LOS ANGELES - In a strongly-worded letter, the ACLU of Southern California along with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the Gay-Straight Alliance Network and other members of the California Safe Schools Coalition demanded that an Orange County high school student be reinstated as editor-in-chief of her school newspaper and that her record be wiped clean.

Ann Long, a senior at Troy High School in Fullerton and former editor-in-chief of her school newspaper, was removed from her position in January after publishing an article about the experiences of three gay students at Troy.

Long was shocked her article caused her to be removed from her post.

"I got the approval of my journalism adviser, I checked my facts, and all the students agreed to tell their stories in this article," said Long, who is an honors student. "I thought this was an important issue, and so did my sources, to discuss in the school newspaper because it promotes tolerance and understanding."

School and district officials gave conflicting reasons for the decision to end Long's term as editor-in-chief. A vice principal told Long she "should have known" to get parental permission before publishing the students' stories, but according to the state attorney general such permission is not required. A school district official claimed Long violated a state law requiring parental permission for school surveys that ask students about their personal beliefs about sexual behavior or family life. The law cited, however, has no relevance to Long's article.

A school principal also charged Long with disobeying her adviser's orders to get parental permission and lying about it. Long insists she was never asked to get such permission.

"Students may not be punished solely for expression that is constitutionally protected if it happens outside the school gates," said Ranjana Natarajan, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Southern California. "A school can't punish a student just because it may not agree with her article's content."

Members of the California Safe Schools Coalition, a statewide partnership of organizations committed to eliminating discrimination and harassment on the basis of sexual orientation in schools, are supporting Long and her right and the rights of the students featured in her article to tell their stories.

"School administrators are required by state and federal law to protect the safety of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students," said Molly O'Shaughnessy, Director of the California Safe Schools Coalition. "By punishing a student simply for writing a newspaper article that deals responsibly with sexual orientation, they are perpetuating a climate of fear and silence for LGBT students."

LOS ANGELES - The city of Los Angeles is on the cusp of commissioning a report to analyze data collected each time an officer stops a pedestrian or searches a driver to help determine whether the LAPD engages in racial profiling. But the report will not look at the race or ethnicity of motorists who are stopped and therefore it will not consider the phenomenon of "Driving While Black/Brown."

An analysis of pedestrian stops cannot substitute for motor vehicle stops since officers stop motorists far more often than pedestrians and the perception of racial profiling is most often linked to harassing stops of minority drivers. Unless it changes the methodology for analysis, the report could be meaningless and may not help allay community concerns, especially among African Americans and Latinos, the ACLU of Southern California says.

"A string of events has raised the tide of concern and opposition about police practices in Los Angeles, but it comes at a time when the police department claims to be looking internally at its practices," said Ricardo Garcia, criminal justice director at the ACLU of Southern California. "The LAPD must use the opportunity not to patronize the community, but to begin a cultural shift on the force."

Community leaders are calling on the city to use the analysis to make changes in the attitude and culture of the LAPD.

"Until the community is involved, the report will only go so far in suggesting substantive redress," said Rev. Lewis Logan, pastor at Bethel AME in South Los Angeles. "The community must be vigilant and take advantage of the moment in order to both expose this egregious practice and effect systemic change. We cannot look at ourselves as victims but must seize the opportunity to empower ourselves through sustained and strategic direct action."

In 2000 the U.S. Department of Justice and the city of Los Angeles entered into a binding Civil Rights Consent Decree that requires collection of data each time a police officer stops someone in the city. U.S. District Court Judge Gary A. Feess who is overseeing the consent decree ordered the data must be analyzed. The LAPD-contracted Analysis Group, a relatively inexperienced firm in analyzing police data, plans to release a report on its findings in about six months. However, flawed methodology threatens to render the study meaningless.

The Analysis Group's proposal for the pending racial profiling study omits analysis of stops of motorists and looks at pedestrian stops instead. The ACLU of Southern California is calling for a revised methodology that:

'Does not use the analysis of pedestrian stops as a substitute for automobile stops. Data related to motor vehicle stops will better illustrate how officers interact with the community.

'First compiles general demographics about drivers in Los Angeles.

'Does not rely heavily on comparing officers in the analysis of the data. Comparing officers will not shed any light on the institutional practices.

SACRAMENTO - The ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse support legislation introduced by Senator Joe Simitian of Northern California that would prohibit identity documents issued by the state, including driver's licenses and library cards, from containing a microchip that contains personal information.

"This is all about individual privacy, personal safety and financial security," said Senator Joe Simitian. "SB 682 ensures that state and local government will be part of the solution, not part of the problem."

The legislation was introduced days after a company in Sutter, California withdrew its pilot program from an elementary school amidst parents' concerns that their children were tagged like inventory. The school district introduced the mandatory use of Radio Frequency Identification tags (RFIDs) to track students' movements. The students were required to wear ID badges that included the device along with the student's name, photo, grade, school name, class year and the four-digit school ID number without parents' consent.

"We fully support this legislation that will protect families throughout California from having to go through what we did - seeing our children tagged like inventory or cattle," said Jeffrey and Michele Tatro, parents of a Sutter elementary student who had to wear the mandatory RFID.

The Identity Information Protection Act of 2005 (SB 682), would prohibit any identity document created by the state, county, or municipal government, from containing a "contactless integrated circuit" or any other device that can broadcast an individual's name, address, telephone number, date of birth, race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, photograph, fingerprint, social security number and any other unique personal identifier or number.

"The signals broadcast by this type of badge can be picked up by anyone with the technology to read it, which allows a child's identity and location to be pinpointed with ease. This does not increase security, it lessens it," said Pam Noles, a policy associate for the ACLU of Southern California. "In Sutter, these badges compromised the safety of the elementary school students and parents weren't even given the option to consent to their use."

Beth Givens, executive director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse in San Diego, added: "Senator Simitian's bill provides vital protection for all Californians. Individuals who are required to carry government issued IDs should not be put in a situation where that document enables them to be monitored and tracked."