LOS ANGELES - Four Los Angeles area activist groups sued Los Angeles and its police department in federal court today to stop the LAPD's policies and customs that violate protesters' Constitutional rights. The four groups �_ National Lawyers Guild, Los Angeles Chapter; Los Angeles Coalition to Stop the Execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal; Los Angeles Chapter of the October 22nd Coalition to Stop Police Brutality, Repression and the Criminalization of a Generation; and D2K Convention Planning Coalition �_ brought the suit as a result of free speech violations that took place at two major protest events in Los Angeles in the last year, the protests at the Democratic National Convention between August 14 and August 17, 2000, and the October 22, 2000, protest against police brutality at the Parker Center.

"Battles that the LAPD lost in court, it took to the street and fought with batons and missiles," said Dan Tokaji, staff attorney at the ACLU of Southern California. "Last year the courts ordered the LAPD to allow protesters to exercise their Constitutionally guaranteed free speech rights. Officials and officers of the LAPD decided they knew better than the courts and shut down free speech anyway. It's time to reckon with that gross abuse of power and to change the policies and customs that the LAPD regularly employs to squelch our Constitutional rights."

The lawsuit, National Lawyers Guild v. City of Los Angeles, details an array of activities that the LAPD uses to suppress free speech and to intimidate those who attempt to exercise it in public venues in Los Angeles. These activities include surveillance, infiltration of protest groups, the imposition of no-speech zones, the use of excessive force, the use of inappropriate, pretextual administrative searches, the illegal dispersal of public free speech events, and the illegal blocking of pre-authorized, fully permitted marches.

"The LAPD is at war with the First Amendment," said Carol Sobel, ACLU/SC co-operating attorney. "Right now, people who decide to exercise their Constitutional rights have to fear for their lives."

The lawsuit also describes the LAPD's use of batons, concussion grenades, rubber bullets, and other projectiles to disperse and intimidate crowds. The suit describes multiple instances of deliberate misuse of these weapons, including the use of batons to hit people in the head and the firing of supposedly "nonlethal" projectiles such as "Stingers," "Multiple Batons," and "eXact iMpacts" directly at people, rather than shooting them to ricochet off the ground, a misuse which manufacturers warn could result in serious injury or death.

"LAPD's unconstitutional use of force targets everyone and anyone who dares to speak out about the injustices in our society," said James Lafferty, Executive Director of the Los Angeles Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. "Its target is the right to dissent. Its target is constitutional government as we know it."

The plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU of Southern California and Carol Sobel, an ACLU/SC cooperating attorney and National Lawyers Guild volunteer counsel; Robert Myers, of the firm Newman. Aaronson. Vanaman. and volunteer counsel for the National Lawyers Guild; Prof. Karl Manheim (Loyola Law School), and Paul L. Hoffman, of Schonbrun, Desimone, Seplow, Harris & Hoffman.

LOS ANGELES - People for Community Empowerment, a coalition organizing around energy and other community issues, will be able to go ahead with a rally and parade starting at El Dorado Park in Long Beach on July 4, after winning a temporary restraining order yesterday against the City of Long Beach. People for Community Empowerment is represented by ACLU/SC co-operating attorney Carol Sobel.

"This Independence Day, we have one more thing to celebrate," said Sobel. "The federal court here in Los Angeles allowed our plaintiffs' constitutionally-protected free speech activities to go ahead as planned. Their activities represent the heart of our freedom as a nation, and their perseverance in the face of city bureaucratic obstacles will secure their own rights �_ and the rights of others in the future."

The city began to create obstacles for People for Community Empowerment when it learned that anarchists might distribute literature at a table at the event. The city cited several provisions of its permitting scheme, the substance of which had already been successfully challenged by the ACLU in court nearly ten years ago, when Long Beach Gay and Lesbian Pride event organizers encountered city resistance to their event.

"The City of Long Beach tinkered with its unconstitutional law, but did not fundamentally change its unconstitutionality," said Sobel. " The City of Long Beach still has a permitting scheme which gives the city and its agents the power, in effect, to stop speech it doesn't happen to like. That's what we hope to change."

The temporary restraining order, granted yesterday by U.S. District Judge Robert Takasugi, orders the City of Long Beach not to enforce its parade permitting ordinance and to issue forthwith any and all necessary permits for the event. The order also exempts the group from posting a bond in order to hold their event.

LOS ANGELES - On June 26, the Glendale City Council, after hearing testimony in previous weeks from the ACLU and others, voted 4 in favor, 0 opposed, and 1 abstaining to add comprehensive protections against discrimination in the use of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds -- protections that prevent discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, domestic partner status, pregnancy and parenthood, and AIDS/HIV status. The new law would prevent any organization that practices discrimination against anyone on these bases, such as the Boy Scouts of America, from receiving such funds.

"Last night's vote was a real victory for fairness in Glendale," said Martha Matthews, the ACLU of Southern California's David Bohnett staff attorney, a position funded by the Bohnett Foundation to advance the civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. "The Glendale City Council made the right decision, guided by their own instincts for fairness and the leadership of the League of Women Voters and the Human Relations Commission."

Cities use federal CDBG funds to provide education and job training programs, to assist small businesses, to provide services for youth, seniors and the disabled, to implement anti-crime programs, and more. Cities distribute their CDBG funds as sub-grants to non-profit organizations. Glendale receives about one million dollars per year in CDBG funds.

Federal law already requires that CDBG grant recipients cannot discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex or disability in providing services. In addition, under California law, CDBG grant recipients cannot discriminate in employment, on the basis of all these categories plus marital status, age, and sexual orientation.

"This overlap of federal and state law creates different standards for services and employment, which could lead to unfair results," said Matthews. "For example, under current law, an after-school sports program could not refuse to hire a coach because he was gay, but could legally exclude gay youth from participating in the program."

The new protections added last night would ensure that the same non-discrimination protections apply to services as to employment and adds new categories not covered by current law: gender identity, domestic partner status, pregnancy and parenthood, and AIDS/HIV status. Only two other cities, Los Angeles and San Francisco, have extended the non-discrimination requirements for CDBG grants beyond what is required by federal and state law.

The Glendale Human Relations Coalition drafted the proposed policy last fall. After an initial rejection by the City Council, the League of Women Voters held a community forum to study the issue and presented a report to the City Council on May 8. ACLU staff attorney Martha Matthews advised these community groups, and testified at a May 15 hearing. All three organizations view the new policy'the first non-discrimination ordinance adopted by the city of Glendale--as a major step forward for the city.