The ACLU of Southern California will join dozens of students unjustly barred from participating in their graduation ceremonies in a 'mock' graduation ceremony, Tuesday, June 22, at 1 p.m. Parents, fellow students and teachers are expected to attend.

Last week, the ACLU was contacted by a number of Burbank students who, despite having successfully completed the academic requirements needed to graduate, were denied participation in graduation ceremonies. The ACLU has reviewed the current policy and firmly believes it to be unfair, unjust and misguided. Specifically, the ACLU believes that the attendance requirement "no more than 15 absences, even when excused" and the appeals process should be revised.

On Monday, the ACLU wrote to the Burbank school board demanding the current graduation policy be revised. The ACLU expressed its grave concern that, under the current policy, the Burbank Unified School District might be violating students substantive and procedural due process rights, guaranteed under the United States and the California constitutions.

The ACLU's primary goal is to change this unjust policy, so that future graduating seniors will be able to focus attention on competing their academic work without having to worry about being barred from attending their graduation ceremony should they become ill, suffer a loss in the family, or fulfill their civic duty.

Today the United States House of Representatives passed a measure which would allow states to pass laws permitting public schools to place the Ten Commandments in classrooms across this country. The ACLU of Southern California is shocked by this clear and arrogant violation of our constitution.

"Instead of focusing attention on the real issues facing our children today - violence, poverty, inadequate educational opportunities - Congress has chosen to play the religion card," said Ramona Ripston, ACLU-SC Executive Director. "Far from protecting our children from violence and intolerance, this amendment would serve only to divide communities along religious lines."

The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting, the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

"The framers designed the First Amendment to guarantee religious freedom, understanding, as do most church officials today, that once government becomes involved with religion and acquires the power to promote religious beliefs, it also acquires the power to suppress,. said Ripston." The ACLU supports the separation of church and state for the very same reason the founders of our country did: to promote and protect religious freedom by keeping the government out.

The ACLU of Southern California expressed strong disapproval of today's decision by the California State Supreme Court in Regents v. Superior Court (formerly Molloy v. Regents ), a case arising from the University of California Board of Regents' approval of resolutions abolishing affirmative action. The Court held that student reporter Tim Molloy and the UCSB student newspaper, The Daily Nexus, may not pursue their claim that former Governor Pete Wilson and the U.C. Board of Regents violated the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, in voting to approve resolutions abolishing affirmative action at the U.C. Today's ruling reverses lower court decisions, which had allowed Molloy's case to go forward. Still in question, and unresolved by today's decision, is whether then-Governor Wilson violated the Public Records Act by refusing to turn over telephone records of his conversations with other members of the Board of Regents.

A coalition of civil liberties and civil rights groups representing The Daily Nexus, and reporter Tim Molloy had argued that Wilson violated the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act by secretly locking up the votes through a series of private phone conversations to the regents in the days prior to the July meeting at which the resolutions were formally approved. Such conduct would violate the Open Meeting Act, which protects the public's right to see, hear, and participate in decisions made by government bodies like the Board of Regents and expressly forbids secret commitments to vote a particular way. The Superior Court (Judge David Garcia) and the Court of Appeal had allowed Mr. Molloy and The Daily Nexus to pursue their claims. The Supreme Court reversed on procedural grounds, without ruling on the ultimate question whether Wilson and the regents broke the law.

We're very disappointed by today's ruling,. said ACLU/SC staff attorney Dan Tokaji, who argued the case on behalf of reporter Molloy and The Daily Nexus. This ruling strikes a blow to the gut of the Open Meeting Act. It allows public officials to meet in secret, hide their wrongdoing for a mere 30 days, and get off scot free. We believe that this is against the will of the people of California, who meant to hold all public officials including the governor accountable to the public..

Tokaji added: As a result of today's decision, a cloud of suspicion will always hang over the Wilson Administration. The public is denied the opportunity to find out whether he broke the law. The ruling cuts off any inquiry into whether Wilson and the regents went behind the public's back..

It's disappointing that the Supreme Court threw out our Open Meeting Act claim, said lead plaintiff Tim Molloy. But it provides an impetus to pursue our Public Records Act claim even more intently..

In addition to the ACLU of Southern California, the First Amendment Project, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights, ERA, and the ACLU of Northern California all participated in the case.