vol. 53 (1988), no. 4
Primary tabs
aclu news
NON PROFIT
ORGANIZATION
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
Permit No, 4424
San Francisco, CA
Volume LIlI
July/August 1988
No. 4
Hospital Workers Protest
English-Only Rule
ospital workers at the University of
Hien (San Francisco), repres-
ented by the ACLU-NC and the
Mexican American Legal Defense and Edu-
cational Fund (MALDEF), announced at a
_ June 29 press conference that they had filed
discrimination complaints against the uni-
_ versity in protest against an "English-only"
rule imposed on employees.
The complaints, discrimination "charges"
filed with the U.S. Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission by ten university
workers and their union (AFSCME Council
10), seek to abolish an English-only work-
place rule imposed by UCSF in May of 1987.
The personnel rule, posted prominently in
several workplace reas, prohibits
employees from speaking a language other
than English on the job, except during lunch
breaks or when acting as translators. The
university has used the rule to issue written
and oral reprimands against employees who
have spoken to each other in Spanish and
Tagalog.
Ed Chen, ACLU staff attorney, asserted
that English-only rules in the workplace are
illegal. "These rules are aimed specifically at
bilingual workers and as such constitute
national origin discrimination forbidden by
the civil rights laws," Chen noted.
Rene Zamora-Baca, a bilingual worker
Yolanda Cortez, a diet technician and AFSCME shop steward at UCSF, announces
discrimination charges against the hospital for its English-only rule). MALDEF
attorney Francisco Garcia (left) and the ACLU-NC are representing the workers.
who delivers meals to patients' rooms, also
spoke at the press conference.
Zamora-Baca was orally informed by
supervisors of the English-only rule and
subsequently received a written reminder
not to speak Spanish on the job. Zamora-
Baca said "I didn't think it was right to be
afraid to speak Spanish." Thereafter, he was
stopped in a hallway by a housekeeper, an
older woman who speaks poor English, who
Drug Tests Halted, Started Again
( : harging an East Bay publishing
firm with using "Draconian mea-
sures," Alameda County Superior
Court Judge Michael E. Ballachey on June
8 enjoined a company policy requiring job
applicants to take drug tests as a condition
of employment. Less than three weeks later,
however, the state Court of Appeal stayed
the injunction.
The decision came in Wilkinson v. Times
Mirror Books, the first lawsuit to success-
fully challenge a mandatory drug testing
program for job applicants by a private
employer. Although Judge Ballachey
granted the plaintiffs an injunction, in a 2-1
decision the state appeal court ruled that
while the appeal is pending, a period which
could last anywhere from nine months to
over a year, testing may be continued.
"Tm very disappointed in the stay, partic-
ularly given the fact that there was no real
urgency in drug testing, given the nature of
the industry involved," commented ACLU-
NC staff attorney Ed Chen.
In his ruling, Judge Ballachey stated that
the drug testing program "runs afoul of the
Constitution . . . and it appears to be an
infringement of basic constitutional rights."
The lawsuit was jointly filed by the
ACLU-NC and the Employment Law Cen-
ter in March on behalf of Kathleen Wilkin-
son, Rina Hirai and Francesca Bannerman,
all of whom applied for jobs at the legal
publishing firm of Matthew Bender and Com-
pany, a subsidiary of Times Mirror
Corporation.
The publishing company instituted a pol-
icy of across-the-board mandatory drug and
alcohol testing of all job applicants in April
1987.
Wilkinson first applied for a job as copy
editor trainee in January 1987. In Sep-
tember, after several interviews, she was told
that she would be hired for the job on the
condition that she take the drug test.
"I was shocked," recalled Wilkinson, "I
couldn't believe they were asking for a drug
test. It's a privacy issue," she said.
Hirai, an attorney, who applied for a job
as a legal writer, was told her application
had to be withdrawn because she refused to
sign a statement that she would submit to a
drug test.
A third applicant, attorney Francesca
Bannerman, joined the suit after she, too,
was required to take a urine test for drugs
before being employed as a legal writer by
the firm.
Co-operating attorney Christina Hall of
Hall and Fishman who is litigating the case
with ACLU-NC staff attorneys Chen and
Matthew Coles, and John True of the
Employment Law Center, said, "Urinalysis
testing compromises fundamental privacy
interests and represents a disturbing acceler-
ation in the use of technology to encroach
upon the sanctity of the right to privacy."
Chen was particularly pleased with Balla-
chey's recognition of the overreaching
aspects of the mandatory drug testing pro-
gram. "The judge found that drug tests,
while degrading and invasive of privacy, do
not identify applicants who present a sub-
stantial risk of being a poor employee, nor
do they deter drug use since sophisticated
drug users can easily beat the tests." Chen
said.
Widespread testing
There is widespread use of mandatory
drug testing for job applicants-of compan-
continued on p. 2
engaged him in a brief Spanish conversa-
tion. A supervisor overheard the conversa-
tion and reprimanded Zamora-Baca.
"The rule is bad because it discriminates
against minorities, especially older people
who do not speak English well, and because
there's no good reason to forbid people to
speak their native tongue if they are not
talking to supervisors or the public," said
Zamora-Baca. He also opposes the rule
because it is applied unequally and "used as
a club by supervisors to keep people in line."
Racial animosity
Yolanda Cortez, a UCSF diet technician
and a union steward for AFSCME, noted
that the English-only rule "places enormous
stress on university employees, heightens
racial animosity in the workplace, and
creates an environment of oppression and
resentment where supervisors are encour-
aged to engage in arbitrary and discrimina-
tory actions."
After observing an English-only notice
posted on a kitchen bulletin board, Cortez'
complained to the university's Labor Rela-
tions Department. She was told that the -
university "stood firmly behind the rule" in
spite of the objections of bilingual workers
and nothwithstanding a recent federal court
decision invalidating such rules.
In January of this year, the Ninth Circuit
' Court of Appeals held that a Los Angeles-
area municipal court's English-only rule is a
violation of Title VII, the federal antidis-
crimination law. The ruling in Gutierrez v.
Municipal Court, the first California deci-
sion to address the validity of English-only
rules, noted that "such rules can create an
atmosphere of inferiority, isolation and
intimidation." Significantly, the court relied
on EEOC guidelines, in force since 1980,
that bar English-only rules unless justified
by a "business necessity."
"The university's English-only rule is
identical to the one invalidated in the Gutier-
rez case, and there can be no conceivable
justification for its continued use," said
MALDEF attorney Francisco Garcia.
"Today we send a signal to the university and
all employers who discriminate on the basis _.
of English`only rules that such rules are
illegal and will no longer be tolerated in our
multi-cultural society," added Garcia.
Garcia also explained that through a
"Language Rights Campaign," the ACLU
and MALDEF seek to counter through
public education misguided attempts to
enact English-only legislation and to pro-
tect, through litigation if necessary, the
rights of language minority persons victim-
ized by English-only rules, regulations and
laws.
aclu news
2 july/august 1988
AIDS Initiative
Marc Geller / Sentinel
Health professionals announce their opposition to the Dannemeyer AIDS initiative at
, an ACLU press conference. Left to right: California Medical Association President Dr.
Laurens White, S.F. Public Health Department chief Dr. David Werdegar, ACLU-NC
attorney Matthew Coles and Helen Miramontes of the California Nurses Association.
"LaRouchein |
Sheep's Clothing"
he California Medical Association,
Ts president Dr. Laurens White, the
California Nurses Association and
Dr. David" Werdegar, Director of the San
Francisco Department of Public Health,
filed a suit on July 6 to keep Congressman
William Dannemeyer's AIDS initiative off
the November ballot.
Though promoted as a public health mea-
sure, the initiative would actually impede
efforts to stop the spread of AIDS. The
proposed initiative would forbid anonymous
testing, and require doctors to report the
name of anyone "believed" to be infected
with the virus which causes AIDS to local
health officers. Doctors who failed to report
would be guilty of a crime and subject to a
$250 penalty for each report.
The initiative would also require that all
HIV test results be reported to health offic-
ers, including those obtained during most
research studies; require that all persons
"believed" to be infected turn in the names -
and addresses of all sexual partners (from an
unspecified period of time) within seven
days or face criminal prosecution; eliminate
current laws which prohibit employers and
insurers from requiring HIV antibody tests;
eliminate the present requirement of written
consent for HIV tests; require that persons
charged with certain crimes, including
assault, be tested; and increase prison sen-
tences for HIV positive people convicted of
certain crimes, again including assault.
The lawsuit was filed by ACLU-NC Staff
attorney Matthew Coles, Benjamin Schatz
of National Gay Rights Advocates, ACLU-
NC cooperating attorneys George Cum-
ming and David Furbush of Brobeck,
Phleger and Harrison, and Roberta Achten-
berg of the Lesbian Rights Project. The suit
charges. that the petitions Dannemeyer used
to obtain signatures for the initative mislead-
ingly failed to tell voters that the proposed
law would ban anonymous testing for
AIDS.
Single Subject Rule
The lawsuit also. claims that by including
provisions on insurance, protective clothing,
Gift from Gay Rights Chapter
The Gay Rights Chapter has given
~ $11,475 to underwrite an ACLU-NC AIDS
and Gay Rights Legislative Project con-
ducted by staff counsel Matthew Coles.
The gift enables Coles to devote one-
fourth of his time to working on AIDS and
gay rights legislation. Coles is a key strategist
against repressive AIDS legislation and
initiatives. He has been called in to head off
repressive measures in other Western states,
and is the architect of gay rights and domes-
tic partnership ordinances in California and
around the nation.
In making the gift, Gay Rights Chapter
Chairperson Douglas Warner said, "We
believe that Matt's work in this area is vital.
At a time when the courts are growing
increasingly conservative, we must concen-
trate some of our resources on preventing
bad legislation and enacting affirmative
measures to safeguard rights for lesbians,
gay men and people at risk of contracting
AIDS."
The gift comes from funds from a bequest -
made by Norman Sansom, a long-time
ACLU and Gay Rights Chapter member
who died in 1985.
ACLU-NC Board Chairperson Nancy
Pemberton said, "We are delighted by the
generosity of the chapter's gift because it
makes possible the expansion of our work
on issues we consider of monumental impor-
tance. We are deeply committed to ending
discrimination against lesbians and gay
men, and to combatting the threats to civil
rights and civil liberties surrounding the
AIDS crisis."
testing persons charged with assault, and
longer sentences for HIV positive people
convicted of assault, the initiative violates
the "single subject" requirement of the state
Constitution.
If the initiative were successful in
November, the all-important one-to-one
counseling provided at all anonymous test-
ing sites would be eliminated. If people were
to stay away from the anonymous test sites
and from private physicians for fear of the
reporting requirements, Dr. Werdegar
explained, "the spread of the virus would
increase dramatically."
"Forced testing and reporting," stated
Helen Miramontes, immediate past presi-
dent of the California Nurses Association,
"is impractical, unnecessary and lacks any
public health rationale." She instead advo-
cates "massive on-going education of all
segments of our society."
Dr. White asserted that mandatory
reporting would "drive people away from
education," the most effective tool in halting
the spread of the epidemic.
The provisions on testing criminal defend-
ants and sentencing, the lawsuit charges, are
unrelated to public health. "There is no way
AIDS could be transmitted by assault with a
firearm," said Coles. "The only connection
between AIDS and this part of the initiative
is that people who have the virus which
causes it get special punishment. This isn't
public health, it's public retribution."
According to NGRA attorney Benjamin
Schatz, "The Dannemeyer AIDS initiative
is a poorly drafted and mean spirited
attempt to exploit the AIDS crisis for polit-
ical gain. If it is placed into law, the taxpay-
ers will be forced to pay billions of dollars for
repressive measures which will actually
increase the spread of AIDS. No one," he
said "should be fooled by a LaRouche in
sheep's clothing." _
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 located on the
newsletter mailing label.
Drug Tests
continued from p. 1
ies that use drug testing, over 90% of them
conduct pre-employment drug tests.
The judge, noting the need for drug con-
trol because "it is undermining the very
fabric of our society," said that Matthew
Bender's program "appears to be a panicky
reaction to the problem . . . and companies
should not violate the privacy of
individuals."
Concerned with the means by which the
drug problem is dealt with, the judge called
the views about social control held by Dr.
Robert Dupont, one of Matthew Bender's
expert witnesses, "frightening" and reminis-
cent of pre-World War II Germany. Dupont
advocates random drug testing of all motor-
ists, high school students and children
within the family.
The ACLU has strongly opposed drug
testing as a violation of constitutional pri-
vacy guarantees. The ACLU-NC has chal-
lenged drug testing of refinery workers,
student athletes, federal railway workers and
employees of the Veterans Administration.
Nationally, the ACLU has numerous drug
test challenges pending in the courts.
New ACLU-NC
Board Members
In order to fill the vacancies created by the
resignations of ACLU-NC Board members
Francisco Lobaco, Steven Owyang and
Mary Lou Breslin, the Board of Directors
has appointed the following people to the
Board:
Leigh-Ann Miyasato is an attorney with |
the firm of Erickson, Beasley and Hewitt. A
specialist in employment law, Miyasato is
also active in the Asian American Bar Asso-
ciation. She was one of the attorneys on the
successful Korematsu case which, in 1983,
overturned the conviction of Fred Kore-
matsu for refusing to obey the internment
order which forced 120,000 Japanese Amer-
icans into concentration camps during
World War II.
Joanne Lewis serves as a Vice-Chancellor
at the University of California (San Fran-
cisco). She is a member of the Black Caucus
at UCSF and is currently president of Advo-
cates for Women.
David Averbuck is an attorney who spe-
cializes in disability rights. Currently in pri-
vate practice in Oakland, Averbuck taught
at U.C. Berkeley's School of Social Welfare
from 1973-87 specializing in law and the
disabled, children's rights and age discrimi-
nation. He also served as an Assistant Dean
at Boalt Hall School of Law and as an
attorney with the United Farm Workers.
Lewis is filling an interim vacancy that
expires in July 1988 and therefore is also
running in the current Board of Directors
Elections. Averbuck is filling a term which
expires in July 1989, and Miyasato a term
which expires in July 1990.
Elaine Elinson, Editor
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 I.iberties Union of Northern California
Nancy Pemberton, Chairperson Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director
| 1663 Mission St., 4th floor, San Francisco, California 94103. (415) 621-2488
Membership $20 and up, of which 50 cents is for a subscription to the aclu news
and SO cents is for the national ACLU-bi-monthly publication, Civil Liberties.
Marcia Gallo, Chapter Page
: aciu news
july/august 1988 3
Concord Activists
Protest "Pain Holds"
harging that the Contra Costa She-
e _riffs Department "has resorted to
the use of `pain holds' that inflict
excessive, unnecessary force" on peaceful
protestors at the Concord Naval Weapons
Station, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on May 10
in U.S. District Court on behalf of members
of Nuremberg Actions.
The demonstrators, at least two of whom
had limbs broken by the officers, are being
.represented by ACLU-NC cooperating
attorney Robert Mittelstaedt of Pillsbury,
Madison and Sutro and ACLU-NC staff
attorney Ed Chen.
"Using pain holds and breaking wrists
and arms of peaceful demonstrators is exces-
sive and unnecessary force-and violates the
U.S. and California Constitutions," said
Mittelstaedt.
Nuremberg Actions began a vigil at the
Concord Naval Weapons Station in June
1987 to protest the shipment of weapons by
the U.S. government to the contras in Nica-
ragua, to the governments of El Salvador
and Guatemala and other countries in Cen-
tral America.
The area surrounding the Weapons Sta-
tion is public property and has been the site
of many anti-war protests over the years.
Attorney Chen explained, "The members
of Nuremberg Actions are dedicated to the
peaceful, non-violent exercise of their First
Amendment rights."
Beginning September 1, 1987, the protes-
tors, having first alerted the Weapons Sta-
tion, the Marines and the Sheriff's
Department, began protesting the shipment
of arms to Central America by praying,
fasting, sitting, standing or kneeling on or
near the train tracks outside the main gate.
On that date, veteran Brian Willson (who is
not a party to this lawsuit) was run over by
a munitions train and lost both legs.
According to plaintiff David Hartsough,
who had his wrist broken by a Sheriff's pain
hold, "Since September 1, we have had a 24-
hour a day presence and nonviolently block-
aded every munitions train at the Weapons
Station.
"We plan to continue our nonviolent
actions at Concord and ask our government
to uphold international law, stop inflicting
violence and death on the people of Central
America, and stop its intimidation of peace-
ful protestors in this country," Hartsough
added.
Chuck Goodmacher/ Peace Center
At the train tracks used
for sending arms to Central
America, a Concord sherriff
arrested protestor David Hartsough
with a painhold, breaking his arm.
Since October, 1987 officers have used
pain holds on the demonstrators. Pain holds
(also known as "control holds") consist of the
twisting of arms, fingers, ears or other por-
tions of the body or use of pressure on the
arteries. They are intended to and do pro-
duce severe pain the victim, often resulting
in bruises, torn ligaments, severe swelling
and broken bones. |
Peace Navy Can Sail During
Fleet Week
he Bay Area Peace Navy will be free
to fill San Francisco's Aquatic Park
with peace songs and banners during
"Fleet Week" because of a May ruling by
U.S. District Judge Alfonso Zirpoli in a
lawsuit brought by the ACLU-NC.
The Peace Navy came to the ACLU-NC
seeking to challenge restrictions placed on
their activity by the U.S. Navy, which vio-
lated the peace activists' First Amendment
rights.
In 1986, the Coast Guard imposed a
security zone on the Peace Navy's Fleet
Week demonstration which kept the Peace
Navy's boats 75 yards away from the pier at
_ Aquatic Park. At this distance the Peace
Navy's songs were inaudible and their pro-
test signs were unreadable to viewers. The
Navy attempted to impose the same string-
ent restrictions on the Peace Navy in 1987.
But in October 1987, after hearing argu-
ments from ACLU-NC cooperating attor-
ney James Kaller and ACLU-NC staff
attorney Matthew Coles, Judge Zirpoli
issued a Temporary Restraining Order
(TRO) stating that the Coast Guard's 75-
yard security zone was unconstitutional.
Judge Zirpoli's. May ruling replaces the TRO
with a permanent injunction.
Based in Berkeley, the Peace Navy is a
flotilla comprised of nearly 100 sailboats,
powerboats, yachts, canoes, kayaks and
dinghies. The group has been holding
marine demonstrations during Fleet Week,
the nation's largest annual naval event, since
1984.
As Navy warships pass a reviewing stand
on Aquatic Park's pier in their procession
which opens Fleet Week, the Peace Navy
armada sails past the pier displaying
banners and posters opposing militarism
and calling for peace.
"Our objective," says Peace Navy co-
coordinator and plaintiff Robert Heifitz, "is
to promote an ecologically beneficial, peace-
time revitalization of the Bay for recreation,
commerce and industry-not to promote
false patriotism at home and illegal covert
adventures abroad."
The Coast Guard began imposing the 75-
yard restriction, which extended in all direc-
tions around the pier, in 1986. Navy officials
claimed that they had to "safeguard public
officials from subversive acts... ." Judge
Zirpoli's TRO, issued on the eve of the 1987
Fleet Week procession, decreased the secur-
ity zone to 50 yards for the Peace Navy's
parade and 25 yards for its performance
boat.
Judge Zirpoli asserted, "There has been
no tangible threat of terrorist attack during
the `Fleet Week' ceremonies in the past. The
Peace Navy's counter-demonstrations did
not pose any threat of violence or other
terrorist activity in 1984, 1985, 1986 or 1987.
There is no evidence that the Peace Navy will
pose such a threat in the future." With the
injunction, Judge Zirpoli changed the zone
to 25 yards for all Peace Navy boats.
The ruling allows for possible future mod-
ifications which may be imposed because of
a "tangible threat to security," weather con-
ditions,, or alternations in.the Fleet Week
program. Safety zones placed around naval
ships and during the Blue Angels air show
were excepted from the new zone
requirements.
Said ACLU staff attorney Matthew
Coles, "It's easy to look at this as a small
case. But we were very worried about the
tendency of the U.S. government to use
terrorism as a blanket excuse for cutting
back on First Amendment rights, and we
are very glad it hasn't worked!"
- Suzanne Samuel
On November 10, 1987 Hartsough, who
works at the American Friends Service
Committee in San Francisco, was peacefully
demonstrating at the tracks. When asked to
leave, he explained to the officer that he
would stay because if he left people in Cen-
tral America would die.
Sheriff Mock responded by using a pain
hold, saying that this is to "make sure you
leave the tracks next time." The sheriff broke
Hartsough's wrist.
At the same demonstration, another she-
riff arrested David Wylie, an ordained min-
ister with the United Church of Christ.
Using a pain hold, he twisted Reverend
Wylie's arms behind his back. The sheriff's
actions were so severe that he broke Wylie's
elbow.
Reverend Wylie said, "With this lawsuit,
we want to remind people that this little bit
of suffering that we have experienced
directly in no way compares to the massive
violence and suffering that the U.S. govern-
ment has inflicted on the peoples of Central
America and elsewhere throughout the
world." :
Grandmother injured
On November 17, Sheriff Dussel used a
pain hold to arrest Jean Bakewell, an Orinda
artist and a grandmother of four, who was
sitting on the railway tracks. He twisted her
arm with such force that it was bruised and
swollen. She was taken to the hospital and
diagnosed as having severe sprain.
Bakewell says that she is sure she was
"being used as an example that day."
"T have been involved in the peace move-
ment for many years and I have never
received such treatment. It was raining and
it was the first day I sat on the tracks. I was -
literally thrown between two police cars. It
was obvious I was in extreme pain as I was
screaming at the top of my voice," Bakewell
said.
Hartsough added, "I am outraged that the
Sheriffs Department and the Navy have
attempted to intimidate and frighten us into
discontinuing our peaceful, nonviolent
protest.
"There is no excuse in a democratic coun-
try for government representatives to inflict
violence and pain on protestors whose only
crime is that we are asking our government
to uphold intenational law and stop killing
innocent civilians in Central America and
other parts of the world," he said.
The lawsuit, Nuremberg Actions v. Con-
tra Costa, seeks a court ruling that the use of
pain holds on peaceful demonstrators vio-
lates their constitutional rights, especially
when the Sheriff's Department knows that
the demonstrators are nonviolent and pres-
ent no risk of escape. The lawsuit also seeks
compensatory damages for the injuries
inflicted on the demonstrators.
Filing Cabinets
The ACLU-NC is in great need of
filing cabinets to keep our papers in
order. If you have some to offer, we can
pick them up from you if they are in San
Francisco or nearby environs. We
especially need:
4-drawer, legal size (4)
2-drawer, legal size (1)
Please contact Mila deGuzman at
the ACLU-NC office, (415) 621-2493.
aclu news
4 july/august 1988
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
joined or renewed their membership within
the last twelve months.
The label affixed to this issue of the
ACLU News indicates on the top line the
year and month when your membership
has expired.
If you are not eligible to vote, you may
choose to renew your membership, and
thereby resume your membership in good
standing, at the same time you submit your
ballot.
If you share a joint membership, each
individual is entitled to vote separately-
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 current Board of Direc-
tors after consideration of the Nominating
Committee's recommendations. Candidates
may also be nominated 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 bal-
lot, 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 confidentiality of
your ballot, insert your ballot in a double
envelope with the special mailing label in the -
outer one. The envelopes will be separated
before the counting of the ballot.
Ballots must be returned to the ACLU
office by noon on August 10, 1988.
There are nine candidates running to fill
nine vacancies on the Board. You may vote
for up to nine candidates.
_ For your consideration, we are publish-
ing brief statements submitted by the candi-
dates for election to the Board of Directors.
Marsha Berzon
I have served as a member of the Board of
Directors of the ACLU-NC since 1985. Dur-
ing that time and before, I have been on the
Legal Committee and on several substantive
committees, including ones addressing
AIDS issues and attorneys fees policies, and
served as a volunteer attorney. :
My particular interests among the many
that the ACLU works on include women's
rights and free speech. In both of these
fields, I have done extensive legal work,
including representing the interests of the
labor movement in the United States
Supreme Court. I find serving the Board of
the ACLU-NC a fascinating and rewarding
experience, and hope to be able to continue
to do so in the future.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
BALLOT |
Vote for no more than nine candidates. Joint |
members use both columns. Please read
voting instructions before completing ballot.
Marsha Berzon
James Blume
Ann Brick
Richard Grosboll
Lee Halterman
Joanne A. Lewis
Ethel Long-Scott
Alberto Saldamando
_ac GE se Ge GS Ge Ge oe ee ee
James Blume
I have been a member of the ACLU for
over 20 years. During this period, I have
noted with admiration the ACLU's growth
in importance and stature. As a result, it is,
at once, a great honor and a great opportun-
ity to be nominated to serve on the ACLU-
NC Board of Directors.
If elected, I can bring to the Board an
abiding commitment to civil liberties as well
as a wide-range of experience serving non-
profit organizations. As a Board member, I
believe I can utilize my managerial, financial
and budgetary skills to enhance our organi-
zation. I look forward to the opportunity to
more fully serve the ACLU.
Incumbent: No |
Nominated by: Board of Directors
~ Ann Brick
I am honored to be nominated for mem-
bership on the ACLU-NC Board of Direc-
tors. As a high school student in Wyoming in
the early 1960's, I looked to the ACLU as a
symbol of the fight to safeguard civil liber-
ties and civil rights in this country. I know
now that it is far more than just a symbol; it
is a Vital force in preserving those freedoms.
After finishing law school and joining a
law firm, I have had the privilege of working
both as co-counsel and as a cooperating
attorney on ACLU cases. I have also served
on the ACLU's Legal Committee. Member-
ship on the Board of Directors offers an
opportunity to work to strengthen the
ACLU as an organization as well as to
continue working to further the values for
which the ACLU stands. I hope you will give
me the opportunity to do so.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Richard Grosboll
Having enjoyed my tenure on the ACLU-
NC Board, I would like to remain on the
Board for another three years. I am Chair of
the ACLU-NC Field Committee, Chair of
the 1988 Conference Committee, Co-Chair
of the ACLU-NC Pro-Choice Task Force
and serve on the Development Committee.
Previously, I served as Chair of the Bill of
Rights Campaign Committee for three
years. The issues, as well as our fund-raising
needs, continue to be challenging and inter-
esting, and I hope to have more time to work
on both. I have enjoyed and appreciated the
opportunity to work with the ACLU-NC
staff and fellow Board members.
I work for a union-side labor law firm
specializing in the employee benefits area
and am an active volunteer in neighborhood
and environmental issues in San Francisco.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Lee Halterman
I am honored to be nominated to serve
another term on the ACLU Northern Cali-
fornia Board of Directors. During my five
years on the Board I have served on the
Legislative Committee, the Executive Com-
mittee, the Development Committee, have
chaired ad-hoc committees on the Inde-
pendence of the Judiciary and the Immigra-
tion Reform and Control Act, and have
-attended the Philadelphia biennial confer-
ence on behalf of the affiliate.
I look forward to continuing to work to
end the death penalty, preserve pro-choice
and sexual freedom victories, protect dem-
onstrators, ethnic minorities and those who
confront government harrassment, and to
expand our views of civil liberties to
embrace enhanced expressions of human
rights as manifested in international legal
documents. I want to work to enhance our
outreach and membership recruitment dur-
ing the coming period, and to ensure the
viability of one of the best programs for
protecting civil liberties that operates in the
nation.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Joanne A. Lewis
For the past 20 years I have actively sup-
ported efforts to make the work environ-
ment non-discriminatory, beginning in 1968
as one of the founding members of the
=
1988 ACLU-NC Board of Direc
Douglas R. Young
aclu news
july/august 1988 5
ctors Elections -
University of California, San Francisco
Black Caucus.
During these 20 years I have worked
closely with a variety of organizations and I
appreciate the important role of community
organizations. The ACLU has a strong rep-
utation for quality work. When ACLU
joined you in the battle, your confidence
level increased due to ACLU's unwavering
commitment to individual rights. During
my tenure as Director of the California
Department of Fair Employment and Hous-
ing, the ACLU was a friendly support on
more than one occasion.
It is an honor to serve on the ACLU
Board of Directors. I pledge my support to
the expansion and strengthening of the
ACLU influence in protecting individual
rights.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Ethel Long-Scott
My experience in social justice work cov-
ers 17 years, or all of my adult life and some
of my youth. As Co-Director of the Women's
Economic Agenda Project (WEAP), my
responsibilities have focused on the methods
of evaluating family-oriented programs and
policies and examining their impact on fam-
ily stability. As a state-wide organization,
WEAP has had the opportunity to be a
significant part of many other organizations
who have similar concerns and seek to red-
ress the impact of gender-specific, insensi-
tive public policy. Besides directing the
Project, I serve on national boards (Child
Care Employee Project, Equal Rights Con-
gress, and National Center for Policy Alter-
natives) and also serve on several statewide
boards.
For the past 3 years I have served as the
Co-Convenor of The Women, Family and
Work Coalition which was responsible for
spearheading a non-partisan legislative
package which speaks directly to the needs
of women, children, elderly, disabled, unem-
ployed and underemployed Californians.
Through our efforts, we have had the Gover-
nor sign 25 bills into law.
I serve as an Executive Committee
member of Black Women Organized for
Political Action, an Advisory Board
member of the non-profit organization
Rural Women Resource, Inc., and board
member of New Ways to Work.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Alberto Saldamando
I am honored to have been nominated for
another term on the Board. While other
organizations focus on single issues of par-
ticularized interest, the ACLU-NC is one of
the few important organizations that
address the very bases of societal change and
conflict.
My tenure has allowed me to expand my
vision of what America could and should be,
and has allowed me common cause with
others of ostensibly dissimilar backgrounds.
I hope that I can lend to this strength of
vision and diversity.
I also hope that ACLU-NC will more
systematically offer expanded opportunities
for participation to others for whom the (c)
ACLU is not now an option. And within the
ACLU I hope for a greater recognition of
International Human Rights as basic to
American Civil Liberties concerns.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Douglas R. Young
Over twenty years ago, my father (a col-
lege professor) received ACLU support in a
First Amendment/academic freedom dis-
pute. Having witnessed then how effective
and necessary ACLU involvement can be, I
have been honored recently to serve as a
cooperating attorney with and fundraiser for
the ACLU-NC.
The ACLU has always been vital, and is
particularly important now when civil liber-
ties are under increasing attack and even
established precedents are being subjected
to reconsideration by appellate courts. I am
inspired by the opportunity to serve during
this period. If elected, I would bring years of
experience as a trial and appellate lawyer, a
board member and fundraiser for other civil
rights organizations, and a long-standing
commitment to the preservation of civil
liberties. .
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
High Court to Hear
Affirmative Action Case
n behalf of the national ACLU,
O ACLU-NC staff attorney Ed Chen
filed an amicus brief in the U.S.
Supreme Court in April in the case of City
of Richmond vy. J.A. Croson Company in
support of the city's set-aside programs for
mintority-owned businesses.
A ruling in favor of the City of Richmond
~ would mean that local governments can take
affirmative action to remedy discrimination
without proof of past discrimination against
minorities.
In response to the concern that minority
businesses had never been given a fair oppor-
tunity to compete for construction contracts,
the Richmond City Council adopted an
ordinance to provide employment oppor-
tunities for minority-owned _ businesses.
According to Chen, "Their concern was
amply supported by uncontroverted evi-
dence that the City had awarded, and was
continuing to award, an infinitesimal per-
centage of its construction contracts to
minority businesses."
The ordinance required that for a five-
year period, prime contractors who win City
contracts award 30% of their subcontract
dollars to minority enterprises.
The lawsuit originated when the J.S. Cro-
son Company, a white-owned contractor,
challenged the constitutionality of the city's
affirmative action program, claiming that
the ordinance violated the equal protection
clause of the U.S. Constitution. The com-
pany also claimed that the U.S. Supreme
Court decision in an earlier case, Wygant v.
Jackson Board of Education, in which the
high court struck down an affirmative
action program concerning layoffs ("super
- seniority") also invalidated the Richmond
program. ;
In its friend-of-the-court brief, the ACLU
argues that the city's remedial program is
"not only permissable, but indispensable, if
the nation is to fulfill the promise of equality
contained in the Fourteenth Amendment."
The ACLU is also arguing that such affir-
mative action programs should be subject to
"intermediate scrutiny" rather than "strict
scrutiny," as the- latter would bar local
governments from responding effectively to
racial disparities within their communities
and turn the equal protection clause "on its
head."
"A properly drawn affirmative action pro-
gram would not be inconsistent with, but
rather promote, the `pervading purpose' of
the Fourteenth Amendment, which was to
eliminate oppression of historically subju-
gated minorities and to provide them with
equality of economic opportunity,' Chen
stated.
In addressing the Wygant decision, the
ACLU argues that it does not apply in this
case and that it should not be applied outside
of the layoff context. "The affirmative action
plan in Wygant was struck down by the
court because it involved layoffs rather than
hiring or promotion," said Chen. "It was not
conceived as a remedy for past discrimina-
tion against minority teachers; and, it was
developed by the school board itself and not
by a legislative body with plenary power."
In no way should the court's previous
decision establish an absolute rule that state
and local governments cannot engage in
affirmative action to remedy discrimination
without proof that that agency engaged in
past discrimination against minorities, the
ACLU charges.
The issue is important because the
Court's decision is likely to affect similar
affirmative action plans including those
established by the State of California, Oak- -
land, and San Francisco. Last year the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down
a similar ordinance enacted by the City and
County of San Francisco. The ACLU-NC
filed an amicus brief in that case as well, and
a request for rehearing is pending.
Learn first-hand about the ACLU's
defense of liberties! As the Intake Coor-
dinator, you will be responsible for train-
ing Complaint Counselors, law interns
and volunteers to screen and respond to
civil liberties complaints from phone calls
and mail. The Coordinator position is
critical to the ACLU's legal program. It
This is a critical year for the ACLU-
a time when financial support is more
difficult to come by but civil liberties
needs are more pressing than ever. Help
the ACLU gather resources-join our
Development staff and learn about fund
- raising from experts!
Researchers: We have an immediate need
for responsible people with library
research skills. Hours are very flexible.
VOLUNTEERS NEEDED!
_ INTAKE COORDINATOR
RESEARCHERS AND
DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANTS
. INTERESTED IN VOLUNTEER-
requires a strong commitment to civil
liberties and to helping people, writing
and typing skills, and an ability to ana-
lyze problems. The Coordinator must be
responsible, well-organized, and patient.
Hours are flexible, at least 10-15 hours
per week, with a minimum commitment
of one year.
Development Assistants: We need
organized people with typing skills inter-
ested in working with word processing
and database computer programs. Hours
6-8 hours per week during regular office
hours.
ING? CALL JEAN HOM AT 415/621-
2493 DURING REGULAR OFFICE
HOURS.
aclu news
6 july/august 1988
ACLU Files Suit to Stop
Drug Tests at VA
( : hallenging a drug testing program
mandated by President Reagan's
1986 Executive Order for employees
of executive agencies of the federal govern-
ment, the ACLU-NC, the Employment Law
Center, and the law firm of Heller, Ehrman,
White and McAuliffe which is handling the
case pro-bono for the ACLU, filed a class
action lawsuit on June 9 in the United States
District Court in San Francisco on behalf of
employees of the Veterans Administration.
Claiming that the VA's mandatory drug
testing program violates their constitutional
rights, employees Jeffrey Hansen, Martin
Hudson, and Karen Russ of the VA Hospital
in Palo Alto and Stephen Baird and David
Martin of the VA Medical Center in San
Diego filed the suit on behalf of the class. A
similar suit on behalf of unionized
employees of the VA was also filed by the
American Federation of Government
Employees in the same district court on the
same day.
In November, 1987 the VA established a
"Drug-Free Workplace Plan" which called
for mass random drug testing of all
employees in "sensitive" positions, testing of
employees involved in accidents, and war-
rantless testing based upon "reasonable sus-
picion" of drug use.
Chemical McCarthyism
Chen described urine drug testing as
"today's chosen form of surveillance and
behavior control which is degrading and
offensive to human dignity. Mass urine test-
ing signals the advent of `chemical
McCarthyism.' "
The VA's program has also been criticized
for its techniques, which are, according to
John True, attorney with the Employment
Law Center, "of minimal value in helping
the VA attain its laudable goals of promoting
workplace efficiency safety."
Melanie Gold, an attorney with Heller,
Ehrman, White and McAuliffe, added, "The
tests do not measure whether an employee is
impaired using drugs on the job; it only
indicates that the subject was exposed to
drugs sometime within the past several days
or even weeks. Urinalysis drug testing, there-
fore, unlike blood-alcohol tests, does not
measure current impairment, but is a form
of chemical surveillance of off-the-job con-
duct. Off-duty, off-premises conduct which
does not directly affect performance is
simply not a legitimate area of employer
inquiry."
Moreover, the process is plagued with
inaccuracies. According to True, "Statistical
theory suggests that where a large popula-
tion is randomly tested, more than half the
`positive' results obtained could be
erroneous."
Political motives
"The idea of testing came from the Presi-
dent's Commission on Organized Crime
which recommended testing as a means of
limiting society's demand for drugs. There
was no evidence of a drug abuse problem
among VA employees specifically or federal
workers in general," Chen said.
"The testing program is totally counter-
productive," observed lead plaintiff Jeff
Hansen, a pharmacist at the VA Hospital in
Palo Alto. "First of all, there simply isn't a
problem with drugs at our facility, and no
one claims there is. Second, there are ways
to deal individually with any employees who
abuse substances without assuming that eve-
ryone is guilty."
Since federal drug testing programs have
been put into place, numerous challenges
have been brought by federal employees who
oppose the mandatory testing. Lawsuits
have been filed on behalf of federal prison
workers, customs and Treasury employees,
and postal workers. The ACLU is even
representing attorneys employed by the
Department of Justice who are opposed to
undergoing testing.
- Suzanne Samuel
Privacy Fight over Children's Records
Ae a long battle to protect the privacy
rights of children, the ACLU-NC lost
an appeal this May which would have kept
Department of Developmental Services
(DDS) clients' records confidential. The suit
was filed on behalf of two children with
developmental disabilities, Kyle White and
Shoshana McAvoy, and their parents.
Since 1979 DDS has required all regional
centers, such as the Redwood Coast
Regional Center where the plaintiffs
received treatment, to submit reports on
clients which are known as Client Develop-
ment Evaluation Reports (CDER's).
In 1981 a rule was established which
changed the status of submission of a
CDER ftom voluntary to mandatory for
receiving funding. The regulations regard-
ing CDER's underwent further change in
1984 when DDS altered their client identifi-
cation system, establishing a Client Master
File which contained both the client's name
and the code used for their CDER's; thus,
the confidentiality of the CDER's was lost.
The ACLU-NC filed a lawsuit in Sacra-
mento Superior Court in March, 1985 seek-
ing a court order declaring that CDER's
only be submitted if they contained the
signed consent of the client's parent or legal
guardian. Submitting the records without
such consent would represent a violation of
a client's right to privacy as guaranteed by
the California Constitution and the Lanter-
man Developmental Disabilities Services
Act, the ACLU-NC claimed. The case was
litigated by ACLU-NC cooperating attor-
neys Mark White and Anna Rossi of the
San Francisco law firm of Rogers, Joseph,
O'Donnell and Quinn and ACLU-NC staff
attorney Margaret Crosby.
Access to CDER's, the children's parents
asserted, would present a possibility for
future harm and discrimination as employ-
ers and others could have access to the
records.
In 1986 the trial court ruled that without
CDER's, children were not entitled to fund-
ing.
The appellate court ruled that although
some of the government's claimed need for
the information could be satisfied by alter-
native systems, two administrative objec-
tives required name-identified CDER's.
According to attorney Mark White,
"This case has taught me that courageous
people come in all shapes and sizes-I am
_ especially honored to have represented these
brave parents who, against all odds, decided
to pursue a difficult course to seek justice for
their children."
Disabled Voters
Win Access to Polls
n the eve of the California primary, the
ACLU-NC and the Disability Rights
Education and Defense Fund (DREDF)
filed a class action lawsuit charging that the
inaccessibility of polling places in California
is a violation of the constitutional rights of
disabled voters. The lawsuit was filed on
behalf of two disabled voters and several
disability rights organizations. In a prelimi-
nary injunction issued June 29 by San Fran-
cisco Superior Court Judge Lucy Kelly
McCabe, the state was ordered to increase
handicapped accessibility in the state's vot-
ing precincts in time for the November
election.
The order requires that each county
employ one person full-time to carry out the
order; that counties report on their plans to
~ fulfill the order to Secretary of State March
Fong Eu by August 10; and that Eu issue a
report to the plaintiffs' counsel by Sep-
tember | regarding the counties' plans. It is
now expected that most of the state's polling
places will be accessible to the disabled by
the November election.
The lawsuit was filed because an esti-
mated 7,400 voting places-more than
30%-in California would not be handicap-
accessible by the November 1988 general
election. The lawsuit, Independent Living
Resource Center of San Francisco v. Eu,
asked the court to order the state to make
"reasonable and good faith efforts to assure
that government officials pay attention to
their legal responsibilities and take reasona-
ble steps toward the elimination of inaccess-
ible voting places to the greatest extent
possible."
According to ACLU-NC staff attorney
Matthew Coles, who litigated the case with
DREDF attorney Sid Wolinsky and cooper-
ating attorneys Charlotte Addington,
Evelyn Deaton, and Maureen E. McClain
of Dretzin, Kauff, McClain and McGuire,
"Disabled people ought to be able to vote in
the same way that everybody else does.
"Challenging curbside and absentee vot-
ing is no more about convenience than chal-
lenging sezregation at lunch counters was
about the quality of the cuisine. This case,
like those cases, is about simple human
dignity."
Both individual named plaintiffs, Laura
Cooper and John Wrenn were likely to be
assigned to inaccessible polling places for the
November general election.
According to a 1988 Harris poll, disabled
Americans express greater interest in polit-
ics than other citizens but they register and
vote at a rate considerably lower than the
general public.
The most common barrier cited by dis-
abled people was difficulty in getting to the
polls.
According to Wolinsky, many of Califor-
nia's disabled voters are left to either vote
absentee or in public at the curbside. "The
evidence suggests that the result of this
second class status is that disabled people
are discouraged from voting.
"Tt is past time that disabled voters were
treated like everyone else and permitted to
vote the way everyone else does," he added.
For 2'4 years the state has been obliged
under federal law to make all polling places
used in federal elections accessible. "In this
case, the issue was not really if the state will
make polling places accessible, but when,"
said Coles.
Victory for OCC
Complainants
the review of alleged police abuse, the
First District Court of Appeal in San
Francisco ruled on June 16 that despite
objections by the San Francisco Police
Officers' Association (POA), complainants
and their representatives have the right to
participate fully in hearings of the Office of
Citizen Compalints (OCC) and are entitled
to access to evidence to prepare for the
hearings.
The ACLU-NC argued for full involve-
ment by complainants in an amicus brief by
ACLU-NC staff attorneys Edward Chen
and John Crew; ACLU-NC cooperating
attorney Karrin Klotz from Pillsbury, Mad-
ison and Sutro; and Amitai Schwartz, counsel
for the Bar Association of San Francisco.
Schwartz, a former ACLU-NC staff counsel,
presented the oral arguments, before the
court.
The OCC was established in 1982 when
San Francisco voters passed Proposition
"A," by a vote of 62% to 38%, calling for an
agency "to investigate all complaints of
police misconduct ... [and] recommend
disciplinary action to the chief of police on
those complaints that are sustained."
In the amicus brief, the ACLU-NC and
the Bar Association argued that citizen par-
ticipation in the OCC hearing process
"inspires confidence in the process and con-
fidence that the City of San Francisco is
taking seriously its responsibility . . . to con-
duct investigations in order to ferret out
I n a victory for citizen involvement in
incidents of police misconduct."
In its decision regarding the presence of
complainants and their counsel at OCC
hearings the court agreed, stating, "The
hearing is plainly an integral part of the
investigatory, fact-finding process itself. . .
what is more, such participation [by the
complainant and named officer] provides
assurance to the public that the OCC's inves-
tigation is neutral."
- The suit, San Francisco Police Officers
Association y. City and County of San
Francisco, represents a direct attack on the
hearing process, and an attack, explained
attorney Crew, "on the idea that victims of
police abuse should be allowed to face the
police in a fair and neutral hearing.
"The POA was saying that you can have a
`hearing, except that one side is not allowed
to participate. In our view, that is no hearing
at all," added Crew, Director of the
ACLU-NC Police Practices Project.
In establishing the OCC, the hearing pro-
cess was specifically included.
Crew noted that this decision also means
that the internal affairs systems can have
hearings if they so choose. "And," he added,
"they should, if they take their obligations
seriously."
The POA, which is known to stand
against civilian review, had been pursuing
this case for over three years.
Commented Crew, "This case is a reaffir-
mation of the legality, legitimacy and credi-
bility of the civilian review process."
aclu news
july/august 1988 7
Suit Filed to Save Medi-Cal Abortion Funds `Free Speech
or the eleventh time in as many years.
the ACLU-NC brought suit on
behalf of a coalition of civil rights
groups, women's organizations, health care
providers and taxpayers challenging the
state Legislature's refusal to approve full
funding for abortions performed under the
state Medi-Cal program.
The lawsuit, Committee to Defend
Reproductive Rights (CDRR) v. Kizer. was
filed on July 12 in the state Court of Appeal
by ACLU-NC staff attorney Margaret
Crosby and Ralph Abascal, General Coun-
sel of California Rural Legal Assistance.
If enforced, this year's Budget Act restric-
tions would deny public funding:to 90% of
the 80,000 Medi-Cal eligible California
women-one quarter of them teenagers-
who need abortions.
In every previous case, the court has ruled
that the cuts are unconstitutional. In May of
this year, the California Supreme Court
refused to hear the case, thus upholding the
Court of Appeal's February ruling that the
Medi-Cal abortion funding cuts were
unconstitutional and could not take effect.
Upon filing the lawsuit, Crosby severely
criticized the Legislature's cuts. "It has been
clear since 1981-when the California
Supreme Court decided our original suit-
that the Medi-Cal system must include pub-
lic funding for abortion for women and
adolescents in California," she said.
Sacrifice health care
"The Legislature has consciously violated
the state Constitution for eight years,"
Crosby added. "Their budget cuts show that
they are willing to sacrifice the health care
and lives of the 80,000 women each year
who depend on Medi-Cal funds for
abortion."
Collett Patt of the Committee to Defend
Reproductive Rights Coalition for the Med-
- ical Rights of Women (CDRR) added, "The
right to control reproduction-to choose if,
when, and with whom to bear and raise
children-is essential to our ability to con-
trol our bodies and our lives. Whether we
are rich or poor, without access to abortion
services the rights that women have to par-
ticipate equally in society are jeopardized.
"We will not let the politicians force
women to have unwanted children and we
will not let politicians force a woman, just
because she is poor and pregnant, into a
back alley in search of health care," Patt
added.
Close vote
This year, as in each year following the
first Medi-Cal abortion fund cuts in 1978,
pro-choice organizations throughout the
state made a major effort to lobby the Legis-
lature to preserve funding. "This year, the
Assembly actually defeated the restrictions
on a tie vote," explained ACLU-NC Legisla-
tive Advocate Marjorie Swartz, "and the
vote in the Senate was very close-they
excluded abortion funding by only one
vote."
Swartz stressed that the close vote was an -
indication of the impact of broad lobbying
efforts on this vital issue and noted that the
grassroots pressure will continue as long as
the Legislature continues to "flagrantly vio-
late women's reproductive rights and the
California Constitution."
Attorney Abascal noted that this year's
Budget Act restrictions, like last year's, vio-
late the "single subject" rule of the California
Constitution. "Last year, the Court of
Appeal agreed that the Budget Act cannot
be used as a vehicle to substantively amend
or change existing statute law.
"Existing law (the Medi-Cal Act) provides
public funding for a comprehensive range of
medical services, including abortion."
The 1988-89 Budget Act restrictions mir-.
ror provisions from the last five years. The
Legislature's restrictions include setting up a
$12,858,000 "special financing account" for
abortion services which is separate from the
general fund for Medi-Cal benefits (the
Health Care Deposit Fund). This fund is
much less than needed to fund all abortions
for Medi-Cal eligible women.
The restrictions eliminate Medi-Cal cov-
erage for all but a tiny fraction of abortions.
State financing is kept only for 1) preserving
the life of the pregnant woman; 2) terminat-
ing pregancies from rape or incest (which
have been reported to government authori-
ties); 3) abortions for unmarried girls under
18 whose parents are notified; and 4) abor-
tions involving a severely abnormal fetus.
The petitioners in the lawsuit are CDRR/
CMRW, Coalition of California Welfare
Rights Organizations, Comision Feminil de
Los Angeles, Dr. Alan Margolis, Dr. Philip
Darney, and taxpayers Dr. Sadja Green-
wood and Christine Motley.
The named defendants in the lawsuit are
the Director of Health Services Kenneth
Kizer, Controller Gray Davis and Acting
Treasurer Elizabeth Whitney.
News Update: On July 14, the Court of
Appeals issued a stay prohibiting the
Medi-Cal abortion funding cuts from going
into effect until a final decision is rendered.
This order maintains the funding and pre-
vents state officials from mailing notices to
Medi-Cal recipients about the cuts included
in the Budget Act.
Jackson Campaign Fights Ban at Mall
hallenging a Woodland shopping
center's denial of access to Jesse
Jackson campaign - workers,
ACLU-NC attorneys won a permanent
injunction from Sacramento Superior Cour
ton May 27. The injunction allowed Jackson
campaign workers to register voters, solicit
donations and distribute literature at the
Westgate Shopping Center.
In mid-April, members of the Jackson
campaign sought permission from the mall
management to set up a table for the pur-
poses of registering voters and distributing
written campaign material. The mall denied
the request saying that such activities were
of a partisan political nature, and were thus
not allowed. The manager of Raley's Super-
-store, the desired site of the table, stated that
the mall refuses to allow "anything political."
The Jackson campaign turned to the
ACLU and was represented by attorneys
Daniel Abramson, Nancy Bramberg and
Harry Roth of the Sacramento and Yolo
Chapters of the ACLU and ACLU-NC staff
attorney Alan Schlosser.
The ACLU challenged the mall's policy,
arguing that it represented an abridgment of
the constitutional rights to free speech and
petitioning; violation of the constitutional
guarantee of equal protection by discrimi-
nating against speech based upon its content
and by excluding speech due to its subject
matter; and violation of the public's right to
obtain, by their own choosing, information
protected by the Constitution.
Just a month before the primary, on May
6, the court issued a Temporary Restraining
Order (TRO) allowing the Jackson cam-
paign to station an information table in front
campaigners.
of Raley's, the mall's largest store. A per-
manent injunction was signed on May 27
upholding the right of partisan political
groups, including the Jackson campaign, to
distribute information at the center, as long
as they follow certain guidelines. -
The ruling was based on the 1979 Califor-
nia Supreme Court case Robins v. Prune-
yard Shopping Center which extended the
California Constitution's guarantees of the
rights to petition and to free speech to cover
the exercise of such activities at privately-
owned shopping centers. With that land-
mark ruling, the high court recognized that
shopping centers have become a "modern
Despite a string of ACLU victories, shopping mall owners still try to bar political
day equivalent of the traditional town
plaza," and thus, free speech activities there,
specifically the circulation of a petition or
distribution of leaflets, must be protected.
That ruling was upheld by the USS.
Supreme Court a year later.
Owners of the Westgate Shopping Center
argued that Pruneyard covered only
signature-gathering and not leafleting.
However, the court, agreeing with ACLU
arguments, ruled that the Jackson campaign
would be allowed to both gather signatures
and distribute literature as well as solicit
funds.
- Suzanne Samuel
`Victory at
S.F. State
triking a victory for academic free-
S=: San Francisco Superior Court
Judge Lucy K. McCabe ruled on
June 10 that San Francisco State Universi-
ty's restrictions on a lecture by a controver-
sial Israeli speaker were unconstitutional.
The court also ruled that the University's
policy of allowing administrators discretion
to override the judgment of its professors by
imposing such restrictions on guest lectures
is unconstitutional.
The ACLU-NC case, Simpson v. San
Francisco State University, originated in
1985 when university officials imposed
unprecedented restrictions on a lecture given
by Rabbi Meir Kahane, a member of the
Israeli Knesset, founder of the Jewish
Defense League and head of the Israeli
Kach Party.
International Relations professor Dwight
Simpson had invited Kahane to speak to
two of his classes; Simpson, in accordance
with his long-standing practice, and that of
other professors on campus, had also invited
interested faculty, students and staff who
were not enrolled in his classes to attend
Kahane's lecture. :
University administrators, however,
refused to allow persons who were not offi-
cially enrolled in the classes to attend the,
lecture.
Because of his concern for increased
security precautions, Professor Simpson
notified the University administration about
the planned Kahane lectures. Some students
and community groups apparently pro-
tested against Kahane's appearance.
After some internal discussion, the
administration informed Simpson that the
lecture would be limited to the forty persons
enrolled in the class, although the lecture site
could accommodate 100. Though other con-
troversial speakers, including a spokesman
for the Irish Republican Army, the Consul
General of South Africa, and the Consul
General of Israel, had lectured at the Univer-
sity, this was the first time in the history of
the University that such restrictions were
imposed. -
The new restrictions meant that other
students, International Relations Professor
Marshall Windmiller, and a representative
of the campus newspaper were barred from
attending.
According to ACLU-NC attorney Ed
Chen, who successfully litigated the case
with ACLU-NC cooperating attorneys Cha-
rles Breyer and Virginia Crisp of Coblentz,
Cahen, McCabe and Breyer, "This scheme by
the University to determine to intervene and
override the judgment of its professors as to
teaching methodology on an ad hoc basis
vests unbridled discretion in officials in
deciding who may exercise their First
Amendment rights and when.
Such a system which has no objective
rules governing the discretion of University
administrators is unconstitutional on its
face," Chen added.
"Moreover," according to attorney Crisp,
"this particular incident flies in the face of
academic freedom. According to previous
court rulings, the classroom is peculiarly the
`marketplace of ideas, and the vigilant pro-
tection of constitutional freedoms is
nowhere more vital than in the community
~ of American schools."
aclu news
S july/august 1988
Growing Economic
Inequality
and Its Impact on
~ Civil Liberties
CONFERENCE
Lone Mountain Conference Center
University of San Francisco
4800 Turk Street, San Francisco
Saturday, September 10
- 9:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.
-Dinner Program 7:00 p.m.-8:30 p.m.
= Co-Sponsored by the Gay
Rights Chapter, ACLU-NC and
the San Francisco Chapter,
ACLU-NC
0S 7
ES ES ===],
ES = 7 ES SPEAKERS INCLUDE:
key) f= cent Roberta Achtenberg
RTA ry Rota Lesbian Rights Project . |
SSOCI Se e Angela Blackwell
Urban Strategies Institute
PANELS AND SPEAK- - 0x00B0 Mark Cloutier
ERS ON: Aide to Rep. Boxer on AIDS Task Force
cent Jed Emerson
Larkin Street Center
[_] The Poverty Line
[ | Out of the Mainstream
[_] The Economics of AIDS cent Ethel Long-Scott
Ea No Human Being is Illegal Women's Fcononiic Agenda Project
[_] The War on Drugs cent Donna Hitchens
Civil rights attorney and activist
DEBATE: cent Demetria Martinez
El "Should we legalize Journalist, poet, and Sanctuary defendant
drugs?" cent Alberto Saldamando
ACTION SESSIONS: -inmigaion Poet
[_] Legislation
(Additional speakers to be announced.)
(For information, contact Marcia Gallo at 415/621-2493 after August 3.)
1988 ACLU-NC ANNUAL
Chapter Meetings (c)
B-A-R-K (Berkeley area) CHAPTER
MEETING: (Usually fourth Thursday) Thurs-
day, July 28. Volunteers needed to staff hotline.
Contact Julie Houck, 415/848-4752.
EARL WARREN 0x00A7 (Qakland/ Alameda
County) CHAPTER MEETING: (Usually
third Wednesday) No meeting scheduled for
August. A's fans!! Join the ACLU at the Oak-
land Coliseum, it's a fundraiser for the ACLU /
Earl Warren Chapter. Send self-addressed,
stamped envelope marked "A's Game," to: P.O.
Box 1865, Oakland, CA 94604. (See ad below)
For more information, Contact Paul Bern-
stein, 415/534-ACLU or Lauren Leimbach,
415/655-7339 (eve).
FRESNO CHAPTER MEETING: For
August meeting details please contact Mindy
Rose, 209/486-7735 (eve).
GAY RIGHTS CHAPTER MEETING:
Contact Doug Warner, 415/621-3900.
MARIN CHAPTER MEETING: (Usually
third Monday) There will be no meeting in
August. Contact Eileen Siedman, 415/
383-0848.
MID-PENINSULA (Palo Alto area) CHAP-
TER MEETING: (Usually fourth Wednes-
day) Wednesday, July 27 and August 24, 8:00
p.m., All Saints Episcopal Church, 555 Wav-
erly, Room 15, Palo Alto. Contact Harry Anis-
gard, 415/856-9186.
MONTEREY CHAPTER MEETING: Usu-
ally fourth Tuesday ) Tuesday, July 26, 7:30
p-m., Monterey Library, Pacific and Jefferson
Streets, Monterey. Contact Richard Criley,
408/624-7562.
MT. DIABLO (Contra Costa County)
CHAPTER MEETING: (Usually fourth
Tuesday or Wednesday) Wednesday, July 27;
7:30 117 Los Altos Ave, Walnut Creek. Annual
Board Meeting on Sunday, August 28, 5:00:
2153 LaSalle Dr, Walnut Creek.Contact
Lowell Richards, 415 /939-ACLU.
NORTH PENINSULA (San Mateo area)
CHAPTER MEETING: (NOTE CHANGE:
Now third Monday) August 15, 7:30. Bank of
America, Third and El Camino, San Mateo.
Contact Bob Delzell, 415/343-7339.
SACRAMENTO VALLEY CHAPTER
MEETING: (Usually second Wednesday)
August 10; 7:30 p.m., County Administration
Building, 7th/I Streets, Sacramento. Contact
Eric Andrus, 916/441-2552.
SAN FRANCISCO CHAPTER MEET-
ING: (Usually fourth Tuesday) Tuesday, July
26 and August 22; 6:00 p.m. ACLU office,
1663 Mission Street, San Francisco. Contact
Marion Standish, 415/863-3520.
SANTA CLARA CHAPTER MEETING:
(First Tuesday of the month) Tuesday, August
2. Contact Christine Beraldo, 408/554-9478.
SANTA CRUZ CHAPTER MEETING:
ANNUAL MEETING/FORUM: There will
be no meeting in July. We will be meeting
Wednesday, August 10. For more information,
contact Kathleen Tranchina, 408 / 438-6094.
SONOMA CHAPTER MEETING: (Usually
third Thursday) Thursday, July 21 and August
18. Contact June Swan, 707/546-7711.
Congratulations on voting down Measure A.
Save Saturday, August 20 for the revival of the
Annual Picnic and September 18 for the
ACLU/NUC Free Zone Musical Festival.
Watch newsletter for details.
YOLO COUNTY CHAPTER MEETING:
(Usually third Wednesday) August meeting to
be decided, for information Contact Casey
McKeever, 916/442-0753.
Field Committee |
Meetings
RIGHT TO KNOW/RIGHT TO DISSENT
COMMITTEE: Tuesday, August 9, 6:00 p.m.,
ACLU-NC Office, 1663 Mission St., San Fran-
cisco. Contact Marcia Gallo, 415/621-2493.
A's Fans!
Come to the Earl Warren Chapter's
Oakland A's game/fundraiser! Friday,
September 16 (night game) vs. Kansas
City Royals. Tickets are $6.00 from "A's
Game," PO Box 1865, Oakland, CA
94604 or call 415/534-ACLU. Please
enclose a stamped, self-addressed
envelope.
Deadline for ticket orders is September 1.
rooms; and all rooms have been recently decorated.
as noted below:
e Single room
e Double room
$35.00
$46.00
All guest rooms must be reserved no later than August 26; reservations will be
accepted on a first-come, first-served basis.
If you would like to reserve a room for Friday, September 9, please include full payment
_Number/ages of children
1988 ACLU-NC Annual Conference REGISTRATION FORM Advance Registration Deadline: August 31
Conference: _ Dinner Program:
- 1) Registration Fee (per person) e Regular rate $20.00
0x00B0 Regular rate $20.00 cent Limited income $10.00
2 Limited income a I/We enclose payment for Registration $ Lunch $25
2) Lunch (per person): $600.27 Dinner Program $____ Optional Housing $______ Total$__
cent Vegetarian only ee
cent Other dietary restrictions ae NAME(S)
3) Optional Housing: : ADDRESS
There are a limited number of guest rooms available at the Lone Mountain Conference CITY ZIP
i : : t t
Center. Rooms are either single or double-occupancy; bathrooms are shared between two TELEPHONE (DAY] (EVE)
N.B. Lone Mountain Conference Center is wheelchair-accessible; however, the guest
rooms. are not. Childcare will be provided throughout the Conference and the Dinner
Program. Please note below whether you would like to arrange for childcare:
ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1981.batch ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1982.batch ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1984.batch ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1985.batch ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1986.batch ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1987.batch ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1988.batch ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_1999.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Scholarships Available: We have made every effort to keep the conference cost `easonable; however, we recognize that additional assistance may be necessary. We have
__ set aside some funds for scholarships; if you are interested in applying, please contact Marcia Gallo at 415/621-2493 after August 3.