spain his

constitutional due process rights.

Spain's attorney, Dennis Riordan, said,

"This decision is extraordinarily significant

because it says we are going to have courts

where a black man cannot be chained to

the floor during a trial for no reason at

all. After 20 years, it is an opportunity to

get Johnny Spain out of prison."

While Riordan has filed a bail motion

with Judge Henderson, the state has already

moved to appeal the ruling to the Ninth

Circuit Court of Appeals. The ACLU-NC

will again submit an amicus brief in the

appellate court and will also be joined by

Amnesty International.

aclu news

oct/nov. 1986 5D

! Briefs

Appeal Filed to Halt

INS Raids

Seeking to overturn a federal appeals

court ruling allowing the Immigration and

Naturalization Service (INS) to enter

worksites without individualized warrants,

the ACLU-NC and other civil rights

attorneys filed a petition for rehearing in

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on

September 25.

The Court ruled on September 11 that

INS agents do not have to specifically name

persons sought nor include a description in

warrants obtained to enter workplaces. That

ruling reversed a major part of an injunction

issued in 1985 by U.S. District Court Judge

Robert Aguilar that INS warrants must

include names and specific descriptions.

"We [INS] agents like to sur-

round a factory and clean it

out."

- Deputy INS Director

The lawsuit, International Molders and

Allied Workers Union v. INS was filed by

the ACLU-NC, MALDEE the Asian Law

Caucus, CRLA, and other noted immigra-

tion attorneys in 1982 challenging a series

of raids in the Bay Area-part of nationwide

INS crackdown known as "Operation Jobs."

During Operation Jobs and subsequent

raids, the class action lawsuit charged,

immigration agents violated the constitu-

tional rights of workers and employers by

illegally entering worksites without warrant

or consent, and by detaining workers simply

because they looked Hispanic.

Judge Aguilar's preliminary injunction

restrained INS agents from detaining

workers without reasonable suspicion of

alleged alienage and arresting workers

without probable cause.

Although the most recent ruling wipes

out the provision for specified warrants, the

three-judge appellate court panel upheld

Judge Aguilar's ruling concerning detentions

and arrests, and that a "systematic" pattern

of abuses by the INS had been established.

According to ACLU-NC staff attorney

Alan Schlosser, "We lost an important

element of Judge Aguilar's injunction and

that is why we are petitioning for a rehearing

before the full Court of Appeals.

"But the fact that other aspects of the

injunction still stand is an important

message to the INS that it must still comply

with the law in other respects when entering

worksites and questioning employees, he

added.

The attorneys are asking for a speedy

review because, if the appeals court ruling

stands, the entire preliminary injunction will

be dissolved at the end of October, months

before the trial for a permanent injunction.

Deputy INS Director Arthur Shanks was

quoted by the Los Angeles Daily Journal

as saying that since Judge Aguilar's ruling,

the INS has been "treading very lightly"

in the Bay Area. "We've been waiting for

a decision, and were raring to go again.

We, our agents, like to surround a factory

and clean it out," the INS official said.

"OK, YOU WDDLED MASSES. | KNOW YOURE IN HERE."

Gagne Wiltenaan - Mercury Now

Salvadorans Denied Political

Asylum

and death for Salvadoran refugees.

Despite extensive documentation of

violence and massive human rights abuses

in El Salvador, the Ninth Circuit Court of

Appeals ruled on October 15 that young

men of military age fleeing El Salvador did

not qualify for political asylum in the United

States "as a special group."

The ACLU affiliates of Northern and

Southern California had filed an amicus

brief in the case Trujillo v. INS supporting

arguments by attorneys Marc Van Der Hout

and Patti Blum on behalf of Salvadoran

refugees at San Francisco's Father Moriarty

Central Americal Refugee Program.

Van Der Hout and Blum contended that

Luis Sanchez-Irujillo and Luis Escobar-

Nieto, as young, civilian urban males, 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.

At a 1982 Immigration Court hearing,

the two young Salvadorans presented a

dozen witnesses who testified that mutilated

bodies of young men were regularly found

after they had been interrogated by the

_ military.

They applied for political asylum under

1980 provisions in the immigration law

which permitted political asylum for people

who established "a well-founded fear of

persecution" on the basis of membership

in a particular religious, political, racial, or

social group.

The appellate court upheld the Immigra-

tion Court ruling denying asylum. The

ruling stated that under the law "a social

group" implied a "collection of people

closely affiliated with each other" and was

meant to apply to groups with a "voluntary

associational nature."

Attorney Van Der Hout said the ruling

was "extremely disappointing" and "astound-

ing" in its narrow defition of a social group. -

"I think the panel just didn't pay any

attention to the evidence," Van Der Hout

said, adding, "I think largely they were

influenced by foreign policy concerns which

is a reality anytime you have a case like

this challenging U.S. government policy."

`Van Der Hout is seeking a rehearing

before an en banc panel of the Appeals

Court.

The ACLU amicus brief had also argued

that principles of international law prohibit

the forced repatriation of civilians fleeing

armed internal conflict.

Less than 3% of Salvadorans who seek

asylum in the U.S. are granted it.

ACLU Opposes

Cigarette Ad Ban

Stating "This is a ban not on smoking

itself but on speech-the conveyance of

ideas," the ACLU-NC wrote to each

member of the San Francisco Board of

Supervisors, urging them to oppose the

proposed ordinance outlawing cigarette

billboard advertising.

The letter, signed by ACLU-NC Executive

Director Dorothy Ehrlich and staff attorney

Alan Schlosser, notes that "Commercial

speech is clearly entitled to constitutional

protection. The U.S. Supreme Court has

recognized that such expression `furthers the

societal interest in the fullest possible

dissemination of information."

According to the ACLU-NC, the ordi-

nance proposed by Supervisor Quentin

Kopp, is "unlike the city's regulation of

smoking in the workplace. That the

ordinance may be grounded in legitimate

concerns about the health hazards associated

with cigarette smoking should not obscure

the fact that it is an exercise in govenrmental

censorship."

The ordinance passed through the

Board's Public Protection Committee and

went to the full Board for a vote and

discussion on October 27.

aclu news

6 oct. Inov. 1986

Police Practices Project Scores Successes

In less than a year of existence, the

ACLU-NC Police Practices Project, directed

by attorney John Crew, has made its

presence felt in the San Francisco Police

Department by monitoring abuses and

mobilizing community pressure for change.

Launched in 1985 with an initial grant

from the San Francisco ACLU-NC Chapter,

the Project pulled together an impressive

group of civil liberties and minority rights

organizations in the city-the San Francisco

Police Practices Coalition-which now

meets quarterly with Police Chief Frank

Jordan to discuss community concerns.

"As a result of our three quarterly

meetings with the Police Chief there has

been significant progress," explained Crew,

"but it is still difficult for the Department

as a whole to change practices which have

been set in stone for decades."

One of the major victories of the Coalition

was halting a proposal to ban complainants'

representatives from hearings before the

Office of Citizen Complaints (OCC).

"Reacting to a City Attorney's opinion

(which was two years out of date), the OCC

proposed that, unlike accused officers,

people who make complaints to the OCC

about police abuse must come to the hearing

without the benefit of any attorney or moral

support from a friend or relative," explained

Crew.

The Coalition's efforts against the

proposal were successful even in the face

of opposition from the politically powerful

S.E Police Officers Association (POA).

Spurred by the Police Practices Project,

virtually every member of the Coalition

wrote letters condemning the proposal, the

Public Defender joined the effort, and the

San Francisco Chronicle editorialized

against it. The Board of Supervisors passed

a unanimous resolution asking the Police

Commission not to adopt the measure.

"In the end, even the director of the OCC

wrote letters and issued press releases

distancing himself from the proposal that

had originally been submitted in his name,"

said Crew. "In the face of such strong

opposition, the Police Commission found

it much easier to resist the City Attorney's

opinion and the pressure from the POA."

In July, the proposal was dropped by the

Police Commission.

Another success of the Coalition has been

the revamping of the Field Training Officer

(FTO) Program Reviews. After recruits

graduate from the Police Academy they are

assigned to FTOs for "on the job" training

and evalution. "In the past the FTOs-who

have been virtually all white males- have

displayed great hostility toward minority

and women recruits, and have often trained

the recruits in the practice of violating

people's rights rather than respecting them,"

said Crew.

"For example, on the daily FTO reports,

female recruits would be failed on driving

John Crew

and physical skills, Asian recruits would be

failed in the use of radio equipment, and

black recruits would be failed on report

writing," he explained.

As a result of a number of meetings with

the Chief and his training staff, there is now

an agreement to screen the FTOs on the

basis of complaints made against them, to

recruit more minority and women FTOs

and to make the program a real training

program, rather than a discriminatory

evaluation process.

The Coalition has also been instrumental

in getting the Department to address

internal sexual harrassment problems. In

addition, the Coalition is encouraged by the

Department's hiring of an outside police

consultant to do a thorough review of the

operations of the SFPD. "There has never

( ) Individual$20 ( )

(4

This is a gift membership from

Your Civil Liberties

Ignore them

and they'll go away!

Join the ACLU

ae ae ee ee =

Joint $30

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

Zip

by Michael P. Miller

before been an outside consultant looking

at the problems of the Department," said

Crew. "The consultant who has been hired

has a track record of supporting community

input-like asking people in the Mission,

the Castro, and the Fillmore what they

expect from the Department-a _ process

which has not been a part of the

Department for the last century.

"This process has great potential," Crew

added, "it is now up to the Project and the

Coalition to provide the community input

_ to make sure it meets its promise.

"Without the ACLU-NC Police Practices

Project, we would have been unable to

monitor and communicate our concerns for

changes in the Police Department to the

Police Chief," noted Crew. "Because of the

Project, we have been able to mobilize a

strong community Coalition to make sure

that changes happen!"

The ACLU-NC has funded the Project

through early 1987 and is currently seeking

further financial support to extend the

-Project's lifeline.

Your Rights in Your Pocket!

The ACLU-NC has just issued an

updated version of our popular

pocket-sized ``Rights on Arrest''

cards. The cards, which are available

in English, Spanish and Chinese, pro-

vide useful, accurate information

about an individual's basic rights

when confronted by a police officer.

Written in easy-to-understand lan-

guage, the cards are a useful tool for

everyone to have on hand.

You can get your copy now at

the ACLU office by writing ``Rights''

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St., San

Francisco 94103 or calling

415/621-2488. Individual copies are

free of charge. Orders of 50 or more

are $5.00 per 50. When ordering

please specify quantity and language

desired.

Honors

ACLU-NC Honored by

BALIF |

The Bay Area Lawyers for Individual

Freedom, a leading gay rights legal

association, honored the ACLU-NC with its

prestigious Community Service Award at

its fourth annual dinner on October 23. The

award was presented by BALIF Dinner Co-

Chair Nanci Clarence, who is also on the

ACLU-NC Gay Rights Chapter Board, to

Dorothy Ehrlich who accepted the award

on behalf of the affiliate.

Clarence noted, "Since its founding in

1934, the ACLU-NC has been involved in

the major struggles of the people of this

state for the preservation and extension of

our basic freedoms, and has been an

outspoken advocate of our basic freedoms,

and has been an outspoken advocate for

the right to privacy as well as the rights

of gay men and lesbians. In particular,

Clarence cited the ACLU-NC's representa-

tion of an employee of Southern Pacific who

was denied bereavement leave when his

partner of eleven years died and the lawsuit

on behalf of an officer in the California Air

National Guard who was involuntarily

discharged after disclosing that she was a

lesbian.

Rothschild Honored

Civil liberties and peace activist Miriam

Rothschild was honored by the Meiklejohn

Civil Liberties Institute for "leading the way

in defending First Amendment liberties."

The award was presented at an October

18 program in Berkeley. In 1982, Rothschild,

an indefatigable ACLU activist, was

honored by the ACLU-NC with the Lola

Hanzel Volunteer of the Year Award.

Ralph Atkinson Award

The ACLU-NC Monterey Chapter

bestowed the 1986 Ralph Atkinson Civil

Liberties Award on attorney Lydia Villareal

for her "defense of the elementary rights

of those in greatest need and most

vulnerable to exploitation-farmworker

families." The award was presented at the

Chapter's annual dinner on October 12 by

Monterey Chapter Executive Director

Richard Criley.

Villareal is a Salinas attorney with the

CRLA who focused the nation's attention

on the plight of farm laborers when she

filed a lawsuit on behalf of strawberry

workers who were living in caves.

aclu news

oct./nov. 1986 7

Bill of Rights Day Celebration

continued from p. 1

carry on their backs to save lives. Some

of them left behind their most valuable

posession outside of their family-the crops _

in the ground. One story melds into the

next: `the Army came and killed, the Army

came and burned, our crops, our animals,

our people."

Federal Indictment

When Nicgorski returned to the U.S., she

began working with the local ecumenical

task force on Central America in Phoenix,

Arizona. "I also learned about the Refugee

Act of 1980. I served in immigration court

testifying to the general conditions of

repression in Guatemala. I heard the judge

summarily deny applications. In fact, from

October 1982 through October 1985, the

judge heard 80 applications for Central

Americans for political asylum and granted

only one. I read about international law |

and treaties enacted to prevent such

deportations. It was clear that there were

good legal claims to assistance to refugees

that were being subverted by the INS.

"I began to understand the need to tell

the truth in the face of this administration's

efforts to silence the truth about Central

America," Nicgorski said.

On January 14, 1986 Nicgorski's Phoenix

apartment was searched by agents of the

INS. A videotape of that search-which

took place while she was attending a

religious conference in Michigan-shows

armed agents harshly questioning a

Salvadoran woman who was living there,

photos on the wall of murdered Salvadoran

Archbishop Romero and Nicgorski's friends

in Guatemala, an agent reading off all her

files on sanctuary issues, her passport and

visa entries, and a large poster on her

bathroom wall saying "Dump the Dinosaur

in 0x00B085-Vote Democrat."

That day, Nicgorski and fifteen others

were indicted by a federal grand jury. More

than 40 Central Americans were also

rounded up and named as "Alien Unindicted

Coconspirators."

Silence in Court

During a pretrial hearing in May 1985,

Judge Earl H. Carroll accepted a govern-

ment motion in limine which prevented the

defense from introducing any testimony or

evidence about the conditions of war and

repression in Guatemala or El Salvador,

international human rights law, the Refugee

Act of 1980 or religious motivation or intent.

"In other words," said Nicgorski, "our whole

defense was undermined and we were

silenced in the courtroom from telling the

truth, the whole truth." .

Some of the most painful moments of

the trial for Nicgorski and her co-defendants

came when the refugees whom they had

sheltered were called as government

witnesses. They, too, were kept from telling

their stories as the courtroom ban on

describing torture, assassination, and

disappearances in Central America applied

to them as well. More than once, Judge

Carroll instructed the jury to leave the room

as weight of their tragic testimony caused

_many of the refugees-and even the official

court translator-to break into tears.

On May 1, Nicgorski was convicted of

five counts: conspiracy to violate immigra-

tion law and two counts each of transporting

and aiding and abetting the harboring of

illegal aliens. She faced a possible 25 years

in prison.

At the sentencing hearing in July-

ironically just two days before the gala

national celebrations honoring the Statue

of Liberty-Nicgorski and the seven other

convicted defendants were given a chance

to speak in the courtroom for the first time.

In an eloquent 45-minute statement,

Nicgorski explained the "why" behind her

actions-the "why" that was never allowed

to be discussed in front of the jury. She

was given suspended sentences and five

years probation.

Nicgorski has not been deterred by her

ordeal. She continues to actively work in

sanctuary and has spoken in many cities

across the country, as well as on the Phil

Donahue Show, National Public Radio, and

through the pages of the New Yorker, the

New York Times, and many other publi-

cations. "To say `yes' to the refugees is to

say `no' to deportations, detentions, and the

continued sending of arms, advisors, and

money that continue the war machine that

makes the refugees flee. [Through the trial]

I saw the U.S. government use the same

tactics of intimidation that are used in

Central America. Somehow the anger that

builds inside strengthens our resolve and

courage. We are in for the long haul."

The Bill of Rights Day Celebretion will

~ be held at the Sheraton Palace Hotel in

San Francisco on Sunday, December 7;

program at 5 pm (no-host reception at 4

pm). Tickets for the event are $10 and are

available from the ACLU-NC office. Use

the order form in this issue. See back page.

Keynote Speaker

respected and popular teachers. Professor

Tribe is also a much sought-after

appellate advocate, having prevailed in

ten of the thirteen cases he has handled

as lead counsel in the United States

Supreme Court.

By 1977, Time magazine had already

named Tribe one of the nation's ten most

outstanding law professors. And in 1985,

The New Republic called Tribe "the

premier Supreme Court litigator of the

decade." :

During the last Supreme Court term,

he argued for the ACLU against

Georgia's antiquated homosexual sodomy

law.

John Shattuck, former Director of the

ACLU Washington Office, called Tribe

"one of the most important and

outspoken advocates of civil liberties." In

particular, Shattuck noted Tribe's efforts

in fighting the effort to strip federal

courts of jurisdiction and in defeating

the federal "Right to Life" constitutional

amendment which would have outlawed

abortion.

Tribe has written numerous books and

Laurence H. Tribe

ill of Rights Day keynote speaker

Laurence H. Tribe is the Tyler

Professor of Constitutional Law

at Harvard University where he has

served as a full-time member of the Law

where he is one of the most widely

Faculty for the past eighteen years, and -

articles, among them American Consti-

tutional Law which received the 1980

Coif Award for the most outstanding

legal writing in the nation.

Gay Rights Chapter

Membership Notice

ACLU members in northern Cali-

fornia are routinely placed on the

membership lists of local chapters ac-

cording to geographic area. There are

two exceptions: (1) those members

who live in areas where no local chap-

ter is currently organized are identi-

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

ACLU member may request to be

part of the only non-geographic chap-

ter in northern California - the Gay ~

Rights Chapter.

The _- nature of ACLU's

membership records system is such

that when ACLU members move,

they are reassigned to a new chapter.

When Gay Rights Chapter members

have moved, many have been routine-

ly reassigned to a new geographic

chapter, with the result that interested

ACLU members frequently lose

touch with the Gay Rights Chapter.

Any ACLU member in northern

California who wants to be a member

of the Gay Rights Chapter, or who

wants to confirm that she or he is.

already on the Gay Rights Chapter

membership roll, should call or write

the Membership Department, ACLU

of Northern California, 1663 Mission,

#460, San Francisco 94103, 415/621-

2493.

Volunteers Honored

Tracy Brown

Eric Bonaventura, Brenda McNamara, and Janet Allington (l.-r.) were three of the

more than two dozen ACLU-NC volunteers who were honored at a luncheon in

September. Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlich presented each volunteer with an award,

hand calligraphed by longtime volunteer Selwyn Jones, and told them, "You are truly

the backbone of this organization. It is not only the important work that you do,

but your selflessness and dedication that inspires us, the staff, to continue doing what

we do!"

At the luncheon, which is held annually, the volunteers heard presentations on police

complaints by Police Practices Project attorney John Crew and on drug testing by

staff attorney Alan Schlosser.

ACLU-NC volunteers serve the affiliate as Complaint Counselors, media monitors,

office workers, and in many various ways. If you would like to volunteer at the ACLU-NC,

please call Volunteer Coordinator Jean Hom at 415-621-2493.

-

Ss

aclu news"

8 oct./nov. 1986

A Will to Give

For more than 50 years the ACLU

of Northern California has fought to

defend the Constitution and the Bill

of Rights. Through the pages of

history-redbaiting, vigilantes, WWII

internment camps, HUAC, the Free

Speech Movement, Vietnam, civil

rights, the women's movement, gay

rights and more-the ACLU has

pioneered the fight for individual

liberties.

You can do something now to

insure that the ACLU will continue to

fight-and win-ten, twenty and fifty

years from now, through a simple

addition to your will.

Every year thoughtful civil libertar-

ians have, through their bequests,

provided important support for the

ACLU. In 1985, interest income alone

earned by these bequests contributed

over $50,000.

Making a bequest is simple: you

need only specify a dollar gift or a

portion of your estate for the American

Civil Liberties Union Foundation of

Northern California, Inc.

If you need information about

writing a will or want additional

information, consult your attorney or

write:

Bequests

ACLU Foundation

1663 Mission Street

San Francisco, CA 94103

| City

L120:

ACLU Z

-Foundation of

Northern

Z

ZY California

G

F 14th Annual

Bill of Rights Day

Celebration

Presentation of

Earl Warren Civil Liberties Award to

sister Darlene Nicgorski

Sanctuary Worker

Keynote Speaker

Laurence Tribe

=

Professor of Constitutional Law

Harvard Untversity

Sunday, December 7

1986, 5:00PM

No Host Wine pe 4:00PM

Sheraton Palace Hotel

Grand Ballroom

New Montgomery and Market Streets

San Francisco

Tickets $10-Call (415) 621-2493 or order from:

Bill of Rights Celebration

ACLU

1663 Mission Street, SE CA 94103

Checks payable to: ACLU

Bill of Rights Day Celebration Ticket Order Form

Enclosed is my payment of $ for

Name

tickets.

Address

Please make checks payable to the ACLU Foundation of Northern California. Mail

to Bill of Rights Day, 1663 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94103. Please enclose -

la self-addressed, stamped envelope.

Zip

Board Meetings

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

fourth Thursday) Volunteers are needed to

staff hotline. Contact Florence Piliavin,

415-848-4752. or 415-848-5195.

EARL WARREN BOARD MEETING:

(Third Wednesday) Contact Rose Bonhag,

415-658-7977.

FRESNO BOARD MEETING: (Usually

third Wednesday) Annual Membership

Meeting and Breakfast on December 13, 9:00-

11:00 am. Details to follow in Chapter

Newsletter. Contact Sam Gitchel for details:

209-486-2411 (days), 209-442-094] (evenings).

GAY RIGHTS BOARD MEETING: (Usu-

ally first Tuesday) November meeting

canceled. Tuesday, December 2, 1986, 7:00

pm, ACLU, 1663 Mission Street, #460, San

Francisco. Call Doug Warner for more

information: 415-621-3900.

MARIN COUNTY BOARD MEETING:

(Third Monday) 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, November 25,

7:30 pm, Monterey Library, Pacific and

Jefferson Streets, Monterey. Contact Richard

Criley, 408-624-7562.

MT. DIABLO BOARD MEETING: (Usu-

ally third Wednesday or third Thursday)

Thursday, November 20, Grimsted residence,

2153 La Salle. Wednesday, December 17.

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.

-_ Chapter Calendar _

SAN FRANCISCO BOARD MEETING:

(Usually fourth Tuesday) Tuesday, November _

25, and Tuesday, December 23, 6:00 pm,

ACLU, 1663 Mission Street, #460, San

Francisco. Contact Suzanne Donovan,

415-642-4890.

SANTA CLARA BOARD MEETING: 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

Colleen O'Neal, 707-545-1156.

STOCKTON BOARD MEETING: (Third

Wednesday) Contact Eric Ratner,

209-948-4040 (evenings).

YOLO COUNTY BOARD MEETING:

(Fourth Thursday of each month) Ongoing

efforts to defeat Measure D. Contact Dan

Abramson, 916-446-7701.

Field Committee

Meetings

FIELD COMMITTEE: Field Committee

Quarterly Meeting, Thursday, November 13,

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

San Francisco. Contact Marcia Gallo,

415-621-2494.

PRO-CHOICE TASK FORCE: Wednesday,

November 12, 7:00 pm, ACLU, 1663 Mission

Street, #460, San Francisco. Contact Marcia

Gallo, 415-621-2494.

INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY: (Usually

first Saturday of each month.) November 8,

10:30 am, ACLU, 1663 Mission Street, #460,

San Francisco. Contact Marcia Gallo,

415-621-2494.

DRAFT OPPOSITION NETWORK: Con-

tact Judy Newman, 415-567-1527.

FIELD COMMITTEE

SIGN ME UP

| want to be more involved in Field Committee activities

Name:

Address:

City:

Zip:

Telephone: Day

Night

I'm interested in working on the following issues:

Right to Dissent

________ Reproductive Rights

immigrants' Rights

Please send me information about my local chapter.

Thank you! Together we can make a difference.

Please return this form to:

Marcia Gallo, ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission Street #460, San Francisco, CA 94103.