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.

ACLU co-operating attorney Carol Sobel filed suit in federal court today challenging the City of Long Beach's impediments to an activist community group, People for Community Empowerment, holding an Independence Day celebration at a city park.

The issue came to a head when police learned that anarchists would be tabling to distribute political literature at the event.

Sobel has been contacted by the city.

LOS ANGELES - Students at Locke High School, who are routinely subjected to intrusive searches of their persons, papers, and belongings, took action today as plaintiffs in a suit filed on their behalf in federal court by the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California. The lawsuit, filed against various Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) officials, alleges that students' Fourth Amendment rights have been violated by the searches.

"Our society is moving toward treating every youth as a criminal suspect," said Ramona Ripston, Executive Director of the ACLU of Southern California. "Searches without reasonable suspicion are just one component in this trend �_ a trend that makes the false promise of providing safety in exchange for surrendering civil rights. The safety payoff never materializes, but in the meantime, students' rights do get taken away."

"By instituting repressive security measures in schools, we educate our students to be residents of a police state, not a democracy," said Ripston.

"School officials have a responsibility to treat the students in their care with respect and to provide them with a quality education," said Chris Tan, an ACLU of Southern California staff attorney and Skadden Fellow. "Instead, at Locke, they're taking time away from teaching and treating students like criminals. In so doing, they are blatantly violating the right of every student to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures."

At Locke, students are subjected to two kinds of searches, neither of which is based on reasonable suspicion. At the front gate of the school, some students who are late are chosen for searches. Students are scanned using a metal-detecting wand, and their jackets, book bags, pockets, and purses are searched. A second form of search is conducted during class time, when students are randomly selected for a search in front of the class. Students report being taken to the front of the room and patted down in front of their classmates.

Elizabeth Perea, a junior at Locke, described one of the searches:

"[A school official]...took the girls to the blackboard," said Perea. "We were told to face the blackboard. She told us to lift up our arms and open our legs. She patted down our pockets, ankles, and pant legs. She told us to untuck our shirts and to turn around. Nobody found anything on any of the students. Nobody explained why they were searching us. Instead, we each received a note afterwards explaining that we had been searched."

Perea noted that the searches humiliate and embarrass Locke students and waste time that could have spent learning.

"The searches make me very uncomfortable," said Perea. "It is absurd. We try to stay away from violence and gangs, and either way we are treated like gangbangers. They should not search us during our education time. Plus, girls have private things in our bags, like for when we get our period, and that shouldn't be shown for everyone to see."

Parents also objected to their children being treated like criminals. Nathaniel Ali-Perkins, of the African-American Parent/Community Organization, charged that the searches damaged students' self-esteem.

"We believe the searches are dehumanizing and damaging to our children's self-esteem - and, overall, program them for failure," said Ali-Perkins.

Moreover, the searches have failed as a security tool. Not once in the eight years since LAUSD instituted its random search policy has a gun been uncovered as a result of a random search.