Letter to the Los Angeles Police Commission

LOS ANGELES - The ACLU of Southern California is deeply concerned that the LAPD's conduct may have lead to another precarious situation in South Los Angeles. The use of excessive and unlawful force on any person is deplorable. We expect that the investigation of the most recent incident involving Minister Tony Mohammed will be handled by the Commission's Inspector General, utilizing methods emphasizing transparency, reasonable expeditiousness and accountability. Every use of force by police officers must be investigated in a careful and thorough manner.

The ACLU, like many community groups, will closely monitor this investigation. We believe a proper start involves the Commission publicly describing the methodology it intends to require, and the setting of a timetable for a report to be completed. Those responsible for breaking the law must be held accountable, especially if they are entrusted with enforcing it.

Harris v. Board of Supervisors

LOS ANGELES - In a landmark action for low-income residents requiring necessary medical care, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted late Tuesday to approve a settlement that would ensure increased access to better care for patients two years after it announced it would slash medical care at two Los Angeles public facilities.

Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles, the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, the law firm Alshuler Grossman Stein & Kahan, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California filed a lawsuit in March 2003, to stop the Boards' slated closure of Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center and the reduction of close to 100 emergency services beds at Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center. The settlement will ensure that LA County-USC will continue to operate with the appropriate staff and budget for 40,000 patient admissions and Rancho los Amigos will remain open with more than 150 beds for patients requiring catastrophic rehabilitation services.

"This is a victory for the poor, indigent patients in L.A. County who suffer from chronic health conditions and have to rely on the county healthcare system," said Silvia Argueta, an attorney with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles.

The settlement will further ensure at least 50 inpatient psychiatry beds at LA County-USC remain open, maintain a lower waiting time for emergency care, establish a patient tracking system in the emergency department, allocate money to effectively and efficiently operate the facility including managing patient stays in accordance with the national standard.

The County also agreed to ensure Rancho los Amigos remain open for at least three years, which will decrease staff turnover and ensure stability in the hospital. The settlement requires that Rancho continue its mission as a catastrophic rehabilitation hospital for eligible indigent or Medi-Cal patients.

"The settlement is like CPR for the County's health care delivery service," said Mark Rosenbaum, ACLU/SC legal director. "It means that indigent families will receive necessary emergency and rehabilitation services delivered by a more cost and medically efficient system."

In the Fall of 2002, the County Board of Supervisors closed eleven health centers and cut vital services provided by free and low cost clinics. Community organizations and public interest groups submitted over 2,500 pages of testimony, letters, studies and reports to the County detailing the dramatic impact the cuts would have on the quality of medical care in Los Angeles County. In January 2003, the Board announced further reductions, voting to close Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center and to reduce the number of hospital beds at County's largest trauma care provider, LA County-USC Medical Center.

Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center is the largest safety net provider in one of the most densely populated areas of the County. LA County-USC serves close to 50,000 inpatients and 750,000 outpatients a year.

LOS ANGELES - In a strong ruling in favor of religious liberty, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals maintained that the California prison system's ban on long hair for male prisoners violated the religious freedom of a former inmate, who is Native American.

A three-judge panel reversed a lower court decision and held that the California Department of Corrections had failed to demonstrate that the restriction on hair length was necessary to security, especially with respect to a prisoner in a minimum security facility.

"This is a great victory for religious freedom," said Peter Eliasberg, the ACLU of Southern California's Manheim Attorney for First Amendment Rights. "The Ninth Circuit recognized that the Department of Corrections cannot rely on unsubstantiated fears to prevent prisoners from abiding by their deeply held religious beliefs."

The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, together with the law firm of Bingham McCutchen, originally filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Billy Soza Warsoldier, a Cahuilla Native American, after learning that he was being penalized for practicing his religion, a central tenet of which is the prohibition of cutting his hair except upon the death of a loved one. While held in the Adelanto Community Correctional Facility in Adelanto, California, Warsoldier was denied visitation rights and other privileges for refusing to comply with the Department of Corrections' grooming policy, which stipulates that male inmates must keep their hair no longer than three inches.

Warsoldier, who lives in Riverside and owns a gallery owner said the decision was a victory for Indian men. "I was just upholding something I have always believed in," he said.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Warsoldier in March 2004. After a federal district court sided with the state and denied Warsoldier's request for a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the policy against him, Warsoldier was informed that , as a direct consequence of his refusal to violate his religion, he would be additionally punished by an extension of his time in prison until July 7, at the soonest.

On the day Warsoldier was to be released in 2004, the ACLU of Southern California and Bingham McCutchen filed an emergency motion in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, requesting that Warsoldier's punishments - including his additional prison time - be withdrawn immediately. The court granted the emergency request and ordered the state to release Warsoldier.

"Today's ruling sends a clear message to the Department of Corrections that it must change its policy in order to respect religious freedom," Eliasberg added.