vol. 61, no. 4

fe Ta |

S.F. Housing Authority Use of Juvenile Records

to Evict Families is Illegal, Suit Charges

harging that the San Francisco

C Housing Authority's use of confiden-

tial juvenile arrest records as a basis

to evict families from their homes violates

both federal and state law, the ACLU-NC

and the Asian Law Caucus filed a class

action lawsuit on June 3 in San Francisco

Superior Court.

"The Housing Authority does little to

foster an environment of lawfulness when

the agency itself breaks the law in releas-

ing confidential juvenile court records.

The confidential arrest records of children

should not be the basis for evicting entire

families," said ACLU-NC staff attorney Kelli

Evans.

EVICT WHOLE FAMILIES

Federal law does not allow the dissemina-

tion of juvenile records unless there is

express authorization under state law;

California law establishes the confidential-

ity of juvenile records and sharply limits

access to them, the suit, Michael Doe v.

San Francisco Housing Authority, states.

Yet the Housing Authority, in blatant disre-

_| gard of the law and privacy considerations,

| uses juvenile arrest records - including

instances where there has been no convic-

tion - to forcibly evict whole families from

their homes.

Moreover, the Housing Authority

unlawfully publicizes the information in its

eviction actions and fails to provide ten-

ants with any opportunity to appeal or

object as required by federal law. The

Housing Authority has proceeded with

evictions where the original criminal

charge was dismissed, dropped or even

based on mistaken identity.

The named plaintiff is seventeen-year-

old Michael Doe who lives with his family in

a public housing development in San

Francisco. In 1996, at the age of 16, he was

arrested on a minor marijuana charge.

Without any court authorization, the police

department released Michael Doe's arrest

NEWSPAPER OF THE AMERICAN euro:ivilt LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

aclu news

RTT Ta ae el

nD

=)

S

=

=

oO

4

2

s

nD

=

fos

S

nD

isi

=

`Ss

S

oO

Entire families have been forcibly evicted from their homes by the San Francisco

Housing Authority based on the arrest of one teenage child.

report to the Housing Authority which then

publicly disseminated the confidential

information and issued a unilateral and

unequivocal notice of termination to the

teenager's entire family. .

The family is still battling the eviction

- and the Housing Authority has given

them no opportunity to dispute the accura-

cy or the relevance of the police report.

ONE STRIKE - You'RE OuT

The Housing Authority maintains over

3,000 units; since January 1996, when

President Clinton announced his "One

Strike, You're Out" policy for public hous-

ing, more than 100 eviction actions have

been initiated on the basis of police

"reports. "The Housing Authority makes no

distinction between police reports con-

cerning adults and those concerning

minors, and indiscriminately relies upon

either as the basis for pursuing evictions,"

said Evans. "Both federal and state law,

however, make an important distinction

Berkeley Drops

Anti-Homeless

Laws; Council Vote

Settles ACLU Suit

other advocates for the rights of the

| na move applauded by the ACLU and

poor, the Berkeley City Council at its

May 13 meeting agreed to repeal its contro-

versial ordinances that prohibited sitting

and peaceful solicitation on the streets of

Berkeley.

The Council's action will end the feder-

al class-action lawsuit filed by the ACLU-

NC in 1995 challenging the two municipal

ordinances that criminalized peaceful

solicitation of money and sitting or lying on

sidewalks.

ACLU-NC_. Managing Attorney Alan

Schlosser, who argued the case before the

U.S. District Court and the Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals, applauded the City

-Council's decision. "The First Amendment

guarantees that all people, poor and rich

alike, have the right to publicly express

their beliefs and ask for help and financial

support of others for their cause or for

themselves.

"A law that makes the panhandler sit-

ting silently with a sign a criminal is a law

Continued on page 7

between adult and juvenile records. With

limited exceptions, juvenile records may

only be released upon permission of a court

and must be kept confidential," she

. explained.

"California has long recognized the val-

ue of protecting the confidentiality of juve-

nile records and proceedings. Our juvenile

justice system's confidentiality provisions

protect young people, unless they are

accused of committing serious crimes, from |

the lifetime stigma associated with arrest

Non-Profit

Organization

U.S Postage

PAID

Permit No. 4424

San Francisco, CA

and incarceration. | The Housing

Authority's use of confidential police

reports in order to evict families violates

minors' privacy rights and makes a mock-

ery of our justice system."

The "One Strike, You're Out" policy

takes such a harsh toll that civil liberties

advocates and tenant activists have lob-

bied the Housing Authority to use evictions

as a last resort in addressing crime in pub-

lic housing. "The Housing Authority has its

priorities wrong. It has failed to investi-

gate incidents of hate violence by adults

yet it seeks to evict an entire family

because a teenager has been arrested for

selling marijuana. Not only does this vio-

late the law, it violates common sense,"

said attorney Gen Fujioka of the Asian Law .

Caucus.

The suit is asking the court to issue an

injunction ordering the Housing Authority

to immediately stop the illegal dissemina-

tion of the juvenile records; to halt any

eviction proceedings based on the confi-

dential information; and to provide resi-

dents with the required pre-eviction

opportunity to dispute the accuracy and

relevance of criminal reports.

Several weeks prior to filing this suit,

plaintiffs made an inquiry to the Housing

Authority regarding its improper use of

confidential juvenile records. As the

Housing Authority failed to respond, the

plaintiffs were compelled to file the class

action lawsuit. Hi

(c) SUNDAY, DECEMBER 14 (c)

SHERATON PALACE HOTEL (c)

SAN FRANCISCO

Houoring:

FRANK WILKINSON

Founder of the National Committee Against Representative Legislation Veteran activist jailed for fighting against HUAC

For more information: Call Field Representative Lisa Maldonado 415/621-2493

Gomme to the Activists Conference - August 23

Amendment rights, on June 26, the

U.S. Supreme Court struck down the

Communications Decency Act (CDA). The

federal law criminalized free speech on the

Internet, making it illegal to send or post

anything considered "indecent," because

the on-line forum made such information

available to minors.

Ruling that the CDA placed an unac-

ceptably heavy burden on protected

speech that threatened to eliminate a

large segment of speech in the internet

community, the Supreme Court affirmed

the lower court ruling in a 7-2 decision

written by Justice Stevens. Justice

O'Conner, with Chief Justice Rehnquist,

concurred in the judgment, making the

ruling virtually unanimous, although they

did not join in the majority opinion.

Justice Stevens wrote, "We have

repeatedly recognized the governmental

interest in protecting children from harm-

ful materials. But that interest does not

justify an unnecessarily broad suppression

of speech addressed to adults. As we have

explained, the government may not reduce

the adult population... to ... only what is fit

for children."

In a "cyber-cast" news conference held

at the ACLU National offices in New York,

ACLU National Legal Director Steven R.

romoting the two important goals of

religious freedom and school securi-

ty, the ACLU-NC and the Livingston

ment which guarantees the right of bap-

tized Sikh students to attend school

wearing kirpans - small, symbolic ceremo-

nial knives.

The June 10 agreement requires strict

limitations on kirpan size and other

restrictions designed to assure that the

kirpans cannot be misused.

"This is an important achievement for

religious liberty, but it is an achievement

that does not come at the cost of safety in

our schools," said ACLU-NC cooperating

attorney Stephen Bomse of the law firm

Heller, Ehrman, White and McAuliffe.

Bomse and ACLU-NC staff attorney

Margaret Crosby originally filed the case,

Cheema v. Thompson, in April, 1994 under

the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration

Act, after the Livingston School Board sus-

[: a resounding victory for First.

Rajinder and Jaspreet Cheema, accompanied by their mother (1. to r.) and sister

Sukhjinder (partially hidden in photo ), head back to elementary school wearing their

kirpans, small ceremonial knives which are symbols of the Sikh religion.

Union School District reached a settle- |

Shapiro said, "This is one of the most

important free speech cases in many, many

| years. The Courts today recognized what

Congress did not - that speech cannot

flourish under the shadow of censorship."

In its 39-page majority opinion, the

Court' extends the highest First

Amendment protections - those applied

to newspapers and books - to cyberspace,

distinguishing the Internet from broadcast

media for which greater government regu-

lation has been permitted:

"Those factors [history of government

regulation, scarcity of frequencies, `inva-

sive' nature] are not present in cyber-

space. Neither before nor after the

enactment of the CDA have the vast demo-

cratic fora of the Internet been subject to

the type of government supervision and

regulation that has attended the broadcast

industry. Moreover, the Internet is not as

`invasive' as radio or television... Users sel-

dom encounter content `by accident."

Questioning the vagueness of the

terms "indecency" and "patently offensive,"

Justice Stevens wrote, "Could a speaker

confidently assume that a serious discus-

sion about birth control practices, homo-

sexuality..., or the consequences of prison

rape would not violate the CDA? We are

persuaded that the CDA lacks the preci-

sion that the First Amendment requires

Sikh Students May

Wear Kirpans to School

ACLU, ScHOOL BOARD REACH AGREEMENT

pended three Sikh elementary school stu-

` dents for wearing their kirpans to school.

Unwilling to violate the religious

requirement that baptized Sikhs wear five

sacred symbols, including kirpans at all

times, the three Cheema family children

`stayed out of school for eight months until

a Ninth Circuit Court order returned the

children to school pending the now unnec-

essary trial.

Under the new settlement, approved

by the Livingston Union School Board at

its June 10 meeting, the kirpan blade

must be no longer than 2-1/2 inches. It

must also be dulled and sewn securely into

a sheath and further secured in a cloth

pouch which the Sikh community in

_ Livingston designed to accommodate the

District's concerns over safety. The settle-

ment also gives the District limited inspec-

tion rights assure that the restrictions are

followed.

GENE LIEB, TURLOCK JO

ACLU Victory in Internet

Censorship Challenge

of First Amendment protection, has

ensured that the Internet will fulfill its

| promise as a true marketplace of ideas."

The suit, Reno v. ACLU, was originally

_ filed on February 8, 1996 in federal district

_ court in Philadelphia by the ACLU and 19

when a statute regulates the content of |

speech. In order to deny minors access to

| potentially harmful speech, the CDA effec-

__ tively suppresses a large amount of speech

| that adults have a constitutional right to

_ receive and to address to one another. "

ACLU-NC staff attorney Ann Brick spoke |

at the San Francisco rally to celebrate the

ruling. "The Internet has dramatically

transformed people's ability to communi-

~ cate with one another, The CDA threatened

the vitality of this new medium by giving a

_ veto power over everyone's speech to any |

| community that found that speech to be

_ `patently offensive' - no matter how con-

__ servative or narrow-minded that community |

might be," she said. "The Supreme Court, in

striking down the-CDA and affirming that

the Internet is entitled to the highest level

other individuals and organizations that

provide information via the Internet. In

addition to the ACLU, plaintiffs in the case

_ Computer

included Planned Parenthood Federation

of America, Human Rights Watch,

Professionals for Social

"Responsibility, the Electronic Privacy

Information Center, Critical Path AIDS

Project, the Institute for Global

Communication, and others. A second

case, brought by the American Library

Association, was consolidated with Reno v.

ACLU on February 26. |

The ACLU attorneys who litigated the

suit are national legal staff Christopher

Hansen, Marjorie Heins, Ann Beeson, and

Legal Director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania

Stefan Presser.

(c)0000 OHOHOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHEHHHHHHHEE

FEDERAL COURT HEARING

Advocates Argue: No

Cutoff of SSI Benefits

for Immigrants

BY MARIA ARCHULETA

n June 19, U.S. District Court Judge

(eat Wilken heard oral argu-

ment in the class action lawsuit,

Sutich v. Callahan, Commissioner of

Social Security, challenging the denial of

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) pay-

ments to indigent legal immigrants who

are elderly, blind or disabled.

Attorney Judith Gold of the San

Francisco law firm Heller, Ehrman, White

McAuliffe, arguing on behalf of a coali-

tion of civil liberties and immigrant rights

organizations, asked the court to issue a

preliminary injunction to halt the SSI cut-

off by barring enforcement of the federal

welfare reform legislation, Section 402 of

the Personal Responsibility and Work

Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,

because it violates the constitutionally

guaranteed rights of indigent legal resi-

dent immigrants.

Judge Wilken took the plaintiffs'

motion for an injunction under submission;

the ruling is expected before September 30,

which is the deadline for the cut-off of SSI

benefits under the new law.

The plaintiffs represent a class of hun-

dreds of thousands of legal residents who

are being denied SSI benefits or who will'

be purged from the SSI rolls as a result of

the "welfare reform" bill passed by

Congress and signed by President Clinton

on August, 1996.

| "This is not constitutionally tolerable,"

| said Gold. "The impact of the welfare act is

| staggering. Thousands of desperately

| needy applicants for SSI, who are unable

| due to old age, blindness or severe physical |

| or mental disabilities to provide for their

| basic needs for food, clothing and shelter,

Lo have been denied benefits solely because

| of their status as non-citizens." "

| ACLU-NC managing attorney Alan

Schlosser added, "It is imperative that this

| welfare law be halted before it wreaks ines-

' timable hardship on legal immigrants,

who, because of their age or disability can-

not work to support themselves. People.

| who receive the cut-off notices cannot rea-

sonably foresee any future for themselves

except homelessness and starvation."

The class action lawsuit was filed on

March 26; it is being litigated by Gold, Paul

W. Sugarman, Roger W. Doughty, Thomas P.

Brown, Robert Mahnke, and Jeff Hessekiel

of the law firm Heller, Ehrman; ACLU-NC

attorneys Alan Schlosser and Edward

Chen; Yolanda Vera and Linton Joaquin of

the National Immigration Law Center;

Victor Hwang and Gen Fujioka of the

National Asian Pacific American Legal

Consortium; Gerald A. McIntyre and

_ Herbert Semmel of the National Senior

Citizens Law Center; Melinda Bird and

Gioconda R. Molina of Protection and

Advocacy, Inc.; Robert Rubin of the

Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights; and

ACLU National Immigrants' Rights

Director Lucas Guttentag. Hi

ACLU News = Summer 1997 = Pace 2

ACLU-NC Leaders

Honored

nd Davis Riemer, were all recently

recognized for their leadership and com-

munity service.

Current Board Chair Grosboll was hon-

ored by Golden Gate University with the

Judith G. McKelvey Award for Outstanding

Achievement by an Alumnus. The award,

granted in June for his commitment in

working for civil

liberties and civil

rights, was pre-

sented by fellow

Board member,

Professor - Maria

Ontiveros.

Grosboll, an attor-

ney whose . firm

represents labor

unions, employee

benefit plans,

retirees and

employees, . was

elected Chair of

the ACLU-NC in

1995. A civil liber-

ties activist for more than 20 years,

Dick Grosbolle

Grosboll has served on the ACLU-NC Board f

of Directors, where he chaired the Field |

Committee and the ACLU-NC Pro-Choice

Task Force, and as a leader in the Defeat

209 Campaign.

ACLU-NC Board member Davis Riemer |

is the first recipient of the ACLU |

Davis Riemer

Distinguished Service Award in recognition

of his exceptional service and commitment

presented by National ACLU President

serves as Chair of the

CLU-NC Board Chair Dick Grosboll | -as a lay leader of the ACLU. The award was |

An two former Chairs, Milton Estes |

| Nadine Stroessen at the ACLU Biennial in

| Santa Fe, New Mexico in June. Riemer, who |

| operates an. investment counseling and |

| financial advisory practice in Oakland, |

ACLU-NC

Development Committee and. asamember of |

the ACLU-NC Executive Committee. A

national leader in fundraising for the organi-

zation, Riemer is the Dean of the

National

Faculty, and sits on the National

Investment Committee, the

Nationwide Development Working

Group, and the Nationwide

Endowment Policy Committee.

Milton Estes, a member of

the Boards of the national ACLU

and the ACLU-NC, was honored

~ by the Marin AIDs Project for his

Carole Migden

Milton Estes :

and HIV physician, provides HIV care not

only in his private practice, but in San

Francisco County jails. He is a leading

advocate in the improvement of HIV care

' and serves on numerous AIDS commissions

and task-forces. Estes is also a physician

plaintiff in the medical marijuana lawsuit.

| The former Chair of the ACLU-NC is cur-

| rently. a

member of the affiliate

ACLU Development -

dedicated work in fighting the |

HIV epidemic. The award was |

presented by Assemblymembers |

and. Kerry |

Mazzoni. Estes, a family practice |

Development Committee and a leader in |

_ national fundraising efforts. i

ACLU-NC at the

Biennial

ACLU-NC delegates (1. to r.), Dick Grosboll, Marina Hsieh, and Carlos Munoz, voting at

Union MAID

the Biennial plenary session. The affiliate delegation also included Eleanor Eisenberg,

Dennis McNally Fran Strauss, Beverly Tucker, and Michelle Welsh. The Biennial drew

over 500 ACLU activists for an intensive four-day conference in Santa Fe, New Mexico in

June. Plenary sessions on New Media Realities and the First Amendment, Racial

| dustice, and Native American Rights were complemented by a debate on Campaign

| Finance regulations and workshops on a broad spectrum of civil liberties issues.

Members of the ACLU-NC Board and staff played a major role in the Biennial, leading

workshops on issues ranging from lesbian and gay rights to criminal justice and affirma-

tive action. Staff attorney Ed Chen served as a panelist at the plenary session on Racial

Justice, focusing on fighting the forces against Proposition 209 and English Only laws.

ACLU ON THE

Come to the At

issues ranging fr

rights and teen cur

releases, letters to the "

and the ACLU-NC.

io) {hoya AV [b) aa YAY

n civil liberties

m to reproductive

| Voto a (uate) NVA Reet

(Rome ceenr ENG ne

You can even impact national policy by signing up for legislative action alerts.

Become an ACLU cyber-activist today!

Gang Database Stigmatizes Minority Youth

BY MARIA ARCHULETA

he "war on gangs," has become a war

ik civil liberties as law enforcement

agencies across California have cre-

ated a massive gang database network con-

taining the names and faces of thousands

of minority youth, many who have never

been arrested or even charged with a

crime. The database stigmatizes young

men as criminals documenting those guilty

only of their age, ethnicity, and relation-

ships to further the nation's reactionary

movement to "get tough on juvenile crime."

For the past three years, the ACLU

affiliates of Northern and Southern

California have been monitoring the net-

work's exponential growth and have testi-

fied on the civil rights violations related to

the database, especially in targeting young

men of color.

ACLU-NC Police Practices Director

John Crew likens the gang database to

McCarthy-era black lists. "We've seen

extreme tactics like these used before.

Decades ago the government created a list

of alleged Communists and people they

supposedly associated with. They pres-

sured people on the list to name others. |

Stigmatizing labels were attached to peo-

ple without notice or due process.

"There is broad recognition of the abus-

es of the blacklists of the fifties, yet today,

the rights of minority youth are being vio-

lated in much the same way. Except now

people are being secretly - and often

inaccurately labeled `gang members' or

`associates' in a computerized network in

which highly personal information is only a

few mouse clicks away from hundreds of |

law enforcement agencies," Crew said.

GREAT/CALGANG BACKGROUND

The Gang Reporting Evaluation and

Tracking system (GREAT), soon to be

expanded and renamed CalGang, is a com-

puter database containing information on

200,000 to 250,000 individuals labeled -

without their knowledge - gang members,

associates or affiliates. More than 90% of

those in the database are apparently peo-

ple of color. The data is accessible to any

law enforcement agency using software

available for less than $30.

The Los Angeles Sheriffs' Department

first developed the database for its own use

in 1986. By the early nineties GREAT

became a system linking law enforcement

agencies throughout California and at

least three other states via seven regional

nodes. A young person labeled a "gang

member" in Sonoma, for example, will find

his label electronically travels with him

when he visits relatives in Santa Ana.

In 1992, the California GREAT Advisory

Committee (CGNAC) was formed to "over-

see" the GREAT system. CGNAC is made

up of representatives of law enforcement

agencies from each regional node using

GREAT, the Department of Justice and the

Office of Criminal Justice Planning. There

are no non-law enforcement entities in

CGNAC.

At least 150 law enforcement agencies

now contribute to and access information

from the GREAT/CalGang database. The

FBI has developed a national gang data-

base partially based on California's GREAT

network.

ApDvisory COMMITTEE TO THE U.S.

COMMISSION OF CiviL RIGHTS

HEARING

On May 29, Crew testified on

GREAT/CalGang at a hearing in Orange

ACLU News = Summer 1997 = Pace 3

County held by the Advisory Committee to

the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Leaders in the Orange County Community

had pressed for the hearing because of

widespread allegations of civil rights viola-

tions in the area as a result of law enforce-

ment's anti-gang tactics. __

At the hearing, Crew sharply criticized

inadequate oversight of the system and

the lack uniform statewide criteria for

entering names and information into the

gang database. "Nearly a quarter of a mil-

lion people have already been labeled gang

members without their knowledge and

without consistent, reliable criteria that

would indicate that the individuals might

actually be involved in criminal activity,"

Crew told the Commission.

Even as the agencies continue to argue

amongst themselves about how best to

define alleged gang membership or affili-

ates, law enforcement agencies across the

sate continue to add names to the data-

base, using varied and often conflicting

criteria. : :

Crew noted that people were often

labeled gang members for merely being

Continued on page 7

ACLU: Oakland

Should Reject Police

Video Cameras

n an open letter to the Oakland City |

| comet John Crew, Director of the

ACLU-NC Police Practices Project,

blasted the proposed use of video surveil-

lance cameras as a "reckless gamble of pre-

cious Pee rights and scarce ance

resources."

Charging that the video isc aiee

system under consideration by the

Council's Public Safety Committee will not

reduce crime, is not cost-effective and is

more intrusive of people's privacy than

people think, Crew asked the Council and

the residents of Oakland to consider some

key questions before "volunteering to serve

as guinea pigs for the proponents of video

surveillance."

In the May 20 letter, Crew urged the

Council to consider whether or not the

California Constitution's explicit right to

_ privacy would allow government video spy-

ing on innocent activity. "For example,"

Crew asked, "should the government be

able to zoom in from more than 100 yards

away to read and record the print on politi-

cal flyers being distributed on public side-

walks?"

Crew also questioned what will happen

to the tapes - and who will have access to

them. "If someone submits a public

records request for routine surveillance

tapes, would Oakland be legally obligated

to release them?"

The ACLU letter also noted that there

is no credible evidence that a video surveil-

lance system will reduce crime; indeed, in

the past, several U.S. cities, for example

Miami Beach, have tried surveillance cam-

eras only to abandon them as ineffective.

Crew also pointed out that the video sur-

veillance systems used in the United

Kingdom, which proponents cite as useful

examples, are now being criticized widely

by the press, academic researchers and

even law enforcement officials. Those sys-

tems may soon be banned by the European

Parliament as an invasion of privacy.

The proposed video surveillance sys-

tem poses financial costs for the city in the

form of maintenance and personnel - the

city will have to choose between more cops

on the beat or cameras on light poles. In

addition, Crew noted, there are several

hidden costs, for example, defending the

city against legal challenges for privacy

violations, and the negative impact on

Oakland's reputation as footage of common

street crimes finds its way on daily news

broadcasts and national cop shows.

Until the Public Safety Committee ful-

fills its promise to research these and oth-

er crucial questions, Crew asserted that

Oakland "should not be asked to accept

`Big Brother into its family."

Judge: SF Schools

Desegregation Plan OK

BY RINI CHAKRABORTY

n the midst of efforts to dismantle affir-

| mative action programs and other

race-conscious remedies, the San

Francisco School District's consent decree

has been vindicated in a lawsuit challeng-

ing the district's efforts to integrate. The

ACLU-NC filed an amicus brief on behalf of

the school district's desegregation plan.

On May 5, U.S. District Judge William

Orrick denied plaintiff's motion for sum-

mary judgment and rejected claims that

the consent decree is unconstitutional and

ought to be terminated.

ACLU-NC staff attorney Kelli Evans

applauded the ruling. "The consent decree

has helped improve all of San Francisco's

schools. It is also an effective and fair tool

for ending the shameful history of school

segregation in San Francisco," she said.

In July 1994, a group of Chinese

American students filed a suit, Ho vs. San

Francisco Unified School District, chal-

lenging the district's consent decree and

seeking to eliminate all race-conscious

provisions of the school desegregation pro-

gram.

The SFUSD has operated under a fed-

eral and judicial consent decree since

1983, in response to a lawsuit brought by

- the NAACP to address years of racial dis-

crimination against African American stu-

dents in San Francisco. The decree is a

voluntary, carefully negotiated and judi-

cially supervised compromise. The two

goals of the consent decree are to desegre-

gate the city's schools and to improve acad-

emic performance.

Under the consent decree, no racial

group may constitute more than 40% or

Join the ACLU and other justice advocates in an

BLT

0x00B0To save the life of MUMIA ABU-JAMAL

To welcome back GERONIMO Ji JAGA PRATT

centTo END the DEATH PENALTY

Saturday,August 16 0x00B0 7:30PM

Mission High School cent San Francisco

'8th Street (between Dolores and Church Streets)

Donation: sliding scale $10-$5

This rally occurs in the middle of the "Juvenile Justice: Unplugged" field investigation by and for students spon-

sored by the ACLU-NC Howard Friedman First Amendment Education Project. The students will speak at

the rally after having just interviewed inmates on death row at San Quentin.

Also speaking are novelist Alice Walker, former Black Panther leader Geronimo ji Jaga Pratt who was

unjustly incarcerated and just recently released after a judge overtuned his 1972 conviction, and attorney

Leonard Weinglass who represents one of America's most noted death row prisoners - Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Fighting Racial Slurs

at the Workplace

BY MARIA ARCHULETA

sking the California Supreme Court

As uphold an injunction preventing

- MAvis Rent-a-Car supervisor John

Lawrence from hurling racial slurs at his

Latino subordinates, the ACLU-NC filed an

amicus brief in the race discrimination

case, Aguilar v. Avis Rent-a-Car System

Inc. on February 14. This case highlights

the often thorny intersection between

anti-discrimination laws and _ First

Amendment rights.

ACLU-NC staff attorney Margaret

Crosby wrote in the brief, "In most settings,

the right to speak one's mind is a core right

of a free society. however, the Constitution

permits state and federal governments to

place some limits on the unrestrained

speech of bigots in the workplace, particu-

larly when they are in positions of authori-

ty on the job."

The case arises from a 1998 suit in

which 17 Latino Avis employees in the

company's San Francisco International

Airport office charged that Avis managers

created a hostile and abusive work envi-

ronment.

The plaintiffs claim that Lawrence

habitually subjected them to racial slurs

and to unwanted physical contact such as

"popping" them on the back. After a full

evidentiary hearing, the trial court found

that Lawrence would continue such behav-

ior in the absence of a court order. In addi- (c)

tion to the injunction against future verbal

harassment, the court awarded the plain-

tiffs damages.

Apparently unwilling to discipline

Lawrence, Avis has appealed only the

injunction, arguing that the use of racial

epithets in the workplace is constitutional-

ly protected speech.

Crosby emphasized in the brief that in

work situations, employees are unable to _

respond freely to a supervisors' derogatory

remarks without risking their livelihoods,

and that unlike people on a public street,

employees may not walk away from racial

insults.

She wrote, "On a soapbox, on a public

street, an individual in a free society may

express racially demeaning views. The

government may not ban expression simply

because most people find it offensive or

even outrageous. However, Avis' categori-

cal assertion that racist speech is protect-

ed expression overlooks the second part to

the constitutional inquiry: the context of

the speech. This case is not about Hyde

Park corner. Here, a manager hurled

racial slurs at his subordinates on the job."

The Court of Appeal, in a divided opin-

ion upheld the trial court's injunction.

However, the court reasoned that racial

epithets could be barred in order to pre-

vent the "secondary effects" of creating a

hostile working environment.

Crosby disagreed with the application

of the "secondary effects" doctrine to the

Aguilar case. The doctrine applies to.cases

involving the regulation of adult business-

es, allowing such censorship not because

of the impact of sexually explicit material

on viewers, but because the establish-

ments create a host of other nuisances,

such as prostitution, in their neighbor-

hoods. :

Crosby wrote, "The secondary effects

doctrine has no application to this case.

Here, the injunction focuses directly on

the content of speech, racial slurs, and

their effect on the Latino workers. The

emotive impact of speech on its audience

is a primary effect, and to the degree that

the government suppresses speech

because of its effect on a listener, it must

justify its action by establishing that the

speech is unprotected."

The ACLU-NC brief argues that an

injunction barring the supervisor from

continuing to hurl racist epithets at his

subordinates is permissible under the

unusual circumstances of this case, in

which the court has conducted a full trial

to determine that the epithets violate anti-

discrimination laws and that the supervi-

sor would continue

invective. |

In Pittsburgh Press Company v.

Pittsburgh Commission of Human

kelations, the United States Supreme

Court upheld an order issued under a local

anti-discrimination law restraining a

newspaper from publishing sex-segregated

employment advertisements, ruling that

the First Amendment does not prevent the

government from regulating behavior that

obstructs equal employment opportunities

of racial minorities and women simply

because speech is also involved.

spewing racist

45% (the percentage depending on the

kind of school) of total student enrollment

at any given school. Additionally the

decree requires each school to have stu-

dents from at least four out of nine differ-

ent ethnic groups represented in its

student body. Under the terms of the

SFUSD consent decree, every student is

guaranteed free, desegregated public edu-

cation; no child and no particular group of

children may be denied these benefits.

"In order to assure that no San (c)

Francisco child attends a racially segregat-

ed school, the decree's racial percentages

apply uniformly across the board to chil-

dren of all racial and ethnic backgrounds;

no child is denied access to San Fran-

cisco's public school system because of her

race," Evans explained. "Thus, while the

decree is necessarily conscious of race in

assignment of students in order to deseg-

regate San Francisco's schools, it does not

_ systematically provide a preference to stu-

dents of any particular race."

The plaintiffs charge that Chinese

American students are more likely to run

up against the enrollment "caps" than any

other student group, including white stu-

dents, and therefore, the consent decree

ACLU News = Summer 1997 = Pace? -

enrollment guidelines have disproportion-

ately deprived Chinese students access to

schools of choice, such as the academically

prestigious Lowell High School, solely

because of their race.

"In a broad sense, Ho and SFNAACP

involve the same right - the right of chil-

dren to attend public school free of invidi-

ous discrimination. Ho and SFNAACP may

reach different conclusions about how to

protect the rights of the SFUSD school

children, but this is the issue at the heart

of both suits," said Judge Orrick in his

opinion.

"While we disagree with the plaintiff's

wholesale attack on the desegregation

plan, we recognize that the unfair burden

of the caps on Chinese American students

needs to be addressed in a way that does

not jeopardize the basic integration plan

and other race-conscious remedies," said

Lora Foo, staff attorney for the Asian Law

Caucus.

On September 18, 1996, ACLU-NC staff

attorneys Kelli Evans and Edward Chen

filed an amicus brief in U.S. District Court

to address the proper. level of judicial

scrutiny in the unique context presented

by school desegregation consent decrees.

ACLU News = Summer 1997 = Pace 5

GANG INJUNCTIONS

The U.S. Supreme Court denied on June 27 the ACLU-NC's petition for a writ of certio-

rari in the City of San Jose's civil gang injunction case, People v. Acuna. Former ACLU-NC

staff attorney Amitai Schwartz, representing the defendants on behalf of the ACLU and oth-

er civil rights groups, contended that the injunction violates the rights of young Latino

males who are targeted in large part because of their age, ethnicity and associations. The

injunction, which was upheld by the California Supreme Court in January after being struck

down as unconstitutional by the Court of Appeal, is unfortunately now being used as a model

by cities around the state. ACLU-NC staff attorney Ed Chen and Police Practices Director

John Crew are currently formulating strategies for advocates to ease the civil rights viola-

tions that will inevitably follow.

| RIGHT TO BEG

| In the final installment of an eight-year legal battle between the ACLU-NC and the City

of San Francisco which resulted in a landmark decision that the First Amendment protects

to pay $328,785.56 in attorneys fees and costs in Blair v. Shanahan. The June 16 ruling came

in the case originally filed in 1989 on behalf of Celestus Blair who was arrested five times for

peacefully asking people for money in downtown San Francisco.

WELFARE RIGHTS

' Declaring that California may not institute laws that thwart the Equal Protection Clause

of the 14th Amendment by discriminating against new state residents, U.S. District Court

Judge David Levi issued a preliminary injunction on June 18 in Roe v. Anderson, stopping

Governor Wilson from reducing public assistance benefits of qualified families who have

lived in the state for less than one year to the amount they would have received in the state

they left. The ACLU-NC joined this case which was originally filed by the ACLU of Southern

California. The decision is the first in the country to strike down as unconstitutional restric-

tions on poor women and children authorized by the welfare legislation signed into law by

President Clinton last year.

WITNESSING EXECUTIONS

The ACLU-NC successfully fought a bid by the California Department of Corrections to

once again restrict the viewing and reporting on executions. On July 17, U.S. District Court

Judge Vaughn Walker refused to lift his injunction allowing the press and the public to wit-

ness the entire execution process at San Quentin. The judge agreed with ACLU arguments

that reporters have a First Amendment right to witness executions and stated, "What is nec-

essary...is that the public have sufficient access to the execution by whatever method it is

undertaken so it can understand and appreciate the nature and quality of the event." The

case was originally filed in 1996, after reporters were severely limited in viewing the execu-

| the right of poor people to request funds, U.S. District Judge William Orrick ordered the City

tion of William Bonin.

BY VALERIE SMALL NAVARRO

AND CARL TAKEI

battle is raging in the state Capitol

At may well determine the fate of

tens of thousands of poor families in

California well into the next century.

Sacramento's "Big 5" - Governor Pete

Wilson and the leaders of the two parties

in each house - are negotiating the

future of welfare reform.

This summer, as the finishing touches

were being added to the Welfare Reform

package developed by the California

Legislature's 18-member "super commit-

tee," -- members of the Assembly and

Senate charged with figuring out how the

state would adapt its programs to the new

federal welfare law - moderate

Democrats balked at the plan, arguing

that they would not be able to defend

some of its provisions to their con-

stituents.

As a result, almost all of the major wel-

fare issues were modified to the detriment

of indigent families. The modifications

covered time limits, grant levels, hours of

required work activity, penalties for truan-

cy and immunizations, and eligibility for

substance abuse treatment. Aid to legal

immigrants escaped being cut entirely

due to the hard work of advocates and leg-

islators. Now, the welfare reform package

is still a very dangerous piece of legisla-

tion - especially because the current

package is merely the starting point from

which negotiations with the Governor

_ Wilson will proceed.

LIFETIME BAN FOR DruUG FELONS

One of the more damaging items in the

_ federal welfare reform law passed by

Congress and signed by President Clinton

in 1996 is the federal lifetime ban on food

stamps and welfare forpeople convicted of

drug felonies. The ACLU and other advo-

cates developed a provision softening this

in California, barring those convicted of

felony drug sales crimes from receiving

benefits for a period of time equivalent to -

their sentences; people convicted of use

or possession crimes would be ineligible

for a similar period, unless they agreed to

or were enrolled in a drug treatment pro-

gram.

The ACLU proposal was originally

adopted by a conference committee and

garnered 2 Republican votes (Ken Maddy,

R-Fresno and Cathie Wright, R-Simi

Valley), but our proposal ended up being

deep-sixed by Assembly Democrats.

LIFETIME LIMIT: FIVE YEARS

An earlier plan also provided that after the

five-year federal time limit on welfare,

families could continue to receive welfare

benefits if the adults agreed to work in

community service jobs. The final version,

however, imposed a hard five-year lifetime

limit for adults. After this five-year period,

aid would be provided only to children,

. Congress. The suit charged that

City Auctions Cross

he City of San Francisco

[sat the process of com-

plying with its court-

ordered constitutional obligation

on July 21 and auctioned off the

land atop Mt. Davidson, the site

of one of the tallest Christian

crosses in the United States. The

cross and the land around it went

to the highest bidder, the Council

of Armenian American

Organizations. The sale must be

approved by the Board of

Supervisors and then by the vot-

ers of San Francisco in the

November 4 election.

The auction came as the

result of a victory in Carpenter v.

San Francisco, a federal lawsuit

brought by five religious leaders

and other city residents repre-

sented by the ACLU-NC,

Americans United for the

Separation of Church and State,

and the American Jewish

city ownership of the towering

religious symbol violated the

state and federal Constitutions'

guarantees of the separation of

church and state. The Ninth Circuit ruled

in January that the city must divest itself

of the cross; in March, the U S. Supreme

Court refused to hear the city's appeal.

The Council of Armenian American

Organizations of Northern California, a

nonprofit group representing two dozen

Armenian groups, bought the cross for

$26,000. According to Paul Tour-

Sarkissian, the Council representative

Dismantling Welfare as We Know It

ACI) FIGHTS FOR RIGHTS OF POOR

with counties having the option fo provide

the benefits in cash or vouchers. In addi-

tion to this hard deadlineon benefits,

Democrats added a provision preventing

adults who have reached the five-year life-

time limit on welfare from getting General

Assistance.

An earlier version of the Democrats'

plan also would have given recipients

three months to spend in an intense job

search after applying for welfare. At the

end of that period, if they didn't have a job,

they would have been evaluated and

allowed up to a year and a half more to

receive training and find work. After that

time, counties would have had the discre-

tion to allow another six months or an

additional year of welfare if the recipient

lived in a high unemployment area.

Instead, the final version of the mea-

_sure provided that people would have two

years to move from welfare to work,

including up to three months of "job

searching."

SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT

Under the earlier proposal, counties could

refer an individual receiving welfare assis-

tance to a drug and alcohol program to

determine whether the person had a sub-

stance abuse problem and what treatment

would be effective. The counties also had

the option to expand an individual's time

limit on benefits to accommodate treat-

ment needs.

Union Matp

. who bid at the auction, they plan to main-

tain the cross. "Since it is a symbol of tol-

erance, the council would like to adopt it

as a memorial for Armenian martyrs," he

said.

In accordance with the court order

and the terms of sale, the park must be

open, accessible and free to the public and

no other structures may be built on it.

COCHOHO OOOO OOOOH HOHOHOHHOHHOHOHOSHHOHHHOHHHOHHHHOHOEHHHHHOHHHHHHHHHHHHTHHHHOHHHEEHOOHEOSO OO

Now, however, the Democrats' plan

imposes the same deadlines on all individ-

uals, regardless of their individual abuse

problems. Furthermore, they have

imposed a "three strikes" rule: people only

get two opportunities to be treated - and

then they are cut off.

IMMIGRANTS

The limited "good news' of this welfare

reform involves benefits for legal immi-

grants. State programs have been

designed to aid legal immigrants who will

be cut off by new federal limits on food

stamps and `Supplemental Security

Income (for elderly, blind, and disabled

immigrants). The ACLU-NC has chal-

lenged the federal cut-off in U.S. District

Court (see article page 2).

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

The above proposals and the Governor's

proposals are the basis for the negotia-

tions among the "Big 5," the Governor and

the leaders of the two parties in the

Senate (Bill Lockyer [D-Hayward] and

Rob Hurtt [R-Garden Grove] ) and in the

Assembly (Cruz Bustamante [D-Fresno]

and Curt Pringle [R-Garden Grove] ).

The bottom line is that things are only

going to get worse for low income earners.

These "welfare to work" proposals - includ-

ing the Democrats' opening proposals - do

not take into account the lack of jobs in |

many communities, even using the most

optimistic labor market assumptions.

Furthermore, politically expedient discus-

sions of tax cuts will only reduce available

funds for crucial services. It's always hard

to be poor in California - the Legislature

is about to make it even harder. @

Valerie Small Navarro is the ACLU

Legislative Advocate in Sacramento;

Carl Takei is an intern in the Legislative

Office.

ACLU News = Summer 1997 a Pace 6

Berkeley Ordinances...

Continued from page |

that has gone beyond constitutional lim-

its," Schlosser said.

"Especially at a time when laws that tar-

get the poor and homeless by criminalizing

peaceful sidewalk activities are proliferat-

ing throughout the Bay Area, Berkeley's |

move is especially forward-thinking and |

humanitarian," Schlosser. added.

Attorney James B. Chanin, spokesper-

son for the Berkeley-Albany-Richmond-

Kensington Chapter of the ACLU-NC,

noted that the commitment and activism

of many in the community were responsi-

| ble for the change in the Berkeley laws.

"This result could not have happened with-

out the combined efforts of numerous com-

munity organizations and __ totally

committed individuals who were deter- |

mined to do something to try and reverse a

tide of repressive legislation against poor

people that has swept the nation over the

last decade," Chanin said. "We are pleased |

that these laws will no longer add to the

misery of poor people, and will allow com-

munity organizations access to the streets

of Berkeley without fear of police harass-

ment and criminal prosecution."

The suit, Berkeley Community Health.

Project (also known as the Berkeley Free

Clinic) et al. v. City of Berkeley, was filed

on February 27, 1995 - two days before

the laws were to go into effect - on behalf

of the Berkeley clinic; Copwatch; the

Green Party; and Toni Catano and Chris

Stanley, indigent, physically disabled indi-

viduals who because of their disabilities

need to sit.on the sidewalk when they ask

for charity from passers-by.

_ After the filing of the lawsuit, both

WorTes ~ Pri

LIBERTIES

OMNIBUS CIVIL

RIGHTS BILL

Assemblymember Shiela Kuehl (D-

Santa Monica) started 10 votes behind,

but after a lot of nail-biting and lobbying,

the civil rights advocate and the ACLU

managed to get her Omnibus Civil Rights

bill (AB 310) off the Assembly floor, with-

out a single vote to spare. This bill had

been targeted, along with other civil

"rights measures - primarily bills to pro-

tect the rights of gay and lesbians in

schools and elsewhere - by the extreme

right for defeat.

_ This innovative civil liberties bill will

remove the arbitrary $50,000 cap on dam-

ages for employment discrimination, pro-

hibit employers from genetically testing

their workers, and extend sexual harass-

ment protections to contract workers.

Letters are still needed to ensure that

this crucial legislation becomes law. We

urge all ACLU members to write to

Governor Wilson, supporting this legisla-

tion which makes needed improvements

to existing protections against discrimi-

nation in housing and the workplace.

MEDIA ACCESS TO

PRISONS

On the other hand, Senator Quentin

Kopp's (I-San Francisco) measure to

ensure media access to prisons (SB 434)

virtually sailed through the Senate on a

bipartisan basis. However, we expect the

Governor to veto this important freedom

of the press legislation, unless he hears

from people that they want the media to

report on how their tax dollars are being

spent in our prisons.

Please write today to Governor Wilson,

urging him to sign AB 310 and SB 434!

ordinances were originally enjoined by U.S.

District Court Judge Claudia Wilken in May, |

1995; the City appealed the preliminary

injunction against the anti-solicitation ordi-

| nance to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

On December 9, 1996 ACLU-NC Managing |

Attorney Alan Schlosser argued before a

three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit that

because Berkeley's anti-soliciting ordinance

limits the protected free speech activities of

poor people and grass root organizations,

the injunction barring its enforcement

should remain in place. At the time of the

settlement, a decision was pending. The

appeal has now be dismissed as moot.

The City Council repealed in entirety

the ordinance prohibiting sitting and lying

on sidewalks; it also repealed the sections

of the anti-solicitation ordinance that. pro-

hibited solicitation after dark, within six

feet of a building and from persons exiting

or entering automobiles. The revised ordi-

nance now only prohibits soliciting in a

"threatening" or "coercive" manner and

within ten feet of an ATM machine. The set-

tlement also provides $110,000 in payment

to the ACLU for attorneys' fees.

"People have a right to walk on the side-

walks of Berkeley without being intimidat-

ed. or threatened," explained Schlosser.

"The ACLU has never opposed narrowly-

drafted ordinances that punish intimida-

tion, or obstruction or trespass. However,

city laws should not be used as a tool to

silence the voices of the poor who rely on

charity to help them survive or to move poor

people out of the downtown area because of

their appearance."

"We hope that this victory will stop other.

cities from singling out poor people and

grassroots organizations for discriminatory

restrictions on their fundamental right of

free speech,"

= of Wilson, Sonsini Goodrich and Rosati, a Palo

| Alto law firm that served as ACLU cooperat-

| ing counsel.

said attorney Harry Bremond

"As our economic problems

refuse to abate, and the numbers of poor

continue to rise, more and more cities. are

passing laws which criminalize poverty by

punishing people simply for doing the

things they have to do in order to survive,"

said Bremond, noting the recent passage of |

anti-begging or sitting laws in Palo Alto, San

Jose and Santa Cruz. `

The ACLU-NC suit was litigated by _

Schlosser, Berkeley attorneys James B.

Chanin and Osha Neumann and cooperat-

ing attorneys Harry Bremond, Sarah

Harrington, Sandy Roth, Joanne Scully and

James Yoon of Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich and

Rosati.

Gang Databases...

- Continued from page 3

part of a group with "a common identifying

sign, symbol or name" in which only a few

members of the group "engage in a pattern

of criminal activity creating an atmosphere

of fear and intimidation." GREAT does not

require the purpose of the group to be crimi-

nality, that a significant portion of the group

be engaged in crime, or that the people

being labeled even be aware of the criminal

activities of others.

"It's a classic example of `guilt-by-associ-

ation," Crew said. "Under the GREAT defin-

ition, if a few corrupt members of a large

police department are engaged in a secret

pattern of criminal extortion, every officer

in that department who displayed the `iden-

tifying symbols' of the group - the badge

and the blue - could be labeled a gang

member even if they were entirely ignorant

-of their fellow officers' criminal activities.

That's crazy."

Crew charged that, because the loose

criteria were being applied almost exclu-

sively to young men of color, the obvious

problems with the GREAT system were

`Lawyers Council

~Campaign Fund Launch

Mona Laczo

ACLU-NG Board member Martha Jimenez and Rob Goodin, past co-chair of the Lawyers

Council, joined 20 fellow attorneys at the law firm of Heller, Ehrman, White and McAuliffe

on May 30, for the Foundation Lawyers Council Campaign Annual Kick-Off. The

Campaign, which runs through the Fall, is expected to raise $135,000 for the ACLU-NC

Foundation's legal and public education programs through the efforts of 50 lawyers

making personal visits or phone calls to prospective donors in the legal community.

groups: or those whose programs are

ompati sle with ACLU policies,

Whether by exchange or rental he

lists e governed by stric privacy proc

- dure. Lists are never actually placed. in

the physical possession of the organiza- S

_ tion which has rented them OF oo .

for them. -

When w we rent or ex

| Deine on ai le a

being overlooked. The hearing revealed

that 97% of the people entered into GREAT

system in Orange County were non-white.

In Los Angeles County, the District

Attorney's Office found in 1992 that one

out of every two African American men

between the ages of 21 and 24 had been

entered into the GREAT system.

Crew also noted that once you're

entered into GREAT it's very difficult to get

out. Individuals are deleted only if no

updated information is entered for five

consecutive years. There is no obligation

to delete inaccurate, unreliable or outdat-

ed information from GREAT.

ACLU-NC RECOMMENDATIONS

Ina July 3 letter to the California Advisory

Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil

Rights, Crew presented a series of recom-

mendations to ease the conflict between

civil liberties and gang databases.

First, Crew suggested that comprehen-

sive and mandatory policies be established

to govern the GREAT/CalGang systems.

This would include strict and consistent

criteria for labeling entries; notification of

individual and/or parent prior to entry to

allow individual to contest the accuracy of

labels; more frequent strictly regulated

hange our lis, it i id

"its lists ausilable to. partisan political such exc

purges to eliminate the retention of old,

inactive and inaccurate records; written

_ policies to ensure Fourth Amendment pro-

tections, specifically, prohibiting deten-

tion of individuals for question without

reasonable suspicion of criminal activity

and requiring officers to warn individuals

that absent criminal suspicion, they do not

have to submit to questioning or to being

photographed; inclusion of independent,

full time, auditors and non-law enforce-

| ment representatives on the CGNAC over-

| sight system;

and public hearings to

expose and address community concerns

about GREAT/CalGang.

Crew also recommended that before

any GREAT data is permitted to become

part of - and potentially infect - the

| new CalGang database, a thorough, inde-

| pendent examination and report on the

data currently in the system is needed,

paying particular attention to racial and

ethnic disparities, quality control and

effectiveness of the system in actually

tracking bona fide criminal gang members

and fighting crime.

The ACLU will continue to monitor the

GREAT/CalGang network and work to doc-

ument and end civil rights abuses.

| : ACLU News = Summer 1997 = Pace 7

MONTEREY COUNTY

Chapter Fights

for

Affirmative Action

BY MICHELLE A. WELSH

concerted lobbying effort by the

Awe Monterey County

Chapter and other local civil rights

groups was successful in fending off an

attack on the County's affirmative action

plan.

In February, a federal court action

was filed by two Monterey County resi-

dents challenging Monterey County's

Affirmative Action Plan and the affirma-

tive action consent decree entered in

1976 in the case Garza v. County of

Monterey. f that consent decree were

invalidated, the County's affirmative

action plan would no longer be exempt

from Proposition 209, should it go into

effect. 2

Initially, Monterey County counsel

agreed with the Plaintiffs that the 1976

Garza consent decree was unconstitu-

tional under later United States Supreme

Court holdings, or that it had expired and

was no longer in effect. The ACLU-NC

objected, and filed an amicus curia brief,

together with the Employment Law

Center and California Rural Legal

Assistance (CRLA).

Since the County was not defending

the Garza consent decree against the

attack, the ACLU Monterey County

Chapter and other members of the

Coalition of Minority Organizations began

a lobbying effort to convince the

Monterey County Board of Supervisors

that the county should defend the con-

sent decree and incorporate it into the.

County's Affirmative Action Plan to keep

Monterey County exempt from

Proposition 209.

The lobbying effort succeeded. On

June 10, the Monterey County Board of

Supervisors approved a Memorandum of

Understanding confirming that "the

Garza consent decree shall remain in full

force and effect and shall be included as -

an exhibit to Monterey County's

Chapter Meetings

(Chapter meetings are open to all interest-

ed members. Contact the Chapter activist

listed for your area. )

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

Kensington) Chapter Meeting: (Usually

fourth Thursday) For more information,

time and address of meetings, contact Jim

Chanin at 510/848-4752 or Fachel

hkichman at 610/540-5507.

Earl Warren (Oakland/Alameda County)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually

Library, on College and Manila, in Oakland.

For more information, call Louise

Rothman-kiemer at 510/596-2580.

Lesbian and Gay Rights Chapter

Meeting: (Usually first Thursday) ACLU-

NC office, 1663 Mission Street, Suite 460,

San Francisco. Mailings and other activi-

ties start at 6:30 PM. Speakers at 7:00 PM.

Business meeting at 7:30 PM. For more

information, contact Burton Weiss at

510/581-6258.

Marin County Chapter Meeting: (Usually

third Monday) Meet at 7:30 p.m. at the

first |

Wednesday) Meet at 7:30 PM at Rockridge -

Affirmative Action Plan." The Supervisors

also agreed to update and amend the con-

sent decree if necessary in the future.

"Our experience shows that even in

these times - when affirmative action is

being assailed on a national, state and

local level - grassroots civil rights

activists can make sure that the doors to

equal opportunity are not slammed shut,"

said Chapter Director Dick Criley.

A motion to dismiss the lawsuit chal-

lenging the Garza consent decree has now

been filed by both sides, and a ruling dis-

missing the case is expected within the

next few weeks. Mf

Field Committee Chair Michelle A.

Welsh is Chair of the Legal Committee of

the Monterey County Chapter.

Ce ee ee ee

YOLO COUNTY

Fighting for Free Speech

at the Farmers Market

BY MICHELLE CHENG

66 TT City of Davis is trying to create

a `No-Speech Zone in the Farmers'

Market," charged ACLU-NC

Managing Attorney Alan Schlosser. "This is

in direct violation of the First Amendment."

Schlosser's argument came in a June 30 let-

ter to the Governing Board of the Davis

Farmers Market Association in response to a

proposal to prohibit all endorsement of

political candidates, fundraising or any oth-

er political activity by market vendors,

except in a "free speech area."

Under the proposed "Market Socio-

Political Activity Rule," the Market Manager

could prohibit vendors from soliciting votes,

_ financial support, or campaign efforts for

any political group without prior consent.

Vendors would only be allowed to wear

clothing with "non-confrontational expres-

sions of such opinions as `Protect the Earth.'

The Market Manager will have ultimate

authority in determining the acceptability |

and violations of the rules; and failure to

comply with these rules will lead to a one

| week suspension or longer from the Market.

The ACLU-NC Yolo County Chapter

opposes the city's attempt to restrict politi-

cal activity in the Farmers' Market because

it not only violates the right to free speech

and expression, but also encourages the

suppression of ideas. "A guy sellinga tomato |

| has as much right to an opinion as any |

Corte Madera Town Center, Community

Meeting Room. Next meeting will be

September 15, same time and place. For

more information, contact Arnie Scher at

415/382-5704.

Mid-Peninsula (Palo Alto area) Chapter

Meeting: (Usually fourth Thursday) Meet

at 7:30 PM, at 460 South California Avenue,

Suite 11, Palo Alto. For information, con-

tact the Chapter Hotline at 415/325-0782.

Monterey County Chapter Meeting: Meet

at 7:15 PM, Monterey Library. For more

information, contact Richard Criley at

408/624-7562.

North Peninsula (San Mateo area)

Chapter Meeting: (Usually third Monday)

Meet at 7:30 PM, at 700 Laurel Street, Park

Tower Apartments, top floor. For more

information, contact Marshall Dinowitte at

415/695-6131.

Redwood (Humboldt County) Chapter

Meeting: (Usually third Thursday) Meet at

Chan's at 359 G Street in Arcadia at 7:00

PM. We are focusing on Police Citizen

Review Boards. For information on

upcoming meeting dates and times, con-

tact Christina Huskey at 707/444-6599.

ACLU News = Summer 1997 = PaceS

one else," said Richard Livingston, co-chair

of the Chapter.

"The apparent proposal of the rule is to

attempt to create a `No-Speech Zone, so that

on Market days this public forum will be `off

limits' for any political or social expression

except what meets the standards of bland-

ness and acceptability of the Market

Manager," wrote Schlosser in his June 30 let-

ter. "The Rule also completely ignores an

even more fundamental tenet of our system

of freedom of expression - the prohibition

discriminating against certain forms of

speech and certain speakers based on the

content or viewpoint of their message."

"Tt is surprising to us that the Farmer's

Market Board would even consider adopting

such arbitrary and restrictive speech rules,"

chapter co-chairs Bill Kopper and Livingston

wrote in a separate letter to the City Council

and the Governing Board of Davis Farmers'

Association. In a meeting with Market

Board members on July 14, Kopper charged

that the Market has already informally

enforced the proposal by punishing vendors

who have been campaigning for a Yolo

County gravel mining measure in an area

that was not designated for vendors who

wish to engage in the "socio-political activi-

ty." Chapter leaders have also scheduled a

meeting with the City Council.

Michelle Cheng is an intern in the

Public Information Department.

Sacramento Valley Chapter Meeting:

(Usually first Wednesday) Meet at 7:00 PM

at the Java City in Sutter Galleria

(between 29 and 380, J and K Streets) in

Sacramento. For more information, con-

tact Ruth Ordas at 916/488-9955.

San Francisco Chapter Meeting: (Third

Tuesday) Meet at 6:45 PM at the ACLU-NC

Office, 1663 Mission Street, Suite #460, San

Francisco. For more information, 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 Towers, Ist Floor

Conference Room, 111 West St. John

Street, San Jose. Next meeting will be

September 2, same time and place. Join us

for a fundraising reception on Saturday,

September 20, from 5 to 7:30 p.m., at the

Jewish Community Center at 14855 Oak

Road in Los Gatos. For further chapter

information contact Bob Obrey at 408/745-

1736.

Santa Cruz County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Monday) Meet at 7:15 PM.

For more information, contact Dianne'

Vaillancourt at 408/454-0112.

Sonoma County Chapter Meeting:

(Usually third Tuesday) Meet at 7:30 PM at

Eisenberg to

Head Arizona

ACLU

Longtime ACLU activist and affiliate

Board member Eleanor Eisenberg (7),

pictured here with Field Committee

Chair Michelle Welsh, has been

appointed Executive Director of the

ACLU of Arizona.

Fisenberg, an attorney mediator and

consultant to small businesses and

non-profit organizations, has been a

leader on the ACLU-NC Board, serving

on the Executive, Field, Legal and

Budget/Management Committees.

Eisenberg, a former Chair of the Santa.

Cruz ACLU-NC Chapter, has also

served as a volunteer attorney for the

organization. She will assume her

new post in September.

Congratulations, Eleanor, you will

be missed!

Activist ||

Ni eiKs

August 23.

See agenda and registration

form on page 5

the Peace and Justice Center, 540 Pacific

Avenue, Santa Rosa. Call Judith Volkart at

707/526-2898 for more information.

Yolo County Chapter Meeting: (Usually

third Tuesday) Meet at 7:30 PM, 2505 dth

Street #154, Davis. We are currently plan-

ning a teach-in on welfare "reform" for

September. For more information on any

of these events or other general chapter

activities, call Natalie Wormeli at 916/756-

1900 or the Chapter Hotline at 916/756-

ACLU.

Chapters Reorganizing

If you are interested in reviving the

Fresno, Mt. Diablo or North Valley

Chapter, please contact Field

Representative Lisa Maldonado at 415/621-

2493,

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 infor-

mation, contact Nancy Otto at 415/621-

2006 ext. 37.4

Student Advisory Committee: For more

information, contact Nancy Otto at

415/621-2006 ext. 37.