ORANGE, Calif. - The ACLU of Southern California and the Fullerton School District announced an agreement today that will ensure equal access to a public school program that requires certain students and their families to purchase laptop computers.

The settlement, which was announced after four months of talks, will allow parents at the 20 schools in the Fullerton district to choose whether or not a school should participate in the Laptops for Learning Program. If a majority of families decide to implement the program at a particular school, parents may either pay nearly $1,500 for a Macintosh G4 laptop or they will be able to borrow one from the district.

Hector Villagra, director of the ACLU of Southern California's Orange County office, said modifications to the existing program ensure that it is fair and equitable.

"We're pleased to have worked out a way for families to participate fully in the laptop program even if, for whatever reason, they choose not to buy computers," Villagra said.

Under the settlement, the program can be initiated if the total number of families that voluntarily lease computers through lease/purchase agreements, those that qualify to buy computers through grants, and those loaned computers purchased by the school with federal, state and local funds, not including the district's general fund, equals 90 percent. The district will then provide the remaining 10 percent of students with computers to borrow. Students will have equal access to computers during the school year regardless of whether they purchased or borrowed them.

Several parents alerted the ACLU about the program, concerned that the fee for computers violated the state constitutional guarantee of a free public education. The parents filed suit in Orange County Superior Court Thursday morning and will seek court approval of the proposed settlement. The settlement also creates a fund for parents seeking reimbursement for past participation in the program. The Orange County Superior Court will oversee the settlement for the next five years.

LOS ANGELES - In support of a resolution Speaker of the Assembly Fabian Nu�ez (D-Los Angeles) will present today in the state legislature urging Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill that includes a path to legalization, the ACLU of Southern California issues this statement:

The following statement can be attributed to Ramona Ripston, executive director of the ACLU of Southern California.

For more than three decades the ACLU of Southern California has supported humane immigration law that recognizes the contributions immigrants make to our society by advocating a path to legalization, protecting family unity and ensuring that immigrants are treated fairly in the judicial system.

Hundreds of thousands of people here in Southern California have joined millions more throughout the United States in peaceful protest to urge Congress and the President to adopt comprehensive immigration reform. Efforts to criminalize immigrants contradict the spirit of our Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the principles on which this country was founded.

As Congress continues to evaluate immigration reform proposals, the ACLU of Southern California calls upon elected representatives to:

' Ensure equal protection. Preserve the individual rights and liberties of every person, regardless of immigration status, as guaranteed by our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

' Preserve due process of law for all by ensuring a fair and equitable legalization process through access to courts and meaningful judicial review.

' Reject indefinite detention. Locking up asylum seekers, torture victims and other immigrants who have no just means to fight their cases is inhumane and does not serve to make our country safer.

' Protect the privacy of all workers.

' Maintain a divide between federal immigration enforcement and local law enforcement. When those lines are clearly drawn all communities are safer.

Any fair immigration reform must include a path to legalization. Dehumanizing hard-working families by criminalizing them just for living here is un-American. Without a path to legalization, undocumented immigrants will remain vulnerable to abuse and exploitation because of their status.

As a staunch supporter of individual liberty and equality, the ACLU of Southern California supports a compassionate approach to immigration reform that will not undermine constitutional freedoms. Immigrants continue to contribute to our growing economy as well as the social fabric of the United States and our laws must reflect that.

LOS ANGELES - A year after filing a lawsuit to stop federal policies designed to silence whistleblowers in the Federal Air Marshal Service, the ACLU of Southern California announced an agreement with the Department of Homeland Security and other government agencies that will permit marshals to speak about public safety concerns.

'We are very pleased that the government has agreed to clarify its policy, which was previously so vague that it effectively silenced members of the air marshals,' said Peter Eliasberg, managing attorney for the ACLU/SC. 'It is of vital importance that there be clear rules about employee speech so that air marshals, can when necessary, bring to the attention of the public policies and practices that undermine the safety of our aviation system.'

As a part of the agreement, which was reached late Friday, the government has agreed to send an e-mail within the week to all federal air marshals clarifying its policy on what marshals can say publicly. In particular, the message will clarify the meaning of two policies that Federal Air Marshal Frank Terreri argued were unconstitutionally vague.

The message will also inform marshals that while the personnel policy does prohibit employees from undermining teamwork or public confidence, 'nothing in the (directive) is intended to limit the free public expression of an employees personal opinions about matters of public concern relating to the FAMS - provided the individual complies with all laws and policies safeguarding the unauthorized disclosure of official information.'

In the original lawsuit, filed in April 2005 against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and other security officials, Terreri challenged Federal Air Marshal Service rules that prohibited him from speaking publicly about his job or saying anything to do with the Air Marshal Service, a clear violation of his First Amendment rights.

The government changed its rules governing employee speech in July after the lawsuit was filed, but, like the previous policy, the new policy also contained speech-restrictive provisions. At the end of August 2005, Terreri amended his lawsuit to also challenge the constitutionality of the new policy. In February U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie denied the government's motion to dismiss the case and ruled that it should move forward toward a trial.

'I am grateful for this settlement,' Terreri said. 'Finally the American public will be able to hear an honest account of our federal air marshal program and air marshals interested in improving the public's safety will not have to risk their employment to do so.'

Terreri, who has 16 years of law enforcement experience with an unblemished record, has since been asked to testify in front of Congress about the federal air marshal program. For the past four years he has been a federal air marshal and is also a president of the air marshal division of a professional membership organization that represents more than 24,000 federal agents, including 1,400 air marshals.

The ACLU of Southern California, Professor Allan Ides of Loyola Law School and Paul Hoffman of Schonbrun, DeSimone, Seplow, Harris and Hoffman are representing Terreri.