The ACLU of Southern California, along with the law firm of Morrison & Foerster, has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of homeless individuals who have been the victims of a campaign of lawlessness on the streets at the hands of private security guards in downtown Los Angeles.

The suit alleges that the security guards are seeking to run the homeless out of certain sections of the city, and that to achieve that goal, have devised and implemented policies that call on their security brigades to engage in a concerted pattern of lawbreaking. By design, these patrols routinely and deliberately violate the homeless' civil liberties through a campaign of physical and verbal abuse.

'These security forces have been on a rampage,' said Michael Small, chief counsel of the ACLU of Southern California. 'It is time for these rogue operations to be shut down.' The court papers document a disturbing series of repeated and ongoing encounters on the streets and sidewalks in which the security guards, without lawful justification, search the homeless' pockets and clothing, rifle through their personal possessions, order them to stay or go somewhere against their will, and place them in handcuffs.

In one frightening episode, a man with a broken leg who refused to consent to having his photograph taken by the security forces was handcuffed, forced by security guards to walk 30 yards without his crutches, and placed in a patrol car until bystanders summoned the police to intervene and order his release. In another episode, a security guard accused a man who suffers from diabetes with jaywalking, then forcibly searched him and threatened to discard the contents of a bottle of prescription medicine. Security guards ordered one man to dump water from his canteen on a day that temperature soared well past 90 degrees. Another was doused with chemical spray. These men have had their possessions confiscated and thrown over chain-link fences and have been accosted on the streets (sometimes at gunpoint), forced to divulge personal information, and sit still for 'mug shot' type photographs even though they had not been accused of any crime.

'There is no excuse for the abusive tactics employed by these security guards,' said Morrison & Foerster attorney Hector Gallegos. 'This case is not about the rights of the police to enforce any laws against the homeless. It simply seeks to require that these security forces not harass the homeless nor interfere with their enjoyment of the same rights afforded all individuals. These security forces find the homeless to be undesirable, and their presence bad for business. But that distaste does not give them license to flaunt the law.' The case stems from the formation in recent years of Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) in downtown Los Angeles. The defendants in the case are the companies that manage the BIDs and the security guard companies that the BID managers have retained. In their court filings, the ACLU and Morrison & Foerster are seeking a preliminary injunction against the security guard companies that would compel them to obey the law pending trial in the case.

The ACLU Foundation of Southern California today filed a federal lawsuit challenging the posting of the Ten Commandments on the walls of school offices in the Val Verde School District. Along with the law firm of Morrison and Foerster, the ACLU has brought this suit on behalf of two families whose children attend school in Val Verde. The Supreme Court held in Stone v.Graham (1980) that the posting of the Ten Commandments on public school property violates the religious freedoms of students guaranteed by the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

David McDowell, an attorney at Morrison and Foerster, said, "It is stunning that the Val Verde school board officials feel that they can choose which court decisions to follow. Those responsible for educating our children should be teaching them that it is the rule of law that governs in this nation."

"The Constitution permits a public school to integrate the Bible into the curriculum in an objective manner as part of a discussion of the history of religion or ethical and moral values," said Michael Small, the chief counsel of the ACLU of Southern California. "That is not what is going on here. Rather, the Val Verde School District is seeking to indoctrinate children behind schoolhouse walls, and to force them to subscribe to particular religious tenets. That is clearly forbidden by the Constitution."

A number of parents who object to the school board's action have voiced their concerns to the Mexican Political Association. MPA President Victoria Baca said, "It is unfortunate that the school board has decided to waste time, energy, and taxpayer dollars on an action they know is illegal. The families of Val Verde would be better served if the school board truly sought to address the educational needs of its students." The Val Verde School District serves several communities in Riverside County.

The ACLU and Morrison and Foerster are representing parents Rigoberto and Odelia Roman, and Juanita Franco. ACLU's Small added, 'These parents believe in God and attend church regularly with their children. But they believe a public school is not the place to promote religion to impressionable students.

This suit seeks to guarantee that choices about religion are made by parents in their homes and their houses of worship, not by school board officials.' Along with their complaint, the ACLU and Morrison and Foerster sent a letter warning the school board that the plaintiffs would ask a court to issue a temporary restraining order blocking the posting of the Ten Commandments if the school board does not rescind its policy at its next meeting, which is scheduled forNovember 22.

The decision this week by the Val Verde school board to ignore the U.S. Constitution and post copies of the Ten Commandments on school house walls is deeply troubling. The Supreme Court has said that such action violates the religious freedom guarantees of the First Amendment. Nevertheless, the school board has proclaimed that it is free to disregard the law of the land. Educators should teach our children that, in this country, it is the rule of law that governs, not the whims of administrators and bureaucrats.

Val Verde's action serves no educational purpose. It is about religious indoctrination, pure and simple. It is not about integrating the Bible, including the Ten Commandments, into the curriculum in an objective manner as part of a discussion on the history of religion, comparative religion, or ethical values - a practice the Supreme Court allows.

Make no mistake about it -- the school board will be sued, and it will lose. But the real losers here are the students in Val Verde. The taxpayer funds that the school board will waste in lawsuits could be used for textbooks, computers, and other instructional materials. Unfortunately, the school board has placed the politics of symbolism over the educational needs of its students and decided to divide them along religious lines.