LOS ANGELES - The ACLU of Southern California is seeking to enjoin a new Department of Homeland Security policy relating to federal air marshals' free speech rights that, like the previous directive, overly restricts speech and is likely to continue to jeopardize public safety.

"The new policy does nothing to ease the chilling effect on whistleblowers' speech," said Peter Eliasberg, Manheim Family Attorney for First Amendment Rights at the ACLU of Southern California. "The policy is still unconstitutional and leaves air marshals in the untenable position of not knowing whether they have First Amendment rights to participate in public discussion that could improve the safety of the airline industry."

The motion filed today seeks a temporary restraining order in advance of a House Committee on the Judiciary report pertaining to its investigation of the mismanagement of the Federal Air Marshal Service by the current administrators. The current rules could prohibit Air Marshal Frank Terreri from commenting on the report despite his prominent role as a president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association and an informed critic of FAMS.

The director of FAMS has personally initiated four investigations of Terreri - two after the lawsuit was filed. As a result, portions of the motion for a restraining order are being made under seal since the Department of Homeland Security warns employees that any release of information about an investigation may result in discipline or criminal action.

In the original lawsuit, dubbed Air Marshal X, filed in April against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and other security officials, Air Marshal Frank 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 Office of Professional Responsibility concluded the original rules were "unenforceable as written." In July, the Department of Homeland Security issued a new directive purporting to honor the free speech rights of Federal Air Marshal employees. At the end of August, Terreri amended his lawsuit to also challenge the constitutionality of the new policy.

"The new policy of the Department of Homeland Security simply repackages the original unconstitutional restrictions in different language," said Professor Allan Ides of Loyola Law School. "The biggest loser is the public, which is denied information on critical policy matters."

Terreri has 12 years of law enforcement experience with an unblemished record. For the past three years he has been a federal air marshal and is also a president of a professional membership organization that represents more than 23,000 federal agents, including 1,400 air marshals.

Last year Terreri was taken off active flight duty and placed on administrative duty after he sent a private e-mail to another air marshal raising concerns about an air marshal profile in People magazine. He was returned to active flight duty the day after filing the lawsuit in April. He learned he was cleared of the first investigation and the charges were unfounded only after filing a Freedom of Information Act Request.

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.

Date

Tuesday, November 8, 2005 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Criminal Justice and Drug Policy Reform

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

ORANGE, Calif. - The Orange County Branch of the ACLU of Southern California sent a letter to the Fullerton School District after receiving complaints about a district program that requires parents to purchase expensive laptop computers for their children so they can fully participate in class.

In a letter to the district on behalf of parents with children in the district, Orange County Office Director Hector Villagra wrote: the "Laptops for Learning Program, which has been implemented at various grade levels in four district schools, requires the payment of fees in order for students to participate. We write to you because the program plainly violates the free school guarantee under the California Constitution, which forbids the imposition of fees for educational activities offered by public school districts."

Parents like Sandra Dingess, who has five adopted children in the district, must pay nearly $1,500.00 in order to purchase a laptop computer, warranty, insurance, and computer case costs so her children can participate fully in class.

"At my children's school there really isn't any difference between not having a textbook and not having a computer," said Dingess, who has since enrolled three of her children in Fullerton schools not participating in the program. "I don't expect the school district to give my children a computer, but I do expect the school district to loan them. It's unfair when all kids don't have the same opportunities to learn, and it's stigmatizing for the kids who don't have the laptops."

As a part of a pilot program, students at four Fullerton School District in grades two through eight are using Macintosh iBook G4 computers at school and home. This year, the second year of the program, students in several other elementary and junior high schools are using laptops in the classroom. Teachers and parents at the schools estimate about 50 percent of class is conducted with the aid of a computer. Students without are asked to look over the shoulder of a neighbor.

"We understand the importance of providing technology access to students, but this is a huge burden for many parents," Villagra said. "Many parents simply cannot afford a $1,500 laptop for their young student. We've heard from parents who are upset that their children will not be able to fully participate in class if they don't have the computer and one parent who had to transfer her children to another public school because the cost is too great."

The district has until Friday, November 11 to respond to the letter.

Date

Friday, November 4, 2005 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Education Equity

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

LOS ANGELES - East Bakersfield High School students will publish a series of articles about sexual orientation in the November edition of the award-winning school newspaper, The Kernal, editors announced today.

The articles will be published November 4 as a result of an ongoing lawsuit against the Kern High School District led by current editor-in-chief and East High senior Maria Krauter, former editor-in-chief and current Bakersfield College student Joel Paramo, several other students interviewed for the series, the ACLU of Southern California, the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and the law firm of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley and McCloy. The series was slated to run last May before school officials demanded it be censored at the eleventh hour, citing unsubstantiated threats to the students interviewed.

"I knew this day would come," said Krauter, who wrote one of the articles and planned and edited the other four in the series as a feature editor for the paper last academic year. "We had the support of our parents, the parents of those interviewed, the entire editorial staff, our journalism advisor and even the editorial board of the Bakersfield Californian. I'm glad students at East will finally get to read these important articles, even if it's a little late."

ACLU/SC staff attorney Christine P. Sun said publishing the articles, which included both the views of people supportive of gay and lesbian rights and the views of those who have religious objections to homosexuality, is long overdue.

"The principal was wrong to censor these well-researched, balanced articles about a topic that affects teenagers today," Sun said. "Not only were the threats the principal cited last spring unsubstantiated, but the law is clear that the principal may not just throw up his hands and resort to censorship when he is concerned about student safety. The right to free speech requires that the principal protect students who want to speak out about important issues, and not cede control of the campus to school bullies."

Students originally sought to publish the articles in the second to last edition of the paper last school year, but could not after the principal demanded the students pull the articles citing vague threats to gay students. The student journalists and their sources went to court seeking an order allowing them to publish the articles in the final edition of the paper.

The court denied the request, stating that more information about the district's reasons for censoring the articles was needed. Over the summer and fall school officials failed to produce evidence of their claims that lesbian and gay students would be harmed as a result of the publication of the articles. The lawsuit also revealed the principal took no steps to inform those students' parents or the police officer assigned to the school of the alleged threats. In October, the school relented and informed The Kernal editorial board members that the articles can be printed.

Janet Rangel, who graduated from East High last June and is a plaintiff in the lawsuit, was interviewed for the story with her mother.

"When our principal said the articles on sexual orientation could not be published in The Kernal it made me feel like I was back in the closet again, hiding," Rangel said. "I'm glad that because we didn't back down the articles will be printed. It's important for schools to be a place where students learn and feel comfortable. "

GSA Network Alliance Executive Director Carolyn Laub, whose group was a plaintiff in the case, added: "Finally, the voices of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth at East Bakersfield High are no longer being silenced. Now, other LGBT students will know they are not alone. This should be a wake-up call for school administrators that they need to conduct anti-bullying training in schools proactively, to prevent discrimination or bullying from happening in the first place."

After the articles are printed, the students will continue to seek a court order clarifying the duties of the school with respect to protecting student free speech rights, so that future student journalists will not be similarly censored and to ensure that the school district will seek effective methods to combat bullying on campus.

Date

Friday, November 4, 2005 - 12:00am

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Related issues

Education Equity LGBTQ Rights Religious Liberty

Show related content

Menu parent dynamic listing

68

Style

Standard with sidebar

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of Southern California RSS