vol. 30, no. 2

American

Civil Liberties

~ Union

Volume XXX

SAN FRANCISCO, FEBRUARY, 1965

Rights of Public Employees

in Si iperior Court

ins

Berkeley fireman Claude T. Belshaw was fully vindicated

in his assertion of First Amendment rights when, on the last

day of the year, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Lyle

E. Cook filed an opinion holding his 30-day suspension illegal.

Belshaw was suspended in August, 1963 by Berkeley

City Manager Phillips after there

was published in the Berkeley

Daily Gazette a letter to the edi-

tor which expressed Belshaw's

views on the decision of the

Berkeley City Council to give

higher pay to policemen and

firemen. According to city offi-

cials, the most offensive portion

of the letter was the first sen-

tence which read: "As a citizen,

a taxpayer and a Berkeley fire-

`man for 20 years I realize that

the Berkeley Police Department

must be laughing up their sleeve

now that they have fooled the

City Manager, the Personnel De-

partment and the City Council."

Some officials made the far-

fetched claim that Belshaw had

called the officers "fools."

Public Employee's Rights

When Belshaw was suspended,

the ACLU of Northern Califor-

nia immediately came to his de-

fense pointing out that public

employees have First Amend-_

ment rights and that it would be

-unconstitutional to discipline Bel-

shaw for the expression of his

views on an issue of public con-

troversy. It was never alleged

- that anything in Belshaw's letter

was libelous or otherwise illegal,

but it was charged that the letter

violated three personnel rules:

Rule -20 providing "Employees

are required at all times to con-

_ duct themselves in such a man-

ner as to reflect no discredit up-

~on the City of Berkeley;" Rule

11: "No member of the Fire De-

partment shall at any time be

guilty of any act or omission

which impedes or injures the

progress, welfare, efficiency or

good name of the department;"

and Rule 31: "They (firemen)

shall refrain from adverse criti-

cism concerning the actions of

any superiors and they shall not

publicly express disapproval of

the policies (of the department)."

Board Uphold's Suspension

At extensive hearings held be-

fore the Personnel Board of the -

City of Berkeley, ACLU counsel

Marshall W. Krause and volun-

teer attorney Albert Bendich ar-

gued that these rules were un-

constitutionally vague -and that

they were so broad and all-inclu-

sive and so lacking in defini-

tional standards that they left all

employees of the City of Berk-

- eley in doubt as to what their

rights of expression were and

thus inhibited the exercise of

First Amendment rights by just

those people who might have

the most important things to say,

. namely, those who run our gov-

ernment. The Personnel Board

by a vote of 3-1 (Board member

Harry Polland dissenting) up-

held the suspension, and Belshaw

-was forced to file a court action

for a Writ of Mandate.

Free Speech Abridged

__.. Judge Cook's decision unequiv-

__ ocally holds that Belshaw's rights

_ of free speech and press were

- abridged by the City's attempt

to discipline him for having his

- letter published. Judge Cook

. found that there was no language

in Belshaw's letter which made it

offensive per se, nor was it in-

flammatory nor obscene, nor did

it urge or even suggest unlawful

or violent action. He further

found that there was no evidence

in the record that the letter

caused any disruption or impair-

ment of discipline among em-

ployees of the City of Berkeley

or other persons. Under these

circumstances Judge Cook point-

ed out that the Supreme Court

of California held in Fort vs.

-Continued on Page 3

Proposition 14

Case in S.F.

The ACLU's Board of Direc-

tors has voted to challenge the

constitutionality of Proposition

14, the housing discrimination

amendment, which was. adopted

by the voters of California at the

election. The proposition, which

is now Section 26 of Article 1 of

the Constitution of California,

makes it the "right" of persons

to sell or rent real property to

whomever they wish and_ nulli-

fies laws providing for injunc-

tions and damages in the event

that there is racial discrimina-

tion in the sale or rental of

certain types of housing.

Several Cases Pending

There are several cases pend-

ing around the state on the issue

of whether Section 26 of the

Constitution is valid or, as main-

tained by the ACLU, void as in

conflict with the 14th Amend-

ment to the United States Consti-

tution. When these cases reach

the appellate courts the ACLU

will file a brief amicus curiae

supporting its position. Mean-

while, ACLU Staff Counsel Mar-

shall Krause has become attor-

ney for a plaintiff in a damage

action pending in the Municipal

Court where it is alleged that the

defendant refused to rent an

apartment to the plaintiff in San

Francisco because the plaintiff is

a Negro. The act of discrimina-

tion took place before Section 26

became law, but the defendant

has moved to dismiss the suit

on the basis that the passage of

Proposition 14 nullifies the cause

of action.

Retroactive Effect

The case is complicated by

the subsidiary question, even if

Section 26 is valid of whether it

can have a retroactive affect on

a cause of action which existed

before its passage? It is hoped

that the Municipal Court will

reach the merits of the 14th

Amendment question and that

Section 26 will be declared void.

Eventually the Supreme Court

of California (and perhaps the

Supreme Court of the United

States) will have to decide the

issue, but their job will be easier

if the lower courts have already

pointed out a sound basis for the

constitutional attack.

Brief Fil

ed

in Berkeley

Sii-In Cases

On January 25, the ACLUNC

filed an amicus curiae brief in

the U. C. Free Speech Move-

ment cases pending before Mu-

nicipal Judge Rupert Crittenden.

The brief, prepared by staff

counsel Marshall W. Krause,

urges dismissal of the charges of

"failing to disperse an unlawful

assembly" against all arrested

persons on the ground that the

definition of this offense is un-

constitutionally vague and re-

sults in an abridgement of free-

dom of speech and assembly.

Limited Purpose

The brief argues that the un-

lawful assembly law was intend-

ed to apply only to gatherings

threatening riot or other violence

and that application of the law

to peaceful demonstrations

would raise grave questions un-

der the First Amendment right

to freely assemble.

The brief also attacked the

law's prohibition of a "lawful

act in a violent, boisterous or

tumultuous manner" as lacking

the precision and definiteness

necessary to inform persons as

to what acts are criminal. Under

this language an excited crowd

at a football game could be ar-

rested,

Too Broad

Finally, the brief argues that

the unlawful assembly law could

be applied to prohibit or threat-

en demonstrations fully protect-

ed by the First Amendment free

speech and assembly clause, and

thus is unconstitutional on its

face as being too broad.

The brief did not take a po-

sition on the trespass and resist-

ing arrest charges pending

against the defendants.

Clem Miller

Memorial

Library

The Clem Miller Memorial Li-

brary, sponsored by the Marin

Chapter ACLU, has to date re-

ceived donations totaling $750.00,

according to Sali Lieberman,

chapter chirman who is `heading

the book selection committee.

The selection committee, which

includes Priscilla Rogers and

Catherine Hanson, are proceding

to purchase $500 worth of books

on civil liberties, most of the vol-

umes to be chosen from a list

compiled for them by law pro-

fessors at the University of Cal-

ifornia.

Donations of volumes in the

field of civil liberties, especially

those oriented to students and

teachers, are also being sought,

Lieberman reported. Private in-

dividuals who wish to make such

a contribution may contact the

following ACLU members who

will pick them up: In San Fran-

cisco, Helen Kerr, HE 1-4364; in

Marin County, Sali Lieberman,

DU 8-3240,

The late Congressman Clem

Miller- who was killed in an air-

plane accident in 1962 was a

staunch defender of civil liber-

ties and one of the charter mem-

bers of the Marin ACLU chapter.

The books, which will carry a

suitable bookplate, will be avail-

able to the public in general, and

schools in particular, from the

Marin County Public Library,

housed in the civie center at San

Rafael.

A dedication ceremony is plan-

ned for late spring at the library. (c)

Number 2 -

Seizure Without Hearing

The federal statute prohibiting the importation of "ob-

scene" materials into the United States has been ruled un-

constitutional by Federal District Judge Stanley A. Weigel

of San Francisco on procedural grounds. The case involves

several thousand "girlie" magazines imported from Scandi-

navia by Dr. Earl Sass. The Cus-

toms authorities in San Francisco

would not allow these magazines

to be delivered to Dr. Sass but

seized them under the authority

of 19 U.S.C. see. 1305 providing

that "any book, pamphlet, paper,

picture, drawing or other repre-

sentation which is obscene or

immoral" which is imported into

the United States shall be seized

- and forfeited. (The statute, which

dates from 1842, also prohibits

the importation of devices for

contraception, but this portion

has not been enforced of late.)

Seizure Without Hearing

Dr. Sass was represented by

ACLU counsel Marshall W.

Krause who argued that the sta-

tute was void on its face because.

Suspension Of

Deportation For

Club Member

In a lengthy opinion, Monroe

Kroll, Special Inquiry Officer of

the Immigration Service granted

suspension of deportation to a

Chinese who belonged to the Chi-

nese American Youth Club from

1952 to 1959. Members of the

Club, now defunct, have been a

farget of the Army and the Im-

migration Service for many

years. According to the Army,

the Club "is an organization

which supports and serves the in-

terests of the People's Repub-

lic of China and the Union of

Soviet Socialist Republics in pre-

ference to the interests of the

United States."

The Immigration Service re-

fused to disclose its official posi-

tion with respect to the organi-

zation on special instructions of

the Commissioner of the Serv-

ice and over objections of Ernest

Besig, ACLU executive director,

who represented the alien. The

ACLU argued that the alien

would suffer physical persecution

if he were deported to Formosa.

The Hearing Officer concluded

"that the respondent, who has

lived here fifteen years, since

he was sixteen years and eleven

months, whose wife is a citizen

of the United States, who is gain-

fully employed here and is self-.

supporting, and whose deporta-

tion could only be effected to the

Far East, would suffer extreme

hardship if deported."

"Un Chant

d'Amour" Case

Still Pending

Last month the Supreme Court

`of California declined to hear ar-

-gument on the question of

whether a writ of mandate

should issue to require the Ala-

meda County Superior Court to

speed up its hearing on the ques-

tion of whether the film "Un

Chant d'Amour" is obscene. Vol-

unteer ACLU attorney Neil Hor-

ton had asked that the writ be

issued when the Alameda County

Superior Court held that it had -

no power to issue a preliminary

injunction preventing the Berk-

eley police from making an ar-

rest, as they have threatened, of

persons who show the film. Now

the case will have to wait until

it can be set for a regular trial

which will be sometime in

March,

it allowed the seizure and deten-

tion of written material without

a judicial hearing if, in the opin-

ion of a customs official, it was

"obscene." On this allegation the

material could be detained until

brought to trial in federal court,

a process which takes months,

if not years. In the past, on simi-

lar allegations of obscenity un-

der this statute, works such as

James Joyce's Ulysses, Henry

Miller's Tropic of Cancer and

material intended for scholarly

Study at the University of Indi-

ana's Kinsey Institute have been

detained for long periods of time.

Rights Abridged

Judge Weigel's opinion grant-

ing a motion for summary judge-

ment states: "The statute-does

appear to empower government

officials to seize and exclude im-

ported magazines suspected of

being `obscene' and to do so prior -

to any judicial determination

that they are, in fact, `obscene.'

It is plainly indicated in A

Quantity of Books v. Kansas that

such procedures are unconstitu-

tional. Speaking for the Court,

Mr. Justice Brennan observed ~

that `if seizure of books precedes

an adversary determination of

their obscenity, there is danger

of abridgment of the right of

the public in a free society. to

unobstructed circulation of non-

obscene books.'

Government's Novel Theory

"The Government attempts to

avoid the Kansas case by argu-

ing that the First Amendment

has no inhibitory effect on Con-

gress's `complete' control of for-

eign commerce. This novel

theory is not buttressed by cita-

tion to a single court opinion

which has ever intimated such

a possibilty. The only rationale

offered in support of the theory

is to the effect that unless it be

accepted, there will be practical

limitations on the ability of Con-

gress to restrict the importation

of `obscene' books or other ma-

terial. This may. well be. How-

ever, Constitutional guarantees

may not be subverted to expedi-

ency. The Constitution, as it is

written and construed by the

United States Supreme Court,

must be strictly respected."

Police Seizures Threatened

If Judge Weigel's opinion

stands, there will be no statute

preventing importation of arti-

cles on the basis of obscenity.

Statutes of the various states and

the federal statute forbidding the

mailing of "obscene" material

(upheld in the leading case of

Roth v. United States) remain in

force, but Judge Weigel's opin-

ion and the Kansas case he re-

lied upon make it doubtful that

the police can seize material they

claim to be obscene as an inci-

dent to an arrest. What the po-

lice will probably have to do toe

comply with procedural require-

ments is to purchase the material

they allege to be obscene rather

than use their power of seizure.

Appeal To Supreme Court

The Government has appealed

the decision of Judge Weigel te

the Supreme Court (which it is

entitled to do when a statute is

-held unconstitutional) and a stay

has been entered allowing the

statute to be enforced pending

the appeal.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

ERNEST BESIG ... Editor

503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California, EXbrook 2-4692

Subscription Rates -- Two Dollars a Year

Twenty Cents Per Copy

Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

CHAIRMAN: Heward A. Friedman

VICE-CHAIRMEN: Helen Saiz

Rev. Harry B. Scholefield

SECRETARY-TREASURER: John M. Fowle

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig

Ralph B. Atkinson

Br. Alfred Azevedo

Prof. Arthur K. Bierman

Lee Borregard

Rey. Richard Byfield

Prof. James R. Caldwell

Richard DeLancie

Rabbi Alvin f. Fine

Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross"

Atbert Haas, Jr.

Howard A? Jewel

Rey. F. Danford Lien

Pref. Seaton W. Manning

John R. May

Prof. John Henry Merryman

Prof. Charles Muscatine

Prof. Herbert Packer

Clarence E. Rust

John Brisbin Rutherford

bars. Martin Steiner

Gregory S. Stout

Stephen Thicrmann

Richard E. Tuttle

Donald Vial

- Richard J. Werthimer

GENERAL COUNSEL

Wayne M. Coltins

Committee of Sponsors

Reger Kent

Mrs. Ruth Kingman

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

Norman Lezin

Prof. John Henry Merryman

Rey. Robert W. Moon

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Prof Hubert Phillips

Prof. Wilson Record

Dr. Norman Reider -

Prof. Wallace Stegner

Mrs. Theedosia Stewart

Honorary Treasurer:

Jeseph S$. Thompson

Honorary Board Member:

Sara Bard Field

Mrs. Gladys Brown

Mrs. Paul Couture.

John J. Eagan

Joseph Eichler

Morse Erskine

Dr. H. H. Fisher

Mrs. Margaret C. Hayes

Prof. Ernest Hilgard

Mrs. Paul Holmer

Mes. Mary Hutchinson

Richard Johnston Rt. Rev. Sumner Walters

cae Profs. Examine Free

Speech Issues at Cal.

Fellewing are excerpts from a recent report furnished

the Committee on Academic Freedom of the Berkeley Divi-

sion of the Academic Senate by three Boldt Hall constitu-

tienal law professors with respect to the underlying consti-

tutional issues in the free speech crisis at the University of

euroalifornia. The repert was pre-

pared by Professors Robert O'-

Neil, Hans Linde and Robert

Cole, all of whom at one time

served as law clerks to U. S.

Supreme Court justices..

euroConstituticn Applies te U.C.

"A state university is clearly

subject te those federal consti-

tutional limitations and prohibi-

tiens that apply te all other

branches of the state govern-

ment. Thus the courts have con-

sistently held that a state univer-

sity may not refuse admission to

anyone on racial or

grounds. Nor can a state univer-

sity hire or fire employees, aca-

demic or administrative, or cler-

deal, on racially discriminatory

grounds. Similarly the other

basic constitutional guarantees

of individual liberty - including

provisions cf both state and fed-

eral constitution that guarantee

freedoms of expression (speech,

press, assembly and petition) -

apply te actions of the state uni-

versity just as they do to actions

of any other branch ef the state

gevernment. .

Regulation of Speech

".. it is well settled that al-

theugh a city may not exclude

speakers entirely from its pub-

He parks, nor permit them to

speak enly or certain `approved'

subjects, it may forbid the use of

very leud sound amplification

and may require minimal regis-

tration in advance of a speech

or meeting to make sure that

twe speakers are not vying for

the same podium at the same

hour.

eencerned only with the time,

place and manner, undeniably do

interfere with the absolute free-

dem of expression. But they with-

stand constitutional attack for

two distinct reasons: First, they

are entirely indifferent to the

Page 2

ACLU NEWS

FEBRUARY, 1965

religious

Such restrictions, although .

eontent of the expression (and

thus do not permit censorship);

and second, they do not serious-

ly or permanently inhibit the

speaker's ability to reach his

audience. Those legal principles

which warrant municipal regula-

tion apply just as forcefully to

the regulation by a state univer-

sity of the time, place and man-

ner of speaking on the campus

- .. Many regulations on the

campus that affect only the time,

place and manner of expression

may become invalid if they

single out political activity (or

any other protected category)

for special treatment. (We do

not, of course, mean to suggest

that university regulations might

net constitutionally give greater

latitude to political and other

protected ferms of expression;

that is a different question with

which We are not immediately

concerned.)

Discriminatory Teels

... Laws that affect the con-

tent of expression must give

clear warning where the line be-

_ tween the lawful and the unlaw-

ful lies. This is largely because

unclear or vague regulations are

very likely to deter or inhibit

the person who wants to engage

in speech that is protected, but

who also desires to avoid any

possible liability if his judgment

is unsound. What this means, to

distill the learning of hundreds

of court decisions, is that regula-

tion of obscenity, defamation,

`fighting words' and ofher ex-

pression that may be ferbidden,

must be carried out with the

most discriminating teols. In-

numerable regulations that have

attempted to differentiate be-

tween the pretected and the pro-

hibited haye failed to pass con-

stitutional muster because they

left the speaker uncertain of the

- regulatory line. And it should

be clear that some of the most

socially useful speech and po-

litical activity does approach the

borderline-indeed, its very util-

No Ban On Boots

[Im San Francisco

School System

The San Francisco school de-

partment reversed itself last

month and allowed the wearing

of beots by two young ladies at

Herbert Hocver Junior High

School. "It is now my under-

standing that there was a mis-

understanding in the situation

by a member of the faculty at

Herbert Hoever Junior High

School," said Irving G. Breyer,

the School District's Lega] Ad-

visor,' and that there is ne ban

on the wearing of these boots."

The parents had been informed

that the boots were unhygienic,

identified with gangs, violated

standard school dress and weuld

tend toward attitudes of non-

eonformity. The parents com-

plained that the school's action

was unreasonable and that no

`serious consequences would flow

from the wearing of beots.

In a letter to Superintendent

Harold Spears, the ACLU neted

that at one time saddle oxfords

were worn by schoo] girls. They

were succeeded by tennis shoes

(which aren't particularly hy-

gienic). and possibly boots will

now become the vogue. The AC-

LU suggested to the principal

that parents should have free-

dom in dressing their children

unless there is a substantial

basis for interference by the pub-

lice schools. Ordinarily, the

standard should be whether the

attire is decent, neat, and clean

and not bizarre.

ity often derives in large meas-

ure from its controversiality.

Conclusions

"Thus we eonchide: (1) Under

the First Amendment the state

may constitutionally regulate or

prevent certam behavior even

though it may involve the use ef

language; (2) for that reason the

content of speech on the univer-

sity campus may theoretically be

regulated te a limited extent;

_and (3) the drafting of regula-

tions to separate the protected

from the unprotected is a peril-

ous process even for experts in

constitutional law. Thus we cau-

tion against any attempt te draft

regulations for the state univer-

sity campus dealing with expres-

sion in terms of content.

General Laws Apply on Campus

ae the general laws that

make certain dangerous. er high-

ly offensive behavior `illegal' ap-

ply just as much on the campus

as they do off the campus; the

gates of the university afford no

sanctuary frem the enforcement

of the criminal law. Thus if two

or more persons on the campus

beat up a third, the police can

break up the fracas and arrest

the participants for assault and

battery. (It is immaterial te this

analysis whether the arrest be

made by city, county, state or

campus police.) If the attackers

agree among themselves to at-

tack the victim, or if one man

calls upon the others `te de se

but does not himself join the

fray, the ordinary principles of

criminal law and accountability

surely apply just as theugh the

incident had occurred on the

sidewalk.

Law and Grder on Campus

"Many offenses that may be

committed on university cam-

puses are also crimes-theft,

battery, liquor and sex offenses,

for example- Likewise, the law

enforcement authorities have

authority to maintain law and

order on the campus under gen-

eral traffic laws, ordinances re-

lating to excessive noise and

other disturbances, breach of

peace, and many others. In all

these cases it has not been neces-

sary to consider whether the per-

sons involved were students; and

the power ot law enforcement

authorities to invoke the general

law on the campus depends in

no way upon the availability or

actual resort to special univer-

sity disciplinary sanctions."

Dan Miller New

Alexander

The death of Alexander Meiklejohn at the age of 92 robs

the country of a national resource-a figure almost uniquely

symbolic of its libertarian tradition. This ramrod-straight

sparse, spectacled philosopher was at once scholar and pole-

micist, a man of learning and a champion of freedom. An

implacable foe of every restraint on expression, an inveterate

champion of underdogs and lost causes, he was, neverthe-

less, a man of extraordinary sweetness, "gentleness and tol-

erance.

Alec Meiklejohn was forever in the vanguard. As ee of

Brown University, as president of Amherst College, as head

of the experimental college at the University of Wisconsin,

as chairman of the School for Social Studies in San Fran-

cisco, he pressed incessantly for educational ideas and prac-

tices which were not to win general acceptance for nearly

half a century. All of higher education in the United States |

is today indebted to him for his theories and innovations.

He was, above all other things, a gifted, inspired and de-

voted teacher-a lover of learning and an inspirer of youth. "

He believed that mental capacity is developed by exercise;

and so he sought always to make students think and chal- -

lenge and question. He abhorred monologue and delighted

in discourse. He relished argument from yeungsters, eliciting

responsibility from them by treating them as responsible.

Although he deplored reverence, he won it from innumer-

able young men and women who worked under him.

In the area of political controversy, Professor Meiklejohn

always espoused the view that the First Amendment was in-

tended as an absolute barrier to any governmentally imposed

limitation on the expression of political opinion. He made a

distinction between political expression and the discussion

of private interests, asserting that `under the Constitution,

the freedom of advocacy or incitement to action by the Gov-

ernment may never be abridged. It is only advocacy er in-

citement te action by individuals or nonpolitical Sure

which is open to regulation."

Thus, he argued peristently and elequently against Jus-

tice Holmes's clear and present danger limitation of free

speech. "No belief or advocacy may be denied freedom," he

insisted, "if, in the same situation, opposing beliefs or ad-

vocacies are granted that freedom." He held a utilitarian

view of freedom, believing that it "is always expedient'-

that it affords the best assurance ef wisdom in national .af-

fairs and the surest safeguard to national security.

For all the passion of his opinions, Alec Meiklejohn never

doubted the right of others to dispute them-never doubted

the desirability of having them disputed. He represented a

great heritage. And he left a rich inheritance -Editerial,

The Washington Post, December 18, 1964,

`Obscenity' Ruling

THE FIRST AMENDMENT to the Constitution, in guar-

anteeing freedom of the press, is concerned not so much

with the publisher's right to print as with the public's right

to read.

On the basis of such an interpretation, Federal Judge

Stanley A. Weigel has struck down an "obscenity" law that

has been on the Federal books since 1842 and under whieh

the Customs Service has long been seizing and impounding

shipments of literature and paintings. oe Ne

In a case involving seizure of some 2000 "girlie" `maga-

zines consigned to a local dealer, Judge Weigel refused the -

Government's request for approval of the seizure and held ~~

the venerable statute unconstitutional. In so doing, he ap-

plied to the Federal statute the principles enunciated by the

U. S. Supreme Court in recently voiding a Kansas statute

which allowed the State courts to seize and hold books on a :

verified complaint that they were obscene.

THE SUPREME COURT held that the Kane law did

safeguard against suppression of beoks that were not ob-

scene, saying in effect that if it is permitted to seize books

before they have been examined and found obscene by the.

courts, then the public's right to unobstructed circulation of

nonobscene books is clearly endangered. ;

Judge Weigel did not scrutinize the magazines ea

but summarily ordered their release to the consignee en

grounds that seizure by Customs violated the First Amend-

ment. In effect, he denied the competence of Customs offi-

cers to determine the obscenity of printed matter.

In view of the extreme difficulty of defining "obscenity,"

and of applying the legal definition to particular publica-

tions, it is clear that here is a matter for judical determina- .

tion and not for the snap judgement of nen ee

San Francisco Chronicle, Sanuary 5, 1965.

Chapter

Conference On

February 27

Representatives of the ACLU-

NC's nine chapters will meet in

Berkeley, Saturday, Feb. 27, at

an all-day conference. This is the

fourth Chapter Conference. It

will be devoted principally to a

consideration of legislation af-

fecting civil liberties introduced

at the 1965 session of the Cali-

fornia Legislature.

Chairman of

Santa Cruz Unit

Dan Miller of Aptos was elect-

ed chairman of the Santa Cruz

County Chapter of the ACLUNC

for 1965. Ee succeeds Stanley

Stevens who has now become

Program Chairman, |

Other officers elected for the

present year are Mrs. Margaret

Lezin, Vice Chairman; Mrs. Eliza-

beth Moore, Secretary; Bates EI-

liott, Treasurer; and Dr. Marvin

Naman, Membership Chairman.

FE

IAL REPORT

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

For Year Ended October 31, 1964

Board of Directors: .

American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

503 Market Street:

San Francisco 94103

AUDIT OF BOOKS AND RECORDS FOR THE

FISCAL YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1964

We have examined the balance sheet of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California as of October 31, 1964, and the related statement -of

income and expense for the year then ended. Our examination was made in ac-

-cordanee with generally accepted auditing standards, and accordingly included

such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we

considered necessary in the circumstances.

The records are maintained on a cash basis, and accordingly reflect no

"acerual of liabilities. Our examination indicated no material liabilities outstand-

ing. Amounts payable for payroll taxes and minor items were subsequently

promptly paid and did not differ in any significant amount from those payable

at the close of the previous year.

In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheet and statement of income

and expense, subject to adjustment for the difference between book and market

value of treasury bonds, present fairly the financial position of the American

Civil Liberties Union of Northern California at October 31, 1964, and the re-

sults of the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting

principles applied on a basis consistent with that of the previous year. Horwath

Heorwath, Certified Publi ic Accountants, 821 Market Street, San Francisco 3,

California.

Balance Sheet

AS AT OCTOBER 31, 1964

3 ASSETS

CURRENT ASSETS: .

Cash

Wells Fargo Bank :

General account oo... ee ee a 976.00

Savings account "222 = = 13,243.08

San Francisco Federal Savings and

oan `Association =

Security Savings and Lean Association -....

Heme Mutual Savings and Loan Assn. _.............. 10,072.60

Argonaut Savings and Loan Association So 7,070.00

Petty Cash: fund 16-00 52,371.00

United States Treasury Bonds (at cost}* eee 4,500.00

TOTAL -ASSEIS ce er Sr $56,871.00

a LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH

CURRENT LIABILITY

Employee payroll tax withheld oe -$ 51.00

Provison. tor: 1965; Bennal report =. G2 ee 600.00

Obligated funds (see schedule A-[) oc... ceeccecce cece cccceecetceee eee eee eee yen4,632.00

NET WORTH: ;

Balance at October 31, 1963 _.... pee $94 773200

Excess of income-over expenditures- :

Year ended October 31, 1964 25 cccecdiggecteeeeeee 6,215.00

Net worth as at Octeber 31, 1964 00 40,988.00

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH wo... $56,871.00

*A $500 bond is posted as bail in each of four diferent cases.

Wrong In-Laws (c)

Security Charges.

At Last Moment

At virtually the last minute, the Atomic Energy Com-

mission last month cancelled a hearing and dismissed secu-

rity charges against a scientist at the Livermore Radiation

Laberatory rather than try te prove its charges that he was

a security risk because he and his wife `associate with indi-

YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1964

INCOME: :

Memberships = 2 3 $64,090.00

Special funds appeals 2. u...--ececeeee $4,582.00

Less portions directed

to obligated funds (ow... 4,582.60

Special `aiffs: 5 oe 3,782.00

Tanes and insyrance: 4.

1963 triannual report expense and :

provision for 1964 biennial report 0 72400

Statement of Income and Expense

Memorial gifts 0... 106.00

lateres! income 60 2,203.00

Publication sales, notary fees and miscellaneous ..... 329.00 -

TOTAL INCOMES eee ere $70,510.00

ees

Salaries... ee $40,03 1.00

Printing, stationery and office expense -............ 4,347.00

Rent Go i ee 4,642.00

Postage (... 5 en es 4,270.09

ACLU News 3,249.00

Telephone 1,386.00

Retirement. 6 sn a ea eee 741200

Veavel: and `transportation 2 485.00

1,740.00

Employee hospitalization and imsurance _.. 452.00

PAAR es ie 330.68

Poblications 2 a ee 416.60

Furniture and equipment ). 1,341.00

Conference expense 20.00

Miscellaneous: 2 ts oe i er 121.00

TOTAU EXPENDITURES. 6 ee $64,295.60

EXCESS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURES = $ 6,215.00

Belshaw, Berk.

Fireman, Wins in

Superior Court

Continued from Page 1-

euroivil Service Commission that

"Where the curtailment of First

Amendment rights is concerned,

the State may prevail only if it

ean show that it has a `compell-

ing' interest in. Hhmiting those

rights." Judge Cook also said that

enly the gravest abuses, endan-

gering paramount interests,

could give occasion for permis-

sible limitations of the free

speech rights of public em-

ployees.

Rules Must Be Revised

The opinion of the court ap-

plies not only to Mr. Belshaw

but will require a complete re-

examination of the personnel

rules of the City of Berkeley

since it was held that the rules

quoted above were "so vague

and overbroad....as to deprive

petitioner of due process of law."

In addition to finding the sus-

pension invalid, the court or-

dered that the city was to vacate

and expunge from its record all

mention of the suspension and

was to dismiss all proceedings

against Belshaw. Belshaw was al-

so awarded his salary for the

month he was suspended to-

gether with interest at the rate

ef 7% from the date he would

have been paid this salary had he

net been wrongfully suspended.

The City of Berkeley has an-

nounced that it will appeal the

decision.

Transactions 4 in Obligated Funds

viduals who held membership"

in organizations on the Attorney

General's list of subversive

"groups.

Wife's Parents Accused

Neither the employee nor his

`wife themseives are alleged to

`suffer from any. political dis-

abilities. His only problem is

that about twice a month he and

his wife visit her parents who

are alleged to have had commu-

nist political associations more

than twelve years ago. At that.

time, the wife was ten years of

age. :

Neither the wife nor her hus-

band have any knowledge of the

allegations made against her par-

ents, and they so testified at an

interview conducted by AEC se-

eurity officers about ten months

ago. But they did admit that

they visit her parents about

twice a month.

The employee did not consult

the ACLU until after he had fur-

nished his statement to the Gov-

ernment. it agreed to provide

representation if any security

charges were filed against him.

Hearing Plans

The charges were filed and.

Ernest Besig, ACLU Executive

Director, entered an appearance

as the employee's counsel. The

Government then sought to dis-

cover the employee's plans for

the hearing, who his witnesses

would be and especially whether

the wife's parents, the wife and

the husband would testify.

The employee's counsel re-

spended that at that point he

didn't intend to call any wit-

nesses but would wait and see

what the Government proved. He

also demanded "a list of your

witnesses and copies of any doe-

uments you intend to offer into

evidence in order that we may

prepare a defense."

Reassessment

Apparently, there we-e confer-

ences with Washington and, fi-

nally, instructions to dismiss the

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1965.batch ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_1999.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Denotes red figures

charges. "Upon reassessment of

the existing record in your cli-

ent's case," said the AEC, "it has

been determined that a board

hearing wii} not be necessary."

The AEC has the reputation of

runnirg a pretty fair security

program. This case reveals, how-

ever, that when it comes to al-

leged security matters even the

best Government agencies leave

a lot to be Gesired.

Moral of Tale

The moral of t's tale for bud-

ding young scientists is clear:

Den't marry into the wrong fam-

`ly! Make sure your in-laws to be

are politically pure. Require

them to take a loyalty test and

then have them investigated. On

second thought, you might be

happier and there would be few-

er risks for your career if you

went to work for an outfit that

doesn't have anything to do with

classified work.

gainst HUAC'

The ACLUNC office has avail-

able a limited supply of a new

pamphiet,

HUAC," published by the AC-

LU's national office. The price

of this 36-page pamphlet is 35c.

The pamphlet discusses in de-

tail (1) the coenstitutionality of

the mandate, (2) the harm done

to people exposed or mentioned,

(3) the dangerous use of the

Cemmittee's files and "citations,"

and. (4) its impact on education,

civil rights, peace activities and

religion.

Orders should be sent to the

ACLUNC office, 503 Market St.,

San Francisco, Calif., $4105, ac-

eompanied by payment.

"The Case Against

Watchful

Waiting In

U. C. Crisis

As this issue of the NEWS

gees te press, the ACLU is

watchfully waiting for devel-

epments in the U:iversity of

California free speech fight.

Certainly, the situation seems

mere promising new than it |

did before Christmas. Acting |

Chancellor Martin Meyersen

appears to be sensitive to the

legitimate demands of - the

students rer pelitical freedom

on the campus and sew regu-

lations could conceivably suc-

eessfully wind up everything

but the pending court aspects

of the free speech fight.

ACLU NEWS

FEBRUARY, 1965

Page 3

ae

Receipts SCHEDULE A-!

Balance Special Expend- Balance

eS 10-31-63 Appeal Other | ures Transfers FO-3 1-64

DEFENSE FUNDS: :

General Defense Funds -........ eee $11,083.00 $1 $48.00 $ $7.60 $ 1,468.00 $374.00 $11,276.00

John W. Mass ys :

San Francisco Scheol Beard -........ _ 40400 64.00 114.00 51.60

Hartman and H.V.A.C. eee es 405.00 48560

Teachers loyalty oath eases... z 3:15.06* $63.60 4.00 246.00

Goldberger case: ieee 4900 438.00 - 389.00 ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1965.batch ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_1999.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log _

' Customs Service censorship cases 963.00 5460 560.60 1,517.00

Heilbesg case: 5 jek (35.00* 34:00 7900 307.00 231 .00*

Bracerescase Sie ek 15.66 15.00 -

Burks case .... ges 226:69 380.60 : 160.00" :

Sokel ease7e 25 ee er 23.60 136266 113.008) 0)

Belshaw case 2 pene 275.60* 12.08 159.60 422 .00*

Forstner case 14.60* 60:60 291.60 245.00"

Nevada-Pate case _ : : 43.60 43.60"

Ida: Morgans. ee ea = 42.00 15700 1 10x00A7.60*

Salgooyen case 6 Bh $2.00 12:60*

Camara case eae 4200 26109 219-00*

Burbeidge case ye 36:60 560.00 470.00*

TOTAL DEFENSE FUNDS `$12,220.00 $1,914.06 $ 1341.00 $ 401600 -o- "$11,459.60

-OTHER FUNDS:

Beth Livermore Memorial Fund _._..... 272.00 30.60 24260

Lawrence Sears Memorial Fund __.... 495.00 495.00 -

Boyd Memorial Library 0.2. 9.00* 26.00 171.60 214.00"

"Operation Cerrection0x2122 1,920.00 f 443.60 188.08 2,145.00

Sacramento Fund ==) = 1,600.00 1,60000

Scholarship fund: 02 eee eee 455.00 455.00 -

Southern `Regional Offiee 2.0... 0x00A7, pound42.00 (c) 1, 14200 -

Proposition 314) 232") 2 3,658.00 33,515.00 346,573.00 oo

TOTAL OTHER FUNDS oo... 3,618.00 3,084.00 35,525.00 39,054.00 3,173.00

TOTAL OBLIGATED FUNDS 2... $15,838.00 $4,998.00 $362pound66.00 - $43,070:00 $14,632.60

Policy 0x00A7

FCC F

_ Adopted by the ACLU National

Board of Directors, Nov. 23, 1964

- "The American Civil Liberties Union's interest in radio

and television derives from the First Amendment's guaran-

tee of freedom of expression, a guarantee designed to assure

citizens a diversity of information and opinion. The premise

is that in a marketplace of conflicting ideas, the American

public will be exposed to the

broadest circulation of contrast-

ing viewpoints which alone

makes possible the ultimate exer-

cise of freedom of speech and

the press.

Increasing Diversity

"This belief has guided the

ACLU's support of measures

adopted by the Federal Com- -

munications Commission to en-

large diversity of that most im-

portant medium of communica-

tions, radio and television. Be-

eause of the limited number of

channels which technically can

be developed in the radio and TV

spectrum, government regulation

is necessary to avoid chaos. Gov-

ernment regulation always car-

ries with it the possibility of

censorship, and the ACLU is es-

pecially sensitive to this danger.

However, each FCC step toward

actually increasing diversity -

without interfering with program

content - deserves the backing

of civil libertarians eager to have

the First Amendment guaran-

tees utilized for the resolution

oi public issues.

`Fairness Doctrine Endorsed

"It is in this spirit that the

ACLU endorses in principle the

FCC's `fairness doctrine.' In es- |

sence the doctrine says that if

broadcasters are to operate their

publicly-granted licenses in the

`public interest, convenience, and

necessity, they must present dif-

ferent sides of important public

issues. Recently the FCC has set

forth certain standards to assure

that different points of view

would be expressed, and the Un-

jon fully supports these stand-

ards. They provide that: 1)

where a licensee permits the use

. of its facilities for a personal at-

tack upon an individual or or-

ganization, the licensee is re-

quired to give the person or

group attacked time for an ade-

quate response; 2) where a licen-

see permits the use of its facili-

ties for any person other than a

candidate for political office to

take a partisan position on the

issues involved in an election or

to attack one candidate or sup-

port another, the station must

give each candidate concerned a

`comparable' opportunity to an-

swer. And finally; 3) where a li-

censee permits the use of its fa-

cilities for the presentation of

views regarding issues of current

importance, there must be sim-

ilar opportunity for the expres-

sion of contrasting views accord-

ed to other responsible groups

within the community... (With re-

gard to this third standard, the

FCC goes out of its way to em- -

phasize its applicability to the

presentation of views regarding

racial segregation, integration or

discrimination.) -

Reasonable Application

"In its various statements

about the `fairness doctrine,' the

FCC has made clear that these

standards will be applied on a

basis of reasonableness and with

a view to the facts of each par-~

ticular situation. In addition

`much weight is to be given to the

good faith judgments exercised

by the licensee in each case. The

Union agrees that in order to op-

erate most effectively, the `fair-

ness doctrine' must and should

be applied in this reasonable

manner,

Procedural Requirements

"In some of its statements on

the `fairness doctrine,' notably

its July 26, 1963 statement, the

FCC specified certain procedural

requirements which would neces-

Sitate, in certain circumstances,

Page 4

ACLU NEWS

FEBRUARY, 1965

the submission of broadcast tran-

scripts by licensees to: persons or

groups attacked. Although the

Union strongly supports the prin-

ciple of the `fairness doctrine,'

it does not at this time take any

position on these procedural re-

quirements, Indeed, it has strong

reservations about their advisa-

bility and practicality. We sug-

gest that the Commission _re-

evaluate them in the. light of

their own experience and the

practicalities of the broadcasting

industry, especially in. the con-

text of this last election cam-

paign.

Dangers to Freedom

"With regard to the `fairness

doctrine' itself, the ACLU is not

unmindful that when government

action even approaches the area

of content, dangers arise which

may limit freedom of expression

on the air. Particularly there is

the danger that to avoid involve-

ment with a government agency

over interpretation of what is a

controversial program, or where

a dramatic or other non-discus-

sion format presents an issue,

the station management will

simply remove the controversy

from its programming. The fear

is the station will play safe, thus

depriving the public of needed

exposure of controversy. Such a

fear of government involvement

with programming on the part of

the broadcaster is understand-

able. But the broadcaster does

have a responsibility as a public

licensee and a challenging oppor-

tunity to acquaint his audience

with a variety of points of view

-especially when individuals

and organizations are under spe-

cific attack and thus the particu-

lar controversy is very sharp.

"Government regulations not

based on reasonableness' or

which does not consider whether

the licensee acts in good faith,

must be opposed, and the Union

will act to oppose such regula-

tion if and when it occurs.

Basic Criteria

"Not all problems have been

solved in interpreting the `fair-

ness doctrine,' nor can they be

until particular cases arise. For

example where one side of a con-

troversial issue is involved in a

program other points of view

might be presented in another

format. The basic criteria is

whether the public is exposed

not to one but to a diversity of

opinions. The way of doing this,

consistent with the principle of

fairness and reasonableness,

should remain with the station.

As the FCC stated in its July 1,

1964 `The History of the Fair-

ness Doctrine':

In determining in an individ-

ual case whether or not a licen-

see has complied with the fair-

ness doctrine, the Commission

looks solely to whether, in the

circumstances presented, the li-

censee acted reasonably and in

good faith to present a fair cross-

section of opinion on the contro-

versial issue presented. In mak-

ing such a determination, an hon-

est mistake or error in judgment

will not be condemned, so long

as the licensee demonstrates a

reasonable and honest effort to

provide a balanced presentation

of the controversial issue. The

question of whether the licensee

generally is operating in the pub-

lie interest is determined at the

time of renewal on an overall

basis,

No Easy Way

"The successful working of de-

mocracy, indeed the exercise of

freedom itself, is not always

easy or simple. Effort is required,

and broadcasters have the re-

Mid-Peninsula

Chapter Annual

Meeting Feb. 12

The annual membership: meet-

ing of the Mid-Peninsula Chap-

ter of the ACLUNC will be held

Thursday evening, February 12

at eight o'clock in the Parish

Hall of All Saints Episcopal

Church, corner of Hamilton and

Waverley streets in Palo Alto.

An election will be held for

five new members to the Board

of Direcetors. The Nominating

Committee, headed by Larry Slei-

zer, has prepared a slate of 13

nominees. As always, nomina-

tions from the floor will be in

order.

Hal Gross Reports

Following the election, Chair-

man Harold Gross will report

on the year's activity of the Mid-

Peninsula Chapter. The year has

been a busy one and the summa-

tion should serve to refresh

memories of the effective and

valuable accomplishments of the

Chapter.

Also on the program is a panel

discussion on the subject of

"Sit-Ins and Civil Disobedience

-Pros and Cons." Included on

the panel are Mal Burnstein,

Robert Naylor and Jay Kadane.

Mal Burnstzein Panelist

Mr. Burnstein is in the active

practice of law in Oakland. He

is Northern California Counsel

for CORE. He is also one of the

principal Coordination Counsel

members of the United Civil

Rights Movement and is at pre-

sent attorney for many of the

students arrested in the sit-in

demonstrations at the University

of California Berkeley.

Other Panelists

Mr. Naylor is editor of the

Stanford Daiiy. Mr. Kadane is a

graduate student at Stanford and

a member of the Executive Com-

mittee of the Stanford Graduate

Executive Committee, which was

formed in response to the free

speech crisis at the Univ. of

California. He is also chairman

of the Resolutions Committee of

the Stanford Young Democrats.

Every effort has been made to

make the evening an interesting

one. So, make it a point to at-

tend and bring a friend. The

election of members of the Board

of Directors is one of the prime

opportunities which the general

membership has to influence the

scope and direction of the Chap-

ter's activities. Do not.miss this

opportunity.

ACLU Supports

Mississippi

Challenge

Both the National and the

Northern California ACLU are

supporting the challenge to the

five Mississippi congressmen who

were elected in elections where

Negroes were systematically ex-

cluded from registering and vot-

ing by intimidation, harassment

and physical violence.

148 congressmen voted not to

seat these congressmen pending

a hearing on whether they were

legally elected. This substantial

humber, though a minority,

should insure that the hearings

to be held by a House Subcom-

mittee on Elections will seriously -

consider the question of racial

discrimination in Mississippi elec-

tions, : :

The ACLU of Northern Cali-

fornia has asked its attorney-

members to go to Mississippi to

help gather evidence to substan-

tiate the charges of racial dis-

crimination so that this evidence

may be presented to the House

Subcommittee,

sponsibility to make this effort,

if their industry is to remain

true to the democratic ideal that

not one viewpoint, but many, are

essential if the public is to know

and understand the issues it

alone must decide."

Police Harassment

In one of San Francisco's most offensive incidents of

police harassment of unpopular groups, three attorneys and -

a secretary will be forced to face trial in February on the

charge that they committed the misdemeanor of obstructing

a police officer in the course of his duties. The three attor-

neys, Elliott Leighton, Herbert

Donaldson and Evander Smith,

and the secretary, Nancy May,

on the evening of January ist

were assisting The Council On

Religion and the Homosexual,

which is an inter-faith group of

ministers seeking to integrate

homosexuals into the community,

in supervising a party co-spon-

sored by various homophile or-

ganizations in the area.

Private Party

Attendance at the party, held

at California Hall, was by invi-

tation only and no tickets were

sold at the door. On two occa-

sions the party was discussed

with the Police Department by

the sponsoring ministers, but on

neither occasion was much prog-

ress made. When one minister

complained that homosexuals

feel that they are harassed by

the police, Inspector Lusher of

the Vice Detail replied, "You

say there are seventy to ninety

thousand (homosexuals), and you

can see there are only six of us

on crime prevention so we're in

no condition to harass anybody."

This plea of lack of manpower

to do the job is not too convinc-

ing in the light of the events of

the, party.

Large Police Force

Police reports available to the

ACLU indicate that on the night

of the party eight plainclothes

men, two police photographers,

six uniformed officers, a police-

woman, and two paddy wagons

were assigned to cover the par-

ty. The sponsors of the party

considered it a private affair

since admission was denied to

those not purchasing tickets in

advance. Nevertheless, when

some of the officers requested

permission to inspect the prem-

ises they were allowed to enter

and go where they wished.

Some of the participants in the

party came in the costume. of

`the opposite sex and as they

entered the hall were photo-

graphed by police photographers.

Police Asked To Leave

Two of the attorneys, Donald-

son and Smith, stationed them-

selves at the door to provide ad-

vice on legal questions. At about

10 p.m. a large group of plain-

clothes men gathered inside the

door but outside the ballroom

itself. They refused to answer

the questions of the attorneys as

to whether they had a warrant,

`whether they suspected a crime

had been committed on the

premises, and even refused to

identify themselves to the attor-

neys. Donaldson and Smith asked.

them to leave, stating that the

party was private, but did not

press the point. At this time

the uniformed officers started

pushing past the ticket table and

the attorneys asked them the

same questions. They were then

arrested for "obstructing an of-

ficer in the course of his duties."

The police do not claim `that

Donaldson and Smith attempted

to physically restrain them, nor

do they claim that despite the

attorneys' protest they were un-

able to enter. Substantially the

same facts are true of the ar-

rests of Leighton and May about

an hour later. ;

ACLU Intervenes

The ACLU has accepted the

request of the defendants that

staff counsel Marshall Krause

defend them and he will do so on

four grounds. First, the arrests

interfered with the right and

duty of attorneys to represent

unpopular groups and causes

without being harassed for that

representation. In this case it is

believed that the arrests. were

made to intimidate attorneys

who represent homosexuals and

to prevent homosexuals from

exercising their rights. Second,

because words alone cannot ob-

struct a police officer unless (as

is not charged here) they were

intended to incite to violence. In

fact, the words of these attor-

neys in expressing their opinion

is protected by the First Amend-

ment. Z es

Harassment of Homosexuals (c)

Third, the arrests are part of

police harassment of homosex-

uals, whereas it is not a crime

to be a homosexual. Fourth, the

police in invading a private par-

ty were engaging in an illegal

search seeking to gather evi-

dence rather than acting on in-

formation "hat a crime was be-

ing- committed. The ACLU `is:

also concerned. with the invasion

of privacy by police photograph-

ers when they directed flood-

lights into cars and took pictures:

of the occupants. ee oS

The first right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible

AMERICAN CIVIL

JOIN TODAY

Seeeo 151 3

Bee

LIBERTIES UNION

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron Membership .......

Sustaining Membership .....

Business and Professional Membership ............0-

Family Membership .......

oe 8 (c) (c) (c) (c) (c) @ @ @

os ee oe ec eo 8 (c)

@eee ees (c) 6 (c)

oon. 8100

50

25

Cee ee

oe eee 08 e(R) (c) (c)

Associate: Membership .........................- 210

Annual Membership ......

4 7

oeet 9 9 @ DM @

oe eee 0 e 8 oOo

Student Membership ..... i. e pie eee ee

ACLU News Subscription Seep veers ee isco 92.0

NAME.

(c)SCSCHHHHFEHHHHHHB OHH OHH SHH HHOHEOHS EHR CHD HO OHHH HS OHH OEE OBE

POD REDS oe a io Gee oo cess a es ee soe ec ase

TELEPHONE NUMBER......

seesecceess AMT. ENCLOSED... ..020000

503 Market Street

San Francisco, 94105