vol. 42, no. 7

Volume XLII

October 1977

NO. 7

Bakke tests remedy for inequality Political practices audit

By David Fishlow

"Two centuries of slavery and racial

discrimination have left our nation an'

awful legacy - a largely separated

society in which wealth, educational

resources, employment opportunities -

indeed all society's benefits - remain

largely the preserve of the white-Anglo

majority.'

- Calif. Supreme Court Justice

Mathew Tobriner, dissenting in

Bakke vs. Regents of

the University of California

`(O)ur system of constitutional

liberties would be gravely undermined

if the law were to give sanction to the

use of race in the decision-making

VI

process of governmental agencies.

- American Jewish Congress et al.,

amicus curiae brief in

Bakke vs. Regents.

American society's quandary about

the solution to this country's race

problem (how old-fashioned that phrase

seems!) is not likely to be resolved by

the Supreme Court of the United States

in October, though its ruling in Bakke

vs. Board of Regents of the University

Celebration

of California will no doubt stand with

Dred Scott, Plessy vs. Ferguson, and

Brown vs. Board of Education of

Topeka, in the first rank of decisions

affecting the solution.

The issue, of course, has been much

discussed in the press, and ACLU

members are not likely to require much

explanation here. In its simplest terms,

the case involves a policy of the Medical

School of the University of California at

Davis to reserve 16 of the 100 places in

its entering class for "disadvantaged"

applicants.

Allan Bakke, a 37-year-old white

male. applicant, frustrated many times

in his attempts to gain admission to

other medical schools, challenged the

University's use of racial criteria in its

admissions policies, alleging that the

reservation of the 16 places resulted in

his exclusion from the entering class.

`When the case reached the California

Supreme Court, only Justice Mathew

Tobriner dissented from a majority

opinion which declared the admissions

pclicy unconstitutional. The University

appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court,

but not before a number of civil rights

organizations asked them to forego an

appeal because the Bakke case presents

continued on page 2

will honor

Francis Heisler

As many members of the ACLU of

Northern California as can fit in the

Grand Ballroom of the Sheraton Palace

Hotel will celebrate the 186th

Anniversary of the Bill of Rights on

Sunday evening, December 11. 0x00B0.

On that occasion Francis Heisler, a

long time ACLU activist and deter-

mined advocate for the Bill of Rights,

will receive the fifth annual Earl

Warren Civil Liberties Award from the

ACLU Foundation of Northern

California.

Participating in the program will be

friends and clients of Mr. Heisler's

whose lives also reflect a dedication to -

the fight for freedom - and specifically

-- to the evening's theme, ``the right to

_dissent."'

`These eminent clients, many of whom -

waged constitutional battles which

sparked nationwide civil liberties in-

terest include Joan Baez, Linus Pauling,

Milton Mayer and Leonard Levy.

Honoring Mr. Heisler and the Bill of

Rights anniversary on the program will

be his former law partner and current

Monterey County Superior Court Judge

Richard Silver, and the dedicated

activist-writer, Jessica Mitford.

Francis Heisler was chosen by the

ACLU's Board of Directors to receive

the 1977 Earl Warren Award for his

significant involvement with nearly

every major civil liberties issue to face

this nation in his more than fifty years

of practicing law.

From his contribution to the union

movement in the 1930's to his resolute

defense of conscientious objectors and

his participation in the landmark "right

to dissent' case - Terminiello v.

Chicago - Francis Heisler has

steadfastly fought for civil liberties and

individual rights.

Mr. Heisler will join the ranks of

distinguished recipients of the Earl

Warren Civil Liberties Award who have

all made major contributions to the

cause of freedom and justice: Previous

recipients

Professor Anthony G. Amsterdam,

former California Supreme

Justice Roger J. Traynor, ACLU of

Northern California founder Helen Salz |

and the late Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn,

and Supreme Court Justice William O.

Douglas.

Tickets to attend the celebration, at

$5 each, can be obtained at the ACLU

offices - 814 Mission Street, Suite 301,

San Francisco 94103.

"Mimi Gina and her Medicine

Men," a favorite San Francisco Jazz

band, will entertain at the no-host

cocktail party preceding the program,

which is scheduled to begin at 8:00 p.m.

Stanford University Law

Court

Refusal to answer subpoena

sparks legal action

ACLU Advisory Counsel Coleman A..

Blease is currently engaged in the-not

uncommon-practice of preparing

briefs in defense of someone's : civil

liberties. This time, however, the client

is the ACLU, as defendants in an action

brought by the Attorney General for the

Franchise Tax Board.

The ACLU became the target of the

`legal action when it refused to honor an

administrative subpoena, issued by the

Tax Board, for an extremely general

and ill-defined list of "records" in

connection with a routine audit of the

ACLU's lobbying expenditures. The list

of items to which auditors wanted

unlimited access were records such as

personal checkbooks and _ personal

appointment calendars of the ACLU's

_ lobbying staff.

Proposition Nine, the 1974 ballot

measure which completely rewrote the

law on political campaign financing

and lobbying in California, authorized

the newly-created Fair Political

Practices Commission (FPPC) to

monitor and regulate such activities.

It requires paid lobbyists, and those

who employ them (in this case, the

ACLU of Northern California), to file

monthly statements listing all legislative -

and administrative bodies and all laws

and regulations which they have at-

tempted to affect. Also reported

monthly are any expenditures incurred

by lobbyists and their employees in the

course of their efforts.

The Franchise Tax Board, the

revenue-collection agency of the State,

is required to conduct "`routine'' annual

audits in order to verify the truth of the

monthly reports.

David M. Fishlow, executive director

of the ACLU, said "we reluctantly

comply with the law, and I dutifully

sign the `employer's report' every

month, though it seems to me that

requiring us to list every bill in which

the ACLU is interested intrudes upon

our constitutional right to engage in the

political process, violates ous right to

privacy, and infringes upon our

continued on page 2

- October 1977 |

aciu news

LEGAL

by David M. Fishlow

Executive Director

First Amendment

- it's for Nazis too

_ Earl Raab, ACLU member and a real

friend of the Bill of Rights, wrote a

column recently in the San Francisco

Jewish community newspaper in-

dicating some discomfort with -

though he did not directly object to -

the decision of the Illinois Division of

the ACLU to represent a Nazi group in

Skokie.

_ Mr. Raab felt such an action was

inconsistent with other ACLU

positions, pointing to the Bakke case

(see page 1) and a recent situation in

which I wrote a letter to a San Francisco

. television station objecting to its having

allowed a local Nazi to spout the old

"blood libel" (the one about the Jews

and Christian babies) over the air as

examples of our inconsistency.

`In other words,' Mr. Raab wrote,

"the ACLU is not taking the same `pure

and rigid' Constitutional position in the

Bakke case as it had in the Skokie case.

Or it might be said that the ACLU has

taken rigid (rather than creative)

positions in both cases, but this rigidity

has been for pure Constitutionalism in

Skokie, against pure Constitutionalism

in Bakke. Why?' he asks. Others

have asked, too. Many others. Here in

Northern California we have received

fewer than half a dozen letters of .

complaint over the Skokie case, but the -

Illinois affiliate has received nearly

2,000 resignations from its mem-

bership.

I believe that the ACLU is acting

consistently and that the Illinois had no

choice but to take the Nazi parade

permitcase. |

When I wrote to a TV station

criticizing its editorial judgment in

allowing a Nazi to say, unchallenged,

that Christian children disappeared

from the streets during certain Jewish

holiday periods, I began my letter by

saying, more or less, "`the ACLU is not -

_ about to tell you what you legally must

or must not publish, but your position

of influence in this community gives you

a concomitant responsibility to work for

good race relations,' and soon...

If, on the other hand, some group

offended by the remarks had tried to

_take legal action against the station, the

ACLU might take a good hard look at

such a threat to the station's free

"press"' rights.

Throughout the history of the civil

rights movement, local officials sought

to limit the right of blacks to

demonstrate peacably because their

demand for equal protection of the laws

was so unpalatable to the local

majority, it could not be expected to

tolerate such demonstrations. The mere

presence of black people demanding,

say, the right to vote, was intolerable

provocation. . . fighting words.

The ACLU objected then, and ob-

jects now, to any system which seeks to

regulate free speech by giving the

- audience the right to determine what

may be said.

There are all kinds of `"`fighting

words" in our society. Unless we want

to turn over to the government - any

branch: legislative, judicial, executive

- the right to determine which

philosophies may be expressed, and

which not, then we must insist upon the

right of all peacably to demonstrate and

to be protected against violence.

Even the Nazis. - .

And it is not enough to say "`let them

hire their own lawyers.'' In fact, the

ACLU lawyers representing them are

volunteers, but even if they weren't, we

frequently need to remind ourselves

that our client is not the Nazis, it's the

Bill of Rights. And when there is an

attack on those rights - judicial

validation of the heckler's veto, is, I

assure you, a very real attack - we, the

ACLU, must defend. As Aryeh Neier,

national executive director, put it,

"Civil liberties is the antithesis of

Nazism. Perhaps that explains why we

defend free speech for Nazis. We don't

share their values."

Political

Practices

Subpoena

continued from page I

freedom of speech and association.

Nevertheless, we comply and file every

month."'

"Now, however,'' Fishlow said, ``we

have an added problem with the so-

called `routine audit.' Apparently

_ everybody who hires a lawyer or other

representative to represent his interests

in Sacramento is supposed to give up

every vestige of privacy.

"Rather than asking for specific

vouchers of other proofs to verify our

reports, the FITB subpoena demands

access to all the records in our office,

`including but not limited to' our

personal appointment books, all our

correspondence with the attorney

general's office, and so on and so on.

_ "We won't do it," he said. "In this

case civil liberties begin at home."

Staff members whose records were

subpoenaed were Charles Marson,

former legal director who only oc-

casionally lobbied on behalf of the

ACLU during 1976, legislative

representative Brent Barnhart, and his

then assistant, Mary Willans-Izett.

"Our lobbying records and financial

books are completely in order," Bar-

nhart said,

reasonable requests that we verify our

monthly reports. But we refuse as free

citizens to give a fishing license to a

government agency which allows it to

sort through our records which affect

our clients, ACLU members, and

contributors, and make random inquiry

concerning the way we exercise our

freedom of speech."'

The initial hearing on the attorney

general's petition was held on July 14.

Defendants briefs will be submitted this |

month with a full hearing scheduled for

November 15, 1977.

_. thas

"and we don't object to -

Bakke to High C ourt coniidied from page 1

facts which will make it difficult for the

high court to resolve the underlying

constitutional issues.

Those underlying constitutional

conflicts were also difficult for the

ACLU, which vigorously debated the

issue of "`affirmative action," long

before Alan Bakke applied to Medical

School at-U.C. Davis. =

Throughout the lively debates

questions were raised by many ACLU -

Board members regarding the conflict

between the 14th Amendment's

promise - that all individuals should

be treated equally - vs. the fact that

affirmative action programs may treat

some people unequally. |

What emerged from _ those

discussions was a policy - and more

importantly - a realization that, "the

major civil liberties issue still facing the

United States is the elimination, root

and branch, of all vestiges of racism."'

As the ACLU declared in a 1973 policy

resolution,

"The root concept of the

principle of non-discrimination ts

that individuals should be treated

individually, in accordance with

their personal merits,

achievements and potential, and

not on the basis of the supposed

attributes of any class or caste

with which they may be iden-

tified. | However, when

discrimination - and par-

ticularly when discrimination in

employment and. education -

been long and _ widely

practiced against a particular

class, it cannot be satisfactorily

eliminated merely by the

prospective adoption of neutral,

`color-blind' standards for

selection among the applicants

for available jobs or educational

programs. Affirmative action is

required to overcome the han-

dicaps. imposed by | past

discrimination of this sort; and,

at the present time, affirmative

action is especially demanded to

increase the employment and the

educational opportunities of

racial minorities."

When the U.S. Supreme Court

decided to hear the Bakke case, ACLU

submitted a friend-of-the-court brief on

the side of the University of California.

In a joint brief, written largely by S.F.

cooperating attorney Sanford Jay

Rosen, and filed on behalf of the ACLU

of Northern California, the Southern

have

_ throughout the land.

California affiliate and the national

office, ACLU argues that it is

"generations too late' to insist that

"under no circumstances should we

abide selection processes in which race

counts in the calculus. That notion of

neutrality" could only serve as a

"preserver of the status quo," the brief

maintains.

"If the overriding purpose of

the Fourteenth Amendment

is...to protect minorities, it

would be a cruel irony for the

[Supreme] Court to turn that

shield into a weapon against state

governmental efforts to redress

culmulative racial injustice."' -

U.C. students' protest button

Whether or not the Court will agree

with the ACLU's argument is of course

unknown, but one fact is clear - any

broad decision in the Bakke case will

enormous gone' ductces

-A broad decision in support of Bakke

will seriously interfere with the af-

firmative action programs we support.

On the other hand, an equally broad

decision in favor of the University's

position will lead to organized op-

position similar to that we now see on

the abortion, equal rights amendment,

gay rights and busing issues.

If we have learned anything in the 23

years since the. U.S. Supreme Court

proclaimed, in its historic decision in

Brown v. Board of Education, that

"separate is inherently unequal,'' it is

that we cannot look to the courts alone

to solve all of society's problems.

Sweeping decisions do not, necessarily,

pave the way to a just society: obviously

a simple declaration that segregation

was unconstitutional was not enough to

end it. Real remedies have to be found.

The ACLU's Bakke brief makes it clear

that, "the United States cannot remedy

the egregious wrongs that blight the

nation's history by leaving the victims of

racism where Brown v. Board of

Education found them."

S

8 issues a year, monthly except bi-monthly in January-February, M. arch-April,

July-August and November-December ,

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, California

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Warren Saltzman, Chairperson David M. Fishlow, Executive Director

Dorothy Ehrlich, Editor

Publication Number 018040

814 Mission St. - Ste. 301, San Francisco, California 94103 - 777-4545

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

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

LEGISLATIVE

`Losing our grip'

in Sacramento

By Brent Barnhart

Legislative Representative

At this writing, the true half-way

point in the

Legislature has not been reached. Given

the past two years' performance, it is

never too safe to assume that Jerry

Brown will either sign or veto any

measure. So any complete half-way

wrapup is risky until the Governor has

had his say.

However, whatever the final tally, for

ACLU this session the theme is a sad

one. Like Rocky we're still on our feet,

and we'll go the distance, but to

summarize 1977 in any other way than

that we got clobbered on the big ones, is

to ape the Joseph Alsop columns which

insisted that the Tet Offensive was

actually an American victory.

The Death Penalty was the headliner

loss; the Governor's transmogrification

of SB 42 from a reasonable compromise

into his own Rosemary's Baby; the

Omnibus Privacy Act which finally

avoided a Governor's veto bears more

resemblance to an "official secrets act'';

but the most disturbing message this

session is more subtle. Despite an

improved lobbying effort in 1977-the

reunified ACLU/NU and ACLU/SC

Legislative Office, and the lobbying

presence of the State Public Defender's

Office-as to vital criminal justice

issues, we're losing our grip.

There were clear ACLU victories this.

year. Gary Hart's student suspension ~

bill, codifying the due process rights -

guaranteed in Goss v. Lopez was a

winner. Senator Peter Behr's medical

privacy bill cleared the Senate, and its

prospects for clearing the Assembly

next year look very good. Bad packages

dealing with abortion, public inebriates

and juvenile status offenders (truants

and runaways) were killed or at least

stopped temporarily.

Abortion rights held in abeyance

1977-78 California -

the -

But none of those `victories' in-

volved criminal justice issues except for

the juvenile status offender bill, and

that bill was stopped in the Senate

Finance Committee! Similarly, the

terrorist threats bill was shorn of a

substantial portion of its un-

constitutionality-but in Assembly

Revenue and Taxation-not in Criminal

Justice which waved it through, free

speech be damned.

Throughout the past 15 years, it has

been the assumption of virtually

everyone in the Legislature that ACLU

had an enormous impact on the

Assembly Criminal Justice Committee.

Cole Blease, Paul Halvonik, Chuck

Marson and Joe Remcho served as

prime devil's advocates in that Com-

mittee for all legislation that sought to

- expand law enforcement discretion, and

enhance government power to invade

individuals' fundamental rights.

Now, however, that neat system has

begun to come unglued. Evelle

Younger, the District Attorneys

Association and the Peace Officers

Association have hammered at the

Committee for years, crying that it is

the deathbed of all legislation which

would eliminate crime in California,

and it now appears that the Committee

is succumbing to the pressure.

From where we sit, that weakening

results from a number of factors. For

one thing, the Governor has suc-

cessfully defused and_ short-circuited

Criminal Justice ~

whenever he felt specific legislation was

necessary to enhance his tough law and

order image. However, the most telling

flaw in the alloy appears to be the fact

that no one really cares a whole lot

anymore.

The war in Vietnam is over; peace

demonstrators are no longer being

clubbed in Century City; and overt

continued on page 4

~ Committee -

October 1977 |

aclu news

Strategy planned to defeat S. 1437

Northern California opponents of -

Senate Bill One regrouped last month

to begin plans to defeat, or to

drastically amend Senate Bill 1437, the

Criminal Code Reform Act of 1977-a

direct descendant of S. 1.

According to Frank Wilkinson,

Speaking to the reorganized `Coalition

Against S. 1," civil libertarians in

California have a strategic lobbying role

to play in this national effort to stop S.

1437. Wilkinson emphasized the need

to persuade Senator Alan Cranston,

majority whip of the Senate, to take a

strong position against the most

repressive features of the bill.

Wilkinson, the Director of the

National Committee Against Repressive

Legislation, and a member of the

`ACLU of Southern California's Board

of Directors, told the San Francisco

audience that "after a year or more of

public outcry against the passage of S.

1, and the final demise of the bill in

Committee, progressive forces were

hopeful that the new Carter ad-

ministration would take a strong stand

against any dangerous legislation of this

kind. Carter took a strong stand against

S. 1 during his Presidential campaign,"

he declared, ``but since S. 1437 has

been introduced in the Senate he has

not made a single statement about it."'

Features of the bill which have

sparked the renewed interest in this

second attempt to reform the criminal

code include:

e denying citizens the ecat to

`demonstrate' within 200 feet of a

Federal courthouse. .

(R) granting any Federal employes the

authority to disperse a gathering, or

forbid picketing or leafletting whenever

in his or her judgement there is a risk of

injury to person or property. . .

e forbidding activites which would

"obstruct military recruitment or in-

duction" which could include picketing

in front of an induction center or

counseling a conscientious objector not

to register for the draft.

Unlikely co-authors of S. 1437,

continued on page 4

Hatch Act chills campaign

Government employees are free to

participate in local campaigns, ac-

cording to a memo prepared by ACLU

Executive Director David Fishlow and

sent to 116 candidates campaigning for

election to the San Francisco Board of

Supervisors this fall.

Federal employees are barred by the

Hatch Act from certain kinds of

partisan political activities on the state

and national level, but the Act leaves

them free to participate as actively as

they wish in non-partisan, local elec-

tions such as the current campaign in _

San Francisco,'' Fishlow declared.

State and local employees are under

virtually no restrictions, he noted,

except that they are barred from

soliciting campaign contributions from

other city or state employees, and they

are not permitted to politic in uniform.

Fishlow said the memo was prepared

after a number of candidates and

potential supporters called the ACLU

for information on the subject.

"We are distressed that so many U.S.

citizens are reluctant to exercise their

constitutional rights because of con-

fusion on this subject," Fishlow said.

"When the old California equivalent of

the Hatch Act was repealed in 1976,

that was a great step forward. We

-would like to see the Hatch Act itself

repealed so that Federal employees |

could more fully exercise their rights.

But until it is, it should at least be

properly understood by the people it.

regulates."'

U.S. Postal Service, Statement of Ownership, Management and Cir-

culation (Required by 39 U.S.C. 3685)

1. Title of Publication: ACLU News. 2. Date of Filing: September 21,

1977 3. Frequency of issue: Monthly, except bi-monthly January-

February, March-April, July-August, November-December. 3a. No. of

issues Published Annually: 8. 3b. Annual Subscription Price: 50 cents.

4. Location of Known Office of Publication: 814 Mission Street, Suite 301,

Recent actions taken by the U.S. Congress,

President Carter and the U.S. Supreme Court have

rendered the right to obtain an abortion almost

meaningless for poor women. In California, rich and

poor alike are currently afforded the right to safely

terminate a pregnancy. The decision to continue

funding abortions as state Medi-Cal regulations have

always required, despite the end of Federal aid,

directly results from Governor Jerry Brown's position

that, "high income people in this society have always

been able to obtain an abortion. ..if abortion is

wrong, it is wrong for everyone." The Legislature

could, however, change all that.

Urgency legislation has already been introduced in

the Assembly which would delete the provision which

funds abortions from the Medi-Cal law. AB 2063,

introduced by Assembly member Eugene Chappie (D-

Yuba City), is, according to ACLU Legislative

Representative Brent Barnhart, ``just the beginning of

a series of drastic measures.' It will not receive

consideration until January, 1978.

The most recent ACLU count shows that since the

1976 Hyde Amendment (federal legislation which

prohibits federal funds to pay for abortions) went into

effect in late August, only nine states, including

California, are attempting to continue to provide

abortions for women who depend upon Medicaid for

all medical services.

A 1977 House version of the Hyde amendment

prohibits federal Medicaid to pay for abortion, except

when the life of the mother is at stake. The Senate has

adopted a more liberal restriction, permitting

payment whenever a doctor determines that abortion

is medically necessary or where a woman is the victim

of rape or incest. The final version of the Hyde

amendment has not been determined as House and

Senate conferees have yet to reach an agreement as to

the extent of the restrictions.

Although the Senate's proposed restrictions are

severely discriminatory, any further compromise, such

`as the House version, would be intolerable, according

to the ACLU's Washington office. In the meantime

the House has reaffirmed its rigid restrictions

bringing House-Senate conferees back to the con-

ference table as the ACLU News goes to press. |

With only one exception, Donald H. Clausen (R-

Santa Rosa), Northern California's entire

Congressional delegation voted against the Hyde

Amendement. U. S. Senators S. I. Hayakawa and

Alan Cranston both voted in favor of the defeated

amendment introduced by Senator Robert Packwood

(D-Ohio) to permit the use of federal funds for

abortions.

The fate of state funding in California will not be -

determined before the 1977-1978 legislative session

resumes in January. During this recess support of

Governor Brown's action to continue state funding of

abortions must be communicated to his office, and to

Assemblymembers and State Senators.

San Francisco, CA 94103. 5. Location of the Headquarters or General

Business Offices of the Publishers: 814 Mission Street, Suite 301, San

Francisco, CA 94103. 6. Names and Complete Addresses of Publisher,

Editor, and Managing Editor: Publisher: American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California, 814 Mission Street, Suite 301, San Francisco, CA.

94103. Editor: Dorothy M. Ehrlich, 814 Mission Street, Suite 301, San

Francisco, CA 94103. Managing Editor: None. 7. Owner: American Civil

Liberties Union of Northern California, Inc. (no stock holders), 814

Mission Street, Suite 301, San Francisco, CA 94103. 8. Known Bond-

holders, Mortgages, and Other Security Holders Owning or Holding 1

percent or more of the Total Amount of Bonds, Mortgages or Other

Securities:

None. 9. For completion by Nonprofit Organizations

Authorized to Mail at Special Rates: Not applicable. 10. Extent and

Nature of Circulation:

Printing

12 month average Sept., 1977

A. Total No. Copies Printed 17,375 16,500

B. Paid Circulation

1. Sales through Dealers,

Carriers, Street Vendors and

Counter Sales NONE NONE

2. Mail Subscriptions 15,678 15,706

C. Total Paid Circulation 15,678 15,706

D. Free distribution by Mail,

Carrier or Other Means,

Samples, Complimentary, and

Other Free Copies 539 62

E. Total Distribution 16,217 15,768

F. Copies Not Distributed 4

1. Office Use, Left-over, ;

Unaccounted, Spoiled after

1,158 732

2. Returns from News Agents NONE NONE

17,375 16,500

G. Total

11. | Certify that the statements made by me above are correct and

complete.

/s/David M. Fishiow

12. For Completion by Publishers Mailing at the Regular Rates: 39

U.S.C. 3626 provides in pertinent part: ``No person who would have been

entitled to mail matter under former section 4359 of this title should mail

such matter at the rates provided under this subsection unless he files

annually with the Postal Service a written request for permission to mail

matter at such rates.'

In accordance with the provisions of this statute, | hereby request

permission to mail the publication named in item 1 at the phased postage

rates presently authorized by 39 U.S.C. 3626.

By: /s/ David M. Fishlow

American Civil Liberties Union

_ of Northern California, Inc.

i

eA

_ October 1977

aclu news

CHAPTERS

Berkeley-Albany-

Kensington

The annual meeting of the

Berkeley/Albany/Kensington Chapter

will take place the last week in

November. The topic will be "`the status

of undocumented aliens-their civil

rights." Further details will be an-

nounced in the next issue of ACLU

News. Election of members to the

- Board of Directors will be held at that

time.

Persons who wish to be nominated to

the Board may petition to be on the

ballot. A petition must be signed by 15

Chapter members and must be mailed

to the B.A.K. Chapter-P.O. Box 955,

Berkeley, Ca. 94701-by October 14.

. Gay rithts

Brent Barnhart, ACLU Legislative

Advocate in Sacramento, at the Sep-

tember 15th chapter meeting talked to

an overflow crowd of more than 100

ACLU members about current

legislation as it affects gay rights. The

membership also approved new chapter

by-laws at this meeting.

State Senator John Briggs' Initiative.

directed against teachers' rights, will be

the subject of the Chapter's October

meeting, to be co-sponsored with the

Unitarian Universalist Gay Caucus.

This meeting, at 7:30 p.m., on Thurs-

day October 20th at the Unitarian

Center (Franklin at Geary in San

Francisco), will present a _ panel

providing information concerning the

Briggs' Initiative.

Mt. Diablo

The Mt. Diablo Chapter will have its

-Annual Meeting on Sunday night, Oct.

23rd at the Willows Theater, 1975

Diamond Blvd., Concord (off Freeway

680 at Willow Pass Exit) A 7 pm

reception will precede the 8 pm

meeting.

Featured speakers will be David

Fishlow, ACLUNC Executive Director,

with an update on "Civil Liberties

Today," and Nicholas C. Arguimbau,

attorney, speaking on the state of the

suit against the County's proposed new

jail.

Ballots have been mailed out and the

election of the board of directors of the

Mt. Diablo Chapter will be held.

Candidates include: Clarence

Andirson, David Bortin, Johnson and

Louise Clark, Joe Disch, Miriam

DuPace, Helen Grinstead, Bill Higham,

Pam Hulse, Jim Hupp, Cleo Morales,

Guyla Ponomareff and Sari and

Zachary Stadt. There is room on the

ballot for three write-in votes. Guyla

Ponomareff has also been nominated as

Chapter representative.

For further information,

phone Louise Clark, 254-4523.

please

Sonoma

A special auction, featuring the

works of local Sonoma County artists _

will be postponed until the December

dinner. ACLU members are urged to

plan to purchase Christmas gifts at this

important annual event.

The next Sonoma County Board

meeting will be held at 7:30 p.m., 604

College, Santa Rosa, on October 20. All

members are welcome to attend.

"annual

Oakland

A woman phones, frightened that her

landlord will evict her because her son

gets into fights with the neighbors. A

man calls because his employer insists

that he take a lie detector test to

"prove" he is not shop-lifting. These

are typical of the calls that come into

the Oakland Chapter's _ answering

service from people wanting help.

Volunteers respond to the calls, and

refer those people with issues involving

civil liberties to the legal panel for

assistance. Other callers are directed to

sources more appropriate to their

needs. Right now more volunteers are

desperately needed. If you would like to

help with this interesting and valuable

program, or would like more in-

formation, call 534-2258. Leave your

name and number, and a volunteer will

return your call!

This month the Chapter will join

several other community organizations,

including the Oakland League of

Women Votes, in shared offices known

as A Central Place. A Central Place is

located on the third floor of the Clorox

building at 12th and Broadway in

downtown Oakland. We will have desk

space, files, and access to office

equipment. Even more important, we

will have an opportunity to share in-

formation with other groups of con-

cerned citizens and have a place to

display literature and meet the public,

so that more people will become in-

formed about the ACLU.

The next Board meeting will be

October 5, 8 p.m., at A Gentnt Place.

San Francisco

David Fishlow, Executive Director of

ACLU-NU will be the principal speaker

at the San Francisco Chapter's AN-

NUAL MEETING SUNDAY OC-

FOBER.-16; -1971,..3 P.Me -at

FIREMEN'S FUND AUDITORIUM,

3333 California Street. Mr. Fishlow's

topic will be "THE RIGHT TO BE

WRONG - Defending the Indefen-

sible."'

Mr. Fishlow will discuss new and

emerging threats to First Amendment

values and some of the unpopular

causes which ACLU defends because of

its primary and historic commitment to

the First Amendment.

Bring your questions, bring your

friends and plan to attend this

important meeting.

_ Additional program highlights:

e Election of members to the

Board of Directors

e Summary of the year's activities.

According to the by-laws of the

Chapter ``a member of the Chapter who .

wishes to nominate a member for Board

membership may do so no later than 20

days before the annual meeting with the

~ consent of the nominee. Such nominee

shall be submitted to the Board of

Directors at least. 10 days before the

meeting and shall be ac-

companied by a SO word biography

prepared by the nominee. The list of

nominations shall be presented to the

full membership for elections at the

October annual meeting."

HELP

Lend a hand to help ACLU.

Immediate openings for volunteers!

Contact Deborah Boyce at 777-4880.

Marin

The Marin County chapter has -

established a telephone answering

system for citizens who seek in-

formation about their constitutional

rights or about activities of the ACLU.

The number is: 457-4601. An answering

service operator will receive the inquiry

and a member of the Marin chapter

board will return the call.

The September meeting of the Marin

chapter was addressed by an attorney

representing residents of houseboats in

_ Waldo Point harbor and by an attorney

for the investors who seek to develop

that controversial facility in Sausalito.

The chapter board is trying to deter-

mine whether there are any civil

liberties issues involved in_ this

prolonged and very complex conflict.

Over 300 protestors, including many

members of the Marin chapter, helped

to organize and turned out for an anti-

death penalty rally at San Quentin

prison on August 23rd. The demon-

stration was sponsored by the

California Coalition Against the Death

Penalty.

The recent establishment of a Gay

Rights chapter in Northern California

has been a subject of some discussion at

several meetings of the Marin board.

While some members approve the

inauguration of a Gay Rights chapter,

others have expressed concern about

the exclusivity of special interest

groups, about a growing tendency

toward subcultural fragmentation in

American society and about the

dangers of an organizational precedent

that now has been set.

S. 1437 continued on page 3

Arkansas Senator John McClellan and

Massachusetts Senator Edward

Kennedy are working for quick Senate

passage of S. 1437. `In their haste,"

Wilkinson claimed, "`they permitted

ACLU's National Director Aryeh Neier -

and ACLU Attorney John Shattuck

only three minutes to testify before the

Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on

Criminal Laws and Procedures." The

bill was unanimously approved by that

Subcommittee and is now before the

full Senate Judiciary Committee with

preparations being made for a Senate

vote on the bill as early as January,

1978.

Wilkinson predicted that the bill

would be approved by the Senate

Judiciary Committee, but claimed that

with the powerful leadership of Senator

Cranston, the bill could be rejected by

the full Senate.

WHAT YOU CAN DO

TO STOP S. 1437:

e Write to Senators Alan

- Cranston and S.I. Hayakawa

(Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C. 20510) and

urge opposition to S. 1437 in its

current form.

e Order a copy of S. 1437 from

your Senator.

e Write to the ACLU

Washington, D.C. office (600

Pennsylvania Avenue, _ S.E., .

Washington, D.C. 20003) and

request a copy of "Federal

Criminal Codification in the 95th

Congress."'

| ~ psychiatrist's

Mid-Peninsula

TWO BIG EVENTS IN OCTOBER

The annual meeting of the Mid-

Peninsula Chapter will be on Thursday,

October 20, 1977, at 7:00 p.m. in the

Kresge Auditorium at the Stanford

University Law School. The guest

speaker will be Justice Sidney Feinberg,

recently appointed to the California

Court of Appeals. Members and the

public are cordially invited to attend.

Refreshments will be served.

The Mid-Peninsula Chapter proudly

announces its FIRST ANNUAL CIVIL

LIBERTIES RUMMAGE SALE. It

_will be held on Saturday, October 29,

1977 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at

1805 Cowper in Palo Alto. All proceeds

will go to the local chapter so it can

continue its important activities in

defending civil liberties. For con-

tributions or questions, call 328-8139.

Sacramento

Report

continued from page 3

police action against demonstrators,

marijuana smokers, and the youth

counter-culture is more subdued. John

Knox votes for bills he never would

have brooked in years passed, and sighs

that, "`times have changed;" Alan

Sieroty has gone over to the Senate;

Speaker Leo McCarthy is concerned

about. criminal justice, but it's not

especially high on his list of priorities;

and the best of the liberal assem- -

blymembers like Willie Brown, Howard

Berman, Barry Keene, Gary Hart, Vic

Fazio, Mike Gage, and Maxine Waters,

are up to their ears in other matters of

compelling interest.

Our gloom this September stems

partly from the bruises of the past

session, but also from what we perceive

to be a steady decline in the alertness of

intelligent citizens to the continuing

threat to their fundamental rights. The

expansion of a mindless bureau-

cracy-swallowing greater authority

and discretion-continues unin-

terrupted.

And particularly with respect to

police and prosecutorial powers, such

expansion seriously threatens the

fragile protections which preserve our ~

individuality and our freedom.

The laws passed this session will not

create martial law on January Ist, but

such measures as the Joe Freitas-Diane

Feinstein terrorist threats bill (SB 923) -

will have telling effect some untold day

in the future when the spores of SB 923

find an enriched medium in which to -

ripen and grow.

In January, the Governor will be back

to push his "court efficiency packages,"'

seeking dispatch to the detriment of

justice; Mentally Disordered Violent

Offender bills will be pushed, giving the

State the authority to imprison people

indefinitely on the basis of a

prediction of dan-

gerousness; expansion in search and |

seizure powers, and in_ electronic

surveillance authority will be back

again.

_ In the past, all these proposals have

been stopped. But this time we have to

ask, does anybody care?