The ACLU of Southern California, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the law firm Millbank, Tweed, Hadley and McCloy reached a settlement yesterday in their lawsuit filed against the Los Angeles Unified School District on behalf of Washington Preparatory High School students and the Gay-Straight Alliance Network who sued to stop harassment on the basis of sexual orientation.
The settlement includes a comprehensive series of mandatory training sessions for Washington Prep teachers, staff, and students, and for middle school students who will attend the South Los Angeles high school. The settlement aims to prevent harassment and discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students through training and other efforts by LAUSD's Education Equity Compliance Office that will focus on ending sexual orientation and gender identity prejudice.
"History has shown that ignoring bias never works and only silences the voices that need most to be heard. Other school districts have tried to hide sexual orientation and gender identity issues as too controversial, so we are pleased that LAUSD has chosen to face these issues head on and is working to create a better environment for students at Washington Prep," said Christine Sun, staff attorney for the ACLU of Southern California. "The training is a model for the rest of the state."
The settlement includes a mandatory day-long faculty training on diversity, discrimination and harassment, focused primarily on issues pertaining to actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity. The Anti-Defamation League will conduct the training, which began this year and will be repeated in the next two school years.
Gays and Lesbians Initiating Dialogue for Equality (GLIDE), will hold classroom training sessions and assemblies for Washington Prep students and middle school students slated to attend the high school that encourage diversity and aim to eliminate discrimination and harassment.
"I am so happy all the students at Washington Prep will have this training," said David Ramirez, who will graduate next week. "It was really hard to go to school before because some people here just didn't know how to be tolerant. Things have gotten better since we stood up for gay students and I think they'll improve even more now."
Added Carolyn Laub, executive director of the Gay-Straight Alliance Network, which was also a plaintiff in the lawsuit: "GSA Network is pleased that the settlement agreement includes mandatory staff training and student education on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues because these proven strategies will help create what all students at Washington Prep deserve -- a safe place to learn."
The lawsuit originally charged LAUSD and Washington Preparatory High School administrators, teachers, and security guards for harassing gay and lesbian students on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation and operating "a climate rife with hostility towards and discrimination against students and staff based on their actual or perceived sexual orientation."
Students at the school sued on the grounds that they were subjected to administrators, teachers, and staff calling students names such as "faggot" and "sinner" and telling students they are "wrong," "unholy," "hate[d]," and "not supposed to be like this" because the students are, or are perceived to be, lesbian, gay, or bisexual. The suit also charged that teachers threatened to "out" students to their families as punishment for students' sexual orientation, the lawsuit said.
Deanne Neiman from LAUSD's Education Equity Compliance Office said: "It is important to acknowledge that the District has had a long-standing and pro-active commitment to protecting LGBT students from discrimination and harassment. Since 2001 and continuing to date, 216 Anti-Bias LGBT Trainings were conducted for school administrators and staff. At Washington Prep this settlement agreement augments the comprehensive training and activities already underway at the school and in the District as a whole."

A bill that puts California at the forefront of efforts to guard the privacy rights of its residents cleared a major hurdle on this week when it was approved by the Assembly Judiciary Committee with strong bipartisan support.
The Identity Information Protection Act of 2005 (SB 682) zeros in on the use of radio frequency identification (RFID) tags. It would prohibit identity documents issued by the state from containing an integrated circuit or other device that can broadcast an individual's personal information. The bill was introduced by Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), and is supported by a diverse coalition of privacy, women's and conservative groups from throughout the state.
SB 682 would prohibit the most common state-issued identification documents from containing an RFID tag or other device that can broadcast an individual's personal information, unique identifier number, or location. The bill now heads to Assembly appropriations for review.
"This represents significant progress for protecting the privacy, personal safety, and financial security of all Californians," said Simitian. "RFID technology is not in and of itself the issue. The issue is whether and under what circumstances the government should be allowed to impose this technology on its residents. This bill provides a thoughtful and rational policy framework for making those decisions."
Long in use in the manufacturing, distribution and retail industries to track goods, RFID tags are also widely used in toll booths, inside pet id tags, and even seismic sensors used to collect data in land prone to earthquakes. But the escalating use of RFID in everyday lives poses a threat to the privacy and civil liberties individuals. All matter of personal information can be embedded in these chips - an individual's name, address, telephone number, date of birth, social security number, fingerprint and photograph, which can then be easily captured using scanners widely available off the shelf. Secret and remote reading of this critically personal data broadcasting from the chips puts an individual at risk of identity theft, tracking and surveillance by the government, stalking or even kidnapping.
&#34With each step in this process, California's legislators are letting residents know protecting our privacy is their concern, &#34 said Pam Noles, a policy associate with the ACLU of Southern California. &#34Residents must be protected from inappropriate use of this useful technology, and once again California is on track to take a leading role ensuring technological advances do not come at the expense of everyday people. Our belief is simple - Tag goods, not people.&#34
The legislation was introduced in February, about a month after controversy erupted in a small Northern California town over mandatory use of RFIDs to track student movements at an elementary school. Parents had no idea their children had been tagged with chipped badges that carried the student's name, photo, grade, class year and four-digit school identification number.
Recent U.S. State Department testing showed that even IDs with an intended read range of just 4 inches can actually be read from 2-3 feet away with modified readers.
"People have a right not to be tracked. The government shouldn't be putting tracking devices into driver's licenses and other ID cards that people need to go about their daily lives,&#34 said Lee Tien, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. &#34That is why this bill is so important, because it represents a positive first step in managing a problem that will make all Californians safer."
SB 682 is supported by a diverse coalition that includes the Free Congress Foundation and the California Family Alliance, to the Consumer Federation, the PTA, and AARP.
"California legislators have always been on the forefront of introducing important legislation to balance the potential benefits of emerging technology while safeguarding the privacy and security of Californians,&#34 said Nicole Ozer, Technology & Civil Liberties Policy Director, ACLU of Northern California. &#34With today's vote, legislators have sent a strong message that the privacy and security of Californians must be protected.&#34

LOS ANGELES - As high school seniors graduate and look to the future this month, local students called on Congress Monday to pass the DREAM Act, a federal bill that would increase access to higher education for undocumented immigrant students and give them the opportunity to pursue their goals after high school.

Students, with support from congressional representatives, community organizations and teachers, are seeking federal reform that would help hard-working students who aspire to attend college or join the military to become eligible for permanent residence and in-state tuition rates.

"My parents came to Los Angeles so that my sisters and I could have more opportunities," said Cynthia, a junior at Fairfax High School. "I want to do the right thing and make them proud of their daughters. College is part of that, but my family doesn't have a lot of extra money and right now there is no way for me to become a permanent resident and make sure that I can really make a difference in this country."

Students announced that they will continue to fight for the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act or the DREAM Act, bipartisan legislation introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) that would help young people who were brought to the U.S. more than 5 years ago when they were 15 years old or younger and have kept out of trouble. Under the DREAM Act, students would be able to apply for conditional status, which would authorize up to 6 years of legal residence while attending college or serving in the military. After six years, if students have met all the requirements they would be granted permanent residence.

"The DREAM Act would not only enable myself, but thousands of other students who have grown up in this country and have proven themselves through their hard work in school that they deserve an opportunity to attend college and find a path to legalization," said Byron P. who graduated yesterday from Manual Arts High School.

Both the DREAM Act and the Student Adjustment Act, a similar bill in the House, would expand existing state legislation and will be introduced in July. Both Sens. Feinstein and Boxer have supported the bill in the last Congressional session.

"Currently our immigration law has no mechanism to consider students' special circumstances," said ACLU/SC Executive Director Ramona Ripston. "The DREAM Act would eliminate this flaw. It is un-American to punish students indefinitely who want to go on to higher studies and use those lessons to contribute to our society. We hope Congress recognizes immigrant students potential and enacts the DREAM Act."