LOS ANGELES - The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California filed suit today in federal court on behalf of residents of City Council District 13, who have been deprived by the City Council of representation on that body. The City Council on January 23rd refused to fill the seat formerly held by Jackie Goldberg, who vacated her City Council seat after the November 2000 election, in which she won a seat in the State Assembly. The ACLU of Southern California charges that the continued vacancy violates the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the City Charter, because it deprives the constituents of the 13th District of a voice on the City Council, even as the Council makes decisions which profoundly affect them.

Section 409 of the new City Charter, which went into effect on July 1, 2000, states that: "Vacancies in the offices of Mayor, City Attorney, controller, and members of the City Council shall be filled by either appointment or election in the manner set forth in this section." Subsections 409 (a) and 409 (b) spell out that the Council shall either appoint a replacement or schedule a special election for a replacement prior to the next election.

"Our nation was founded on the principle that taxation without representation is unjust," said Dan Tokaji, staff attorney at the ACLU of Southern California. "But that's exactly what's happening to over 250,000 residents of this city, who have no voice and no vote on the City Council. All of the Councilmembers know how important their work is to the people who live in their districts, and how important it is for constituents and their interests to be represented vigorously. There is no excuse to continue disenfranchising the people in District 13."

"Whether the issue is police reform, paramedic services, park land, or budget allocations," said Tokaji, "the Council's decisions shape the lives of Los Angeles residents. Public policy and resource allocation matter to individual districts and are shaped by the interests of different neighborhoods and communities. Those interests will not be represented by Councilmembers from other districts."

At the meeting on the 23rd, over a hundred residents of District 13 referred to the Boston Tea Party by waving tea bags to symbolize their lack of a voice in their own government. Some City Council members have proposed extending the vacancy through the runoff election on June 5.

Professor Erwin Chemerinsky and City Attorney James Hahn have both urged the City Council to act swiftly to fill the vacancy to ensure that the City Council does not operate in violation of its own charter.

LOS ANGELES - On behalf of its 28,000 members, the ACLU of Southern California called on Senator Dianne Feinstein to oppose the nomination of John Ashcroft as Attorney General of the United States, citing the nominee's appalling record on civil liberties and civil rights during his tenure in elected office in Missouri and in the United States Senate.

Noting that the Attorney General is responsible for setting Justice Department policy on such vital issues as voting rights, civil rights, affirmative action, school prayer, vouchers, reproductive rights, habeas corpus reform and the execution of federal prisoners, the ACLU/SC decried President George W. Bush's attempt to fill the position with a nominee who has actively sought to roll back protections in these critical areas.

"As Senator, John Ashcroft carried out a radical anti-civil rights and civil liberties agenda," said Ramona Ripston, Executive Director of the ACLU/SC. "He attacked privacy rights, reproductive rights, lesbian and gay rights, immigrant rights and the expansion of habeas corpus rights. He systematically opposed affirmative action programs and anti-discrimination protections. In short, Senator Ashcroft has dedicated his long political career to reversing the very laws he would be expected to prosecute as Attorney General. There is a fundamental conflict of interest here that cannot be resolved through a confirmation hearing conversion."

The ACLU-SC also observed that, if confirmed, the nominee would have ample opportunity to shape a judiciary hostile to civil rights and civil liberties, since the Attorney General wields great influence on nominations to the Supreme Court and lower federal courts.

"Bear in mind that John Ashcroft led the fight against the nomination of Justice Ronnie White, the first African-American to serve on the Missouri Supreme Court, as federal district court judge," noted Ripston. "In the process, he willfully misrepresented Justice White's record. What you have here is a right-wing ideologue who will stop at nothing to achieve a judiciary that shares his agenda."

"The Attorney General is the nation's principal enforcer of federal civil rights laws," Ripston added. "The power of this office is enormous, and should not rest in the hands of a man who has shown himself in every other context to be hostile to civil rights and civil liberties."

Because the American Civil Liberties Union policy prohibits it from either supporting or opposing candidates for public office, with the possible exception of the U.S. Supreme Court, the National ACLU has refrained from taking a position on this cabinet appointment. However, the Southern California affiliate views the nomination of Senator Ashcroft to the position of Attorney General to be such an extreme threat to the cause of civil rights and civil liberties as to warrant calling on Senator Feinstein to oppose it. In taking this position, the ACLU of Southern California represents only itself and not the National ACLU or any other ACLU affiliate.

LOS ANGELES - The ACLU of Southern California strongly opposes efforts to give Anaheim police officers the authority to arrest people suspected of violating federal immigration laws.

The proponents of this measure have deviously twisted the meaning of the 1996 federal welfare and immigration laws. Under those laws, state and local governments cannot enforce a law that prohibits the local police from reporting information on a person's immigration status to the INS. The federal law does not - and under our Constitutional system of government cannot - give local police the authority to act as INS agents enforcing INS laws.

Moreover, this mean-spirited, anti-immigrant measure would wreak immeasurable harm on Anaheim residents and visitors alike. Bluntly put, it will lead to racial profiling in a city that has a nearly 40% Latino population - as well as a large number of Latinos who come to the city to work, cheer for their teams at sports events, and enjoy the rides at Disneyland. And make no mistake: improper arrests can lead to expensive legal liability. Wrongful detention and arrests by local police in cooperation with the INS have recently resulted in several successful damages suits against municipalities.

In addition, there is clear evidence that when local law enforcement attempts to enforce federal immigration laws, the police have an even tougher time investigating and curbing crime. We know that immigrants are disproportionately the target of crime. Victims and witnesses concerned that they will be questioned about their immigration status - or arrested and turned over to INS officials by the police - will refuse to come forward. Immigrants will become easy prey for criminals who know the victims will not report offenses to the police for fear of being deported.

The result is inevitable: crime will go unreported and unsolved. And criminals will be free to strike again and again in vulnerable communities. We urge the Council to leave enforcement of the federal immigration laws where it properly, and legally, belongs - with federal immigration authorities.