vol. 67, no. 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

ACLU

WHAT'S INSIDE

VOLUME LXVIII ISSUE 4

pace and

Sex Ed: Why It's Broke |

and How to Fix It

"WE'RE MORE THAN JUST WORKERS

AND PROTESTERS - WE'RE PEOPLE."

- BILLY KEPOO

Palo Alto: One City's

Patriot Act Resolution

POLICE FIRE ON PROTESTERS-ACLU SUES

Backlash Profile: Teen

Brothers Face Deportation

By Sarah Nelson Wright, ACLU Intern

lad in full riot gear, they opened fire with wooden

bullets, sting-ball grenades and shot-filled bean

bags, scattering the crowd and wounding heads,

bodies and limbs. Terrified protesters, dockworkers

and bystanders fled the advancing police line, helping the

injured along.

This was the scene at the Port of Oakland on April 7,

Oakland Police

when opened fire on _ peaceful

anti-war protesters.

Willow Rosenthal, 31, never expected to sustain a life-alter-

ing injury when she attended the April 7 protest. But after

Oakland police shot Rosenthal in the back of her right calf,

she has suffered "probably the most excruciating pain I've ever

experienced in my life... I will be disfigured for the rest of my

life and I have permanent nerve damage," Rosenthal says.

VOTE "NO!" ON PROP. 54 ON OCT. 7

CONNERLY'S INITIATIVE WILL BLINDFOLD CALIFORNIA

He says that when the government asks us about our race it perpetuates divi-

sion. He says that eliminating race checkboxes from government forms will

build a colorblind society. He wants a state "where we see ourselves as one

American family, all committed to do the same thing."

Ward Connerly's vision sounds like a wonderful thing. But delve a little deep-

er and it's crystal clear that this vision is profoundly flawed. That's why, as

Californians prepare to go to the polls October 7 and cast their votes on

Connerly's Classification by Race, Ethnicity, Color and National Origin

Initiative (Proposition 54), the ACLU and a cast of unusual

race and

Scandal Rocks

San Francisco Police

PAGE 1 O

Through Our Eyes - Youth

Explore Gender Identity

Rosenthal is one of 40 plaintiffs in a federal class action

lawsuit filed on June 26 against the City of Oakland by the

ACLU of Northern California (ACLU-NC), National

Lawyers Guild (NLG), Local 10 of the International

Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), and a team of

prominent civil rights attorneys including John Burris and

James Chanin. The suit claims that the plaintiffs' First

Amendment rights to freedom of speech, assembly and asso-

ciation were violated that day.

"The Constitution itself was a victim on April 7, just like

our clients," says Alan Schlosser, legal director of the ACLU-

NC. "Such indiscriminate and excessive use of force is ille-

gal and unconstitutional, and people must not be deterred

by this unprecedented police overreaction from exercising

vigorously their constitutional right to dissent."

"Numerous photographs taken at the scene show that

the officers fired directly at demonstrators, thus, in

effect, opting for a deadly force response to a non-vio-

lent demonstration," says Chanin. "The serious

injuries that resulted were clearly foreseeable." The bul-

lets, Chanin notes, were clearly labeled, "Do not fire

directly at person as serious injury or death may result.

Ricochet baton shell approximately 3 meters in front of

persons." Legal observers sent by NLG were shot at

during the protest. One powerful piece of evidence

from a press conference held on June 26 is a

notebook of one of the observers, spattered

with his blood. "Apparently police fired at him

said Rachel

"This was the most outrageous inci-

because he was taking notes,"

Lederman of the NLG.

dent of unprovoked mass police violence the National

Lawyers Guild has seen in our 20 years of providing legal

support to

Bay Area demonstrations."

The plaintiffs are seeking a court continued on page 11

continued on page 9

OCTOBER 7 Vote "NO" on Prop. 54

SEPTEMBER 13 ACLU-NC Membership Conference, Holy Names College, Oakland

OCTOBER 30 ACLU-NC Fall Youth Rights Conference, San Jose State University

DECEMBER 14 Celebrate Bill of Rights Day! Argent Hotel, San Francisco

For details on events, visit www.aclunc.org or call 415-

READ MORE AT

WWW.ACLUNC.ORG

621-2493.

ACLU MEMBERS CONVERGE ON NATION'S CAPITAL

By Stella Richardson, Media Relations Director

early 1,500 card-carrying members of the American

N Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) converged on the

nation's capital for the organization's inaugural mem-

bership conference in June, an event the ACLU called a

national rallying cry against the government's determina-

tion to cut back on civil liberties in

the name of national security. The

Washington, DC Conference was

held from June 11-15 with more

than 30 delegates from northern

California, including many college

and high school students.

From Vermont to California,

ACLU members of all backgrounds

and ages traveled to attend the first

national gathering of an organization whose ranks have

swelled to 400,000 -an unprecedented 33 percent jump - in

the past 18 months. Nowhere has the membership grown

more than in northern California.

"We were proud to be in the nation's capital representing

close to 40,000 members from northern California," says

Dorothy Ehrlich, executive director of the ACLU of

Northern California (ACLU-NC). "And our message was

clear: the American public does not want the government to

trade away our freedoms."

About 1,000 conference attendees signed up for a Lobby

Day that included visits with key legislators as well as drop-

ins on the offices of presidential hopefuls. The northern

California delegation met with Senator

FROM VERMONT TO CALIFORNIA, ACLU

MEMBERS OF ALL BACKGROUNDS AND

AGES TRAVELED 10 ATTEND THE

FIRST NATIONAL GATHERING OF AN

ORGANIZATION WHOSE RANKS HAVE

SWELLED TO 400,000 - AN UNPRECEDENTED 33 PERCENT

JUMP - IN THE PAST 18 MONTHS.

Feinstein's office, Senator Boxer's office, and Congressional

representatives.

Youth delegate and ACLU-NC board member William

Walker was instrumental in organizing students for the con-

THE DREAM TEAM

BOB KEARNEY, formerly the national field director at the ACLU's Legislative Office

in Washington, DC, began in April as the new associate director of the ACLU of

Northern California (ACLU-NC). In his new role, Kearney is working to strength-

en the ACLU-NC's field and activist program. He has hit the ground running,

expanding the ACLU-NC email action alert list (sign up at www.aclunc.org), train-

ing an overflow audience of people interested in speaking about civil liberties, and

building a campaign against "Patriot Act I."

BOB KEARNEY

_ MAYA HARRIS began as the new Racial Justice Project (RJP) director in July. No

_ stranger to the ACLU, Harris is an expert on criminal justice, race and police prac-

tices who has worked closely with RJP in the past. Harris joins us from Oakland

_ think-tank PolicyLink, where, as a senior associate, she researched community-cen-

tered policing. A graduate of Stanford Law School, she has taught at the University of

San Francisco School of Law, Hastings College of Law, New College School of Law,

_and was dean at Lincoln Law School of San Jose.

Staff attorney JULIA HARUMI MASS comes to us from Los Angeles union-side labor law

"firm Rothner, Segall and Greenstone. She has previously worked on many issues dear

WOE aL

Port of Oakland.

to the ACLU, including a challenge to Californias ban on bilingual education.

Harumi Mass is now working on several cases, including the class action lawsuit on

_ behalf of dockworkers and protesters injured by police during a peaceful protest at the

In July, TAMARA LANGE of the national ACLU's Lesbian and Gay Rights and AIDS

Projects moved her office to San Francisco. Here, she will continue her work to

advance the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and people living

with HIV, working on cases with the northern California affiliate and the national

office. After receiving her law degree from UC Berkeley, Lange worked at Heller,

Ehrman, White and McAuliffe in San Francisco and at Caldwell, Leslie, Newcombe and

Pettite in Los Angeles. (See photo, back page.)

creecetenerenceetnertneetensceeenen SHELTER MORE THAN JUST YOUR MONEY |--------

In these times of economic uncertainty, an ACLU

Foundation Gift Annuity is more than just a safe invest-

`ment. It is a way that you can preserve the Bill of Rights

for future generations!

A minimum contribution of $5,000 provides:

cent Guaranteed income for life

0x00B0 A strong Bill of Rights.

Please send me information on:

|] ACLU Foundation Gift Annuities.

(1 Remembering the ACLU Foundation in my will.

name

address

city state zip

phone email

date of birth

Return to : Stan Yogi, 1663 Mission Street, Suite 460, San Francisco, CA 94103

phone: 415-621-2493 ext. 330 email: syogi@aclunc.org

ference. "This kind of meeting is especially important because

the ACLU must find ways to tap into the energy of youth and

cultivate the membership," says Walker. "Young people are

often doing the work of the ACLU - in the classroom, in col-

lege chapters, on the streets - it's necessary for them to feel

more a part of the organization. This conference is an impor-

tant first step in mobilizing youth nationally."

At least 30 percent of conference attendees were between

the ages of 16 and 27.

In addition to lobbying Congress, ACLU members ques-

tioned top federal officials and other Washington insiders

about where they stand, and enjoyed entertainment by top

performers. Highlights included a reception with Supreme

Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the presentation of

the ACLU Muhammad Ali Champion of Liberty Award to

Ali himself - the first recipient of the award and a former

ACLU client. FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III delivered a

speech on "The New FBI" and took questions from ACLU

members, and veteran New York Times columnist Anthony

Lewis was presented with the Roger N. Baldwin Medal of

Liberty Award for his outstanding writing on civil liberties.

The ACLU has 53 staffed affiliates in major cities and

more than 300 chapters nationwide. The ACLU-NC is the

largest affiliate in the nation. m

GENEROUS GIFT LAUNCHES SPECIAL FUND

By Robert Nakatani,

Endowment Campaign Director

The most recent addition to the endow-

of contribution every organization hopes

for but rarely gets: thoughtful, signifi-

cant, and completely unexpected.

In May, the Carol Walter Sinton

Fund for Freedom of Expression was established with a

Carol Walter Sinton

$50,000 gift from Henry Sinton of San Francisco and his

children, Patricia Adler of Berkeley and Peter Sinton of San

Francisco. This extraordinary contribution creates a special

fund within The Trust for the Bill of Rights, the ACLU's

endowment, that will support in perpetuity the ACLU's

work to protect freedom of expression, artistic freedom and

the right to dissent.

This gift was made to commemorate the life, works, and

civil liberties passion of Carol Walter Sinton, who passed

away last year. A member of a family that moved to San

Francisco over 150 years ago, Sinton was a well-known fiber

artist whose weaving and basketry were exhibited widely,

including shows at the de Young Memorial Museum,

Richmond Art Center, California Crafts Museum and Palo

lto @ultural Genter = Sue cemed: asea tilistee fon tne

American Craft Council and was the board chair of

Fiberworks and the California Crafts Museum.

"My family and I are pleased to make this lasting contri-

bution to the ACLU," said Adler. "We think it'll be an

enduring legacy to Moms life and values, and we hope it'll

inspire others to do the same thing for their family members

..and for the ACLU." a

~ ACLUnews -

THE QUARTERLY PUBLICATION OF THE

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA.

Membership ($20 and up) includes a subscription to

the ACLU News. For membership information call

415-621-2493 or visit www.aclunc.org/join.html.

Quinn Delaney, CHAIR

Dorothy Ehrlich, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Rachel Swain, EDITOR

Gigi Pandian, EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Underground Advertising, DESIGN

1663 Mission Street #460, San Francisco, CA 94103

415-621-2493

2 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

RULING PROTECTS STUDENTS

FROM HARRASSMENT

By Stella Richardson

When Alana Flores found a pornographic picture taped to

her locker with a handwritten note that read, "Die, Die, . .

Dyke bitch, Fuck off. We'll kill you," she turned to her school

for help. But the response to Flores' request for a new locker

did little to assuage the sophomore's fears. "Yes, sure, sure,

later," the assistant principal told her... "Don't bring me this

trash anymore. This is disgusting."

Now, thanks to a crucial 3-0 ruling from the Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals, school officials may be held liable for fail-

ing to protect students like Flores from anti-gay harassment.

The Court ruled on April 8 that it's not enough to have anti-

discrimination policies on the books - school officials must

also enforce them. The ruling covers school districts in

California and eight other Western states.

"This is a most welcome deci-

IT'S NOT ENOUGH

TO HAVE

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION

POLICIES

ON THE BOOKS -

SCHOOL OFFICIALS

MUST ALSO

ENFORCE THEM.

sion," said Ann Brick, staff attorney

with the ACLU of Northern

California (ACLU-NC). "It affirms

that school officials have an obliga-

tion to protect students from anti-

gay harassment and abuse by other

students. They can no longer look

the other way, as they have for so

long."

The decision comes in a lawsuit

brought on behalf of Flores and five

other high school students in the

Morgan Hill Unified School

District, who charged that school

officials refused to take any action to protect them from ongo-

ing anti-gay harassment. The students, five girls and one boy,

were subjected to death threats, physical assaults, and a never-

ending stream of verbal abuse. One student was hospitalized

after a group of male students shouted "faggot" and other

homophobic slurs while hitting and kicking him at a school

bus stop in full view of the bus driver.

The harassment covered a span of over seven years, ending

only when the students left school. The lawsuit was filed in

San Jose federal court in 1998. The case, Flores v. Morgan Hill

Unified School District, will now return to the federal district

court for trial in early January.

"Finally, it's clear that schools can no longer stand back

and turn a blind eye to the kind of debilitating harassment

that so many lesbian, gay and bisexual students face every

day," said Kate Kendell, executive director for the National

Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR).

James Emery and Stacey Wexler, of Keker and Van Nest, LLP,

the ACLU-NC, the National ACLU Lesbian and Gay Rights

Project, the NCLR, and attorneys Leslie Levy and Diane

Ritchie are representing the students. m

FREE SPEECH VICTORY FOR INTEL WORKER

By Stella Richardson

na major victory for the free speech rights of workers

in the digital age, the California Supreme Court has

ruled that Silicon Valley giant Intel Corporation may not

stop a former employee from sending e-mails to Intel

employees.

When Ken Hamidi sent email messages that criticized

Intel to his former colleagues, he "no more invaded

Intel's property than does a protestor holding a sign or

shouting through a bullhorn outside corporate headquar-

ters," wrote the Court.

"The Court's decision protects the right of a former

employee to criticize a large and powerful corporation,"

said), Ann, (Brick, `stat attorney with, the ACLU or

Northern California (ACLU-NC). "Today, e-mail is the

electronic version of a protestor's picket sign and leaflet.

It has quickly become the preferred means of commu-

nication for millions of people across the country and

around the world."

The ACLU-NC, along with the national ACLU, filed

an amicus brief in the California Supreme Court chal-

lenging an injunction that prohibited Hamidi from send-

ing e-mail to Intel staff at their work addresses. Intel

argued that Hamidi's e-mail messages were

"spam" and claimed they were "trespassing"

on Intel property. A lower court granted the

injunction, accepting Intel's argument.

In its friend of the court brief, the ACLU

argued that the First Amendment permits an

injunction in a case like this only when the

emails are so voluminous that they impair

the ability of Intel's email to function, or

physically damage the system. The ACLU

argued that Hamidi's e-mail messages were

not "spam" because he only sent six e-mails

over a two-year period, and that Intel's

actions were a heavy-handed attempt to

silence a critic, not an effort to prevent over-

load on its e-mail system. The Supreme

Court agreed, adopting the standard sup-

ported by the ACLU.

"The ancient tort of `trespass to personal property'

was never intended to be used as a tool to muzzle free

speech," said Christopher A. Hansen, an attorney with

the national ACLU. "Both the United States Supreme

Court and the California Supreme Court have been

very clear in saying that state tort laws may not be

employed as a smokescreen for silencing those with

whom we disagree." m

By Stella Richardson

LEGAL BRIEFS

THREE STRIKES - On March 5, the U.S. Supreme Court,

in a 5-4 vote, upheld two draconian sentences handed

down under California's "three strikes' law. The Court

found that the two sentences - 25 years without the pos-

sibility of parole for stealing three golf clubs in Ewzng,

and 50 years without the possibility of parole for stealing

videotapes worth approximately $150 in Andrade - were

not `grossly disproportionate' and thus did not violate

the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and

unusual punishment. The ACLU and ACLU of

Northern California (ACLU-NC) served as co-counsel

in Lockyer v. Andrade.

MANDATORY DETENTIONS - On April 29, the U-S.

Supreme Court, in a disappointing 5-4 vote, upheld the

constitutionality of a mandatory immigration detention

statute enacted by Congress. The statute requires the

INS to incarcerate, throughout deportation proceedings,

lawful permanent residents who are charged with

deportability based on a criminal offense. The Court

ruled that permanent residents could be subject to

mandatory detention pending deportation proceedings

without an individualized hearing to determine whether

they are dangerous or a flight risk. Deportation proceed-

ings may take up to several years. Demore v. Kim.

EDUCATIONAL DIVERSITY - On July 11, the U.S. District

Court of Northern California granted a motion allowing

a children's theater company and a group of concerned

parents to intervene as defendants in a case in the Novato

Unified School District. ACLU-NC, the ACLU of

Southern California, the National Center for Lesbian

Rights, and the national ACLU Lesbian and Gay Rights

Project are representing the groups, who are defending

the Novato Unified School District's ability to provide

diversity and tolerance-building educational programs.

Citizens for Parental Rights v. Novato Unified School

District.

UNIVERSITY ADMISSIONS - On June 9, a federal judge in

San Francisco approved a consent decree in a civil rights

lawsuit filed in 1999 on behalf of African American,

Latino, and Pilipino American applicants to UC

Berkeley. The students charged that the UC Berkeley

undergraduate admissions process unfairly discriminated

against disadvantaged applicants of color by not taking

into account the full range of indicators of "merit." The

parties were able to settle the case because of UC

Berkeley's decision, while the litigation was pending, to

use `comprehensive review' for every applicant. The set-

tlement requires the Regents to take key steps to ensure

compliance with civil rights laws. Castaneda v. Regents of

the University of California.

LIBRARY CENSORSHIP - On June 23, the U.S. Supreme

Court, in a 6-3 vote, upheld the right of Congress to

insist that public libraries install blocking software on

their computers to censor sexually explicit speech as a

condition of receiving federal funding. The Court justi-

fied its decision by citing the governments interest in

protecting children from exposure to sexually inappro-

priate material, even though it is undisputed that the

currently available programs erroneously block thou-

sands of web pages that are not obscene either for chil-

dren or adults, and that some material that might be

"harmful to minors' is nonetheless constitutionally pro-

tected for adults. However, the impact of the decision

was blunted by the Court's interpretation of the statute

as permitting an adult to request that the blocking soft-

ware be turned off at any time. United States v. American

Library Association.

FIRST AMENDMENT - In an important case dealing with the

question of when speech by a business is "commercial

speech," the California Supreme Court issued a disap-

pointing 4-3 decision giving an extremely broad defini-

tion to the term commercial speech. The U.S. Supreme

Court then agreed to hear the case, which involves a

claim that statements made by shoe company Nike con-

stitute false or misleading advertising. The statements

by Nike, which were made in a series of press releases,

letters, and a letter to the editor of the New York Times,

occurred in the context of a far-reaching public debate

over the conditions under which Nike products are man-

ufactured abroad. After hearing oral argument in the

case, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that its decision

to review the case was premature, because the case has

not yet gone to trial. Accordingly, the important First

Amendment questions raised by the case remain unde-

cided for now. Kasky v. Nike. =

See ACLU Forum, p.12, for more on recent U.S.

Supreme Court Rulings.

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF | 3

SEX

EDUCATION

By Laura Saponara, ACLU News Contributor

WHY ITS BROKE,

AND HOW A

CRUCIAL BILL

WILL FIX IT

hen it comes to sex education, "Some schools are up to speed and others are just

totally in the dark," says Linda Nyberg, 16, a student at University City High

School in San Diego. Nyberg is one of 15 young people from around the state

who studied sex ed policies and practices through the Policy Leadership Program (PLP) a

project of the California Center for Civic Participation.

These young researchers found

that many young Californians are

exposed to lessons on the mechan-

ics of reproduction and the preva-

lence of sexually transmitted dis-

a eases (STDs), but do not get basic

Linda Nyberg

regnancy and protect against disease. "They teach about

information about how to prevent

AIDS because they have to, but without emphasizing the

fact that there are ways to prevent it," explained Nyberg.

"It's really weird."

Yet there is a simple explanation: the law governing sex

education in California is crying out for reform. That's why

the ACLU is co-sponsoring a major bill, SB 71, to clarify and

update the law.

While HIV/AIDS education is now mandated in

California, sex education is not. An estimated 96 percent of

schools do teach about sexual health, and those that do must

abide by 11 different, sometimes conflicting statutes scat-

tered throughout the Education Code. Divergent interpreta-

tions of these statutes have produced inconsistency in the

content and quality of curriculum across districts and

schools, with many school officials and teachers confused

about what they may and may not teach.

A recent survey of sex education and HIV/AIDS

prevention programs in over 150 California schools con-

ducted by PB Consulting, in cooperation with the ACLU

and other organizations, found that 85 percent violate the

Education Code in some respect: by failing to cover

required topics such as condom effectiveness, omitting

teacher training requirements, or following improper

parental notification procedures.

By Bob Kearney, Associate Director

The ACLU's lobbying team in Sacramento is hard at work every

day on these and other bills affecting civil liberties in the state leg-

islature. You can take action on any of these issues through our

website, at: www.aclunc.org/takeaction.html.

FINANCIAL VICTORY

Advocates of financial privacy snatched victory from the

jaws of defeat in August when they announced an agree-

ment that will provide California with the strongest finan-

cial privacy protection law in the nation. Following a

series of meetings with proponents, financial industry rep-

resentatives dropped their opposition to SB 1 (Speier-D)

- a bill that they have spent over three years and millions

of dollars lobbying to defeat. Governor Davis has pledged

to sign the bill into law. If the Legislature fails to pass the

revised version of SB 1 this August, Californians for

Privacy Now will take the issue to the voters in a financial

ptivacy initiative in March 2004. To learn more, visit

www.californiaprivacynow.org.

DEATH PENALTY

SB 3 (Burton-D) implements the recent U.S. Supreme

Court decision prohibiting the execution of the mentally

retarded. By implementing a pre-trial hearing solely to deter-

mine mental retardation, the bill will ensure that the issue of

mental retardation is not biased by the proceedings of the

trial. SB 3 has passed the Senate and is now in the Assembly

Appropriations Committee on its way to the Assembly floor.

POLICE REFORM

There are three police reform bills that have been sup-

4 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

POLITICAL PUSH FOR "ABSTINENCE-ONLY"

Meanwhile, organizations such as Focus on the Family and

the Heritage Foundation are pushing an "abstinence-only"

approach to sex education. All too often based on curricula

that are outdated, replete with bias or simply inaccurate, the

"just-say-no and get married" approach frequently teaches

that sex outside a heterosexual marriage is wrong and dan-

gerous, and prohibits teachers from discussing contraceptive

methods except to emphasize their failure rates.

It's an approach embraced in Washington, DC, with the

Bush Administration investing $120.75 million federal

dollars to fund abstinence-only education in 2003.

Nationally, 35 percent of schools that teach sex education

take this approach.

Yet it's an approach that misses the mark in a world where six

in ten teenage women and seven in ten teenage men are esti-

mated to have had sexual intercourse by their 18th birthday,

according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute. It's also out of step

with public opinion in California, where a 1997 Field Poll

found that 84 percent of adults support comprehensive sex ed.

Despite the `family values' rhetoric surrounding abstinence-

only programs, there is no empirical evidence that they actu-

ally work. "There do not currently exist any abstinence-only

programs with strong evidence that they either delay sex or

reduce teen pregnancy," concluded a 2002 report by the

National" "Campaign to ~ Prevent een Pregnatcy.

Comprehensive approaches fare better: they are more effective

in reducing the spread of STDs and unwanted pregnancies,

according to several studies that compare the two methods.

California is a national leader in resisting the pressure to

adopt unproven and insufficient abstinence-only programs.

It is the only state to refuse participation in a federal match-

ing-grant program for abstinence-only sex education.

However, communities in California are feeling the bite of

the abstinence-only "movement." Some school districts have

adopted biased and inaccurate programs. Others have cen-

sored information on condoms and contraception from oth-

erwise responsible curricula. In both cases, these districts are

violating California law.

Abstinence-only programs are problematic not only

because they are illegal here. Perhaps most troublingly, they

SACRAMENTO REPORT

ported by the Police Practices Project at the ACLU of

Northern California. AB 1119 (Wesson-D) would require

law enforcement agencies to implement "early warning

systems' to identify problematic patterns of police offi-

cers. These programs have been successful in numerous

police departments in heading off problems through

retraining and other non-disciplinary action. AB 1077

(Wesson-D) would improve the current complaint proce-

dures and make filing a complaint less intimidating by

allowing complaints to be filed at locations other than in

person at the police department. AB 1331 (Wesson-D and

Horton-R) requires the Attorney General to establish

whistleblower protections in law enforcement agencies.

`These bills have all passed the Assembly and are currently

in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

STUDENT INTERROGATION

AB 1012 (Steinberg-D) defends the rights of minors by

increasing the participation of parents when their children

are being questioned at school. The bill requires a school

principal to seek the consent of the parent or guardian of

an elementary school pupil before allowing the student to

be questioned by police. For high school students, the

school principal must offer the opportunity to have a par-

ent or trusted member of the school staff present during

questioning. AB 1012 is currently in the Senate

Appropriations Committee after passing the Assembly.

_FRONT-YARD FREE SPEECH

AB 1525 (Longville-D and Steinberg-D) upholds the

First Amendment by codifying that common interest

housing developments may not prohibit homeowners

from placing signs on their lawns or windows. AB 1525

will extend the free speech protections most of us take for

granted to private homeowners who happen to live in

common interest developments. The bill has passed the

Assembly and is now in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

LGBTI RIGHTS

The ACLU is currently involved in three bills affirming

LGBTI rights. AB 205 (Goldberg-D) extends to domestic

partners the same rights and responsibilities that are cur-

rently given to married couples under state law. This

includes protections such as community property, finan-

cial support obligations, assumption of parenting respon-

sibilities, and mutual responsibility for debts. SB 17

(Kehoe-D) would prohibit the state from contracting with

vendors that do not offer benefits to employees' domestic

partners that are equal to the benefits given to married

spouses of employees. These two bills have passed the

State Assembly. AB 196 (Leno-D), which includes gender

as a category protected from illegal discrimination, has

passed both houses and been signed by the Governor.

DRIVERS LICENSE

SB 60 (Cedillo-D) allows all Californians to obtain a

drivers license, including immigrants who are in the

process of applying for legal status. This bill will

improve the safety of the roads by allowing every

Californian to train for a license and to purchase car

insurance. The bill is now in the Assembly

Appropriations Committee after having passed the

Senate. Governor Davis vetoed this bill last year, so

efforts will focus on getting him to sign the bill. =

can have a deleterious impact on students. "It's good to be a

virgin," said Sam Hilliard, a recent graduate of Vallejo High

School. But abstinence-only "excludes people who have

already done it and people who feel pressured to do it."

Referring to the youth who participated in her focus group,

Nyberg recalled, "None of the kids knew about emergency con-

traception or that you can get it at a pharmacy." Gilbert

Ramos, 18, concurred: "People know about the [birth control]

pill, but sometimes they don't know that you have to take it

every day. And they don't know the side effects."

EVOLVING THE LAW

In an effort to clear up confusion and improve teen health,

the ACLU and Planned Parenthood affiliates of California are

sponsoring legislation that will provide public schools with

guidelines for improving the quality and scope of sex educa-

tion curricula. Introduced by Senator Sheila Kuehl (D), The

Comprehensive Sexual Health and HIV/AIDS Prevention

Education Act (SB 71) will require schools that teach about

reproductive health to take a comprehensive approach.

"This bill, supported by a broad coalition of teacher's

groups, school administrators, health organizations and civil

rights groups, will ensure that sex education in California is

medically accurate and free of bias. It's the education parents

want and young people deserve," said Margaret Crosby, staff

attorney with the ACLU of Northern California (ACLU-

NC), who helped to draft the bill.

"By clarifying and consolidating different requirements that

have been enacted over the years, SB 71 will make it easier for

schools to implement California policy, which calls for sci-

"THERE DO NOT CUR-

RENTLY EXIST ANY

ABSTINENCE-ONLY

PROGRAMS WITH

STRONG EVIDENCE

THAT THEY EITHER

DELAY SEX OR REDUCE

TEEN PREGNANCY,"

ence-based, comprehensive

Sex cdilcation@ =. said

Phyllida Burlingame, a

researcher who has studied

sex education in California

and is serving as a consult-

ant with the ACLU-NC.

SB 71 emphasizes that

abstinence is the only guar-

anteed way to prevent sexu-

ally transmitted diseases and

unintended pregnancy. But

it also ensures that students

NATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT receive valuable information

TEEN PREGNANCY REPORT, 2002. abouucondoms andicontts

ception that they will need

whenever they become sexually active.

SB 71 also requires that sex ed instruction be appropriate

for all of California's diverse students, including English lan-

guage learners; students with disabilities; gay, lesbian and

bisexual students; and students from different races, ethnic-

ities and cultural backgrounds.

The goal is to provide all students with facts to help them

to make informed personal choices - and to prevent

unwanted pregnancies and disease.

And SB 71 gives parents a choice by allowing them to

remove their children from sex education and HIV/AIDS

prevention instruction. It streamlines the current patchwork

of notification and consent procedures that often leave school

districts in violation of the law and parents in confusion. =

community a. works who counse S

_ birth control and STDs. `That'

trators in his work to make the

hensive sex ed

about the pieces of ad

SPEAK UP FOR COMPREHENSIVE SEX ED!

B 71 has passed the Senate and is now pending in the

Assembly. Governor Davis has indicated that he will sign

the bill.

Some Republican members of the Assembly object to the

words "and committed relationships' in the following clause:

"Instruction and materials shall teach respect for marriage and

committed relationships." Organizations such as the

Traditional Values Coalition hold that the language under-

mines marriage between heterosexual people.

The time is now for ACLU members to voice support for

evolving sex education by requiring schools to take a com-

prehensive, bias-free approach. Please contact your assembly

member and let him or her know:

" Nearly 90 percent of adults in California support teach-

ing age-appropriate sexuality education in the schools.

= More than 84 percent support a comprehensive

approach that includes accurate information about how

to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

Wio= senda trce= taxes please visite oltre = website at

www.aclunc.org/takeaction.html.

AM

pees a law."

o own, for a month cent or more. _ Not just " one e day _

"TEEW ACTIVISTS

- "GILBERT RAMOS, 18

Modesto Fligh School

When Gilbert .

first started at Modesto

"was" taught a 4 4 one

_ week course. By build- _

Gilbert Ramos ing a relationship wit

the school principal, Ramos and fell

of the ofganization Teen Life Challenge on _

_ the course to a full month of learning. _

message ne

has brought to policymakers

Of trips to Sacramento, Ramos and

enthusiasm, "I talked `to lobby

per yea."

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF | 5

PALO ALTO RESOLVED:

HOW ONE COMMUNITY PASSED A RESOLUTION

AGAINST THE

By Sarah Nelson Wright, ACLU Intern

eetings, phone calls, and a Yahoo group called P-A-

Patriot: these are just some of the tools that Palo Alto

community members used to pass a City Council res-

olution against the USA Patriot Act, the federal legislation

that gives the government sweeping new powers that under-

mine the Bill of Rights.

The coalition included members of the community from

many different walks of life: Stanford Law School graduates

to ACLU Mid-Peninsula Chapter members, to the founder

of a hotline for Arab, Muslim and South Asian communities.

Joined by a host of local activists, lawyers, librarians and

booksellers, these individuals pooled their resources and

worked together to advocate for a strong local resolution.

A COMMUNITY TAKES A STAND

"All of us play out the Constitution every day when we

participate in citizenship," said Aram James, an attorney

and art activist. "There is no more important local issue

than attacks on our Constitution."

James was speaking at the Palo Alto Human Relations

Commission (HRC) meeting on February 13. He joined 14

other community members speaking out against the Patriot Act.

Faith Bell, who owns Palo Alto's Bells Bookstore, also

spoke at the meeting. She declared, "Our constitutionally

protected freedom to read is

profoundly at the heart of a true

democracy. It's time to end the

politics of fear."

Samina Faheem spoke on

behalf of Muslim Americans in

the community. She runs a hot-

line 24 hours a day, seven days a

week, to answer questions about

Special Registration, the USA

Samina Faheem runs a hotline

in Palo Alto

Patriot Act, and other legislation

and policy changes introduced

since September 11, 2001.

"This movement is a miracle," she said. "Muslims had lost

all faith and hope in the system. Now we are not alone any-

more. We have fellow Americans standing with us."

Palo Altans against the Patriot Act encountered clear sup-

port for the concept of a resolution from that first packed

meeting of the HRC. The next stage of the movement was

to fight for a resolution, as Stanford Law School graduate

and ACLU intern Shirin Sinnar put it, "with teeth."

A MEANINGFUL RESOLUTION

In guest editorial in the Palo Alto Daily News Sinnar wrote,

"It is important that Palo Alto set clear limits, in advance, on

what types of activities its police will participate in, so that

local police support only those activities that meet the stan-

dards of our federal and state constitutions."

The Palo Alto activists knew that the difference between a

strong resolution and a symbolic gesture lay in persuading the

City Council to include a non-compliance clause and a

demand for information. And they won out: in the resolu-

tion, the City Council directs the City Manager to obtain and

report information from the federal government on how

Patriot Act legislation is being enacted in Palo Alto and directs

the Police Department not to comply with orders from the

federal government that violate the Bill of Rights.

The HRC decided to adopt the stronger resolution after

hearing from the community both in meetings and through

individual letters, calls and e-mails.

Ken Russell, former HRC commissioner and chair of the

Mid-Peninsula ACLU Board, and now a staff member in the

ACLU's Sacramento office, believes that vocal community

support was the secret to Palo Alto's success. "There is no

PATRIOT ACT

doubt," he said, "that the sheer volume of emotion in the

commission chamber pushed the commission to adopt the

stronger resolution."

BUILDING BLOCKS

Securing the support of `unlikely allies,' including key City

officials, was also instrumental in the campaign's success.

The Police Chief and the City Manager's office were directly

involved in drafting the resolution, with a series of meetings

with the Police Chief ensuring that her department could and

would comply with the resolution, and that the language was

supportive of the Police Department rather than accusatory.

community, it was sparked by local concerns."

Paul George of the Peninsula Peace and Justice Center,

which played a key role in coordinating and facilitating the

coalition, emphasizes the importance of demonstrating wide-

spread community support. "When you are asking a person

in an elected position to go out on a limb, you have to

demonstrate all along that they have the support of the elec-

torate," he says.

"There is value in trying to pass a resolution, even if you

don't ultimately succeed," added George. "You are getting

the public to think about the Patriot Act and how it affects

our civil liberties."

Eve Agiewich, who chairs the HRC, added that the move-

ment had larger benefits for the city government process.

"Tt is great that community members recognized that there

is a forum for people to address these issues," she said.

City Councilwoman Judy Kleinberg echoed this enthusi-

asm, asserting that the resolution is an effort to "take the

Patriot Act out of the shadows and shine a bright light on

it." The resolution, she notes, will ensure that local enact-

ment of the Patriot Act will be closely watched by the City

Council to make certain that it follows the Constitution and

the Bill of Rights.

ANTI-PATRIOT ACT RESOLUTIONS

IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

15. SANTA CRUZ, 11/12/02

19. SEBASTOPOL, 12/3/02

24. FAIRFAX, 1/7/03

27. ARCATA. 1/15/03

28. SAN FRANCISCO, 1/21/03

To

bolster

the already

blossoming

Shep porn.

Stanford alums

Sinnar and Luke

Platzer released a

report on the local

impact of the Patriot

Act. Their research gener-

%

media coverage and ensured that %

ated a significant amount of =

key players understood that this was a

local - not merely a national - issue.

By the time the resolution reached the City Council, it was

on the consent calendar, which meant that the Council

would approve it without discussion, provided no one

objected, "The resolution was very well examined by the

time it got to the City Council," said Paul Gilbert of the

ACLU Mid-Peninsula Chapter. "We made sure that every-

one affected by the resolution

supported it."

"MUSLIMS HAD LOST WORDS OF WISDOM

What lessons can the Palo

ALL FAITH AND HOPE Alto activists offer to others

considering passing resolu-

IN THE SYSTEM. NOW tions in their communities?

"lo think "theres 4 lot to

WE ARE NOT ALONE learn from Palo Alto," said

Sanjeev Bery, field organizer

with the ACLU of Northern

California, who has been

ANYMORE. WE HAVE

FELLOW AMERICANS instrumental in helping many

communities pass such reso-

He

reached out to allies across the

STANDING WITH US."

lutions. activists

eee political spectrum who care

liberties and

rights. They built a broad,

committed, effective coalition. And it was clear to lawmakers

about civil

that this was a genuine grassroots effort - it grew from the

30. YOLO COUNTY, 1/28/03

28. SAN ANSELMO, 2/12/03

50. RICHMOND, 2/25/03

51. COTATI, 2/26/03

66. SONOMA, 3/5/03

67. UNION CITY, 3/11/03

72. EL CERRITO, 3/17/03

23. LOS GATOS, 3/17/03

77, WATSONVILLE, 3/25/03

79. PINOLE, 4/1/03

. UKIAH, 4/2/03

84. MILL VALLEY, 4/7/03

89. DUBLIN, 4/16/03

91. ALBANY, 4/21/03

93. MENDOCINO COUNTY, 4/22/03

98. SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 4/30/03

102. SAN MATEO COUNTY, 5/6/03

103. MARIN COUNTY, 5/6/03

104. SAUSALITO, 5/6/03

106. SALINAS, 5/13/03

120. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, 6/3/02

123. PALO ALTO, 6/9/03

129. TEHAMA COUNTY, 6/26/03

NEW!

LAKE COUNTY, 7/8/03

HAYWARD, 7/23/03

But perhaps it is Samina Faheem who best

sums up the spirit of community activism that

worked so well in Palo Alto. "Never think one person can't make

a difference," she said. m

SHARE YOUR STORY!

BRSNeteyra onrcorcaty ap conttactitcccagy vert core tell (cel

that your community has faced in the resolutions

campaign. Send your comments to :

gpandian@aclunc.org, and we'll try to include them in

Pen Ycae tC dus Cxcttca(o) oid cas (OVA ON) :

_ To learn more about the national Revol trstennesrrter ron

ment, download the ACLU's new report: Independence

: Day 2003: Main Street America Fights the Federal

Governments Insatiable Appetite for New Powers in the

: Post 9/11 Era at a Soe

www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=130_

-608 c=206.

Ss

`To find out how you can become involved and to

learn more about the Palo Alto campaign and other

northern California resolutions, visit

http://acluweb.best.vwh.net/91 1/resolution/ eoteron th

6 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

LOCKYER MOVES TO PROTECT

PROTESTERS RIGHTS

By Sarah Nelson Wright

or almost two years, the ACLU has warned Attorney

F General Bill Lockyer and his staff

that loosened standards for intel-

ligence gathering in the post-

September 11 era pose grave dangers

to basic freedoms of speech and

assembly and privacy.

On July 14: a victory. In a meeting

with ACLU attorneys,

agreed to implement new guidelines

to ensure that the California Anti-

Lockyer

Terrorism Information Center

(CATIC) will no longer monitor, col-

lect or share information on the activ-

ities of political protesters. The deci-

sion, applauded by the ACLU, was

sparked by new information thatlent |

credence to our warnings. 7

On May 18, an explosive report by the Oakland Tribune'

Ian Hoffman revealed that since its inception shortly after

September 11, 2001, CATIC has been gathering informa-

tion not merely on terrorist threats as mandated, but also on

protected First Amendment activity.

ACLU'S WORST FEARS CONFIRMED

"The revelations in the Oakland Tribune story confirm our

worse fears: CATIC is not only being used to gather and dis-

equates peaceful protest with terrorism itself," said the

ACLU of Northern California (ACLU-NC)'s police prac-

tices policy director Mark Schlosberg

on May 20.

That same day Schlosberg and Ben

Wizner of the ACLU of Southern

California sent a letter to the

Attorney General expressing dismay

at revelations that CATIC "since Day

One" has gathered and analyzed

information on protest activity and

compiled dossiers on a wide range of

organizations.

The letter called for the Attorney

General to direct CATIC to cease col-

lecting such information, to develop

guidelines that implement a definition

of terrorism that does not threaten

civil liberties, and to "issue guidance

to state and local law enforcement agencies that law enforce-

ment agencies may not survey or monitor individuals or organ-

izations engaged in peaceful protest activity in the absence of

reasonable suspicion."

CATIC: OAKLAND PROTESTERS AS TERRORISTS

The Attorney General, who was reportedly shocked by the

revelations in the Tribune report, swiftly disavowed the response

of CATIC spokesperson Mike Van Winkle, who justified mon-

itoring protests by defining terrorism so continued on page 11

seminate information about non-violent protesters but

MISSTEP

AFTER SEPT. 11

Misrepresentations, bungled investigations, and abuses of immigrants'

rights: From the ACLU to the Justice Department's own watchdog, reports

from various sources in recent months have revealed disturbing missteps

in the government's handling of the investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Here, we detail a few recent revelations that lend credence to the ACLU's

long-held belief that the Bush administration has abused its powers and

needlessly trampled individual rights.

ENT

JULY 22-PATRIOT ACT ABUSES REVEALED: Justice Department

investigators uphold 34 claims of abuse under the USA

Patriot Act between December 16, 2002, and June 15, 2003.

ACLU executive director Anthony Romero cites the reports as

evidence that "there was a pattern of violating immigrants

rights" after September 11, 2001. The New York Times reports

that complaints include the following:

cent The FBI was accused of illegally searching an Arab-

American's apartment, vandalizing it and seizing property,

later to return "to plant drugs in the complainant's home."

e An immigration official allegedly held a loaded gun to the

head of a detainee, while another was said to have "rudely"

asked a person being detained if he "wanted to kill Christians

and Jews."

cent A prison doctor told a federal prison inmate: "If I was in

charge I would execute every one of you...because of the

crimes you all did."

JULY 9-PATRIOT ACT PROPAGANDA: An ACLU report docu-

ments Justice Department efforts to whitewash the USA

Patriot Act. In Seeking Truth from Justice, the ACLU outlines

an orchestrated campaign to deceive the American people

about the impact of the Act. For example:

MYTH: "[T]here is concern that under the Patriot Act, feder-

al agents are now able to review library records and books

KEEP AMERIC

checked out by U.S. Citizens... If you read the Act, that's

absolutely not true... It can't be for U.S. citizens.

- U.S. Attorney for Alaska testifying before a state Senate

Committee.

FACT: Section 215 of the USA Patriot makes clear that

"U.S. persons" - a term referring to citizens and some

non-citizens alike - can have their records seized.

MYTH: "For the FBI to check on a citizen's reading

habits... it must convince a judge "there is probable cause

that the person you are seeking the information for is a

terrorist or a foreign spy."

- Mark Corallo, Justice Department spokesperson, to the

Bangor (Maine) Daily News.

FACT: Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act allows the

government to obtain materials like library records with-

out probable cause.

MYTH: The USA Patriot Act "doesn't apply to the aver-

age American...It's only for people who are spying or

members of a terrorist organization."

- Mark Corallo, Justice Department spokesperson, to the

Journal News (New York).

FACT: Section 215 can

be applied to anybody.

"(T]he errors document-

ed in this report go beyond

MANY PEOPLE WITH

NO TIES TO TERRORISM

mere legal hair splitting;

rather, they deal with core

constitutional values like

LANGUISHED BEHIND

BARS IN AN INVESTIGATION

THAT MADE "LITTLE

ATTEMPT TO DISTINGUISH"

BETWEEN ILLEGAL

RESIDENTS WITH

LINKS TO TERRORISM

AND THOSE "COINCIDEN-

TALLY" SWEPT UP.

due process for Fourth

Amendment protections

against unreasonable search

and seizure," says Laura

Murphy, director of the

ACLU's Washington

Legislative Office. "They

also raise serious questions

about whether our leaders

in Washington are inten-

tionally misrepresenting

the facts of a debate to

deflect public or political

ao "

criticism.

CAUGHT IN THE BACKLASH

By Gigi Pandian, Communicatons Asssistant

0 ne year ago, we published Caught in the Backlash:

Stories from Northern California which tells the

stories of people who

experienced the dis-

criminatory aftermath of

September 11, 2001.

Today, the backlash is

still being felt in com-

munities of color across

the region. We will con-

tinue to highlight new

faces of the backlash on the pages of the ACLU News

and online at http://acluweb.best.vwh.net/911/backlash.

AHMAD AND HASSAN AMIN

Ahmad and Hassan Amin think of themselves as regu-

lar American teenagers. Ahmad, 17, is a star on his

Cupertino high schools football team. His brother,

Hassan, 19, is studying accounting at De Anza College in

Cupertino. Their friends are here, their family is here,

and they want their future to be here. "We sold our house

in Pakistan to come to this country so that my sons could

have a better education and a better life, explains their

mother, [ahira Manzur. "Our home is here."

Yet the brothers may soon be forced to return to

Pakistan - a country with which they feel no connection

and where they have no family to take them in. I

dont even know if | remember how to write my lan-

guage, says Hassan.

Ahmad and Hassan believed they were in the U.S.

legally, in the process of becoming permanent resi-

dents, when they took part in the INS Special

Registration program, which requires non-citizen men

over the age of 16 from a list of mostly Arab and

Muslim countries to register

with their local INS office.

What the brothers didnt

realize is that their visas had

THEIR FRIENDS

ARE HERE, THEIR

FAMILY IS HERE,

AND THEY WANT

THEIR FUTURE

TO BE HERE.

expired as a result of bad

advice from an immigration

lawyer. And that, combined

with the discriminatory regis-

tration requirement, spelt dis-

aster for the Amin boys.

Hassan was detained, arrest-

ed and sent to Yuba County, where he was held

overnight in a criminal cell until the boys older brother

had him released on $4,000 bail. Ahmad ts required miss

school every third Wednesday to register with the INS

offices. Both brothers will likely soon face deportation. =

Abmad and Hassan recently told their stories at an

ACLU-NC news conference.

JUNE 2-DETENTIONS DENOUNCED: A report from the Justice

Department's inspector general concludes that the depart-

ment's round-up of non-citizens after Sept. 11, 2001, was

plagued with problems. Justice's own watchdog finds that

many people with no ties to terrorism languished behind bars

in an investigation that made "little attempt to distinguish"

between illegal residents with links to terrorism and those

"coincidentally" swept up. The ACLU's Romero notes: "The

inspector general's findings confirm our long-held view that

civil liberties and the rights of immigrants were trampled in

the aftermath of 9/11." Among the findings:

in the months after Sept. 11. Most have now been deported,

and none has been charged as a terrorist.

Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn faced "a pattern

of physical and verbal abuse" and "unduly harsh" detention

policies.

against them for more than a month. =

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF | 7

aap

SCANDAL ROCKS THE SF POLICE

acial slurs and improper searches. Citizens beaten by off-duty

officers. Allegations of obstruction of justice. A series of scandals

has thrust the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) into

the spotlight in recent months. Here, the ACLU of Northern

California (ACLU-NC)'s Mark Schlosberg, who is at the front and

center of efforts to clean up the ugly underbelly of the SFPD, explains

why a proposed charter amendment may hold the key to reform.

By Mark Schlosberg, Police Practices Policy Director

While the criminal charges against several high-ranking

San Francisco officers in the "fajitagate" scandal have been

dropped, serious questions about the incident remain. More

significantly, the incident highlights a troubling breakdown

in accountability mechanisms within the SFPD, underscor-

ing the urgent need for reform.

"Fajitagate" began in the early hours of November 20,

2002. Jade Santoro and Adam Snyder were standing outside

a San Francisco bar when three off-duty officers demanded

that Santoro hand over his steak fajitas. When Santoro

refused, the officers launched a physical assault, according to

a 911 call placed by Snyder.

The investigation that followed was suspect from the start.

The three officers - Matthew Tonsing, David Lee and Alex

Fagan, Jr., the son of then-Assistant Chief Alex Fagan - were

not separated by the investigating officers. They were allowed

to keep their cell phones and make multiple calls. Key pieces

of evidence were not seized, and the victims were not

brought in to identify the suspects. It was irregularities like

these that led to criminal indictments against top SFPD brass

for conspiracy to obstruct justice, leaving a command struc-

ture in tatters and a city in shock.

Citing the absence of any evidence of an agreement

_ David Lee and Alex Fagan Je

8 | ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

between the officers, the conspiracy charges were dismissed

on April 4 by Judge Ksemia Tsenin. However, Judge Tsenin

concluded that the three officers did, in fact, receive "prefer-

ential treatment," referred to "numerous improper acts and

events that transpired," and described the senior officers'

conduct as "inappropriate," "uncooperative," and of "serious

concain, Ine Oisce oF

Citizen Complaints

(OCC), the independent

agency charged with inves-

FUNDAMENTAL

CHANGES ARE NEEDED

TO BOTH REPAIR A

SERIOUSLY BROKEN

SYSTEM AND RESTORE

PUBLIC TRUST IN THE

POLICE DEPARTMENT.

tigating complaints of

police misconduct, is still

conducting an administra-

tive review that could lead

to discipline of some or all

of the high-ranking officers.

While the scandal repre-

sents one very public and

highly visible example of

police misconduct, it is by

no means unique (see time-

line for additional exam-

ples). On April 23, the OCC issued a blistering and well-

documented report charging that the department "routinely

obstructed and delayed" its investigations. Two days later, the

San Francisco Controller's office concluded a "best practices"

review of the department's accountability mechanisms and

found them woefully inadequate.

Both reports followed on the heels of a report issued by the

ACLU-NG, which highlighted the breakdown in accounta-

bility mechanisms and called for reform.

`Today, fundamental changes are needed to both repair a

seriously broken system and restore public trust in the Police

Department. These changes must start at the top. While the

Police Commission is charged with overseeing the Police

Department, it has shown itself unwilling to address the issue

of accountability, and that unwillingness stems, in part, from

its lack of independence. All Commissioners are currently

appointed by the Mayor and serve at will - characteristics

that the city Controller described as "structural weaknesses."

At the same time, the OCC lacks the power to prevent

departmental delays.

A charter amendment that will go before the voters this

November will go a long way towards resolving these problems.

The measure would make the Police Commission stronger,

more representative and independent by expanding the number

of Commissioners, allowing the Supervisors to appoint some of

the members, and providing that no Commissioner may be

removed without consent of the supervisors.

Additionally, the charter amendment would expand the

powers of the OCC, allowing the agency to bring charges

directly to the Commission after meeting and conferring with

the Police Chief, and clarifying its authority to obtain docu-

ments in cases it is investigating. These reforms would allow

the OCC to effectively investigate cases of police misconduct.

These reforms mirror recommendations made by the

ACLU-NG, the OCC and the City Controller. Still, the

Police Officers Association began a massive misinformation

campaign, spending thousands of dollars to mislead San

Francisco voters about the initiative before the language was

even finalized. Passing this initiative will require a significant

investment of time and resources. Yet, despite the obstacles

ahead, we are confident that this amendment will win,

making the SFPD stronger and San Franciscans safer.

To find out more about this campaign, please e-mail the

author at mschlosberg@aclunc.org or call him at 415-621-

2493 ext. 316. Turn to page 11 for information on how

you can help! =

SRINDYMEDIA ORB

CONNERLY. riscss nse

allies is urging voters to respond with a resounding "no."

"We all want a colorblind society," says Dorothy Ehrlich,

executive director of the ACLU of Northern California

(ACLU-NC)." But in reality, we live in a state that is rife with

disparities, where your racial or ethnic identity dramatically

influences your chances of receiving a quality education,

securing a well-paid job, or protecting your family's health.

Prop. 54 would not erase these differences. It would merely

blindfold California by erasing the proof that they exist."

Prop. 54 would prohibit state and local agencies from

collecting, analyzing or using information about race and

ethnicity - information that is crucial to developing programs

that address pressing social problems. And perhaps nowhere is

this of greater concern than in the field of public health.

PUBLIC HEALTH AT RISK

`Take breast cancer, for example. It currently afflicts one in

eight American women - but it is not a colorblind disease.

White women are most likely to be diagnosed with breast

cancer, while African American women are more likely to die

from the disease.

In a bid to reduce preventable deaths, the Contra Costa

County Health department recently set out to achieve parity

in detection rates. With a program that specifically targeted

African American women with appropriate, tailored messages,

the department was able to reach that goal - saving lives as well

as taxpayer dollars.

Prop. 54 would eliminate data that makes programs like

this possible - a prospect that has the health community in an

uproar. Over 40 of the state's leading health organizations,

including the California Medical Association and the state's

American Academy of Pediatrics, recently wrote to Connerly,

urging him to come clean about the initiative's health effects.

"From AIDS and lung cancer to adolescent weight prob-

lems or childhood diabetes, the most effective prevention pro-

grams carefully target the communities that are the most at

risk," they wrote. "Your initiative would turn prevention into

a guessing game rather than a knowledge-driven science, forc-

ing California to take a one-size-fits-all approach to public

health. This constitutes an unacceptable waste of taxpayers'

money and a threat to the basic health of all Californians."

And the threats posed by Prop. 54 extend far beyond pub-

lic health.

DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS UNPROVEN

"Communities of color are treated differently by the crim-

inal justice community," says Maya Harris, director of the

ACLU-NC's Racial Justice Project. "We have known this

through stories for years, and now we have data that proves it."

Curtis Rodriguez knows this first hand. He was driving

over the Pacheco Pass near San Jose when he noticed several

cars that had been pulled over by the police. All the stopped

drivers were Latino, he remarked. Moments later, Rodriguez

was waved over, too. He knew something was wrong - but

how could he prove it?

The ACLU-NC filed suit on Rodriguez's behalf, and

obtained data during discovery that supported Rodriguez's

hunch. It revealed that African Americans and Latinos are

two to three times more likely to be pulled over by drug

enforcement agents in parts of California than whites - even

though they are no more likely to be carrying contraband.

This data led to the historic settlement of Rodriguez v.

California Highway Patrol (CHP), in which the CHP vol-

untarily banned practices that allow racial profiling to pro-

liferate. Thanks to government race data, Rodriguez's

humiliating traffic stop was transformed from another tale

of bias to a vibrant force for change.

Under Prop. 54, Harris warns, "Stories of discrimination

will be dismissed as speculation, anec-

dotes, figments of our imagination.

Without the facts, remedy will become

impossible."

CHECKBOXES SAVE LIVES

"We may not like those checkboxes

that ask us about our race," says the

ACLU-NC's Ehrlich. "But the bottom

line is, those checkboxes could just save

your life."

As well as tying the state's hands by

eliminating data that can reduce domes-

tic violence, Prop. 54 endangers infor-

mation that helps law enforcement solve

and prevent hate crimes. Information,

for example, that helped identify and

reduce hate crimes against Muslim, Arab

American and South Asian communities

in the wake of Sept. 11 may be lost under Prop. 54.

The hazards posed to public safety helped garner the

opposition of the state's top law enforcement official. "This

measure would handcuff law enforcement efforts to investi-

gate and prosecute hate crimes. It would roll back efforts to

combat racial profiling and promote inequality, injustice and

ignorance," Attorney General Bill Lockyer recently said.

"For those who care deeply about and fight daily to protect

the public's safety, this poorly conceived initiative threatens

to disarm law enforcement and prevent them from doing

their job."

It is, perhaps, the range of impacts - on health care, edu-

cation, contracting, employment and safety - that has

sparked such widespread opposition to Prop. 54. Over 350

organizations - including labor unions, corporations like

Kaiser Permanente, health care, environmental and civil

INFORMATION SAVES LIVES

JOIN THE "NO ON 54" CAMPAIGN!

YES! | WANT TO HELP BEAT PROP. 54!

L] Sign me up for the ACLU-NC email

action network

Address

| Sign me up as a "No on 54" volunteer

Cis, Sens, Zp

Please return your form to:

Phone 1 -

PROP 54 Volunteers

Phone 2

ACLU-NC

1663 Mission Street #460

Email

NOT AN ACLU MEMBER? JOIN ONLINE AT WWW.ACLUNC.ORG

San Francisco, CA 94103

rights organizations, currently oppose the initiative.

These advocates warn that, at least for now, we must con-

tinue to monitor our progress and our problems. "As long as

there is discrimination based on my skin color and health care

disparities based on race," says civil rights lawyer Eva Jefferson

Paterson, "I think we need to have people checking boxes."

information on_ the visit

For more campaign,

www.informedcalifornia.org. =

PROP. 94:

WHAT ACLU VOTERS NEED TO KNOW

Don't be fooled by the misinformation out there about

this initiative! Here are some straight answers to common

questions about Prop. 54.

ISN'T THERE A MEDICAL EXEMPTION THAT PROTECTS OUR HEALTH?

NG! A narrow exemption for "medical research sub-

jects and patients" allows data to be collected by doctors

or during clinical trials. But public health specialists

need much more information to protect our health -

information drawn from a range of public databases that

Prop. 54 would ban.

In recent years, public agencies have slashed

Californias smoking rate, reduced teen pregnancy, and

achieved parity in breast cancer detection rates between

white and African American women. These programs

worked because they identified and targeted the com-

munities most at risk. They relied on data that Prop. 54

would make illegal.

But don't listen to us; listen to the experts. Forty lead-

ing health organizations including the California

Medical Health

Association and American Cancer Society say the

Association, American Public

exemption is bunk. The bottom line: if Prop. 54 passes,

health care specialists will be denied the tools they need

to protect our families' health.

I'VE HEARD THAT THIS INITIATIVE WILL "END RACIAL PROFILING."

WRONG! Far from ending racial profiling, this initiative

will guarantee it. Local agencies may continue to volun-

tarily collect data that reveals whether officers are pulling

motorists over because of their race. However, Prop. 54

expressly prohibits the Legislature from mandating that all

agencies collect such data. Vhus, Prop. 54 offers ZERO

accountability for agencies that are not interested in

stamping out racial profiling. It gives "bad players' a

green light to profile.

ISN'T THIS INITIATIVE ABOUT INDIVIDUAL PRIVACY?

NO! In fact, the Secretary of State changed its name

from the "Racial Privacy Initiative' because the initiative

has nothing to do with privacy. It has to do with whether

or not the state should be able to collect, sort and ana-

lyze impersonal, quantitative data - data that could save

your job, your children's education, or even your life.

And you never have to tell the government about your

race; its purely voluntary. Right now, Californians have

a choice - a choice that Prop. 54 would eliminate.

DON'T YOU WANT A COLORBLIND SOCIETY?

YES! But, as the U.S. Supreme Court recently con-

cluded, supported by briefs from the U.S. military and

corporate leaders like Microsoft, we're not there yet. We

live in a world rife with inequality, where the reality is

that race still counts. If we are to create a culture that

offers opportunity to all of our children, we must con-

tinue to monitor both our progress and our problems.

As Justice Harry Blackman wrote in Regents of the

University of California v. Bakke, "n order to get beyond

racism we must first take account of race. There is no

other way." Prop. 54 would build a blindfolded

California, not a colorblind state. =

ACLU BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF | 9

2m,