vol. 58, no. 6

aclu news

Non-PROFIT

ORGANIZATION

U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

Permit No.4424

SAN FRANCISCO, CA

Volume LVIII

esponding to lawsuits filed immedi-

R= after the election results were

in, state and federal judges blocked

the implementation of Proposition 187, the

ballot initiative which would deny educa-

tion, health and social services to children

and others who cannot prove that they are

legally in this country.

The first Temporary Restraining Order

was issued at noon on November 9 by San

- Francisco Superior Court Judge Stuart

Pollak in three cases protecting the right of

students to attend school.

In one of the suits, Pedro A. v. Dawson

and the State Board of Education, the

ACLU joined other civil rights organiza-

tions in representing children in Califor-

nia's public elementary, junior high and

high schools who would be barred from

school if the measure went into effect.

At a packed press conference preced-

ing the hearing before Judge Pollak,

National ACLU Immigrants' Rights

Project Director Lucas Guttentag noted

that this suit is one of many state and

federal lawsuits being filed in California to

challenge Proposition 187. "Proposition

187 is a frontal attack on the Constitution

- and is being challenged by lawsuits

throughout the state. This proposition is

the culmination of a hysteria over immigra-

tion created by politicians afraid to

confront the real issues facing California. I

am confident that the courts will send a

loud and clear message to the sponsors of

187 and to the entire country - Proposi-

tion 187 is unconstitutional, it is discrimi-

natory and it will never go into effect."

Pedro A. is a statewide class action suit

November - December 1994

STATE, FEDERAL COURT ORDERS

Judges Block Anti-Immigrant Measure

East Bay high school students joined thousands of students around the state in

marches and demonstrations opposing Proposition 187.

David Bacon

No. 6

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_1989.batch ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1990.batch ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1991.batch ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1992.batch ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1993.batch ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1994.batch 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 that asks the court to permanently enjoin

Section 48215 of the California Educa-

tional Code - automatically enacted with

the passage of Proposition 187 - because

it violates the constitutionally guaranteed

rights of innocent children. The new

section mandates school officials to verify

the immigration status of all students and

their parents, exclude children based solely

on their undocumented immigration status,

and report all children and their parents to

state and federal authorities if they

"reasonably suspect" them to be in viola-

tion of immigration law.

The plaintiffs are five families and their

children who are currently enrolled in

California elementary and high schools

and California taxpayer Henry Der, the

Director of Chinese for Affirmative

Action. The children represent a class of

about 300,000 students who would be

excluded from California schools under the

provisions of Proposition 187.

Judge Pollak issued the TRO despite

- protests from lawyers from the state Attor-

ney General's office. The TRO is in effect

until November 29 and will be extended

until February 8, when Judge Pollak has

scheduled a hearing on the preliminary

injunction. The order states that all of the

defendants are prohibited from "barring

the public school attendance of any child

based upon his/her immigration status,

inquiring of the immigration status of any

child or any child's parent/guardian,

providing any immigration status informa-

tion [under Proposition 187] to any state or

Continued on page 8

Gas Chamber Banned in California

Ihe gas chamber is "inhumane and

has no place in a civilized society,"

decided U. S. District Court Judge

Marilyn Hall Patel on October 4 in a 75- 0x00B0

page opinion in the ACLU lawsuit Fierro

v. Gomez.

"The gas chamber is widely viewed as

an antiquated mode of execution, causing a

slow, painful and inhumane death," Judge

Patel stated, ruling the gas chamber "cruel

and unusual" in violation of the Eighth

Amendment.

"This decision is one small step away

from inhumanity," said ACLU-NC Death

Penalty Project Director. Michael

Laurence. "We knew that if any judge

looked at the evidence dispassionately, he

or she would conclude that California

slowly tortures people to death in the gas

chamber. Judge Patel did precisely that

kind of review in her opinion."

Laurence, along with cooperating

attorney Warren George of McCutcheon,

Doyle, Brown and Enerson and ACLU-NC

staff attorney Matthew Coles, filed the

civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Califor-

nia's Death Row inmates in April 1992 just

days before Robert Harris became the first

person to be executed in California's gas

chamber in 25 years.

This is the first time in the history of the

United States that any method of execution

has been ruled unconstitutional. "Judges

who faced this question were never before

confronted with the broad array of

This ts the first time in U.S. history that

any method of execution has been ruled

unconstitutional.

evidence that we presented to the court,"

explained Laurence. During a three-week

trial in the fall of 1993, the ACLU-NC

presented testimony from journalists and

other eyewitnesses to executions, toxicol-

ogy experts, neurologists, prison officials

and a legal ethicist. In addition, thousands

of pages of written testimony, including

declarations from Holocaust survivors

_who witnessed deaths by gas in Nazi

concentration camps, supplemented the

witnesses on the stand.

Savage, uncivilized

"Judge Patel has very carefully

documented that the gas chamber is a

savage, uncivilized way of executing

people," said attorney Coles. "This is the

right decision - it has finally brought

California into the 20th Century and

stopped a savage practice."

Judge Patel's lengthy ruling paid

careful attention to the fine points of

science, ethics and law that were examined

in the 1993 trial in San Francisco's U.S.

District Court.

Drawing on the expert testimony

presented by toxicologists and neurolo-

gists about the severity and duration of

pain during gas chamber executions, Judge

Patel concluded that condemned inmates

remain conscious for several minutes and

suffer intense pain. "Symptoms of air

hunger include intense chest pains, such as

felt during a heart attack, acute anxiety,

and struggling to breathe," Patel noted in

her opinion. There may also be other types

of pain, including "exquisitely painful

muscle spasms."

The ruling also drew on medical and

eyewitness accounts of San Quentin gas

chamber executions. Both Robert Harris

and David Mason remained conscious for

up to three minutes after exposure to

hydrogen cyanide gas, she noted, rejecting

Continued on page 2

BiLL OF ar

RisHis if

HONORING CONGRESSMAN DON EDWARDS

DECEMBER

on

"

aclu news

2

November - December 1994

Sues Nation's Largest Security Guard Firm

_ Job Seeker Challenges "Political Litmus Test''

`es a pre-employment examination

D which delves into applicants' views

on workers' rights, free enterprise

and drug laws violate the California Labor

Code's prohibition on employment discrim-

ination based on political activity or affilia-

tion? Veteran security guard Mel Thompson

thinks so. On October 20, Thompson

announced his class action suit against

Burns International Security Services, a

division of Borg-Warner Protective

Services, the largest security agency in the

country, to challenge its use of a pre-

_ employment "political litmus test."

Thompson is represented by ACLU-NC

staff attorney Ed Chen and cooperating attor-

neys Brad Seligman, an Albany civil rights

lawyer, and Laurence Pulgram, Linda Foy

and Jay Kuo of Howard, Rice Nemerovski,

Canady, Robertson,-Falk and Rabkin.

The challenged test requires job appli-

_ cants to answer questions about their

attitudes concerning corporations,

employers, workers' rights and drug and

alcohol laws. Among the 100 True/False

questions are:

- Workers usually come last as far as most

companies are concermed.

+ Most employers try to underpay their

employees if they can.

# Companies provide only what they have

to for worker comfort. -

+ Most companies make too much profit.

+ Most employers really care about

improving working conditions for their

employees.

Most bosses are fair to their employees.

Marijuana should be legalized.

The drinking age should be lowered.

The government has no right to interfere

+444

man, wouldn't answer political questions on an employment exam.

Plaintiff Mel Thompson (center), flanked by attorneys Linda Foy and Brad Selig-

with a person who chooses drugs if its

doesn't hurt anyone.

+ Illegal use of marijuana is worse than

drinking liquor.

According to test documents, the

company can use the exam to determine

whether an applicant believes in "traditional

values" such as "free enterprise" or whether

the applicant is "anti-establishment

(counter-culture)." Applicants are told to

answer every question with "yes," "no" or

"2." Tf the applicant marks "?" as the

response to any item on the test, it is graded

as an incorrect answer.

"T don't see why I should have to pledge

allegiance to corporations to get a $7 an hour

job," said plaintiff Mel Thompson who is

bringing the case on behalf of all job appli-

cants in California who were required to

take the test. Thompson, who applied for an

unarmed guard position in San Francisco,

had been told he was an excellent prospect

for hire until he took the test. He checked (c)

"?" on the test for questions that probed his

political beliefs.

The lawsuit, Thompson v. Burns Inter-

national Security Services, charges that the

use of the test violates California Labor

Code Sections 1101-1102 which prohibit

employers from discriminating against or

coercing employees and applicants based on

their political attitudes, actions and affilia-.

tions. The lawsuit also charges that the use

of the test is an unlawful business practice

under the Business and Professions Code

Section 17200. The suit, which has been

filed as a class action on behalf of all appli-

cants and potential applicants for employ-

ment with Burns, seeks an injunction

prohibiting the use of the test as well as

damages of an unspecified amount for

applicants subjected to the test.

"This test allows an employer to attempt

to hire only job applicants who hold tradi-

tional, conservative political views about

corporations, the workplace and drug laws,"

said ACLU-NC cooperating counsel Brad

Seligman. "Liberals and progressives,

Democrats, Greens and Libertarians or

Peace and Freedom party members are likely

to be screened out by this test,' he added.

"It is: crucial that employers be

prevented from dictating the political beliefs

of their employees," said ACLU-NC staff

attorney Ed Chen. "The national ACLU

Workers' Rights Project and our state affili-

ate are determined to protect employees'

rights of free expression. Fortunately,

California labor laws prohibit employers

from discriminating on the basis of political

views and activities."

Cooperating attorney Linda Foy noted,

"The use of this test has a chilling effect on

the exercise of core political rights: it penal-

izes persons who decline to answer the test's

intrusive questions concerning their attitudes

toward workers' rights, among other issues,

and it sends a signal to applicants and

employees that `correct' political attitudes

and affiliations are being screened for and

are, in effect, job qualifications."

The suit, filed in San Francisco Superior

Court, is one of the largest cases concerning

employees' political activity in California.

Its outcome will have a broad impact on the (c)

nature of employment testing throughout

the state. e

Gas Chamber...

Continued from page 1

hydrogen cyanide gas, she noted, rejecting

the state's claim that unconsciousness is

almost immediate.

National consensus

Judge Patel also reviewed the testi-

mony of legal ethicist Frank Zimring and |

concluded that there was "a national

consensus rejecting the use of the gas

chamber as an acceptable method of

execution."

Professor Zimring's analysis of state

legislatures' laws concerning methods of

execution indicated that since the U.S.

Supreme Court reinstituted the death

penalty in 1976, "the overwhelming

majority" of states that used lethal gas had

dropped it as a means of execution.

Between 1972 and 1992, twenty-five

states had either dropped gas or adopted an

alternative method of execution.

Currently, only five other states -

Maryland, North Carolina, Mississippi,

Missouri and Arizona - still have laws

allowing the use of the gas chamber.

When the ACLU-NC first filed its

challenge, gas was the only method of

execution allowed in California. After the

Harris execution, the Legislature amended

the law to allow inmates to choose lethal

injection. The other states which use gas

also have the option of lethal injection.

"The gas chamber is viewed as an

antiquated mode of execution, causing a

. Slow, painful and inhumane death," Patel

concluded.

Pain and consciousness

Finally, Judge Patel's opinion distin-

guished the ruling on gas from the Ninth

Circuit's January decision in a Washington

state case, Campbell v. Wood allowing

hanging as a method of execution.

"Judge Patel took some pains to show

that lethal gas, unlike hanging, is not a

quick means of death," explained cooper-

ating attorney George.

Judge Patel stated, "While. the

Campbell court did not pinpoint a thresh-

old at which the time to unconsciousness

and the corresponding pain would violate

the Constitution, the court implied that the

persistence of consciousness `for over a

minute' or for `between a minute and a

minute and a half, but no longer than two

minutes might be considered outside

constitutional boundaries."

Patel's opinion noted that the extended

period of consciousness was heightened by

the "unscientific, slapdash manner," in

which San Quentin developed its execution

procedure.

During the trial, former San Quentin

warden Daniel Vasquez, who presided over

both the Harris and the Mason executions,

testified that he had never consulted with

medical experts in designing the gassing of

prisoners by hydrogen cyanide. Vasquez

also testified that he told condemned inmate

David Mason (who was executed a year

after Harris) gas would cause death in "two

to four seconds."

In written records, however, it was

shown that San Quentin's prison doctor

showed that both Harris and Mason had not

been definitely unconscious until three

minutes after they were exposed to the

lethal gas.

The decision was announced in banner

headlines throughout the state. Editorials

in USA Today, the San Francisco

Examiner and the Los Angeles Times

applauded the ruling. |

Only Governor Pete Wilson and Attor-

ney General Dan Lungren seemed disap-

pointed by the decision. In a hastily called

press conference on the afternoon of the

ruling, Lungren announced that he would

appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit.

He did so three days later. Hi

aclu news

6 issues a year: January-February, March-April, May-June, July-August,

September -October, and November-December.

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Milton Estes, Chairperson

Dorothy Ehrlich, Executive Director

Elaine Elinson, Editor

Lisa Maldonado, Field Page

ZesTop Publishing, Design and Layout

1663 Mission St., 4th Floor

`San Francisco, California 94103

(415) 621-2493

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

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

aclu news

3

November - December 1994

by Romi Bhatia

ver 175 high school journalists

() from throughout northern Califor-

nia gathered in the ASUC Build-

ing at U.C. Berkeley on October 12 for the

ACLU-NC "Writing Your Rights Confer-

ence." The conference was co-sponsored

by the Howard A. Friedman First Amend-

ment Education Project, the ACLU-NC

Student Advisory Council and the ACLU |

Berkeley Student Caucus.

The opened on a controversial note

with a debate on school uniforms between

Vallejo Senior High School ACLU Club

members Menwin Morales and Natalie

Adona. "This is a timely issue," explained

Student Advisory Council member Preet-

mohan Sabharwal, a student at San Jose's

Live Oak High School, as he introduced

the debate. "The Legislature has just

passed a law allowing school districts to

adopt uniforms."

Morales emphasized the need for

uniforms to deal with the increase in

gangs and crime in the community. "The

hostility surrounding apparel sometimes

makes students fearful of attending

school," Morales charged.

In response, Adona

reminded the audience of their

individual rights to freedom of

speech and expression.

"Sometimes this means challeng-

ing the rules and regulations that

high school administrations have

burdened students with," Adona

stated.

The debate drew a strong

response from the crowd. A dozen

students stepped up to the mike to tell

their stories and express their feelings.

Brie Mazurek, a junior from Live Oak

High School in San Jose, said "I don't

think that any school should adopt

uniforms because it is a clear violation

of the First Amendment." Another

student charged that school officials are

just relying on stereotypes when they

claim that a hooded sweatshirt or baggy

pants mean someone is a gang member.

Following the plenary, student-led

workshops were held on journalistic

ethics, diversification of newspaper staffs,

how to handle "hot topics," the ramifica-

tions of sex, graffiti art, and underground

newspapers. Resource speakers at the

workshops included Nanette Asimov of

the San Francisco Chronicle, U.C. Santa

Cruz journalism professor Conn Hallinan,

Inside/OUT publisher Rick Aguirre, Yo!

editor Kevin Westin and ACLU-NC staff

attorney Ann Brick.

A vivid example of the role of student

journalists arose in the "hot topics" session

where two students spoke of an editorial

they had written criticizing the mother of a

teenager who had committed suicide. The

mother had apparently blamed the school

newspaper for publishing an article which

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Journalists Suchin Pak (1.) and Kevin Westin spoke of promoting

youth voices in mainstream media.

High School

Reporter and conference participant Romi Bhatia.

Journalists

Learn to "Write Your

cones,

the mother believed had caused her daugh-

ter to commit suicide.

"We found ourselves overwhelmed by

these students' situation," said one

workshop attender. When journalism

professor Hallinan asked the group about

the ethics involved in this situation, there

was a great deal of argument - yet every-

one agreed that student journalists must

take responsibility for what they write and

must also take into account how it will

influence others.

I had the pleasure of facilitating a

workshop, along with Steven Shepard

from Live Oak High School, covering a

topic relatively unknown to the general

public and to ourselves. The focus was on

graffiti art - a new form of expression.

The session was honored to have a graffiti

Rights"

artist from San Francisco. Through his

presentation and frank response to our

questions, we discovered that graffiti art is

not just a new trend but a tradition that has

attracted people to express their artistic as

well as social and political ideas in a

creative form.

The guest artist told the audience that

because of lack of funding for the arts,

young artists are never encouraged or

given a full chance to show their creative

talent in school. The media has reacted

negatively to graffiti and law enforcement

is targeting artists unfairly.

The audience was astonished at the

artistic pieces he displayed in his slide

show from around the Bay Area and

beyond. One student commented, "Most

people look at graffiti art with a distorted

vision and fail to realize the beauty and

message that lies underneath."

Conference Photos by Rick Rocamora

The conference closed with a plenary

session on "How the 1964 Free Speech

Movement Helped (or Hurt) Student

Expression Today." The panel included

Professor Hallinan, one of the original

participants in the 1964 movement that

rocked the U.C. Berkeley campus, Suchin

Pak of KGO-TV's "Straight Talk `N'

Teens," and editor Kevin Westin of Pacific

News Service's Yo!"

"Writing your rights" was the theme of

the ACLU conference. After a full day, the

students realized that it doesn't matter

whether they write, voice, or spray paint

their rights - they have rights and the

power to express them in any way, shape or

form. -

Romi Bhatia is a student at Live Oak

High School in San Jose and a member of

the ACLU Student Advisory Committee. and

ACLU and Mi earthy

Z

was pleased to read in the ACLU News about Ernie Besig's 90th birthday celebra-

tion. I note that the ACLU was "profoundly involved" in the struggles against

McCarthyism and HUAC in 1960s.

My experience in 1951, however, with then-director Erie Besig was quite differ-

ent. When I phoned the ACLU office, after having been subpoenaed by the Burns

State Unamerican Activities Committee, Besig refused to render any support. "How

do we know that you are not connected with the Communists?" he challenged me.

I was not connected with the CP in any way, but Ernie didn't see fit to question me

further, nor to offer any advice or support whatsoever.

- Alice Hamburg

Berkeley

e regret that the ACLU of Northern California did not offer any assistance to

Alice Hamburg when she was subpoenaed by the Burns Committee. Although

Mr. Besig responds that he has no recollection of her phone call 43 years ago, a search

of the ACLU News of that period includes a number of articles about ACLU opposi-

tion to the Burns Committee. In 1952, the ACLU challenged the dismissal of a Salva-

_ tion Army worker who was fired after appearing before the Committee. In 1954,

ACLU-NC attorney Lawrence Speiser filed a lawsuit on behalf of four Pacific Gas and

Electric employees who lost their jobs after refusing to answer questions about their

political beliefs before the Burns Committee.

The ACLU was not immune from the insidious suspicions of the McCarthy era.

For readers who are interested in this crucial period, we recommend Samuel Walker's

In Defense of American Liberties: A History of the ACLU, especially Part IV,

American Inquisition. In addition, copies of the historical edition of the ACLU-NC's

ACLU News, which were created for the 50th anniversary of the affiliate, are avail-

able free of charge from the Public Information Department, ACLU-NC.

We thank Ms. Hamburg for her letter, and for her continued support of the ACLU-

NC and the continuing battle for civil liberties, despite her personal disappointment

with the organization in 1951.

- The Editor

CELEBRATING VICTORIES OF Oe civit ROHS MOVEM Ei cup CONTINUING STRUGG)p

AMERICAN

CIVIL LIBERTIES

UNION OF

NORTHERN

BiLLoF

-RiSHis

Dayen

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 4

Center forthe Arts Forum

at Yerba Buena Gardens

7Q1 Mission Street, San Francisco

Program (c) PM e Refreshments and No-Host Reception PM

Exhibit: High School "Freedom of Expression" Art Contest

m ENTER BAINMENT

Medea Project

Cultural Odyssey's Medea Project, a theater workshop for

incarcerated women founded by performance artist

Rhodessa Jones, takes theater to San Francisco's San Bruno

jail and brings inmates/actresses from the jail to theaters

outside. Medea Project performers confront issues of

violence, addiction and recovery, and recidivism. Since

1988, Jones has used her energetic, visionary approach

to performance art in San Bruno jail to create

powerful dramatic works that incorporate song,

dance, improvisation and monologues. "I tell

them," said Jones, "This is not Dream Girls. This

is not The Wiz. This is our lives."

oro BOR EN

P

Dr. Loco's Rockin' Jalapefio Band

Dr. Loco's Rockin' Jalapefio Band, led by Dr. Jose Cuellar, a professor of La Raza Studies

at San Francisco State, mixes social awareness with salsa, soul, rumba and RGB. The

group has taken its blend of progressive politics and danceable Chicano/Latino rhythms

around the West Coast, and shared the stage with artists ranging from Los Lobos to

Elvin Bishop. Describing the band's "movimiento music," the Los Angeles Times

recently stated "the exponents of `English Only' must wince at these lyrics."

$20.00 per person; $10.00 for seniors, low-income and students over 18; free for students under 18.

a | C is i iS) Ticket Office: Center for the Arts at Yerba Buena Gardens, 701 Mission Street, San Francisco CA 94103-3138.

Charge by phone and 24-hour event information: 415/978-ARTS = 978-2787

ree ==

one

.

oy) =

AAA:

`my

ae and

For the past twenty-one years, the ACLU of Northern California has granted the Earl Warren Civil Liberties

Award to a person or persons who have made major contributions in the battle for justice.

During COMGFEeSSMman Don Edwards' 3) .::5 ini

House of Representatives, he has played a leadership role in the passage of every piece of

civil rights and civil liberties legislation on the American political agenda. A former FBI

agent, in Congress he has been responsible for oversight of the FBI. As Vice-Chair of the

House Judiciary Committee and Chair of its Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional

Rights, Edwards paved the way in Congress for some of the most important civil liberties

laws this century. He passed up opportunities to head up other Congressional committees

so he could retain his position as monitor of the FBI and, as the New York Times called

him, "the field marshal in the battles over civil rights." He led the fight for the Voting

Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Civil Rights

Restoration Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Religious Freedom

Restoration Act. In these efforts, Congressman Edwards worked side-by-side with

national and local ACLU staff and members in lobbying to undo past injustices and to

expand the civil liberties of all Americans, a task that was especially daunting during

the twelve years of the Reagan and Bush Administrations. This year, as Representative

Edwards retires from Congressional service, we honor his more than three decades of

legislating social justice in the United States.

LOLA HANZEL COURAGEOUS [ADVOCACY AWARD

In order to recognize and thank volunteers who have provided strength, dedication and leadership to the ACLU-NC

by their exemplary efforts, the Board of Directors established the Lola Hanzel Courageous Advocacy Award in

1981. Before her death in 1980, Lola Hanzel served as a volunteer at the ACLU-NC for more than a decade,

giving of her spirit and devotion in a way that inspired others.

(R)

ACLU-NC activist Howa ir d Lewis has a knack for doing the right thing at

the most unpredictable times. In 1953, during the Army-McCarthy hearings, Lewis - successful

businessman and real estate broker with a degree from Stanford - joined the ACLU. In 1963,

when he was the Director of the California Association of Realtors, he was the only one of

1,000 delegates at the annual convention to vote against the Associations' sponsorship of the

racist "Proposition 14." In fact, Lewis in 1964 became the Strategy Coordinator for

Californians Against Proposition 14, helping to send that measure - which would have

allowed racial discrimination in housing - down to defeat. That same year, he served as a

consultant to the President's Committee for Equal Opportunity in Housing. For almost a

decade, the ACLU has been fortunate to have this iconoclastic businessman and crusading

proponent for fair housing and racial justice as an activist on our chapter and affiliate

boards. Lewis served as an officer of the Mid-Peninsula Chapter from 1986-1993 and on

the affiliate Board from 1987-1993; of his tenure, Lewis says, "I argued all the time and

enjoyed myself thoroughly." His broad-ranging experience from the world of real estate to

the national campaigns against discrimination in housing have benefited the ACLU in the

most unexpected ways. For continuing to surprise us with his wisdom, his wit, his

leadership and his arguments, we thank activist Howard Lewis and honor him with the

Lola Hanzel Courageous Advocacy Award.

. aclu news

November - December 1994

by Herschel Farbman

n October 11, the Colorado

() Supreme Court struck down

Amendment 2, the anti-gay rights

_ measure passed by Colorado voters in

1992. The court's ruling in Evans v. Romer

made permanent an injunction issued

shortly after the election by the Denver

District Court.

The provisions of Amendment 2

prohibited any governmental body from

enacting any "statute, regulation,

ordinance, or policy" that might allow

claims of discrimination on the basis of :

sexual identity. If implemented, Amend-

ment 2 would have repealed laws protect-

ing gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals

already passed by several Colorado cities,

and prohibited the adoption of similar laws.

Perhaps its most damaging effect, accord-

ing to ACLU-NC staff attorney Matthew

Coles, would have been the short-circuiting

of public debate on the civil rights of gay

men, lesbians, and bisexuals. :

Coles challenged Amendment 2 along

with lawyers from the Colorado ACLU,

the National ACLU Lesbian and Gay

Rights Project, and the LAMBDA Legal

Defense and Education Fund. Plaintiffs

included individual Colorado taxpayers as

well as the governments of Denver, Aspen,

Court Strikes Down

Anti-Gay Measure in

Colorado

and Boulder - cities which had passed

gay rights legislation. Defendant Richard

Romer is the Governor of Colorado.

Coles praised the Colorado Supreme

Court's decision for offering a powerful

reminder that "government never has an

interest in ending debate on anything." The

state, in its defense of Amendment 2, had:

argued that deterring what it called

"factionalism" constitutes a "compelling

State interest."

In addition to its protection of public

debate, Coles also considered the court's

rejection of Amendment 2 to be important

as a precedent for challenges to other anti-

gay rights measures. Amendment 2 is only

the first in a series of state ballot initiatives

designed to take away government's power

to pass laws protecting the civil rights of

gay men and lesbians. Currently, similar

measures are on the ballot in Idaho and

Oregon. Attempts to put anti-gay initiatives

on statewide ballots failed in Michigan,

Arizona, Florida, Maine, Missouri,

Montana, Nevada and Washington, but

there are indications that, in some of these

states, attempts will be made again.

According to Coles, the ruling in Evans

provides the first precedent for challenging

these initiatives. "Similar initiatives

designed to take away government's

power to pass laws protecting the civil

rights of African Americans were struck

down in the late 50's and early `60s,"

explained Coles. "But those measures

were struck down because they constituted

racial discrimination. Cases concerning

the civil rights of gay men and lesbians

don't fit neatly into any existing federal

constitutional category."

Coles added that the Colorado ruling is

also precedent setting in that it represents

ACLU-NC Petitions Ninth Circuit for

Rehearing in Dr. Doe Case

by Jean Field

he ACLU-NC has petitioned for a

rehearing in Doe vy. Attorney

General after a three-judge panel of

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled

that the FBI was entitled to ask a doctor

whether he had AIDS, and to stop sending

its agents to him for routine physical

examinations.

At the same time, the court ruled that in

general, federal law prohibits employers

from asking whether an employee has

AIDS, and that the agents were in no

significant danger of infection.

"The court's interpretation of the law is

a victory for people with HIV," said

ACLU-NC staff attorney Matt Coles, who

filed the case in 1988 on behalf of a doctor

who is now deceased. "But the outcome

just can't be squared with the record."

In its August 30 opinion, the court said

that the FBI tried to find out if the doctor

posed a risk to its agents, and received

evasive answers that allowed it to ask him

if he had AIDS. However, the FBI's testi-

mony itself indicates that Dr. Doe consis-

tently, and correctly, responded to its

questions by saying that if he had AIDS, it

would not have posed a risk to patients

during routine physical exams because he

was following federal guidelines for

minimizing risk.

"We need a rehearing so that the result

of the case is consistent with the court's

interpretation of the law," said Coles. "The

rights of people with HIV shouldn't exist

just in law books - they must be protected

in the real world as well." :

State Supreme Court to Review Parental

Consent for Abortion

by Jean Field

he California Supreme Court

ap announced September 29 that it will

review the Court of Appeal's ruling in

American Academy of Pediatrics y. Lungren,

which held that the state law requiring minors

to obtain parental or judicial consent for

abortion violates the California Constitu-

tion's guarantee of privacy.

"The Court's decision to take an

abortion rights case, its first in 13 years,

doesn't necessarily mean it's dissatisfied

with the Court of Appeal's ruling," said

ACLU-NC cooperating attorney Linda

Shostak. "It suggests that the Court is

seriously interested in the key issues of

privacy, parental rights and reproductive

freedom under the California Constitution

presented by this case."

The Court of Appeal's unanimous

opinion, issued in June, ruled that the state's

1987 parental consent law, which was never

enforced because of the ACLU-NC lawsuit,

did not further the state's asserted interests

in protecting the mental and physical health

of minors and in promoting family

harmony. The appellate court opinion

upheld the 1992 verdict issued by San

Francisco Superior Court Judge Maxine

Chesney after a month-long trial.

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit are the Ameri-

can Academy of Pediatrics, California

District IX; California Medical Associa-

tion; American College of Obstetricians

and Gynecologists, District Ix; Planned

Parenthood of Alameda-San Francisco;

and an individual physician, Philip Darney,

M.D. They are represented by cooperating

attorneys Shostak, Lori Schechter and

Annette Carnegie of Morrison and Foerster;

Abigail English of the National Center for

Youth Law; and ACLU-NC staff attorney

Margaret Crosby.

Coles to Head National

Gay Rights Project

CLU-NC staff attorney Matthew

Ac has been selected to direct

the national ACLU Lesbian and

Gay Rights Project and the AIDS and Civil

Liberties Project. The Projects, which

have been based in the national office in

New York, will be opening an office in

San Francisco; Coles will divide his time

between the two sites.

Coles, an ACLU-NC legal staff

member since 1987, has litigated the affili-

ate's lesbian and gay rights cases,

defended the rights of HIV-infected

prisoners and health workers, and drafted

anti-discrimination and domestic partner-

ship laws for the state of California and

numerous cities. He has often collaborated

with the national Project attorneys on -

litigation in other states, most recently in

the successful challenge to Colorado's

anti-gay rights initiative Amendment 2.

Coles will assume his new post at the

end of the year, replacing William Ruben-

Matthew Coles, new Director of the

ACLU Lesbian and Gay Rights

Project.

stein who has directed the Project since

1990; the first project director was Nan

Hunter. @

the first time that a major court has "stood

up to the loose use of Bowers v. Hardwick"

- the Georgia case that outlawed sodomy.

"States have attempted to use the U.S.

Supreme Court's decision in Bowers as an

all-purpose justification for anything that

disadvantages gay men, lesbians, and

bisexuals, arguing that moral disapproval

of gay people is a legitimate governmental

aim," Coles explained.

"In its Amendment 2 ruling, the

Colorado Supreme Court squarely says

that, while it may be o.k. for people to

disapprove of lesbians and gay men, and it

may be o.k. for the state to legislate in a

way that reinforces that morality, civil

rights laws are not necessarily about

approving or disapproving of the people

they protect."

- Attorney Suzanne Goldberg of the

Lambda Legal Defense and Education

Fund noted, "The ruling sends a clear

message to voters that it is a waste of time

and money to support anti-gay measures

that are so clearly unconstitutional."

Shortly after the ruling, the State of

Colorado filed a petition for review to the

United States Supreme Court.

Herschel Farbman is in intern in the

ACLU-NC Public Information Depart-

ment.

Court Won't

Change Ban

on Begging

by Jean Field

he Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

rejected the City of San Francisco's

attempt to overturn a 1991 ruling

that declared the state law prohibiting

begging unconstitutional.

"This decision is a victory for Celestus

Blair and for the constitutional rights of

people who must ask others for charity,"

said Michael Hallerud, ACLU-NC

cooperating attorney with the firm Pettit and

Martin.. Hallerud, along with ACLU-NC

staff attorney Margaret Crosby, repre-

sented Blair, who was arrested five times

in 1988 and 1989 for peacefully asking

people for money in downtown San

Francisco. He was charged with violating

California Penal Code Section 647(c),

which makes it a misdemeanor to

approach others on public sidewalks "for

the purpose of begging or soliciting alms."

Blair is no longer homeless and currently

works as a bus driver.

In 1991, U.S. District Court Judge

William Orrick ruled that a peaceful

request for charity is expression protected

by the First Amendment. He concluded

that the law violates the rights to expres-

sion and equal protection, by prohibiting

only one message: a request for alms.

The Court of Appeals' complex

decision, issued October 31, was based on

the procedural issues of the case, not the

constitutional merits of Judge Orrick's

ruling. After the 1991 decision, the City

presented a formal settlement offer, which

Blair accepted, resulting in a consent

judgment against the City. The City then

tried unsuccessfully to withdraw from the

judgment which included a $4,000

payment to Blair for damages.

The Court of Appeals said that it

lacked the power to address whether or not

the state law was unconstitutional, because

the settlement rendered the appeal moot. It

returned the case to Judge Orrick to decide

whether to vacate his decision in light of

the fact that the case has become moot.

The appellate court rejected the City's

request to vacate Judge Orrick's ruling.

"Judge Orrick's opinion is both princi-

pled and pervasive. It protects the funda-

mental rights of the most vulnerable

members of society," said ACLU-NC

attorney Crosby. and

aclu news

7

November - December 1994

New ACLU Lobbyist Brings Experience from Both Sides of the Barricades

Valerie Small Navarro

ast year, Valerie Small Navarro was

working inside a Congressional

office, being lobbied by advocacy

groups on immigration and civil rights law.

Today, Small Navarro is knocking on

legislators' doors helping to create a civil

liberties agenda in the state Capitol as the

ACLU' s new Legislative Advocate.

Small Navarro joins Legislative Direc-

tor Francisco Lobaco and Legislative

Assistant Rita Egri in the Sacramento

office. Lobaco was promoted to Legisla-

tive Director after the March departure of

Margaret Pena. The Legislative Office

represents ACLU members throughout

California on issues ranging from the death

penalty and sentencing to immigration and

welfare reform. Annually, ACLU lobby-

ists review over 3,000 bills to determine

their impact on civil liberties and lobby on

approximately 200 of them.

Small Navarro brings with her a wealth

of experience on both sides of the legisla-

tive barricades. Her previous position was

as the Legislative Aide to U.S. Representa-

tive Xavier Becerra, a first term Member of

Congress from Los Angeles.

On Capitol Hill, Small Navarro coordi-

nated the response to an onslaught of anti-

immigrant measures in the House of

Representives for the Congressional

Hispanic Caucus. She also drafted many

of the bills for the comprehensive

immigration package for members of the

California Democratic Delegation with the

assistance of advocacy organizations and

presented written testimony on the need to

repeal the employer sanction provisions of

the Immigration Reform and Control Act

(IRCA) to the Senate Subcommittee on

Immigration and Refugee Affairs.

"T benefited greatly by working with

the Washington Office of the

ACLU," Small Navarro said. "I

worked closely with national ACLU

Field Director Gene Guerrero in

drafting a bill that Congressman

Becerra introduced to create an

independent review commission to

monitor and investigate abuses by

the Border Patrol and the INS."

Prior to her work in Congress, Small

Navarro, a 1985 graduate of

Hastings College of the Law,

directed immigrant rights programs

for MALDEF (Mexican American

Legal Defense and Education

Fund), California Rural Legal

Assistance and the Centro

Campesino in Granger, Washing-

ton.

While working at MALDEF,

Small Navarro coordinated the

writing and edited the immigrants'

rights organizations U.S. Supreme

Court amicus brief in Barr v. Flores,

challenging the INS misrepresenta-

tions about the conditions for

children in detention awaiting

deportation hearings. -

She also contributed to the Valerie Small Navarro, new ACLU lobby

Fourth Circuit amicus brief in

Duane v. GEICO, arguing that alien-

age discrimination was prohibited by a

statutory provision that "all persons" shall

have the same rights to make and enforce

contracts as is enjoyed by "white persons."

Small Navarro, who was born in

Guayaquil, Ecuador and raised in Spain,

Holland, Trinidad and Tobago, and Norway,

has also worked in the international arena

as well. Based on her investigation of a

case in El Salvador, she filed a Human

Rights Complaint with the Organization of

Gerbode Foundation Grants

$20,000 for Planned

Giving Program

he Wallace Alexander Gerbode

Foundation recently awarded the

ACLU-NC its first capacity-build-

ing grant - $20,000 to underwrite the

development and expansion of the ACLU

Foundation of Northern California

(ACLU-NC) planned giving program.

This is the latest in a long series of success-

ful ventures between this San Francisco-

based foundation and the ACLU-NC. The

Gerbode Foundation in the past has been a

generous supporter of the ACLU-NC's

reproductive rights advocacy.

"This grant could not have come at a

better time," noted Dick Grosboll, Chair of

the Planned Giving Committee of the

ACLU-NC's Board of Directors. "We

know that between 1990 and 2015 a unique

generation of Americans will leave an

unprecedented amount of wealth to their

families and to institutions they care about.

The ACLU-NC needs its own proactive

and coherent planned giving program to be

sure that people who care about civil liber-

ties know that they can choose to designate

the ACLU as a charitable beneficiary."

The planned giving program will

promote two types of gifts to the ACLU.

The most familiar type is that provided for

through (1) a will, (2) a revocable living

trust, or (3) the beneficiary designation

form of a life insurance policy, IRA, or

pension/profit-sharing plan. Collectively,

these gifts are known as "bequests"

although technically speaking, "bequests"

refers only to gifts made by will.

The other important type of planned

gift is a life income gift. To make a life

income gift, a donor typically transfers

assets to the ACLU, to our pooled income

fund (called the Liberty Fund), or to a trust,

under an agreement that provides the donor

(and/or a person designated by the donor)

with income from these assets for his or her

lifetime. When the donor dies, what.

remains of these assets is available to the

ACLU for civil liberties advocacy. Life

income gifts provide the donor with signif-

icant lifetime income tax benefits in

addition to income.

"We are constantly reminded of the

importance of planned gifts here at the

ACLU-NC," noted Robert Nakatani, the

newly-appointed Director of Planned

Giving. "Take the case of Ralph Elias. Mr.

Elias, an unmarried man, was a dedicated,

quiet civil libertarian and left his estate to

friends and charities, including the ACLU.

His foresight and thoughtfulness meant

$14,000 in 1990, $54,000 in 1991, and

$15,000 so far this year for ACLU activities.

(The bequest is being distributed over

several years.) Revenue from bequests such

as Mr. Elias's enabled us to forestall serious

program cutbacks during these years."

Members who would like to receive

materials about the ACLU-NC's

planned giving program or assistance in

making a planned gift are encouraged to

call Robert Nakatani at the ACLU-NC .

office 415/621-2493. and

American States, Inter-American Commis-

sion on Human Rights.

And why did Small Navarro cross the

country and cross the legislative threshold to

work as a lobbyist for the ACLU? "In many

ways, I found Washington very frustrating,"

she says, "the climate in Congress is similar

to the climate here - there is a feeding

frenzy on crime and immigration. Who can

outdo the next guy to put more people in jail?

Meanwhile, where's the money for schools

or prevention?

"ve been wanting to come back to

California, and to branch out with my

work," Small Navarro explained. "I found

it very exciting working with the Congres-

sional Hispanic Caucus and Black Caucus

on crucial issues, and I hope to apply some

of those lessons here. I've been working in

the immigration arena for a long time, and I

want to explore more areas of civil rights."

ACLU-NC Executive Director

Dorothy Ehrlich said, "Our ACLU

Legislative Office in Sacramento enjoys a

remarkable reputation for its consistent

devotion to protecting individual rights

despite the hostile climate in the state

capital. Valerie and Francisco will be a

formidable team and can be relied upon as

a powerful voice for civil liberties."

Given the slew of legislation and the

small ACLU lobbying staff, Small Navarro

will be able to explore many new areas as

soon as the new session begins. She will be

focusing on reproductive rights, gay and

lesbian rights, affirmative action and civil

rights legislation.

But right now, given the intense

xenophobia that characterizes the Gover-

nor's political agenda and the state ballot

with Proposition 187, Small Navarro's

expertise on immigration has been called to

the fore.

Within days of arriving in Sacramento,

she became the coordinator for the phone

bank for Get Out the Vote/Voter Registra-

tion for Californians United Against

Proposition 187 in Sacramento and worked

with other civil rights groups to defeat the

measure.

"Lobbying for the ACLU to protect

civil liberties is a big responsibility," said

Small Navarro. "The immediate challenge

for me personally is patience - sometimes

people don't realize how really hostile the

climate can get. But I look forward to

taking on the challenge."

OTT h ae (el are

Terie Fe iG

iiietii ace

Mai

8 aclu news

November - December 1994

BCR elit

Monthly Meetings

Seymour Schwartz

- Santa Cruz Activist

Redwood (Humboldt County)

HALT, the Hate Action Limitation Team.

grandson. (c)

Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94103.

Veteran civil liberties activist Seymour Schwartz died in Santa Cruz on October 5

at the age of 72. Schwartz served as a Board member and Treasurer of the Santa Cruz

ACLU Chapter. As a leader of the ACLU, Schwartz was instrumental in starting

A native New Yorker, Schwartz was a member of the American Stock Exchange

and a financial advisor. In addition to the ACLU, he was active in the Westside

Community Health Center, the Grey Bears, and the People's Democratic Club; at the

time of his death he was working to help pass the single-payer health care initiative.

According to Chapter Co-Chair Eleanor Eisenberg, "Sy always worked hard for the

chapter even when he was not an officer. He always served with good humor and a real

commitment to civil liberties. We're going to miss him."

In his honor, the Chapter is establishing the Sy Schwartz Award, to be given each

year in recognition of the outstanding contributions of a non-attorney Board member.

He is survived by his wife of 53 years, Martha Schwartz, two daughters and a

The family has requested donations in his memory be made to the ACLU-NC, 1663

Proposition 187...

Continued from page I

federal authorities, or otherwise interfering

with the school attendance of any child

based on the immigration status of the

child or the child's parent/guardian."

The lawsuit charges that denying

education to individuals based solely on

their citizenship is in direct violation of the

1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision in

Plyler y. Doe because it denies equal

protection guarantees of the U.S. and

California Constitutions. The new law also

violates the privacy guarantees of the

federal Family Educational Rights and

Privacy Act (FERPA) and Article 1,

Section | of the California Constitution.

Ironically, the legal analysis of

the defendant, the state Depart-

ment of Education, and of the

Legislative Counsel agree with

that conclusion.

The case is being brought by

Peter Roos and Deborah

Escobedo of META; Robert

Rubin, Ignatius Bau, and Sara

Campos of the Lawyers'

Committee for Civil Rights;

ACLU-NC staff attorney Alan

Schlosser, ACLU National

Immigrants' Rights Project

Director. Lucas Guttentag;

Kevin Fong and Ed Kolto of Pillsbury,

Madison and Sutro; and Ralph Santiago

Abascal and Ellen Braff-Guajardo of CRLA.

META attorney Peter Roos, who also

argued Plyler before the U.S. Supreme

Court, stated, "The voters of California

replicated the error of the state of Texas.

This suit is intended to undo that wrong.

The Supreme Court was particularly

concerned about the `lifetime hardship'

that would be imposed on innocent

children who would be marked with the

`stigma of illiteracy' for the rest of their

lives. These are the children that we repre-

sent today."

In striking down the Texas statute, the

Supreme Court ruled: "It is difficult to

understand precisely what the State hopes

to achieve by promoting the creation and

perpetuation of a sub-class of illiterates

within our boundaries.... whatever savings

might be achieved by denying these

children an education they are wholly

insubstantial in light of the costs involved

to these children, the state and the nation."

Lawyers' Committee attorney Robert

Rubin said, "Given the current anti-

immigrant climate that is being fostered by

Pete Wilson and other politicians, it is not

surprising that Proposition 187 was

approved by the voters. But it is precisely

in this type of climate that the courts must

ensure that-constitutional protections are

not undermined.

"The unconstitutional exclusion of

thousands of children is imminent,' Rubin

added. "That is why we sought an immedi-

ate court order to protect against this

immediate threat."

Declarations from educators and

school officials from around the state

document this need. For example, Superin-

tendent Darline Robles of the Montebello

Unified School District describes the

atmosphere of hostility in several schools

in her district towards Mexican and other

immigrant children which leads her to

conclude that, without judicial interven-

tion, undocumented children will be in a

situation of extreme vulnerability from

today on. "In order to adequately protect

my students, I feel that it is absolutely

essential that Iam armed with a court order

prohibiting the implementation of Proposi-

tion 187 or I will not be able to control

those teachers in my district

who will vigorously try to

take the law into their own

hands."

Plaintiff taxpayer Henry

Der stated, "To implement

187 will cost the taxpayers of

California a lot more money

than what its proponents

claim would be saved by

eliminating education and

health services to children in

vulnerable situations."

The two other suits

covered by Judge Pollak's

orders also deal with education. One is

brought by students in California's state

college and university system and the other

by the Los Angeles and San Francisco

Unified School Districts.

On the same day in Los Angeles, U.S.

District Court Judge William Byrne sched-

uled a hearing for a Temporary Restraining

Order Against Proposition 187 on Novem-

ber 16, and said that until that time no

provisions of the measure should be

enforced and no services shall be denied

under the newly passed law.

That court order came in response to

Gregorio T. v. Wilson which was brought

jointly by the ACLU-SC, the Mexican

American Legal Defense and Education

Fund, and other civil rights groups.

That suit charges that Proposition 187

violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S.

Constitution (Article VI) which gives the

federal government the power to regulate

immigration, by enacting immigration

laws that conflict with comprehensive

federal immigration policy.

The suit charges that the measure will

immediately imperil hundreds of thousands

of school children, thousands of people

needing medical care and untold others

who will be forced to forfeit their rights out

of fear of state sanction or deportation.

Three other lawsuits were filed in

federal court in Los Angeles at the same

time; numerous other suits are planned by

educational bodies, health care providers ~

and other service recipients and agencies. Bf

Chapter Meetings

(Chapter meetings are open to all inter-

ested members. Contact the Chapter

activist listed for your area.)

B-A-R-K (Berkeley-Albany-Rich-

mond-Kensington) Chapter Meeting:

(Usually fourth Thursday) Volunteers

needed for the chapter hotline - call

Tom Sarbaugh at 510/526-6376 for

further details. For more information,

time and address of meetings, contact

Julie Houk, 510/848-4752.

Earl Warren (Oakland/Alameda

County) Chapter Meeting: (Usually

second Wednesday) Meet at 7:30 PM

in the basement of the Temescal

Branch of the Oakland Library, 5205

Telegraph Avenue; use the rear

entrance. New volunteers welcome!

For more information, call David

Gassman at 510-835-2334

Fresno Chapter Meeting: (Usually

second Wednesday) Meet at 7:00 PM at

the Center for Non-Violence, 985 N.

Van Ness, Fresno. New members

welcome! For information on date and

time of meetings, call Nadya Coleman

at 209/229-7178 (days) or the Chapter

Hotline at 209/225-3780.

Lesbian and Gay Rights Chapter

`Meeting: (Usually first Thursday)

ACLU-NC office, 1663 Mission Street,

Suite 460, San Francisco. Mailings and

other activities start at 6:30 PM. Speak-

ers at 7:00 PM. Business meeting starts

at 7:30 PM. For more information,

contact Jeff Hooper at 510/460-0712.

Marin County Chapter Meeting:

(usually Third Monday) Meet at 7:30

PM WestAmerica Bank, 1204 Straw-

berry Town and Country Village, Mill

Valley. For more information, contact

Coleman Persily at 415/479-1731.

Mid-Peninsula (Palo Alto area)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually fourth

Thursday) Meet at 7:30 PM at the

California Federal Bank, El] Camino

Real, Palo Alto. For more information,

contact Paul Gilbert at 415/324-1499,

Monterey County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Tuesday) Next meeting

is Tuesday, November 15. Annual

meeting is Saturday, January 21 at 2:00

p.m. Call for information on December

meeting information. For more infor-

mation, contact Richard Criley,

408/624-7562.

North Peninsula (San Mateo area)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually third

Monday) Meet at 7:30 PM, at Planned

Parenthood, 2205 Palm Avenue, San

Mateo.

Chapter Meeting: (Usually third

Monday) For information on upcom-

ing meeting dates and times, contact

Christina Huskey at 707/444-6595.

Sacramento Valley Chapter

Meeting: (Usually first Wednesday)

Meet at 7:00 PM at Shakey's Pizza,

59th and J Streets, Sacramento. For

more information, contact Ruth Ordas,

916/488-9956.

San Francisco Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Tuesday) Meet at 6:45

PM at ACLU Office, 1663 Mission, -

#460, San Francisco. For more infor-

mation, call the Chapter Information

Line at 415/979-6699.

Santa Clara Valley Chapter

Meeting: (Usually first Tuesday)

Meet on Tuesday, November 8 at 7:00

PM at the Community Bank Building,

3rd Floor Conference Room, corner of

Market/St. John Streets, San Jose.

Contact Larry Jensen at 408/995-3250,

for further information.

Santa Cruz County Chapter

Meeting: (Usually third Thursday)

Meet at 7:00 PM at the Women's Law

and Mediation Center, 104 Walnut

Avenue, Suite 203, Santa Cruz.

Annual meeting will be on November

17; social, election of new board

officials and presentation of the first

annual Sy Schwartz Volunteer award

and other volunteer awards. It will be

held at Calvary Church in Santa Cruz.

Contact Eleanor Eisenberg at 408/423-

5327 for further information.

Sonoma County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Wednesday) Meet at

7:30 PM at the Peace and Justice

Center, 540 Pacific Avenue, Santa

Rosa. Call Steve Thornton at 707/544-

S115 for further information.

Yolo County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Thursday) For more

information, call John Crawford at

916/757-6282 or the Chapter Hotline

at 916/756-ACLU.

FIELD ACTION

MEETINGS

(All meetings except those noted will

be held at the ACLU-NC Office, 1663

Mission Street, #460, San Francisco.)

Student Outreach Committee: Meet

to plan outreach activities. For more

information, call Marcia Gallo at

415/621-2493.

Student Advisory Committee: For

more information, call Marcia, Katrina

or Jamie at 4175/62 1-2006 ext. 52.

for

Ss ACLU 75th Anniversary Calendar

inchudes rare archival photographs illustrating highlights of ACLU history, beautifully reproduced on

Gniy $9.95

postage/shipping inchidedi

Yo order: Send this coupon with check/money order, payable to American Civil Liberties Union, to:

ACLU Dept. L P.O. Box 794 Medford, NY 11763

A orders must be prepaid.

Total Enctosed

Number of Catendars requested _

Name

high quality semi-gloss, recycled stock. Wail-styie calendar format. 12" x 127.

Address

City State