Open forum, vol. 76, no. 2 (Spring, 2002)

Criminal Justice: ACLU Works in Coalition

Ruben Arriaga is serving 25 years to

life for stealing a drill. George Anderson

is serving 25 to life for filling out a false

DMV application. Richard Morgan,

26 to life for stealing a baseball glove

from Big 5 Sporting Goods. California's

Three Strikes laws, which, along with

Georgia's, are the broadest in the

nation, count even minor felonies such

as petty theft and drug possession as

strikes. California also has a Two Strikes

law that doubles the prison time for any

felony when a-person has a previous

Strike. A bill moving through California`s

legislature now, AB 1790 (Goldberg),

would reform California's Two and Three

Strikes laws.

In 1994, Californians passed the

Three Strikes initiative by a decisive

margin, fueled in large part by outrage

over the murder of Polly Klaas. But fami-

Protester Represents Life Behind Bars at a Families to Amend California's Three Strikes (FACTS) Rally

Three Strikes Reform Effort Moves Forward -

to Amend California Law

lies, criminal justice experts, civil rights

advocates, and others - including Polly's

father and grandfather - are now urging

reform, having seen the unintended and

tragic consequences of the law. In fact,

64% of Californians, according to poll-

ing by FMM and A Opinion Research and

Public Policy Analysis, agree that only

violent and serious felonies should count

as strikes. Today, more than 50,000

inmates in California are locked up under

Two and Three Strikes laws - more than

half of those for felonies that are neither

violent nor serious.

AB 1790, a bill introduced this year

by Assemblymember Jackie Goldberg,

would place an initiative on the ballot in

2004 to restrict strikes to serious and

violent felonies only. In addition to the

see Three Strikes on page 4

ACLU Defends al Wo

rkers

ight to Protest

Free Speech: Trendy Garment Company Forever 21 Attempts to "SLAPP" Down

Workers' Rights

In a case that pits a $400 million

dollar a year corporation against gar-

ment workers paid less than the

minimum wage of $6.75 an hour, the

ACLU of Southern California has come

to the defense of advocates protesting

Wages and working conditions in Los

Angeles. Anti-sweatshop advocates

have been speaking out on behalf of

workers sewing the women's clothing

line, "Forever 21." The workers have

protested unpaid wages, the company's

failure to pay overtime and unsafe and

unsanitary working conditions, such as

vermin infestations.

"We worked ten to twelve hours a

day for subminimum wages and no

overtime," said Esperanza Hernandez,

one of the garment workers. "A lot of

our factories were dirty and unsafe, with

rats and cockroaches running around."

With support from the Garment

see Workers on page 3

forum

Spring 2002

On April 19, Ward Connerly

delivered hundreds of thousands

of signatures to the Secretary of

State, thus virtually ensuring that

his "Racial Privacy Initiative" will

qualify for either the November

2002 ballot or the March 2004 ballot.

_ County elections officials must

still verify the signatures' validity

before the initiative officially quali-

ties. If Connerly submits less than

110% of the needed signatures, his

initiative will most likely land on the

March 2004 ballot. The initiative

seeks to ban the gathering or use

of information about race or ethnic-

ity by state and local governments

in California. Opponents, including

the ACLU of Southern California

and a broad coalition of civil rights,

public health, education, and con-

sumer groups, believe that the ban

will hurt public health efforts, make

schools less accountable, and dis-

mantle protections for consumers

and employees against unfair and

discriminatory business practices,

_ such as redlining in insurance and

discrimination in housing.

The force behind the initiative -

is Ward Connerly, who conceived

and spearheaded Proposition 209,

which abolished affirmative action

programs in California in 1996.

Connerly's group, American Civil

Rights Coalition, has contributed the

bulk of the funds the campaign has

raised so far - nearly $1.2 million as

of April 4. Conservative commenta-

tors George Will, Thomas Sowell,

and Shelby Steele have joined

Connerly's call to "get rid of those -

_ little boxes," and funders from the

extreme right, including Joseph

Coors (who founded the Heritage

ACLU's Anthony Romero

Highlights New Challenges in

Visit to Southern California

_ National Executive Director Focuses

on ACLU Role in Time of Crisis

National ACLU Executive Director

Anthony Romero visited Southern

California in March, bringing the national

ACLU perspective on September 11 and

its aftermath to the ACLU community

and the general public in Southern

California.

During a joint meeting of the boards

of the ACLU and ACLU Foundation of

Southern California, Romero lamented

that during World War I! the internal

debate regarding the internment of

Japanese Americans almost "broke

the organization in half."

"But it was the strength of the affiliates

from California that made sure we were

on the right side of history," Romero

told ACLU/SC board members.

Romero highlighted the work of the

ACLU in response to such post-9/11

see Romero on page 2

Connerly Delivers Signatures on Race Information Ban

of Southern California

rd

_ Foundation) and Richard Viguerie (a

key political strategist on the far right),

have underwritten the campaign.

According to the Coordinator of the

Coalition to Defeat Ward Connerly`s

"Racial Privacy" Initiative, Malek

Moazzam-Doulat, "This is a danger-

ous and deceptive initiative. It has

see RPI on page 8

Fred Okrand, Visionary and

Beloved ACLU/SC Legal

Director Emeritus, Dies

Former ACLU/SC Legal Director Built

ACLU/SC Legal Program Into Major

Force For Civil Rights

On March 18, Fred

Okrand, Legal Director

Emeritus of the ACLU

Foundation of South-

ern California, passed

away after a long ill-

ness. Fred's career was

devoted to advancing BAS

civil rights and civil lib-

erties. Fred was counsel in more than

500 civil liberties cases. He was a vital

leader of the ACLU. He served as a

volunteer attorney for the affiliate for 21

years, and in 1972 he was appointed

Legal Director, a position he held until

see Okrand on page 2

The Hoffman factory in Paramount, where a

worker was wrongfully fired for organizing - an

event that triggered the Supreme Court's anti-

laborruling inApril. Eliseo Medina, Vice President

of SEIU, discusses the decision on page 3

- Specia

Eee

ort: ACLU/SE Annual Report 2001. =~

Romero continued from page 1

threats to civil liberties as secret deten-

tions, expanded snooping powers for

the government, and racial profiling.

"We have done remarkable work,"

said Romero. "We've prepared and

sent over 150,000 letters to members of

Congress from our members and have

filed lawsuits to lift the veil of secrecy

surrounding the closed immigration

proceedings."

"75,000 new members joined the

ACLU last year," he said of the surge

in the organization's membership since

September 11.

As part of his visit to the Southern

California affiliate, Romero attended

a reception at the Mexican American

Legal Defense Fund (MALDEF), met

with members of the ACLU/SC Heritage

Club at the Astra restaurant in West Hol-

the City of West Hollywood's Human

Rights Speakers Series, along with

ACLU/SC Executive Director Ramona

Ripston and Mayor John Heilman of

West Hollywood. The speech was

broadcast on Adelphia Cable.

Editor: Heather Carrigan

Art Editor: Michael Wilson

open forum est:v24

Associate Editor: Christopher Calhoun

Contributors: Tenoch Flores, Elvia Meza,

Eric Greene, Lois Bader and Liz Schroeder

open foruM (ISSN 0030 - 3429) is published quarterly by The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California

and the ACLU Foundation, at 1616 Beverly Bivd., Los Angeles, CA 90026. Telephone (213) 977-9500. E-mail: ACLUinfo@aclu-sc.org.

Membership is $20 and up, of which $2 is the subscription fee for OPEN FORUM. Periodicals postage is paid at Los Angeles, CA.

eee Send address changes to OPEN FORUM, 1616 Beverly Bivd., Los Angeles, CA 90026. www.aclu-sc.org

ACLU President: Gary Williams

ACLU Foundation Chair: Lee Masters

Executive Director: Ramona Ripston

On March 8, 2002, International

Women's Day, the ACLU/SC unveiled

an advisory board for its Latina Rights

Project (LRP). The project, a pilot initia-

tive of the ACLU Foundation of South-

ern California, will use impact litigation,

bilingual/bicultural public education

and public policy advocacy to address

priority civil rights issues facing Latinas

throughout Southern California.

ACLU/SC staff attorney and LRP

director Rocio Cordoba heads the

project. Cordoba has brought together

a wide group of advocates and coali-

tion partners across disciplinary and

institutional lines to form the project's

advisory board, which includes aca-

demic scholars experts from an array

of fields, health professionals, attorneys,

education professionals and grassroots

organizers.

"Together, we have the perspectives,

ACLU/SC Unveils Multidisciplinary

Advisory Board for Latina Rights Project

the expertise, and the experience on our

advisory board to make real differences

in the lives of Latinas," said Rocio Cor-

doba, LRP director.

According to U.S. Census esti-

mates, Latina/os represent 32.4% of

California's population, with Latinas

making up 31.5% of the state's female

population.

Although they represent a major con-

stituency in the state, Latinas face sig-

nificant obstacles in the areas of health

and education. In California, 61% of

Latinas aged 25-44 do not have a high

school diploma. Latinas also make up the

majority of women throughout California

without health insurance; fully 33% of

Latinas in California are uninsured. The

Latina Rights Project will work to target

these and other disparities that confront

Latinas in Southern California.

Okrand continued from page 1

his retirement in 1984.

He is best remembered for his ground-

breaking - and controversial - challenge

to the internment of Japanese Ameri-

cans during World War II. It was Fred's

outrage over the racist treatment of

Japanese Americans that led him to

the ACLU. But Fred tackled innumerable

critical civil rights issues: racially restric-

tive housing covenants, segregation of

public schools, segregation in swimming

pools, laws barring Asians from owning

land, loyalty oaths required for public

employment or public housing, capital

punishment, the right of peaceful protest

against racial segregation and the Viet-

nam war, the exclusion of women from

service clubs such as Rotary, the voting

rights of monolingual Spanish voters,

abortion rights, and the First Amend-

ment right of Native Americans to use

peyote in religious ceremonies.

Throughout his illness, Fred never

stopped working. He was co-counsel on

a class action lawsuit, Mochizuki et al. v.

U.S., on behalf of 2,264 persons of Japa-

nese ancestry who were uprooted from

their homes throughout Latin America

and forcibly brought to and imprisoned

in INS "enemy alien" internment camps

in this country.

Ramona Ripston, Executive Director of

the ACLU of Southern California, recalled

Fred's gentleness and humor and noted

his many accomplishments, "! feel so

privileged to have worked with Fred. He

was always inspiring as well as always

being upbeat. He was a fierce advocate

who never sought personal glory. Fred

was a legal giant. He argued at least four

cases before the U.S. Supreme Court,

and was the force behind some of the

_ most significant constitutional chal-

lenges in our nation. He will be sorely

missed," said Ripston.

ACLU-SC President Gary Williams

also had fond recollections of Fred.

"Fred was an incredibly accomplished

litigator and theoretician," said Williams.

"He was lead counsel or co-counsel in

some of the most important civil rights

and civil liberties cases to come out of

the state of California. Yet you would

never know these things from speaking

to Fred, because he was one of the most

humble, caring and non-judgmental

human beings | have ever met.

"Fred lived the principles he believed

in every day. He believed in the equality

and inherent goodness of all people, and

he lived that principle out in his relation-

ships with others. From Ramona to the

young people who were working at the

ACLU through a job training program,

Fred treated every member of the ACLU

staff with respect and dignity."

Fred is survived by his wife, Mimi,

and their two sons, Dean and Marc.

TP BR RS PR ee et ie ie

Sh QOS Neon

"af

f

~

7

CF CE SIS SN OR NBS See! SY gmeet

Wor. Kkers continued from page 1

Worker Center, an organization formed

by Sweatshop Watch and headed by

former ACLU/SC staffer Kimi Lee, the

workers followed up their action with

flyers and public demonstrations bring-

ing attention to their plight. The work-

ers, represented by the Asian Pacific

American Legal Center (APALC),also

filed a federal lawsuit against Forever

21 for back wages and an end to the

company's unlawful and unfair busi-

ness practices. The federal lawsuit

relies in part on the published deci-

sion Bureerong v. Uvawas, a case that

APALC and the ACLU/SC jointly litigated

on behalf of 80 Thai garment workers

who sewed behind barbed wire and

under armed guard in El Monte, Califor-

nia until 1995.

Forever 21 contractors retaliated

against workers who complained to

investigators by firing them. But the

company did not stop there. Forever

21 went on to file a Strategic Lawsuit

Against Public Participation (SLAPP)

against several workers, the Garment

Worker Center, Sweatshop Watch, and

the Coalition for Humane Immigrant

Rights Los Angeles (CHIRLA).

The ACLU of Southern California is rep-

resenting the Garment Worker Center,

two of its employees, and Sweatshop

Watch under California's anti-SLAPP

law, which protects people from being

penalized for exercising free speech

Immigrant Workers Will Continue Their Struggle, Despite Court Decision

I, the case of

Hoffman Plastic

Compounds vy.

NLRB, five conser-

vative justices on

the United States

Supreme Court

unfairly stripped

tax-paying immi-

| grant workers of

basic workplace protections enjoyed

by all American workers. The Hoffman

decision created two classes of workers

in this country: those who have protec-

tions and rights at work and those who

are at the mercy of their employers.

Furthermore, this deeply unjust deci-

sion will provide even more incentive

for dishonest employers to hire workers

who can be exploited because of their

document status.

In the Hoffman Plastics decision,

the Supreme Court ruled that undocu-

mented workers who have been fired

because they participated in union

activities are not entitled to back pay

under the National Labor Relations Act.

The Court precludes the National Labor

Relations Board (NLRB) from ordering

unscrupulous employers to pay back

wages for the time an employee is out

of work pursuing their employment

case - giving employers a clear path to

exploit their employees without facing

Stiff financial penalties. This decision

ACLU Fights For Same-Sex Inmate/Visitor Touching

Karl Whitmire and his long-term

Partner, William Lyster, are divided

by Lyster's incarceration, but, unlike

Opposite-sex couples who are similarly

Separated, Whitmire and Lyster are

not even allowed to touch one another

during visits. An Arizona Department

of Corrections policy states that, "The

following conduct shall be prohibited

at visits... Same-sex kissing, embrac-

Ing (with the exception of relatives or

immediate family) or petting." Kissing

and embracing at the beginning and

end of each visit is permitted between

Opposite-sex couples and between

family members, both opposite sex

rights in connection with

a public issue. CHIRLA is

being represented by Carol

Sobel, a frequent ACLU/SC

cooperating attorney

If the company prevails,

it would have a chilling

effect on workers' ability

to organize and change

the conditions that prevail

in sweatshops.

"Forever 21 is trying to

scare us so that we stop

fighting for our rights,"

says Araceli Castro, one

of the garment workers.

"But we're more united

now than ever and will

keep protesting and edu-

cating the public about

sweatshops. It's our First

Amendment right."

According to Sweatshop

Watch, the vast majority

of garment workers in

the U.S. are immigrant

women who work 60-

80 hours a week, often

without minimum wage

or overtime pay, and the

Department of Labor estimates that

more than half of the country's 22,000

sewing shops violate minimum wage

and overtime laws. In addition, many of

the workplaces subject workers to such

has an impact on all workers who try

to improve their working conditions,

regardless of immigration status, by

granting these employers an unfair

competitive advantage over employers

that treat their employees fairly.

Since 1986, our immigration laws

have said that employers that "know-

ingly hire" undocumented workers will

be penalized with "employer sanctions."

These sanctions were meant to deter

illegal immigration. If out-of-status

immigrants were not eligible to get

jobs, the logic went, fewer immigrants

would enter the U.S. looking for work.

But the realities of immigration patterns

over the last 15 years have shown the

error of that logic. Rather than curbing

illegal immigration, employer sanctions

have served to fuel an underground

economy of immigrant workers who

are paid substandard wages and face

poor working conditions and discrimi-

nation on the job. Under our current

laws, immigration status often is used

aS a weapon against those who try to

join together and form a union, stand up

against workplace violations, or improve

their working conditions.

Ina similar way, the Hoffman decision

further undermines the living standards

and working conditions of all Americans

by allowing employers to discriminate

against undocumented workers without

consequence. When part of our work-

force can be fired for standing up for

and same-sex.

On March 15, 2002, ACLU/SC David

Bohnett staff attorney Martha Matthews

challenged the discriminatory policy in

an argument before the Ninth Circuit

Court of Appeals.

Whitmire was told that if he ever

hugged Lyster during visitation, his visits

would be cut off. Whitmire sued to chal-

lenge the policy, but the district court

dismissed Whitmire's case, ruling that

since "homosexuals are not considered

a suspect class," the Equal Protection

clause only requires a "rational basis"

for the policy, and defendants met this

standard by arguing that the policy "may

hazards as blocked fire exits, unsanitary

bathrooms, and poor ventilation, and

government surveys show that 75% of

U.S. garment shops violate health and

safety laws. Fearing job loss or depor-

their rights, all American workers are at

risk of being exploited.

Though the court's decision is deeply

flawed, its effect on our union's efforts

to ensure a strong voice for working

people will be limited. That's because

immigrant workers in the Service

Employees International Union (SEIU)

and other unions have always faced

steep hurdles, dangers, and risks in their

efforts to join together and form a union.

Despite the obstacles, hundreds of thou-

SAS

`homosexual' and being targeted for

physical, sexual or verbal abuse by other

inmates because of that label" and that

"correctional officers could be put in

harm's way by attempting to curtail vio-

lence directed toward the inmate."

On appeal, the ACLU argued that the

policy discriminates on the basis of sex,

so a higher level of equal protection scru-

tiny should apply, and that it also discrimi-

nates on the basis of sexual orientation.

The policy is unconstitutional under

any legal standard, Matthews argued,

because it is not rationally related to

prison security, and has no basis in

tation, workers risk much to organize

and speak out against sweatshop condi-

tions. Sweatshop Watch estimates that

there are 140,000 immigrant garment

workers in Los Angeles.

sands of janitors, hotel and restaurant

employees, construction workers, and

other immigrants have fought against

the odds over the years and united in

unions to improve their wages, benefits,

and working conditions and to fight back

against the discrimination they face in

the workplace. Though the NLRB's role

is important, it has never, and will never,

substitute for the strength workers can

gain when they unite in a union.

Inspite of this decision, the courageous

efforts of immigrant workers to stand up

for their workplace rights will continue.

But we cannot ignore Hoffman and its

consequences for the American work-

place. We must reform our outdated

and discriminatory immigration laws

now. We must allow hard-working,

tax-paying immigrants who live in this

country the opportunity to achieve legal

status. For as many as 8 million immi-

grants in this country, legal status holds

the key to the American Dream and an

end to discrimination at work.

The Hoffman decision only under-

scores the need to rededicate ourselves

to our legalization campaign with a new

sense of urgency and a deepened politi-

cal will.

Eliseo Medina is an Executive Vice President

of the 1.5 million member Service Employ-

ees International Union (SEIU), the largest

and fastest growing union of immigrant

workers in America.

common sense. Since Lyster is openly

gay, kissing or hugging Whitmire during

a visit reveals nothing to other prisoners.

The policy also does nothing to protect

closeted gay prisoners, who are the

last people who would kiss or embrace

someone during visitation. Finally, Mat-

thews argued that the policy does not

protect straight prisoners who might

be mistakenly viewed as gay, because

the same risk would still be present for

prisoners who kiss or embrace same-

sex family members.

A decision is expected within the next

six months.

Three Strikes continued from page 1

legislative reform effort, the 9th Circuit

Court of Appeals has ruled against

applying Three Strikes in petty theft

cases twice in the last six months,

though Attorney General Lockyer's

appeal to the Supreme Court in defense

of California's Three Strikes laws was

granted on April 1. Longtime ACLU/SC

ally and former board member Profes-

sor Erwin Chemerinsky will be arguing

that 25 to life for petty theft is cruel and

unusual punishment.

"| don't believe that Californians ever

intended for crimes like petty theft or

check fraud to be treated the same

as rape or attempted murder," said

Ramona Ripston, Executive Director of

the ACLU of Southern California. "AB

1790 would give Californians a chance

to clarify that."

oa

Oa

Protesters Critique the Role of Money in California's

Criminal Justice System

Numerous reports from the Sentenc-

ing Project, the Justice Policy Institute,

and other criminal justice policy groups

have analyzed the effects of Three

Strikes since 1994 and have docu-

mented both its burgeoning costs and

its inefficacy. A study by Rand pointed to

the possibility that Three Strikes costs,

which it estimated would ultimately

amount to $4.5-$6.5 billion annually,

could threaten other general fund

programs, such as higher education.

The ACLU of Southern California is

working closely with Families to Amend

California's Three Strikes (FACTS),

which was founded by family mem-

bers of Three Strikes inmates and has

conducted a sustained public educa-

tion, organizing, and advocacy cam-

paign for the last six years to change

California's laws. FACTS State Chair

Geri Silva notes that AB 1790 faces

a tough battle to get signed, then

another tough battle on the ballot, but

she believes that Californians, if given

the chance, will choose a Three Strikes

law that's tough but fair, reserving the

stiffest penalties for violent and serious

crimes only.

"| think the people of California are

clearer on the punitive nature of the

Three Strikes law and are willing to

support an amendment to it," said

Silva. "They've heard the stories of

nonviolent Three Strike prisoners, who

are getting 25 years to life for stealing

batteries or pizza, and the injustice of

such a barbaric law becomes imme-

diately apparent to them. It's not just

families who are ready for a change.

People get it."

To Hell and Back

MI, name is Pamela Martinez, and |

ama Three Strikes survivor. By survivor,

| mean that on July 9, 1996, | was sen-

tenced to 25 years to life for petty theft

with a prior conviction. | am now free

and would like to share with you what

it's like to go to Hell and back and the

impact this law has had, not only on the

inmates, but on their families as well.

My husband of 20 years was diag-

nosed with a terminal illness, liver

cancer, two weeks before | was

arrested. My solution to this devastat-

ing news was to drink Kahlua and take

Valium. | picked him up from the hospital

on February 10, 1995, and was arrested

for petty theft of a toolbox on February

1995,

During my initial arraignment, | was

advised | was looking at a possible sen-

tence of 25 years to life. | wasn't exceed-

ingly worried, because | had never heard

of a "strike" law and was certain the

court had somehow mixed up the files

and erroneously believed that mine was

a murder case.

| was assigned a very nice public

defender who urged me to accept a

negotiated plea of 17 years, 80% of a

Three Strikes minimum sentence. My

past plea bargains came back to haunt

me and triggered the strike law. In 1978,

| accepted a two-year prison term for a

robbery conviction. In 1987, | accepted a

prison term for second-degree robbery,

which was actually shoplifting, but since

the security guard fell and scraped his

knee, they charged me with robbery.

| do not condone my past criminal

behavior and offer no excuses except

to say that | was a drug addict and did

not have the knowledge or motivation

to seek treatment.

| was informed that the district attor-

ney was being very gracious in my case

by even offering a deal of any kind. |

was not appreciative of their offer and

proceeded to defend myself in propria

persona. | studied and prepared my case

for a year and half. Before trial, | brought

in a private attorney.

| was sentenced on July 9, 1996, 19

days after the now infamous Romero

decision. | believed that, since the judge

was privy to more information than the

jury was, he would strike at least one

Strike (and hopefully more). He didn't:

it would have been political suicide. The

last thing | saw before leaving the court-

room that day were the tears running

down my husband's face.

Upon my arrival to the California

Department of Corrections, | was kept

at the highest security level possible.

The Department of Corrections looks

only to the sentence and not the crime.

The mandatory minimum on a three

Strikes case is 25 flat years. My first

eligible parole hearing was scheduled

for 2019.

Hopelessness and despair permeate

the lives of strikers. They come from

the knowledge that you might never

see your loved ones again, never pet a

dog, never see the ocean, and possibly

never hold your child again.

My husband was approved to visit

five days before he died. | never saw

him alive again, and being classified as

a "lifer," | was ineligible to attend his

funeral.

| lost on direct appeal all the way

through the California Supreme Court.

My only recourse now was a writ of

habeas corpus based on ineffective

assistance of counsel. Through hard

work and diligence, a USC law student

and | were eventually successful. In July

of 1999, my conviction was reversed and

my sentence vacated. Charges were

reinstated and a new trial ordered. The

superior court judge struck one of my

strikes and offered me a nine-year sen-

tence. | accepted this "deal," not want-

ing to risk another possible 25 years to

life sentence.

After seven years of incarceration, |

can tell you that this law is unjust. | was

not a model citizen during my drug years,

but | still cared about the human race.

For many years, | was a paramedic on ski

patrol. | saved people's lives and cared

what happened to them. It hurt my heart

to be ostracized from a society | cared

about, to be viewed as unworthy to par-

ticipate in society. | did not deserve to do

a mandatory 25 years in prison and/or die

in prison, nor do the thousands of others

that | have left behind, and | view my

current work in Support of Three Strikes

Reform as a way to keep saving lives.

Wit

PNON-VIOLEN) J

Sign the letter below (including your contact information) and send it to:

ACLU of Southern California

Attn: Public Policy

1616 Beverly Blvd.

Los Angeles, CA 90026

Dear Governor Davis and other elected representatives:

Please support AB 1790, Three Strikes Reform. When California

voters passed the Three Strikes initiative in 1994, they did not intend

to treat petty theft or simple drug possession the same as serious,

violent crimes such as rape and murder.

The costs, both human and financial, of not making a distinction

between serious crimes and crimes such as petty theft are

staggering. Already, the law has cost taxpayers hundreds of

millions of dollars in largely unnecessary spending. This money

could certainly be better spent improving our education and health

Care systems.

AB 1790 is a reasoned approach to reforming the "Three Strikes"

law. It makes our laws toughest on the most serious and violent

crimes, just what Californians intended. If passed by the legislature,

it would place before California voters in March 2004 an amended

"Three Strikes" measure that would ensure only serious and violent

felons get life sentences. Clearly, violent repeat offenders should

receive stiff prison terms, and this law does not change that.

| strongly support AB 1790 and believe that the people of California

should have their say on this important issue.

Sincerely,

signature

name (print)

address

city, state, and zip

e-mail

In the first post-Bush v. Gore ruling

to require that obsolete "hanging chad"

voting machines be retired, U.S. District

Judge Stephen V. Wilson issued a ruling

on February 20, 2002, in the ACLU/SC's

Common Cause v. Jones voting rights

case that will require new voting sys-

tems to be in place by 2004. The AFL-

ClO, Common Cause, Southern Chris-

tian Leadership Conference, Southwest

Voter Registration Education Project, and

Chicano Federation of San Diego County

are part of the lawsuit.

Judge Wilson's February 20 ruling

required that Secretary of State Bill

Jones enter into a consent decree within

seven days providing for a 2004 replace-

ment day for the obsolete machines.

Jones failed to meet this court-ordered

deadline and, rather than consenting to

a 2004 decertification date, asked for

"reconsideration." As of press time,

Judge Wilson had not issued a ruling

on Jones's motion for reconsideration.

"If this ruling is upheld, over 8.4 million

California voters will be able to go to the

polls in 2004 with confidence that their

votes will be counted," said ACLU/SC

Staff Attorney Dan Tokaji. "This ruling

will do for California what the Secretary

of State should have done years ago:

upgrade the infrastructure of our democ-

racy, by providing a voting system fit for

use in the 21st Century."

In April 2001, the ACLU brought suit

to make Secretary of State Bill Jones

decertify Votomatic-style punch card

machines - the same kind used in Flor-

ida's disastrous 2000 election. These

outmoded machines have an error rate

ACLU/SC Presses For Community

Representation In Consent Decree

On April 22, the Ninth Circuit Court of

Appeals issued a ruling that allows the

ACLU to proceed in its efforts to make

sure that community groups and individu-

als are a part of the LAPD reform process

carried out under the consent decree

between the Department of Justice and

the City of Los Angeles. Legal Director

Mark Rosenbaum argued before a panel

of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that

individuals affected by police harass-

ment, assault, and racial profiling, as

well community organizations such as

Homeboy Industries, Radio Sin Fronteras

and the Southern Christian Leadership

Conference, should be allowed to inter-

vene as a party to the federal consent

decree requiring systematic reform of

the Los Angeles Police Department. In

January 2001, U.S. District Court Judge

Gary Feess rejected the ACLU/SC''s

motion to intervene on behalf of the

affected individuals and organizations,

but the Ninth Circuit reversed that denial,

allowing the ACLU to pursue status as

an intervenor.

In February 2000, the ACLU/SC filed

a lawsuit against the LAPD for engaging

in racial profiling. Racial profiling data col-

lection, the remedy sought in the lawsuit,

is mandated by the consent decree and,

as a result, the ACLU/SC is no longer

pursuing the case. But without being

party to the consent decree, the ACLU

argued that it cannot fully represent the

interests of community members who

have been the victims of racial profiling

and other police abuses.

Rosenbaum argued that the interests

of the community are not adequately

represented by either the City of Los

Angeles or the federal government.

"Throughout the process of designing

and implementing the consent decree,

the perspective of community members

- those most affected by the consent

decree's implementation - has been

absent," said Rosenbaum. "The Ninth

Circuit recognized the importance of

community involvement."

"We're delighted that the court rec-

ognized the importance of having com-

munity members with a stake in police

reform involved in the process," said

Catherine Lhamon, Staff Attorney with

the ACLU/SC. "We hope and expect

that Judge Feess will allow these com-

munity members to participate in the

process, and we look forward to seeing

the police reform that has long been

promised realized."

"Until now, reform has been shut off

from public view," said Rosenbaum.

"Community members and their

representatives have not been at the

table - have not even been outside the

window looking in. Instead, the blinds

have been drawn, and the windows

shuttered in a closed process without

appropriate mechanisms for public scru-

tiny and involvement. We expect that

more than twice as high as any other

system used in California, resulting in

the disenfranchisement of thousands

of California citizens.

Secretary of State Jones initially

attempted to deny responsibility for

fixing California's voting system, but

on August 24, 2001, the federal court

rejected Jones's attempt to wash his

hands of responsibility. Secretary Jones

finally conceded that the Votomatic-style

punch card machines were "obsolete"

on September 18, 2001. Still, he refused

to require the machines to be replaced in

time for the 2004 presidential elections

and had set a replacement date of July

2005.

The evidence in Common Cause v.

Jones shows that the nine affected

California counties are capable of upgrad-

ing their systems in time for the 2004

presidential election. The case was set

for trial to begin on February 19, 2002.

Judge Wilson's decision in the ACLU's

favor, however, means that no trial will

be necessary.

"No one needs to be reminded

of the disastrous effects inflicted by

obsolete `hanging chad' machines,"

said Dan Tokaji. "Secretary Jones

has a Constitutional duty to assure

California citizens that their votes will

be counted and that we will not have

to endure a Florida-style election day

nightmare in 2004. The court's ruling

will effectively remedy the Secretary

of State's failure to protect the voting

rights of all Californians."

Counties Shut Down Peaceful Anti-Dr. Laura Protest

When employees of Gay and Lesbian

Adolescent Social Services (GLASS),

a Los Angeles child placement agency,

attempted to protest the choice of "Dr.

Laura" Schlessinger as the keynote

speaker at a county-sponsored con-

ference in Palm Springs, they were

required to leave under police escort.

The ACLU of Southern California filed

a free speech suit on their

behalf this January.

Dr. Laura has publicly

referred to gay and les-

bian people as "biological

errors' and single mothers

S child abusers __

Seven GLASS employ- |

ees decided to attend the

2001 conference, wearing

T-shirts with the logo of a |

_ website, "StopDrLaura. com,' and the

question "Are you a biological error?"

They also brought copies of an excerpt

froma book, "Hate Hurts," about how

_ bigotry harms children.

The GLASS employees egiced

and paid to attend the conference.

They planned to sit and listen to Dr.

Laura's speech, wear the T-shirts as

a silent protest, and use the "Hate

Hurts" materials to explain their con-

cerns to other conference attendees.

But conference organizers prevented

the entry of some GLASS employees

into the room where Dr. Laura was

speaking; other GLASS employees,

already in the room, were "disinvited"

and, when they refused to leave, were

escorted out by the police.

"The government cannot -

suppress a peaceful, non-

disruptive expression of dis-

agreement with its choice

of speaker in a government-

sponsored conference,"

| said Martha Matthews,

| Bohnett euorney with the

ACLU/SC_

The ACLU/SC lawsuit

calls fora permanent injunc-

tion requiring the Southern California

counties involved to refrain from sup-

pressing any future peaceful protest

- against the counties' choice of speak-

ers. The suit also seeks damages for

the plaintiffs for the violation of their

_ First Amendment rights.

On April 8, Judge Howard Matz

denied a motion to dismiss, allowing

the " case to go forward.

You've Sent Checks to the ACLU...

Now Let Us Send Checks to You

By participating in the ACLU Fe

Gift Annuity Program you can

for the rest of your life and, at

Civil Liberties Union protect o:

years to come. The rate of pound:

your age. Much of this |

annuity contract will hel

sizable income tax char

this form for a personaliz

Mail to:

Hal Gunn, ACLU Foundati

Blvd., Los Angeles, CA

Name(s)

Birthdate(s)

Address

ion's Legacy of Freedom

quarterly income checks

me, help the American

nstitutional rights for

2ceive depends upon

And, because your

on, you will receive a

r participating. Return

California, 1616 Beverly

Telephone

City

-_---_- .

| op ee o Et eo ee, ee oe

a en (COZICD atin GaCA LCi

AY Us

SS ee

Translating an Activist Legacy Into an

Activist Future: South Bay Success

As long-time activists with the

American Civil Liberties Union, chapters

have proudly taken part in creating the

legacy of this organization. As we

face the future, how can we translate

this legacy for new generations?

How can we, as the organization's

base of grassroots activists, build

an understanding of ACLU's fight to

defend civil rights in our communities?

The South Bay Chapter was pondering

this very idea last year. What started

as a loose idea of putting together a

lecture series became a reality when

the Chapter Council awarded the

chapter a $600 grant last October. The

chapter's goal was to become an active

center for education on civil liberties in

their community.

In January, the chapter launched its

"Upton Sinclair Freedom of Expression

Arts and Lecture Series," in honor of

Sinclair's legendary arrest in 1923 in

San Pedro for reading aloud from the

U.S. Constitution. The first event drew

25 community members. And with

each event, the number of people has

grown. Through outreach, mailings, and

media work, South Bay has succeeded

in creating a lively forum for public

discussion. 86 people showed up on a

Sunday afternoon at their most recent

event.

In only a couple of months, South

Bay has built a platform of education

and discussion through consistent

outreach efforts to their members and

the community. South Bay activists

have given voice in their community to

the ACLU's fights and efforts.

Ruth McGrew''s goal as president

of the South Bay chapter is to build a

team of activists who share a sense

of responsibility for developing their

chapter and their community. South

Bay is already translating its strong

activist legacy into action now.

Dan Pasley, board representative for

the chapter, states, "As long as we can

challenge ourselves to do something,

whether it is letter writing, marching,

tabling or planning events, we'll

grow."

The ACLU invites you to support the

South Bay chapter leaders by attending

their next Lecture Series. They take

place on the 4" Sunday of every

month. For information call 310-519-

1500, or e-mail dan@c-spam.net.

Join the Lesbian and Gay Rights Chapter!

cent Work on LGBT civil rights with other ACLU members.

e Attend LGRC social gatherings. ;

cent Bring the ACLU and its message to the LGBT community.

cent Receive the award-winning, monthly LGRC newsletter for free.

The Lesbian and Gay Rights Chapter forms a critical component of

the ACLU/SC's commitment to equality and freedom for all, with a

special focus on LGBT civil rights.

Join the LGRC today.

Call (310) 289-1299 or e-mail rahennig@ix.netcom.net to join. If you

leave a message, spell your name, and we'll update your member record

to reflect your membership in the Lesbian and Gay Rights Chapter.

SS

Nba eee LULA bMMs LALLA LALLA USAiiieudde y

OE LY, iy

`The Ve Domus for the American Civi.

Liberties Union of Southern Californi a is currently acc

_ suggested nominations for the Board of Directors.

`Please contact members of the committee:

Roce Ach, Isabelle Gunning, Carrie Hempel, Rita Henry,

___ Jacob Kazanjian, and Michael Yamamoto or -

Associate Director Elizabeth Schroeder at 213- ar 5204

"with names for consideration.

american civil iberties union

of southern california

take action

Grafs

CommitteeMeetings

ACLU/SC Board: Wednesday, May 22 at 7 p.m. and Wednesday, July 17 at 7 p.m.

First Amendment: Last Wednesday of the month at 7 p.m.

Medical Rights: Third Monday of the month at 7:30 p.m.

Unless noted, all meetings are held at the ACLU: 1616 Beverly Blvd., LA 90026. Please park in

the fenced lot behind the building and use the rear entrance when attending night meetings. For

Nominations are currently being accepted for the

Eason Monroe Courageous Advocate Award

This award is given each year at the Bill of Rights

Dinner in memory of Eason Monroe, who was the Executive

Director of the ACLU of Southern California for almost 25

years. At a critical moment during the McCarthy era, he

was fired from San Francisco State University for refusing

to sign the state's so-called "loyalty oath." He gave

up his chosen career as a professor to join the struggle

for civil rights and civil liberties.

Previous recipients of this prestigious award include:

Speaker Emeritus Antonio Villaraigosa, Former California

Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird, Rev. James Lawson,

Joyce S. Fiske, Erwin Chemerinsky, Rita Walters, Alan

Sieroty, Dolores Huerta, Frank Wilkinson, Morris Kight

and Lloyd M. Smith.

The selection committee members are Silvia Argueta, Com-

mittee Chair, Doug Mirell, Lupe Navid, Dean Ruby, and

Yvonne Williams Boyd.

The deadline to submit nominations is June 1, 2002. Please

forward nominations to Rick Lam at the ACLU, 1616 Beverly

Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90026 or by fax 213-250-3919. For

information, call 213-977-5227.

information about the Privacy Rights or other committees call the ACLU at (213) 977-9500.

RP. l continued from page 1

nothing to do with protecting privacy

and it does not move us an inch closer

to being a society where a person's

race doesn't interfere with his or her

opportunities in life. In fact, it just turns

a blind eye to disparities."

"To say that this initiative will solve

problems of inequity and division in our

society Is like saying that we can end

crime by not reporting it. This infor-

mation doesn't cause the problem

- it helps us solve it," said Ramona

Ripston, Executive Director of the

ACLU of Southern California.

Data on race and ethnicity are

critical to a number of state and local

efforts.

Monitoring student outcomes and

holding schools accountable for the

success of all students are central to

California's education reform efforts.

A recent analysis by the Public Policy

Institute of California, which relied on

data gathered by the state, found that

educational resources are distributed

unequally by race and ethnicity. Presi-

dent Bush and Senator Kennedy's

education reform bill acknowledges

the necessity of tracking outcomes

for all students and includes provisions

requiring schools to track performance

across demographic categories and

sanctions for schools that fail to serve

students of color.

Prenatal education and care, drug

treatment and education, and teen

smoking prevention programs are

just some of the health programs that

would no longer have the information

necessary to analyze community

health patterns and target resources

effectively, health experts predict.

Tracking and responding to hate

crime, as well as tracking and

responding to discriminatory housing

practices, insurance redlining, and

employment discrimination are other

efforts that the Connerly initiative

would undermine.

To get involved in the campaign,

contact Heather Carrigan at 213/

977-9500, ext. 270 or, via e-mail, at

hcarrigan@aclu-sc.org.

ce Fy AF #4