vol. 59, no. 1 (January-February)

Non-PROFIT

ORGANIZATION

U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

Permit No.4424

SAN FRANCISCO, CA

Volume LIX

aclu news

January - February 1995

No. |

1995: What's in Store in Sacramento

by Francisco Lobaco

ACLU Legislative Director

ax cuts that benefit the

wealthy, welfare reform that

hurts the poor, and tough-on-

crime measures that solve nothing -

Governor Wilson has set the political

tone and agenda for the upcoming

legislative year. Having long shed

his compassionate conservative

image with his incessant focus on

crime and immigrants, the Gover-

nor's recent pronouncements put him

squarely within the conservative

ranks of the Republican Party.

Perhaps most troubling,

there will be a well

organized and

orchestrated attack on

affirmative action

programs.

The Governor's recent support

for the elimination of state affirma-

tive action programs assures us that

the politics of divisiveness, so

evident during the recent elections,

Ninth Circuit

Hears Challenge to

_ City Cross

66 his case is brought by Bay

Area religious leaders and

residents, to challenge the

government's display of the largest cross

in the United States, in solitude, in a public

park, on the highest of San Francisco's

seven hills.

"The City's Cross on Mt. Davidson

represents the paradigm of a symbolic

alliance of church and state that is forbid-

den by the religion clauses of the state and

federal Constitutions."

With this statement, ACLU-NC staff

attorney Margaret Crosby presented the

case of Carpenter v. San Francisco to a

three-judge panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals.

"This case illustrates the dual injuries

which result from government entangle-

ment with religion,' Crosby argued.

"The City's huge Cross is a divisive

presence in a pluralistic society. It makes

the Bay Area's many residents of minority

faiths feel diminished and unwelcome, like

outsiders in their own community.

"At the same time, the City justifies its

possession of the Cross by denigrating its

spiritual significance, thus demeaning a

symbol of profound significance to devout

Christians."

The hearing was held in the unusual

setting of Booth Auditorium at Boalt Hall

School of Law on the U.C. Berkeley

will continue through the presidential

elections of 1996.

As Senate President Pro Tem Bill

Lockyer (D-Hayward) noted in

response to the Governor's budget

proposal, "It's essentially a negative

message full of punishments of

people that don't fit his world view.

We're seeing the nasty side of Pete

Wilson, not the constructive, affir-

mative, visionary side."

But the Governor's "nasty"

message - delivered in his

inaugural and State of the State

addresses the first week of January

- falls on much more receptive ears

in the California Legislature - and

he knows it. For the first time in 25

years the Republicans obtained a

majority (41-39) in the Assembly.

Approximately 30 members of the

Assembly Republicans are aligned

with the far right of the Republican

party. While the Senate continues

nominally Democratic, with a bare'

majority of 21 Democrats, it remains

an institution dominated by conserv-

ative Republicans and Democrats.

This new legislative reality

comes at a time when many of our

friends in the Legislature who for

years had championed civil liberties

already felt compelled to steer to the

political right on fundamental issues.

The ongoing political squabbles and

the 40-40 split between Willie

Brown and Jim Brulte for the Assem-

The Mt. Davidson cross is the tallest

cross in the United States and it sits on

public land on the highest hill in San

Francisco. Human figure at bottom

left of cross shows scale.

campus, because the case was selected to

be heard on "Ninth Circuit Day" at the law

Continued on page 6

bly Speakership (Republican Assem-

blymember Paul Horcher became an

independent and voted for Mr.

Brown) may make for fascinating

political theater, but it does not mask

the fact that the Legislature will be an

even less receptive institution for

civil liberties and civil rights.

Civil liberties will face attacks on

many fronts. It is certain that we will

continue to see more tough-on-crime

legislation. Despite the passage in

1994 of over 100 bills increasing .

criminal penalties, the Governor has

already proclaimed more anti-crime

legislation. We expect assaults on the

procedural constitutional rights of

criminal defendants, including

habeas corpus reforms. It is also

likely that expansion of the death

penalty law will be enacted.

Legislative assaults on the poor,

immigrants, women and people of

color will escalate. Welfare reform

in its various draconian manifesta-

tions will be high on the agenda,

especially if Congress eliminates

entitlement programs and gives more

flexibility to the states in caring for

the poor. More immigrant-bashing

bills will emerge, despite the passage

of Proposition 187. Bills denying

immigrants access to basic goods and

services not included in Proposition

187 are likely to appear.

Perhaps most troubling, there

will be a well organized and orches-

trated attack on affirmative action

programs. A constitutional amend-

ment, ACA 2 (Richter-R, Chico)

eliminating all voluntary affirmative

action programs in public education,

employment and contracting has

already been introduced. The ACLU

strongly supports affirmative action

programs which are necessary to

combat ongoing discrimination and

ensure equal access to women and

persons of color in the workplace and

educational institutions.

Throughout this upcoming diffi-

cult year, the ACLU will continue to

be the leading advocate on behalf of

civil liberties and civil rights in the

state Legislature. Whether it is the

defense of reproductive rights,

freedom of expression, rights of

immigrants or criminal defendants,

we will maintain a strong and power-

ful voice in the state capital.

2 aclu news

January - February 1995

Why Curfews Won't Work

_by Alan L. Schlosser

ACLU-NC Managing Attorney

he proliferation of proposals for

[fesse laws throughout northern

California is a worrisome trend.

Curfews have just been implemented in

San Jose and Palo Alto, and Mayor Jordan

is proposing to reinstate the curfew in San

Francisco. While a curfew for teenagers

may be politically useful as a campaign

tool, as a crime fighting tool, there is

simply no evidence that it will work.

Will a curfew reduce crime and

increase public safety? Past experience

and common sense say no. The police

already have the legal tools to detain and

arrest teenagers involved in drug dealing or

other serious criminal activities, as well as

less serious offenses such as public drunk-

enness or disturbing the peace. The only

persons whose behavior will be affected by

a curfew will be law-abiding minors, who

will be deprived of their right to be in

public at night for innocent and lawful

proposes, and parents, who will be

deprived of the right to make a fundamen-

tal decision about their child's upbringing.

Will a curfew protect teens as propo-

nents argue? Violation of a curfew law is a

criminal offense, and results in teenagers

being stopped, arrested, sometimes

handcuffed, searched, placed in police

wagons and transported to a police station.

There are already laws on the books that

allow police officers to protect minors truly

in danger by taking them into temporary

custody without treating them as criminals

and leaving a trail of arrest records.

Is a curfew a good use of scarce police

The only persons whose behavior will

be affected by a curfew will be law-

abiding minors, who will be deprived of

their right to be in public at night for

innocent and lawful proposes.

resources? Police officers who are check-

ing the ID's of every person who appears

to be under 17 walking a dog late at night

- and spending several hours transporting

and processing violators - are police

officers not available for dealing with more

serious offenses .

A curfew law will inevitably be

enforced selectively, and the targets will be

minority youth, youngsters who choose to

dress in unconventional fashion or who

look like they don't belong in a certain

neighborhood. This discriminatory

enforcement led us to challenge in 1988

San Francisco's teenage curfew law. Our

clients were typical of the youth who have

their first experience with police enforce-

ment when their mere presence in public

Rick Rocamora

becomes a crime: -

e An African-American high school

student was arrested while walking with

his friends to Pier 39. He observed several

whites, who appeared to be minors, who

were not stopped. He was handcuffed to

his friend, searched, transported to Central

Station in a paddy wagon, and held for

three hours.

e A San Francisco teenager was

stopped at night while waiting for a bus,

questioned and frisked, and detained for

several hours at Ingleside station.

Incidents like these led the San

Francisco Police Commission in 1990 to

recommend that the city scrap its teenage

curfew law. The Commission found that

the law "cannot be enforced fairly" and

"will simply multiply problems the Police

Department already faces." The Board of

Supervisors agreed, resulting in the

adoption of the current law which only

applies to minors 13 and under. More

recently, Oakland's City Attorney and

Police Chief both recommended against

the adoption of a youth curfew, finding that

it would diminish patrol officer availability

and otherwise burden police resources

without increasing public safety.

Political leaders should be listening to

these analyses, rather than grandstanding

at the expense of teens and family auton-

omy.

Curfew laws, like some other tough

sounding anti-crime strategies, mask the

underlying causes of crime by diverting the

public's attention away from real crime

prevention, like enriched educational

programs or meaningful job opportunities.

They also divert the police's attention from

more serious crime problems.

Ultimately, these curfew laws do not

make us any more safe. They only make us

LETTERS TO EDITOR

Fair Housing/Free

Speech

In the September/ October

ACLU News, your staff attorney

concludes that the decision by the

HUD not to pursue a complaint

against three neighbors who

vehemently opposed the conver-

sion of a motel to a home for the

homeless persons was a `victory

for the First Amendment, without

being a defeat for fair housing".

She is wrong.

Were Ms. Brick on the front-

lines of fair housing work where

we work, she would know that

each time neighbors use their

political muscle and wealth to

prevent the siting of housing for

the homeless, equal housing

opportunity loses. So do the

people who desperately need

this housing and so does the

community.

Often, the group home

provider loses as well. In Marin

County, a group home provider

took six developmentally disabled

teenagers next door to introduce

them to their prospective new

neighbor. The neighbor saw them

coming up the driveway and

called 91 |. Four of the six young-

sters were Black. The group

home provider soon found that

the wealthy neighbors had gone

to the state, who decided to

investigate its license. The

provider withdrew from the

purchase of the house. They are

not likely to continue to seek

appropriate houses for those that

society has asked them to house

and care for.

In Berkeley, the neighbors at

the Bel Air site described the

prospective homeless residents

publicly as substance abusers and

mentally ill. In addition, they

approached the lender of the

project in their efforts to stop the

project. og

This scenario is being played

out every day in the Bay Area, as

project after project is defeated by

rampant NIMBYismn. Free speech is

not an absolute. VVhen it includes

overt action that acts against the

night to equal housing, it is indeed a

defeat.

Nancy Kenyon

Director, Fair Housing

Program,

Marin County

ACLU-NC staff counsel Ann

Brick responds:

Ms. Kenyon is absolutely right

when she writes that housing

discrimination is everyone's

business and that when those

who discriminate win, we all lose.

Fighting discrimination, however,

is not inconsistent with defending

basic constitutional values of

freedom of expression and the

right to petition the government.

The First Amendment always

has been and always will be a

two-edged sword. It was the

Imarenes, the speecines, the

leafletting, the letters to the

editor, and the intensive lobbying

of government officials at every

level that led to the passage of fair

housing laws. We cannot deny to

others the right to express a

contrary view if we are to

preserve our own right to work

for social change and justice.

That does not mean,

however, that acts of discrimina-

tion must go unpunished simply

because they are the product of

speech. The Constitution does

not protect a landlord's refusal to

rent, a seller's refusal to sell, or a

lender's refusal to lend when that

refusal is based on discriminatory

considerations, regardless of their

ongin or motivation. Nor does tt

protect a government agency's

refusal to approve a project

because of public pressure that is

rooted in bigotry and bias. What

the Constitution does, and must,

protect is the nght of all citizens to

make their views known to those

who govern them - no matter

how hateful or misguided those

views may be.

The issue Ms. Kenyon raises

- the question of attempts to

influence the actions of third

parties such as lenders - is more

problematic. Discourse on issues

of public concem occurs along a

continuum. Quite clearly there

comes a time when protected

discussion of issues of public

importance crosses the line and

becomes an unlawful inducement

to violate the law. Determining

when that line is crossed Is a not

an easy task, requiring a careful,

sensitive evaluation of the facts

and circumstances of each individ-

ual case.

The difficulty of this evalua-

tion, however, must not deter any

of us from undertaking it. Since the

issuance of the new HUD guide-

lines, we have met with fair housing

advocates In the Bay Area in an

effort to address some of the issues

raised by the guidelines as well as

those raised in Ms. Kenyon's letter.

We plan to continue to work

together on these issues and would

welcome her participation in this

process.

It is perhaps inevitable that at

times we will find a tension

between the need to work

against discrimination and the

need to safeguard First Amend-

ment values. As a result, there will

be times when people of good

will may perceive themselves to

be on opposite sides. When that

happens, the most important

thing is to keep talking to one

another so that we can work

together to reach our mutually

shared goals.

Stop 187

| have a duty to support your

court actions to block Proposition

187 and to enforce Motor Voter in

California. Pete Wilson has

pandered to the most selfish, un-

American venom among us. He

seems to be winning.

Outraged pro-| 87ers

shrieked at local school districts

for initially joining in court actions

to block the measure's enforce-

ment. One of their beefs was that

publicly funded agencies shouldn't

be allowed to block the will of the

people. But if nobody receiving

public money has the right to

defend the constitutional rights of

citizens (and/or non-citizens)

against unjust laws, we're heading

toward the "tyranny of the major-

ity' of which Calhoun warned.

Thank God there are groups

like ACLU, not receiving public

money that can qualify to challenge

an unjust law like | 87.

You and your allies may be the

only ones with enough backbone

to stand up and say NO to this

vicious assault on democracy and

civil nghts.

Sam Jones

San Jose

less free. @

PUBLIC PRAYER

As regards the Contra Costa

County Board of Supervisors.

having prayers said at Board

meetings, this is a violation of

church-state separation according

to the First Amendment. It says, in

part, `Congress shall make no law

respecting an establishment of

religion, or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof.."' The establish-

ment clause means freedom from

religion; the free exercise clause

means freedom of religion.

The place for prayer is in the

churches, in the church-schools, in

the home, and as It says in

Matthew, chapter 6 verse 6, "enter

into thy closet'.

Our elected governmental

bodies violate the Constitution

which they are sworn to uphold

when they allow prayers at tax-

supported government functions.

This is abominable. They violate

their oath of office, discredit

themselves, and betray the trust of

the citizens who elected them.

Joseph P. Disch

Pleasant Hill

aclu news 3

January - February 1995

66 hen I first entered Congress

thirty-two years ago, I was

the first member of the

House to vote to abolish HUAC. The

Mercury News declared that I would be a

one-term Congressman. We fooled them,

didn't we?"

Speaking at the annual Bill of Rights

Day Celebration on December 4th,

Congressman Don Edwards thanked the

ACLU-NC for honoring him for his more

than three decades of legislating social

Justice in the United States. Edwards was

the recipient of the Earl Warren Civil

Liberties Award for his leadership role in

the passage of every piece of civil rights

and civil liberties legislation on the Ameri-

can political agenda.

The Celebration, held for the first time

at the Center for the Arts at Yerba Buena

Gardens, was attended by 500 ACLU

members and supporters.

The timing of the event, less than a

month after the election, underscored the

significance of Edwards' contributions to

civil liberties on Capitol Hill - ranging

from the Voting Rights Act to Americans

with Disabilities Act. ACLU-NC Execu-

tive Director Dorothy Ehrlich in her "State

of the Union" address, noted, "Civil liber-

ties are now under siege and so much

depends on us."

The Congress that Edwards is leaving

is now dominated by a mean-spirited

majority who want to turn the clock back

on the rights of the poor, religious freedom,

and civil rights.

Ehrlich warned of the world envisioned

by those who proposed and supported the

anti-immigrant Proposition 187 and the

dangerously shortsighted "Three Strikes

You're Out" initia-

tive. "The 300,000

California school

children who would

be denied a place in

the classroom

because of Proposi-

tion 187 depend on

us. Those locked up

for life under Propo-

sition 184 - which

in Los Angeles is

84% African

American and

Latino men -

depend on us.

"This election

signals that our

work has never been

sO important,"

Ehrlich said, "and

we will be there.

The ACLU will

continue to bring

honor and dignity to

the fight for civil

liberties."

Also honored

was veteran ACLU

activist Howard

Lewis. Lewis, a leader of the Mid-Penin-

sula Chapter and a former affiliate Board

member, was given the Lola Hanzel

Courageous Advocacy Award. The

former real estate broker who spent many

years fighting racial discrimination in

housing in California also had high praise

for the ACLU. "The ACLU is a wonderful

tool for social justice," Lewis noted,

Howard Lewis.

Representative Don Edwards spent more than three decades in Congress fighting for civil liberties and civil rights.

bdwards Sonored at

Rights Day Celebration

Members of the Medea Project shared the lives of incarcerated women in theater, song and dance.

"sometimes a screwdriver and sometimes a

crowbar!"

Sara Bates, Director of American

Indian Contemporary Arts, awarded cash

prizes and citations to San Francisco high

school students who had entered the

Freedom of Expression Art Contest

sponsored by the San Francisco Chapter.

Bates noted that there were over 75 entries

ACLU-NC Chair Milton Estes (r.) presented the Lola Hanzel Award to volunteer

in the visual and written arts

categories this year, indicat-

ing an awareness and a

passion for freedom of

expression among high

school students.

The Celebration was

opened with a powerful

dramatic collage by Cultural

Odyssey's Medea Project.

The dynamic multiracial cast

portrayed in dance, song and

theater the life of women in

and out of prison, violence,

addiction, recovery and

sisterhood.

The program closed with

the danceable Chicano/

Latino rhythms of Dr.

Loco's Rockin Jalapefio

Band, mixing the lyrics of social

movements with salsa, soul, rumba and

R B. Bill of Rights Day Celebrants and

the hardworking event staff took to the

stage and danced, their joyful reflections

mixing with the lights of the Martin

Luther King memorial fountain outside

the Yerba Buena Center.

The 1994 Bill of Rights Day Celebration

was organized by Field Representative Lisa

Leroid David, a senior at Burton High School, exhib-

ited his award-winning drawing in the lobby with the

Freedom of Expression High School Juried Art

Exhibit, sponsored by the San Francisco Chapter.

Maldonado and Field Director Marcia Gallo

and staffed by Jacqueline Bitagon, Stacey

Dyke, Elaine Elinson, Herschel Farbman,

Jean Field, Jennifer Green, Tara Herlocher,

Lisa Levy, Tom Sarbaugh, James Satter,

Eileen Smith, Bernadette Stewart, Zelma

Toro and Steven Zerebecki. @

Bill of Rights Day Celebration

photos by Rick Rocamora

4 aclu news

January - February 1995

(c)

@

1994 -

A Difficult

Year for

Civil

Liberties

`What Was

Proposed,

What

Passed,

What

Failed

he ACLU reviews over a

thousand bills each session

and takes positions on all

those which impact civil

liberties. Here are some of

the major bills on which the ACLU Legisla-

tive office took an active position last

session.

by Francisco Lobaco

ACLU Legislative Director

rights and civil liberties. It was a year

dominated by crime. Hundreds of crime bills

were introduced - most of them draconian in their

scope and intent. The Legislature even held a concur-

rent special session on crime, permitting introduction

of new crime bills late into the session. [A/l bill

numbers with an "x" at the end were part of the special

session on crime. 1 Eventually dozens of "tough on

crime" bills were enacted.

The most sweeping and best known of these bills

was AB 971 (Jones-R, Fresno), the "three strikes and

you're out" legislation enacted early in the year (a

virtually identical law, Proposition 184, was also

approved by the voters in November). The three

strikes law imposes a sentence of 25 years to life upon a

person convicted of any felony who has two previous

convictions for a violent or serious felony. It also

doubles the sentence of a person convicted of any

felony who has a prior serious felony conviction.

Despite knowing that the bill would lock up thousands

of non-violent offenders for life, and eventually cost

the state up to an additional $5.5 billion per year in

criminal justice costs, few legislators exhibited the

political courage to speak out against it.

The truncated legislative history of AB 971

reflected the anti-crime hysteria that infested th

Te was a difficult year in Sacramento for civil

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

AB 971 (JONES-R, FRESNO)

Commonly referred to as the "Three strikes and

you're out" legislation, it is similar to Proposition 184.

This draconian bill, among other things, imposes a 25-

year to life sentence upon a person convicted of any

felony who has two previous convictions for a violent

or serious felony. The bill will cost the state billions of

dollars and do little to solve the crime problem.

ACLU position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

SB 1260 (PresLey-D, RIVERSIDE)

This measure substantially limits the basic rights

granted inmates under the Prisoners' Bill of Rights

enacted 25 years ago. The Department of Corrections

now holds much broader authority over all aspects of

prisoners' lives, including possible repeal of overnight

family visitation.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

SB 41X (PresLey-D, RIVERSIDE)

This bill would have authorized the indefinite

commitment of convicted sex offenders who would be

classified as "sexually violent predators" after termi-

nation of their sentence. The bill is essentially a

preventive detention scheme based on allegations of

future dangerousness and as such, violates substantive

due process.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Public Safety

Committee

AB 3789 (CaALDERA-D, Los ANGELES)

The measure would have authorized police officers

to conduct stops of motorists at designated check-

points within a "firearms emergency area" to engage in

searches for firearms. It did not require the police to

have individualized suspicion or probable cause to

conduct the stop or the search.

ACLU position: Oppose _

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Public Safety

Committee

AB 2500 (ALBy-R, SACRAMENTO)

This bill authorizes the Department of Justice to

create a "900" number allowing members of the public

to call and obtain information on whether an individual

is a registered sex offender. Telephonic dissemination

of criminal justice records will promote abuse and

vigilantism, result in mistaken identification and

increase discrimination against ex-offenders by

entities such as employers, landlords, and insurance

companies.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

Capitol, making rational policy debate on crime issues

Virtually nonexistent.

While public attention focused on the three strike

law, the Legislature was busy passing other crime bi

According to the Assembly Committee on Pub

Safety more than 230 bills on criminal law w

enacted in 1994. Few of these bills focus on prev.

or rehabilitation.

Many of the bills that passed this session had

defeated in previous years. For example, legis

was enacted which reduces the age at which a ju

rational policy

Ebe"eritt WORK eredity of era

forse% of sentence - - tiereby im )

"Reduces tHe ageat whigh a juvenile may be tried as

an adult for the commissiog of various crimes from 16

to 14 years old. The ACEU argues that the juvenile

system is the more appropriate venue for these

children as they are generally less responsible for their

actions and more amenable to rehabilitation than

adults.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 79X (FRAZEE-R, CARLSBAD)

This measure would require the court to suspend

the driving privileges for 6 months of persons

convicted of any controlled substance offense, includ-

ing possession of small amounts of marijuana. It is

popularly known as the "smoke a joint, lose your

license" bill.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 3148 (Katz-D, PANORAMA City)

This bill authorizes the forfeiture of automobiles

driven by persons with a suspended, revoked, or

expired driver's license who have a previous convic-

tion for one of those acts. The broad forfeiture penal-

ties are disproportionate and impact on hundreds of

thousands of Californians and their families who will

have their cars impounded, and subsequently sold.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 150 (Conroy-R, ORANGE)

The measure would authorize the court to order

parents or bailiffs to "paddle" juveniles convicted of

graffiti. The ACLU argued, among other things, that

authorizing beating is a cruel and unusual punishment.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in the Assembly Fiscal

Committe

SB 33X (Kopp-I, SAN FRANCISCO)

The bill would essentially eliminate drug diversion

programs for first time offenders, by requiring defen-

dants to plead guilty before entering a program. Sucha

change frustrates the intent of solving minor drug

offenses outside the criminal justice system.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Public Safety

Committee

AB 2716 (Katz-D, PANORAMA City)

This bill will reduce available work credits for

inmates froin 50% to 15% of sentence (and thereby

substantially increasing sentences) for first time

offenders convicted of "violent" crimes. It had been

_ consistently rejected by the Legislature over the past

several years because of the enormous cost to the

General Fund. Not this year.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

possession of small amounts of marijuana, will now have

heir driving privileges suspended for six months.

p espite this bleak scenario, the ACLU was successful

al unconstitutional and mean-spirited

posals. Our lobbying efforts defeated

y bills that were introduced. We also

a pped bills sucthas AB 145x (Caldera-D, Los Angeles)

"autho ofizing police p officers to stop motorists at designated

points within z a "firearms emergency area' to search

ifearms without the Fourth Amendment mandate of

idijalized euspicien or probable cause; and, AB 150x

AB 3197 (KNOWLEs-R, Cancion PARE: AB

1 7X GlOHNSON-R, FULLERTON), AB 15X

(GOLDsMITH-R, Poway), AB 61X (Conrovy-R,

ORANGE), AB 154X (MounNrTjoy-R, ARCADIA),

SB 1311 (PREsLEyY-D, RiversiDE), SB 1 1X

(LESLIE-R, ROSEVILLE), SB 22X (CALDERON-D,

MONTEBELLO), SB 17X (PRESLEY-D,

RIVERSIDE), SB 21 X (AYALA-D,RANCHO

CUCAMONGA), SB 1835 (CAMPBELL-R, Los

ALTOS) AND AB 1159 (HOGE-R, PASADENA),

AB 1415 (HAYNEsS-R, TEMECULA) -

These bills would have expanded the death penalty in

various ways including situations where a child under 14

years of age or someone over 65 years of age is killed;

where death occurs as a result of a drive-by shooting

whether or not mens rea is present; where a death occurs

from an act the defendant should know creates a great risk

of death to any person; where the killing is committed by a

minor 16 or 17 years of age; and cases where the defendant

is convicted of a felony or attempted felony and the defen-

dant intentionally discharged a firearm - even if no one

dies. The ACLU, of course, opposes the death penalty

under any and all circumstances.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: All bills failed passage in policy committees

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

SB 1269 (WYMAN-R, BAKERSFIELD)

This measure expressly authorizes schools and school

districts to require students to wear uniforms. The bill

significantly interferes with students' rights of free expres-

sion. The ACLU was able to obtain amendments providing

parents the right to opt out of the uniform requirement for

their children.

ACLU Position: Copies

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 501! (BRown-D, SANTA Rosa), SB 1999

(Kopp-I, SAN FRANCISCO)

These similar bills make it a crime for witnesses to sell

their story to the media before the criminal trial is

completed. The bills, introduced as a response to witnesses

in the O.J. Simpson case receiving payment from the

tabloid press, are content-based restrictions of speech that

significantly impede on First Amendment rights.

ACLU Position: Opposed both bills

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 138 (Katz-D, PANORAMA)

This measure would have made it a crime to distribute

to minors any written material that advocates violence

against any person or group because of race, religion, sex,

material or information about heinous crimes to minors,

would have prohibited bookstores from selling to minors

books about the assassination of President Kennedy or

Martin Luther King.

We were also able to scale back the great educational

reform of the 1994 session - school uniforms. SB 1297

(Wyman-R, Bakersfield) was introduced as a bill autho-

rizing schools and school districts to require uniforms. |

We raised concerns regarding the impact on the free

expression rights of students (e.g. the wearing of message

T-shirts). The final version of the statute provides parents

the right to opt out their children from wearing uniforms.

A major disappointment was Governor Wilson's veto

of the domestic partnership legislation, AB 2810 (Katz-D,

Panorama City). Strongly supported by the ACLU and a

broad coalition of senior, religious, and civil rights organi-

zations, the bill would have established a statewide

domestic partnership registry and extended rights regard-

ing conservatorship proceedings, hospital visitation and

wills to domestic partners. But the combination of the fall

elections and the strong opposition from the radical right

was too much for the Governor.

Finally, previewing the next likely "hot" political

issue, we successfully defeated ACA 47 (Richter-R,

Chico) which sought to eliminate all voluntary affirmative

action programs in the state of California in public

employment, education, and contracting. The elimination

of affirmative action programs will be high on the Repub-

lican agenda in the coming year.

etc. The right to hold ideas and advocate those ideas,

however unpopular, is constitutionally protected. The bill

would have prohibited dissemination of history books and

works of literature that are replete with passages that

"advocate" violence against a particular person or group.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Author dropped the bill

AB 3827 (MOUNTJoyY-R, ARCADIA)

This bill would have imposed liability on persons who

create or sell violent video games which subsequently

inspire a minor to injure a third party. The bill violates the

First Amendment and numerous court decisions which

generally bar liability caused by expressive conduct; it

would impose a chilling effect on the production and distri-

bution of protected materials.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Judiciary

Committee

AB 135X (MARTINEZ-D, ALHAMBRA)

The bill creates a mandatory labeling system for all

video and computer games that are sold or rented in

California. Mandatory labeling laws are inherently vague,

and a form of prior restraint which interfere with constitu-

tionally protected freedom of speech.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Author dropped the bill

SB 1297 (WyYMAN-R, BAKERSFIELD)

This measure would have redefined obscene matter by

applying "community" standards instead of "statewide"

standards. Community standards permit local communities

to determine what material is obscene for the whole state.

This imposes a clearly chilling impact on speech.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Senate Judiciary

_Committee

AB 17 (PEAcE-D, CHULA VISTA)

This new law prohibits the sale from vending machines

of materials that contain "harmful matter." The law will

limit access by adults to constitutionally protected materi-

als. The ACLU had blocked passage of this bill for numer-

ous years. Not this year.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 3479 (O'CONNELL-D, SANTA BARBARA)

This measure would impose a sweeping prohibition on

the dissemination of "indecent crime material" or informa-

tion about "heinous crimes" to minors. Clearly violative of

the First Amendment, the bill prohibits e.g., bookstores

selling to minors books about the assassination of JFK or

Martin Luther King.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Public Safety

Committee :

SB 89 (LockyeR-D, HAYWARD)

- This measure sought to decriminalize the right to carry

a knife or dagger that is an integral part of a recognized

aclu news 5

January - February 1995

Paul Anderson

religious practice. The author intended to protect baptized

Sikhs who are required to carry kirpans as part of their

religious practice. The criminal exception is consistent

with the recently enacted federal Religious Freedom

Restoration Act and general religious freedoms. This issue -

is also the subject of an ACLU-NC federal lawsuit,

Cheema v. Thompson, on behalf of three Sikh elementary

school students in the San Joaquin Valley currently

pending in federal court.

ACLU Position: Support

Status: Vetoed by the Governor

CIVIL RIGHTS

AB 2810 (Katz-D, PANORAMA City)

The measure sought to establish a statewide domestic

partnership registry and extend basic rights regarding

conservatorship proceedings, hospital visitation and wills

to domestic partners.

ACLU Position: Support

Status: Vetoed by the Governor

ACA 47 (RICHTER-R, CHICO)

This constitutional amendment would eliminate all

voluntary affirmative action programs in the state of

California in public employment, education and contract-

ing. The legislation is counterproductive in the continuing

efforts to achieve racial and gender equality and would

only exacerbate the lasting effects of discrimination.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Judiciary

Committee

SB 1477 (BERGESON-R, Newport BEACH)

This would have allowed local jurisdictions to impose

more restrictive occupancy standards than permitted under

state law. It would have a discriminatory impact on house-

holds that are disproportionately racial and ethnic minority

families, and likely force large families out of their homes.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Senate Judiciary

Committee

SB 1651 (JOHANNESSEN-R, REDDING)

This bill would have required Medi-Cal providers to

report undocumented aliens seeking emergency health care

to the Immigration and Naturalization Service in order for

the provider to receive rermbursement for treatment.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Senate Health Committee

SB 1955 (ALQuist-D, SAN Jose)

This bill would have required any money withheld

from an undocumented employee for wages for state taxes

be forfeited to the state if the employee is in the state in

violation of federal immigration laws. The bill raised

serious equal protection and due process concerns.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Passed Senate; author dropped bill in

Assembly

AB 70X (Conroy-R, ORANGE)

As introduced, the measure made it a felony for an

undocumented person to attend a college or university.

Subsequent committee amendments instead required

undocumented students to pay out of state tuition regard-

less of the number of years they have resided in California.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Failed passage in Assembly Higher Education

Committee

AB 1045 (ALLEN-R, HUNTINGTON BEACH)

The bill substantially expands the grounds for manda-

tory expulsion (zero tolerance) for students in grades 4 to

12 including, e.g., sale of drugs and threats with a knife. It

eliminates the discretion of local school boards to deter-

mine whether facts of particular case warrants expulsion.

ACLU Position: Oppose

Status: Signed by the Governor

AB 2610 (BRONSHVAG-D, SAN RAFAEL)

Reintroduced again this year, the bill authorizes

counties to establish needle exchange programs in order to

help reduce the risk of HIV infection among the intra-

venous drug-using population.

ACLU Position: Support

Status: Vetoed by the Governor

6 aclu news

January - February 1995

_ Language Rights

Hotline Opens

or the first time in the United States,

H workers who have been subject to

discrimination based on their

language or accent will be able to call a

hotline for legal advice and assistance. The

ACLU-NC and the Employment Law

Center launched the Language Rights

Hotline to assist workers whose rights may

have been violated as a result of the rising

tide of language discrimination,

The hotline - telephone number 1-

800-864-1664 - was launched in January.

People can call anytime and leave a

message for multilingual staff who are on

hand every Thursday evening from 5 PM

to 7 PM.

The hotline is supervised by language

rights attorneys Ed Chen of the ACLU-NC

and Chris Ho of the Employment Law

Center, a project of the Legal Aid Society

of San Francisco. It is being coordinated

by Dan Mahoney of the ELC and staffed

by volunteer counselors who can assist

callers in English, Spanish, Mandarin and

Cantonese.

that federal and state laws

"We have encountered

many people who have been

told not to speak any language

other than English at work,

have been denied credit or

insurance because they do not

speak English well, or even

denied promotions because

they have a foreign accent,"

explained Chen. "Many of

these workers are unaware

prohibit discrimination on the

basis on language and national origin, yet

there legal rights may have been violated."

This innovative project is the first

hotline in the country to specifically

_address the problem of language discrimi-

nation. Attorneys Chen and Ho have

collaborated on several cases to protect the

rights of language minorities, rights which

have been severely threatened by the

growth of the "English Only" movement

over the past decade. They successfully

challenged English only regulations used

Mt. Davidson Cross...

Continued from page I

school. The panel included Judges Harry

Pregerson and Diarmuid O'Scannlain of

the Ninth Circuit and Judge Donald P. Lay

of the Eighth Circuit. In the audience, in

addition to several hundred law students

and professors, were reporters and cameras

from Court TV and local news outlets.

Although deputy City Attorney Mara

Rosales argued that the 103' cross is not a

`religious symbol, but rather a historical

landmark, Crosby disagreed. "The cross

has the effect of turning the open space

area of Mt. Davidson into an open-air

church." For this reason, in the 60-year

history of the cross, not one event of a

minority faith has taken place on Mt.

Davidson. In contrast, the cross is the site

of Christmas celebrations, Easter sunrise

services and weddings. The City has

illuminated its Cross at Christmas and

Ruling on HIV Inmates

Erodes Rights Law

by Herschel Farbman

HIVec inmates at the

California Medical Facility in

Vacaville, suffered a legal setback on

November 4 when a three-judge panel of

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed

prison officials to bar them from food

service jobs within the prison. According

to ACLU attorney Matthew Coles, who is

representing the plaintiffs, "This ruling

marks the first time a federal court has

allowed fear of a minority to justify

discrimination."

In its decision in the federal class action

lawsuit, Gates v. Rowland, the court found

that the Federal Rehabilitation Act did not

require prison officials to fully integrate

HIV-positive inmates into the general

prison population. According to the

court's ruling, prison officials were

"reasonable" in justifying their ban on

kitchen jobs for HIV-positive inmates.

The officials had claimed that allowing

HIV-positive inmates to handle food could

provoke disturbances among other prison-

ers. According to corrections officials, the

irrational fear of non-infected inmates that

they might become infected if HIV-

positive inmates were to handle their food

is enough of a security risk to justify a

suspension of equal rights in the prison.

Coles characterized the argument of

prison officials as "concluding that as long

as you think there could be a risk, even if it

is irrational, as long as you think it may

happen, you don't have to obey civil rights

laws." The ACLU had argued that proper

education should be attempted before

simply capitulating to the supposed fear of

other inmates.

The case was first filed in U.S. District

Court on January 6, 1988, by the ACLU-

NC and other civil rights groups on behalf

of prisoners to challenge overcrowded

and inadequate conditions at the CMF. At

that time HIV-positive prisoners were

completely segregated and virtually had

no access to the educational, occupa-

tional, and recreational programs of the

prison. The 1990 consent decree

integrated most programs.

The November 4 ruling of the Ninth

Circuit reversed the ruling of U.S. District

Court Judge Lawrence K. Karlton and also

placed new limits on the federal Rehabili-

tation Act of 1973, which prohibits

discrimination against disabled individuals

in institutions that receive federal financial

assistance. According to the Ninth Circuit,

"The Act was not designed to deal specifi-

cally with the prison environment; it was

intended for general societal applica-

tion.... There is no indication that Congress

intended the Act to apply to prison facili-

ties irrespective of the considerations of the

reasonable requirements of effective

prison administration."

According to Coles, the Ninth Circuit' s

limitation of the Rehabilitation Act, "paves

the way for ignoring inmates with all kinds

of disabilities.

"By allowing `unreasonable fear' to

serve as a `reasonable cause' for discrimi-

nation at Vacaville, the opinion of the

Ninth Circuit seriously endangers the

rights of disabled prisoners everywhere,"

Coles charged.-

Herschel Farbman is an intern in the

ACLU-NC Public Information Depart-

ment.

to discipline employees at several Bay

Area hospitals and recently got the Califor-

nia Department of Health Services to

inform all of its licensed convalescent care

facilities that they cannot prohibit workers

from speaking their own languages. They

have also represented employees in the

private sector and successfully settled a

case last year on behalf of six Filipino-

American security guards who were

dismissed because of their accents.

Easter, and describes it in a plaque at the

base as the "Sunrise Easter Cross - Mt.

Davidson - First Service 1923."

Judge Harry Pregerson also seemed

skeptical of Rosales' claim that the cross is

merely a cultural symbol.

When Rosales stated that "no reason-

able person could look at the Mt. Davidson

cross and believe the city was endorsing

religion,' Judge Pregerson responded,

"What kind of reasonable person? A

reasonable Christian person?"

The case was originally filed in 1990

by a Baptist preacher, a Unitarian minister,

a Jewish rabbi and a Buddhist priest, as

well as several people who live and work in

San Francisco. They are represented by the

ACLU-NC's Crosby, Fred Blum of the

American Jewish Congress, and Thomas

Steel and John Beattie, attorneys for

Americans United for the Separation of

Church and State.

The case charges that the City's owner-

ship, subsidy, maintenance and display of

the religious symbol violates the state and

federal Constitutions' guarantees of

religious liberty. The suit requests the

The hotline is part of

a Language Rights Project, a -

joint effort of the ACLU-NC and the ELC,

which is supported by grants from the

Rosenberg Foundation and the San

Francisco Foundation. Other components

of the Project include litigation to expand

the scope of existing state and federal civil

rights laws to strike down language

discrimination; community education and

model legislation. Hi

Court to order the City to divest itself of its

ownership of the cross.

The appeal follows a 1992 ruling by the

late U.S. District Court Judge John P.

Vukasin who ruled that the City may

continue to own, maintain and display the

cross in the public park. That ruling,

however, goes against all other decisions in

similar cases, except a district court ruling

from Eugene, Oregon, which was heard by

the Ninth Circuit panel at the same time as

the Mt. Davidson case. The U.S. Supreme

Court has refused to review a Ninth Circuit

decision in an ACLU case holding that San

Diego violated the California Constitution

by maintaining crosses in two hilltop

public parks.

Although a decision is not expected for

several months, the judges seemed

concerned about the negative impact on

San Franciscans of diverse faiths of this

towering Christian City-owned symbol. At

the end of the arguments, Judge Pregerson

said that to him, "San Francisco stands for

a lot - for broadmindedness and for a

place of welcome for people of all religious

backgrounds."

aclu news 7

January - February 1995

Voting Rights Advocates Sue Governor to

Implement the "Motor Voter Law" _

harging that Governor Pete Wilson

e has thwarted the implementation of

the National Voter Registration

Act (NVRA), a coalition of voting rights

organizations filed a class action civil

rights lawsuit on December 15 in U.S.

District Court in San Jose.

The plaintiffs, including the League of

Women Voters, California Common

Cause, the Voting Rights Coalition and the

Coalition for an African-American

Community agenda, argue that failure to

implement the NVRA, commonly known

as the "motor voter law," will have a

particularly harmful effect on minority

communities and the poor. The NVRA

was passed by Congress in 1993 to close

the gap between minority and white voter

registration rates by facilitating voter regis-

tration at DMV, social service and other

state agencies.

The ACLU Foundations of Northern

and Southern California, the Lawyers'

Committee for Civil Rights of the San

Francisco Bay Area, the Asian Law

Caucus and other public interest law firms

are representing the plaintiffs.

The suit, Voting Rights Coalition v.

Wilson, charges that Governor Wilson has

thwarted the implementation of the NVRA

in several ways. He vetoed two bills that

would have set procedures for local

agencies to implement the NVRA. In

addition, he issued an Executive Order on

August 12 instructing state agencies only

to implement the law "`to the extent federal

funding is made available." The Gover-

nor's directive essentially orders state

officials not to comply fully with the

NVRA because, while certain federal

funds will be made available, such funding

will not cover the full cost of state compli-

ance.

"The Governor's thwarting of federal

law is a cynical attempt to deny the right to

vote to poor people and people of color,"

said attorney Robert Rubin of the Lawyers

Committee.

ACLU Establishes DeSilver

Society to Secure

he ACLU Foundation and all the

state ACLU affiliates have joined

together to establish The DeSilver

Society. The DeSilver Society honors

those many unsung individuals who have

invested in the future of civil liberties

through estate and financial plans that

support the work of the ACLU.

Generous legacy

The Society of generous donors is

named after Albert DeSilver (1888-1924),

an ACLU founder, associate director and

benefactor. Education at Yale and Colum-

bia Law School groomed DeSilver for a

place in New York's legal establishment.

Alarmed by the U.S. Government's disre-

gard of free speech and dissent rights

during World War I, however, he resigned

his thriving law practice to devote himself

to defending conscientious objectors, other

citizens and immigrants against persecu-

tion. DeSilver even used his own war

bonds to post bail for defendants in free

- speech cases.

Named as Associate Director at the

ACLU's founding in 1920, DeSilver

participated in the organization's full range

of activities - legal defense, public educa-

tion, and lobbying - and earned a reputa-

tion as a constitutional expert and friend of

free speech.

DeSilver was also the ACLU's finan-

Future

cial life raft, providing more than half of

the ACLU's operating funds on an annual

basis and extending a standing offer to

make up any organizational deficit. After

his untimely death at age 36, this passion-

ate civil libertarian's legacy continued; his

widow Margaret honored DeSilver's

wishes by contributing to the ACLU each

year in her husband's name.

Membership

Membership in The DeSilver Society

is restricted to those who have provided for

the ACLU in their will, revocable living

trust, life insurance or pension plan benefi-

ciary designation form, or other estate plan

instrument. Those who have made life

income gifts, either by establishing a gift

annuity or a charitable remainder trust or

by making a contribution to the Liberty

Fran Packard of the League of Women

Voters added, "The League has worked to

register voters since the days when

women's suffrage was won. Voter registra-

tion procedures often shut people out of the

system instead of inviting them in. Imple-

menting the NVRA tells all California

citizens that their vote is important."

Common Cause representative Jocelyn

Larkin warned, "Voter turnout is declining

at an alarming rate. Currently over 4

million eligible Californians are not regis-

tered to vote. Implementation of this new

law is vital to enabling and encouraging all

citizens to exercise their fundamental right

to vote."

Fund, the ACLU Foundation's pooled

income fund, are also Society members.

Members will receive a certificate

specially created to honor those supporters |

who now carry the torch passed by Albert

DeSilver. The ACLU will also keep them

informed of news of special interest to

Society members and acknowledge their

special support by listing members' names

in national and local annual reports and

newsletters. (All members, of course,

have the option to remain anonymous.)

Those individuals who have informed

the ACLU that they have provided for its

future in their estate plans have already

been sent letters welcoming them as

charter members of The DeSilver Society.

Those supporters who have similarly

provided for the ACLU but have not

received a welcome letter are strongly

urged to fill out the form below and return

it to the ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St.,

Suite 460, San Francisco, CA 94103.

Any individual considering becoming

a member of The DeSilver Society may

also use the form to request additional

information, or call the ACLU-NC's

Director of Planned Giving, Robert

Nakatani, at415/621-2493. Hf

Name

Deve

SO euro

LEY

Address

City/State/Zip

lelephone (_ )

in my Will.

Please recognize me as a member of The DeSilver Society.

| have already provided for the ACLU/ACLU Foundation*,

_____ by other means (please specify):

any publications.

Vv

Please send information about:

gifts through my Will.

date:

gifts of real estate.

deduction.

_____ | would like to help the ACLU Foundation with long-term

planning by offering this estimate of my gift: $

Please do not list me as a DeSilver Society member in

| am considering becoming a member of The DeSilver Society.

gifts that pay me income for life. (Please provide birth

-___-. gifts of insurance and pension plans.

ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1981.batch ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1982.batch ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1984.batch ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1985.batch ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1986.batch ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1987.batch ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1988.batch ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1989.batch ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1990.batch ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1991.batch ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1992.batch ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1993.batch ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1994.batch ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1995.batch ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_1999.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Bequests made to the ACLU Foundation qualify for the estate tax charitable

Vv

Please mail the form to De Silver Society,

ACLU-NC, 1663 Mission St. Suite 460, San Francisco, CA 94103

sewal

8 aclu news

January - February 1995

James Stoll

S.F- Chapter Leader

ames Stoll, former

Chair of the San

Francisco Chapter of the

ACLU-NC, died on

December 8 in San

Francisco of heart failure

at age 58.

Stoll was a Unitarian

minister who marched in

Selma, Alabama with

Martin Luther King and

was active in the anti-war

movement. In 1969, he

became the first clergy-

man in the United States

to openly state that he

was gay. His leadership

encouraged the Unitar-

ian-Universalist Association to become the

first religious organization in the U.S. to

adopt a resolution in 1970 ending discrimi-

nation against gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

Stoll was active in the San Francisco

Chapter during its period of revitalization

in the late 1980's, serving as Program

Chair, Vice-Chair and finally Chapter

Chair from 1993 to 1994.

According to Phil Mehas who

succeeded Stoll as Chair, "Jim brought a

wealth of knowledge, experience, personal

warmth and compas-

sionate strength that

moved our Board

forward into more

challenging areas of

defending and extending

civil liberties in our

community."

An experienced

mental health and

substance abuse

counselor, Stoll served as

a director of San

Francisco's Drug Abuse

Advisory Board, Opera-

tion Concern's Counsel-

ing Service, the Russian

River Mental Health and

Substance Abuse Services and the Suicide

and Crisis Prevention Center in Monterey

and San Benito Counties. At the UCSF

Drug Abuse Treatment Research Unit, he

organized community forums on needle

exchange, women and HIV, and the

reemergence of tuberculosis.

A Connecticut native, Stoll earned his

psychology degree from San Francisco

State University and his Masters of Divin-

ity from Starr King School of the

Ministry.

Erwin Knoll

Editor, The Progressive

he ever-decreasing

world of American

progressive journalism

lost a giant of a voice on

November 2 with the

death of The Progres-

sive editor Erwin Knoll

at the age of 63. The

bold and outspoken

Knoll was defended by |

the ACLU of Northern (c)

California in 1979

when he fought a

government order

barring his magazine

from publishing an

article entitled, ""The H-

Bomb Secret: How We

Got It, Why We're

Telling It."

Knoll edited The Progressive, the

Madison, Wisconsin-based journal with a

circulation of 32,000 which he described as

an "ecumenical journal of the American

left," since 1973. Branded a political foe

by Richard Nixon who placed him on the

presidential enemies list, Knoll was cited

by Ralph Nader as "the most versatile

progressive journalist in America."

In March 1979, when the government

succeeded in winning an injunction against

The Progressive's article on the H-bomb

by freelancer Howard Morland, it obtained

the first lengthy prior restraint order ever

issued against the press. The government

suppressed the article even though all the

information in it came from public

documents. Six months later, after contin-

ued legal action by the ACLU-NC and

support by other publications, the govern-

ment withdrew the case against The

Progressive; Knoll

published the article in

its original form in the

magazine's November

1979 issue.

Knoll called the

decision a "clear cut

legal victory not only

for The Progressive

but also for the Ameri-

Can people = He

shared his views with

ACLU-NC members

at the Annual Chapter

Conference held in

October 1979.

ACLU-NC Execu-

tive Director Dorothy

Ehrlich recalled

working with Knoll to

fight the government censorship. "Erwin

Knoll was a rare force in American

journalism because he had the courage to

challenge official secrecy at its core. By

taking on the U.S. government over the

vital issue of nuclear weapons and the arms

race, he was able to expose and lift the lid

on this far-reaching censorship."

Speaking at a memorial for Knoll at the

San Francisco Press Club in December,

Ehrlich noted that at the time of his death,

Knoll was working on a book about the

death penalty. "Amid the clamor of unten-

able crime legislation and the almost

weekly occurrence of state executions,

Erwin Knoll chose to write about the injus-

tice of capital punishment. This choice

highlights the rare political insight of this

crusading editor who never flinched from

taking on society's most difficult - and

unpopular - issues."

Stan Naparst

ongtime political activist and former

Earl Warren Chapter Board member

Stan Naparst died at age 64 on December

26, 1994.

A former statistician for the Alameda

County Health Department and President

of SEIU Local 616, Naparst, at the age of

fifty, enrolled in law school at Golden Gate

University. In 1984 he opened a law

practice in Albany working in family and

criminal defense law. He also became

involved in the sanctuary movement

defending Central American refugees. In

addition to serving on the ACLU Chapter

Board, Naparst was Chair of the Continu-

ing Education Committee for the Alameda

County Bar Association.

Field Program

VT tea Cte Re

Chapter Meetings

(Chapter meetings are open to all inter-

ested members. Contact the Chapter

activist listed for your area.)

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

mond-Kensington) Chapter

Meeting: (Usually fourth Thursday)

Volunteers needed for the chapter

hotline - call Tom Sarbaugh at

510/526-6376 for further details. For

more information, time and address of

meetings, contact Julie Houk, 510/848-

4752.

Earl Warren (Oakland/Alameda

County) Chapter Meeting: (Usually

second Wednesday) Meet at 7:30 PM at

Dave's Coffee Shop, 4299 Broadway

in Oakland. New volunteers welcome!

Annual Meeting is Sunday, February

5 from 4-6 PM at 6015 Chabolyn

Terrace in Oakland; Guest Speaker:

Professor Frank Zimring;. For more

information, call David Gassman at

510-835-2334.

Fresno Chapter Meeting: (Usually

second Wednesday) Meet at 7:00 PM at

the Center for Non-Violence, 985 N.

Van Ness, Fresno. Meet on Wednes-

day, February 8 when ACLU-NC Field

Director Marcia Gallo and Field Repre-

sentative Lisa Maldonado will join us

to discuss what's ahead for civil liber-

ties in California. New members

welcome! For information on date and

time of meetings, call Nadya Coleman

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

Hotline at 209/225-3780.

Lesbian and Gay Rights Chapter

Meeting: . (Usually first Thursday)

ACLU-NC office, 1663 Mission Street,

Suite 460, San Francisco. Mailings and

other activities start at 6:30 PM. Speak-

ers at 7:00 PM. Business meeting starts

at 7:30 PM. For more information,

contact Jeff Hooper at 510/460-0712.

Marin County Chapter Meeting:

(usually Third Monday) Meet at 7:30

PM at WestAmerica Bank, 1204 Straw-

berry Town and Country Village, Mill

Valley. For more information, contact

Coleman Persily at 415/479-1731.

Mid-Peninsula (Palo Alto area)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually fourth

Thursday) Meet at 7:30 PM at the

California Federal Bank, El] Camino

Real, Palo Alto. For more information,

contact Paul Gilbert at 415/324-1499.

Monterey County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Tuesday) Call for infor-

mation on meeting dates and times.

Contact Richard Criley, 408/624-7562.

North Peninsula (San Mateo area)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually third

Monday) Meet at 7:30 PM, at Planned

Parenthood, 2205 Palm Avenue, San

Mateo. For more information, contact

the Chapter Hotline at 415/579-1789.

Redwood (Humboldt County)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually third

Monday) For information on upcom-

ing meeting dates and times, contact

Christina Huskey at 707/444-6595.

Sacramento Valley Chapter

Meeting: (Usually first Wednesday)

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

59th and J Streets, Sacramento. For

more information, contact Ruth Ordas,

916/488-9956.

San Francisco Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Tuesday) Meet at 6:45

PM at ACLU Office, 1663 Mission,

460, San Francisco. For more informa-

tion, call the Chapter Information Line

at 415/979-6699.

Santa Clara Valley Chapter

Meeting: (Usually first Tuesday)

Meet at 7:00 PM at the Community

Bank Building, 3rd Floor Conference

Room, corner of Market/St. John

Streets, San Jose. Contact Larry

Jensen at 408/995-3250, for further

information.

Santa Cruz County Chapter

Meeting: (Usually third Thursday)

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

and Mediation Center, 104 Walnut

Avenue, Suite 203, Santa Cruz.

Contact Paul Johnson at 408/429-9880

for further information.

Sonoma County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Wednesday) Meet at

7:30 PM at the Peace and Justice

Center, 540 Pacific Avenue, Santa

Rosa. Call Steve Thornton at 707/544-

8115 for further information.

Yolo County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Thursday) For more

information, call John Crawford at .

916/757-6282 or the Chapter Hotline

at 916/756-ACLU.

FIELD ACTION

MEETINGS

~ (All meetings except those noted will

be held at the ACLU-NC Office, 1663

Mission Street, 460, San Francisco.)

Student Outreach Committee: Meet

to plan outreach activities. For more

information, call Marcia Gallo at'

415/621-2493.

Student Advisory Committee: For

more information, call Marcia or

Jamie at 4175/621-2006 ext. 52.