Centerfor ·

Constitutional "':I Rights •

1976~1977

Criminal Justice ...... 3 Women's ltigllts ...... 6 Government Misconduct ...... 10 Grand Juries ...... 12 International 14 .. Attacks on Lawyers ...... 16 Labor ...... 17 First Amendment ltigllts ...... 19 Table of fiiUf' "n

c:aa.- Once there was a very wise old man, and he could answer questions that was almost impossible for people to answer. Two young This Docket Report is dedicated people went to him one day, and said "We're to Fannie Lou Hamer Criminal Justice going to trick this guy today. We'regoing to (1917 -1977), a great leader catch a bird, and we're going to carry it to in the people's movement. this old man. We're going to ask him, 'This that we hold in our hands today, is it alive or dead?' If he says dead, we're going to turn it Her courage and determination loose and let it fly. But if he says alive, we're to speak the truth about Mississippi 1. State ofWashington v. Wanrow going to crush it." the criminal courts. In his judicial capacity, Judge Wright ad­ and the rest of the country In August, 1973, Yvonne Wanrow, a Colville Indian, was sen­ hered to the constitutional right to bail, refusing to use it as a So they walked up to this old man, and said, has been and continues to be tenced to twenty years in prison for fatally shooting a 62-year· system of preventive detention. He also broke "club rules" by ''This that we hold in our hands today, is it old known child molester, who attacked her son, and had pre· speaking out against the racism and venality of the criminal alive or dead?" He looked at the young an inspiration to us. viously raped her babysitter's 7-year-old daughter, giving her justice system. He became the target of a vicious campaign of people and he smiled. a venereal disease. smears, harassment, and ostracism, orchestrated by the court And he said, "It's in your hands. " Her legacy of struggle is in our hands. During the trial, she was represented by counsel from administration, prosecutors, police and the press. When these Spokane, Washington, where the incident took place, who measures failed to restrain him or drive him from the bench, From Fannie Lou Hamer'sspeech at the subsequently appealed the conviction. In August, 1975, the the court administration transferred him from criminal to NAACP Legal Derense Fund Institute Washington State Court of Appeals reversed her conviction, civil court where, presumably, he could do Jess "harm" on be­ in 1971. Excerpted in LNS. based on the illegal use of her tape recorded conversation to half of the oppressed. the police following the incident. The State, anxious that a CCR lawyers, together with attorneys from the National precedent not be set against using similar tape recordings in Conference of Black Lawyers and the National Lawyers the future, appealed the reversal to the Supreme Court of Guild, designed a federal civil rights action attacking the con· Washington. stitutionality of the transfer, and demanding Judge Wright's Wanrow came to the Center for help and CCR lawyers, as return to criminal court. Against a motion to dismiss, the fed­ Center for Constitutional Rights 853 Broadway New York, N.Y. 10003 [2121674-3303 part of an all woman defense team, argued in the Supreme eral district court upheld Judge Wright's claims that the Court against the use of the tape recording and submitted a transfer was instigated to punish him for his race, bail deci­ CooperaUn1 Attortt.,YI Offic:en And Board Or TI'Uiteel supplemental brief attacking the sex stereotyped instruc· sions and controversial public statements concerning the ad­ ROBERT BOEHM WILLIAM ALLISON WILLIAM HIGGS ,JENNIE RHINE tions on the issue of self defense submitted to the jury at the ministration of justice. Chairperson ur lhe Board Louisville, Ky. Washington, D.C. Oakland, Calor close of the trial. We argued that the judge's failure to direct After the suit was filed, the Criminal Courts Committee MORTON STAVIS DANIEL ALTERMAN PHILIP HIRSCHKOP DENNIS ,J. ROBERTS Presidenl New York, N.Y. Alexandria, Vo. On~lnnd , Calif. the jury to consider all the circumstances which led up to the of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York investi· ARTHUR KINOY MARK LEMLE AMSTERDAM MARY EMMA HIXSON CATHERINE RORABACK shooting from Wanrow's own perspective prejudiced her case, gated the traflsfer. The Association filed a report supporting WILLIAM M. KUNSTLER New York, N.Y. Luuisville, Ky. New Haven, Conn. and that failure to apply such individualized standards was Judge Wright's record, criticizing the court administration PETER WEISS WILLIAM J. BENDER LINDA HUBER ALLEN ROSENBERG Vice-Presidenls Seallle, Wash. WaRhinl(llon, D.C". BciSton, Mass prejudicial to all women claiming self defense. In a landmark and the bar, and urging his return to criminal court. This Re­ ABBOTT SIMON EDWARD CARL BROEGE SUSAN B. ,JORDAN DAVID RUDOVSKY ruling, the Washington Supreme Court, sitting en bane, up­ port, however, was not entirely candid. Under the direction of Secretarytrreasurer New Ynrk, N.Y. Son Franciscu, Calif. Philadelphia, Po. PEGGY BILJ.JNGS ALVIN ,J. BRONSTEIN PERCY L . •JULIAN ••JR. MICHAEL SAYER held CCR's arguments, and declared that Wanrow was en· Cyrus Vance, its president at that time, the Association HAYWOOD BURNS Washington, D.C. Madison. Wi~c. LiRhon Falls, Moine titled to have the jury consider her actions in the light of her refused to make public crucial information concerning there­ GREGORY H. FINGER RAMSEY CLARK DA VJD KAIRYS WILLIAM H. SCHAAP ,JUDY LERNER New York, N.Y. Philadelphia, Pa. Washinglon. D C. "perceptions of the situation, including those perceptions sponsibility and motivation of the State's highest ranking DAVID SCRIBNER which were the product of our nation's long and unfortunate judge and others in the judiciary. In a strategy reminiscent of MICHAEL STANDARD BRADY COLEMAN GJ.ADYS KESSLER PAUL SCHACHTER BRUCE C. WALTZER Austin, Texas Washingtun, D.C. New Yurk, N.Y. history of sex discrimination." This ruling, the first in the Nixon's coverup, the Association actually moved in court to MARTHA COPLEMAN C.B. KING BENJAMIN SCHEERER Nacol(dochcs, Texas AJioany, Ga. Cleveland, Ohio country recognizing the particular legal problems of women claim that this information was confidential and therefore Volunteer Stall' Attorney• TIM COULTER .JACK LEVINE HELENE E. SCHWARTZ who defend themselves or their children from male attack­ privileged against discovery by us. This motion was decisive­ ARTHUR KINOY Washingtun, D.C. Philadelphia. Pa. New Yurk, N.Y. M. ers, was again aflirmed by the Washington Supreme Court in ly rejected by the district court. WILLIAM KUNSTLER RALPH SHAPIRO MORTON STAVJS I.T. CRESWELL. ,JR. ROBERT LEWIS denying the prosecutor's petition for rehearing. PETER WEISS Washington, D.C. New Yurk, N.Y. New Yurk, N.Y. Discovery completed to date demonstrates the truth of CAMERON CUNNINGHAM BETH LIVEZEY TOBIAS SIMON Despite efforts by Wanrow's supporters to convince the our allegations in the lawsuit. The judges who ordered Judge Austin, Texas Lo .. An~telell, Calif. Miami. Fla. Stall' Attomeyo state not to re-try her, the prosecuting attorney has sched· Wright's transfer were concerned with his bail decisions, and RHONDA COJ>ELON WJLLIA,\t ,J. CUNNINGHAM, S.J. GEORGE LOGAN. IJI NANCY STANLEY ,JOHN W. CORWIN Santa Clara. Calif. Phoenix. Ariz. New Yurk, N Y. uled her new trial for September, 1977. CCR staff attorney his intolerance for and criticism of racism in the criminal jus­ .lOS£ ANTONIO LUGO MICHAEL I. DAVIS HOLLY MAGUJGAN MARTIN STOLAR Liz Schneider and local counsel Mary Alice Theiler will rep­ tice system. We are now proceeding with discovery against DORIS PETERSON New York. N.Y. Philadelphia, Pa. New York, N.Y. ELIZABETH M. SCHNEIDER ALAN DRANITZKE f>IARTHA McCABE NADINE TAUS resent her at trial. the PBA, the judges, and the district attorneys, who, in re· NANCY STEARNS WaRhingllon, D.C. Nacu~tdoches, Texas Newark, N ,J. (Liz Schneider, Nancy Stearns with Mary Alice Theiler) turn, are harassing us with massive counter-discovery. The MARY DUNLOP CHARJ.F..S VICTOR McTEER DANIEL T. TAYLOR. JJl case provides an opportunity to expose not only the discrimi· Stall' San Franci~~eo , Ca. Green\·illc. Mi~. J.uuisville, Kv. MARILYN BOYDSTUN CLEMENT BERNARD D. FISCHMAN HOWARD MOORE. ,JR. DORON WEINBERG natory motivation and collusion underlying Judge Wright's Directur New York, N.Y. Berkeley, Coli f. Son Francisro, C"olor. transfer, but to expose the attitudes and conduct of the ju­ ~:LIZABETH BOCHNAK DIANNE BRADFORD NANCY GERTNER MARGARET RATNER WENDY WILLIAMS 2. Wright v. Patrolmen's Benevolent diciary respecting defendants, counsel and the criminal jus· New York. N.Y. Wnllhit~~tt nn. D C. GEORGINA CESTERO Bustun, Ma.'IS. Association, BETI GARCIA •JANICE GOODMAN MICHAEL JlATNER et al. tice system generally. We hope to be ready for trial in 1978 . CYNTHIA GRAY New York. N.Y. New Yurk, N.Y. Honorable Judge Bruce McM. Wright is one of the few black (Rhonda Copelan, Liz Schneider and Morton Stavis, with LISA ROTH ,JEREMIAH GUTMAN DAVID REIN ,JOAN L. WASHINGTON New York, N.Y. Wnshinl(ton, D.C. criminal court judges in New York City. He is almost unique Lawrence Cumberbatch of the National Conference of Black in his refusal to collaborate with the racism and injustice Lawyers, Stephen Latimer of the National Lawyers Guild, which black, third world and poor defendants face daily in William H. Schaap and legal worker Merle Ratner). 3 3. State v. H. Rap Brown (Supreme Court, tered guilty pleas. Hughey was sentenced pursuant to the Queens County moved to dismiss in the interest of justice, hellion, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus has just been New York) Youth Corrections Act and spent two years in jail. He was re­ stating, among other things: filed on his behalf in the Supreme Court of Westchester After a lengthy trial in 1972, the jury in the trial of H. Rap leased on parole in 1972 and discharged from supervision two "Ever since their arrival in Rosedale, the Spencers have County and will be heard shortly. Brown and his three codefendants was hopelessly hung on the years later. been subjected to a series of deplorable acts of violence (William Kunstler, Dennis Cunningham, Elizabeth Fink, charge of attempted murder. However, all defendants were Swinton was arrested in Vermont in March, 1976, and and abuse because, as Blacks, they had the temerity to Jonathan Lubell, Mary O'Melveny, Margaret Ratner, convicted of robbery in the first degree and other crimes, and brought to New York to face trail on the 1970 indictment. buy a home in a predominantly white neighborhood ... Michael Ratner.) Brown was sentenced to a term of five to fifteen years in a Two months later, the government attorney prosecuting [Ormistan Spencer's) detractors are motivated by state prison. Following his conviction, it was discovered that Swinton moved for a hearing to determine whether Hughey racial prejudice and hate. They have organized to effec­ 9. Assata Shakur (Joanne Chesimard) would testify as a prosecution witness at her trial. This mo­ the two key detectives involved in the case had been under tuate his ouster from Rosedale. To give their cause the In 1973, Assata Shakur was charged by the State of New Jer­ departmental investigation on serious charges for more than tion, which alleged the government's belief that Hughey appearance of respectability by enlisting their test­ would refuse to testify, sought to have him held in contempt sey with murder, armed robbery and related offenses. As a three years, and one had been indicted for perjury in Bronx imony in the prosecution of Ormistan Spencer would practising member of the Islamic faith, Shakur asked the County. A motion for a new trial based on the withholding of four months before the trial. That motion was withdrawn constitute and result in injustice," prior to a ruling. New Jersey trial court not to hold trial sessions on Fridays, this information was made before the trial judge and was The court granted the motion. the Islamic sabbath. When the state court refused, she sought On September 5, 1976, the government subpoenaed denied. (Morton Stavis and Doris Peterson, with Haywood Burns of relief in federal court, asserting her First Amendment consti­ Hughey as a trial witness. His motion to quash was denied. A motion to vacate the conviction was filed in 1974 after The National Conference of Black Lawyers) tutional right to practice her religion. The district court dis­ He was granted use immunity and jailed for refusing to testi­ the FBI's program against black militants (part of COIN­ missed her claim. A panel of the United States Court of Ap­ fy. He was not advised by the trial judge that he could purge TELPRO) was disclosed. This motion has been used as a peals for the Third Circuit reversed and ruled in her favor, himself by testifying. 7. Puerto Rico Federal Jury Composition model for other litigation around the country. Brown's con­ Challenge but the appellate court then ordered a rehearing en bane be­ viction was upheld by the Appellate Division, and the New After the jury acquited Swinton, Hughey was released To be eligible to serve as a juror in the federal district court in fore 10 judges of the Circuit. York Court of Appeals refused permission to appeal. How­ from jail. Eight months later, he was indicted for criminal At the rehearing, Center attorneys filed a brief amicus ever, Brown was granted parole in October 1976, and as contempt. Center attorneys prepared a motion to dismiss the Puerto Rico, a person must speak English fluently. In an effort to have this requirement removed, CCR attorneys, with curiae in support of Shakur's right to practice her religion Brown's federal conviction has been reversed (see below) and indictment on the grounds of double jeopardy, claiming that without being forced to be absent from trial proceedings. the indictment dismissed, he is now, after nine years, a free Hughey had already been punished for criminal contempt by the National Jury Project, conducted a massive study of the jury system. Analysis of the jury records showed that the While suggesting that Shakur's First Amendment claim man. the punitive incarceration during the Swinton trial. No ruling was sound, the full Circuit ultimately voted 6-4 to dismiss her (William M. Kunstlerand Liz Schneider with Jesse Berman) has been made on that motion. This case is of special impor­ language requirement eliminated almost the entire working class from federal jury service. A pilot study of former jurors federal petition for lack of jurisdiction. tance because of the government's attempt to imprison a per­ (John Corwin and legal worker Marilyn Clement) son twice for the same contempt. revealed that despite the requirement approximately two­ thirds of those actually selected for jury service did not have 4. United States v. H. Rap Brown (Doris Peter.~on, Liz Schneider with Martin R. Stolar). sufficient competence in English to understand the pro­ 10. People v. Robert Rice A motion to vacate conviction and sentence was filed in ceedings and fulfill their obligations as jurors. Robert Rice, the only member of the Harlem Six still in jail, Brown's federal criminal conviction for interstate transpor­ Prior to the Delfin Ramos trial (see Docket No. 24), we has unsuccessfully attempted to obtain executive clemency tation of firearms while under indictment in 1968. This mo­ argued that the English language requirement should be from Governor Carey for the past two years. Despite his ex­ tion was based on COINTELPRO disclosures, and charged 6. State of New York v. Spencer eliminated because it denies defendants the right to a jury emplary prison record and the strong support of many com­ that the federal prosecution was initiated to destroy Brown's Although it has been almost 12 years since pasMge of the representative of their community. The challenge was re­ munity leaders, including Episcopal Bishop Paul Moore, credibility as a leader of the black movement. The motion Civil Rights Act, racism has continued to proliferate. An anti­ jected in an opinion signed not only by the judge on the Representative Charles Rangel and State Senator Carl Mc­ also argued that Brown's trial and sentence violated due proc­ bussing group in Boston, known as ROAR, is one example, Ramos case, but by all of the judges in the federal district. As Call, Rice has again been passed over. A petition for a writ of ess because the trial judge was determined to con\ ict him. In the case of Ormistan (Tony) and Glenda Spencer, is another. that prosecution was dismissed on the first day of trial, we mandamus to force the Governor to exercise his clemency a dramatic hearing in January, 1975, District Judge Fred J. In July, 1974, the Spencer family bought a house in Rose­ have not had an opportunity to appeal the ruling. We are power has been prepared and will be filed this September. Cassibry of the Eastern District of Louisiana heard test­ dale, Queens, a determinedly white neighborhood. The house presently working with lawyers in a number of federal crim­ (William Kunstler) imony from witnesses concerning the trial judge's statement was bombed twice, once before the Spencers and their three inal cases in Puerto Rico in order to have the jury system re­ at a bar association meeting that he wanted to sit at Brown's children even moved in. On New Year's Eve 1974, shortly af­ viewed. trial in order to "get that nigger." The district court ruled ter repairs of the firebomb damage were completed, the Spen­ (Rhonda Copelan, Nancy Stearns with Juan Ramon Acevedo) ll. United States v. Robideau and Butler that although the judge had made the statement, it did not cers and their three children narrowly escaped death, when The trial of these two Native Americans, accused of murder­ violate Brown's right to a fair trial and fair sentence, and held their house was pipe-bombed in the middle of the night. A ing two FBI agents on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in that an evidentiary hearing on COINTELPRO was not re­ note, found on the bomb's timing device read: "N1gger be 8. John Hill June 1975, took place in June and July of the following year in quired. warned. We have time. We will get you. Your first born first. After commuting Hill's life sentence for the murder of a pris­ Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The defendants maintained that FBI The Fifth Circuit reversed the district court's ruling on Viva Boston KKK." After the second bombing, the Spencers on guard during the Attica uprising in September, 1971, Gov­ agents had initiated a day-long shootout between them and both grounds, upholding CCR's arguments that the judge's requested and received 24-hour police protection. One of the ernor Carey, operating through the Parole Board, denied him members of the American Indian Movement in which a statement constituted an inherent violation of due process guards was shot at and beaten in the Spencers' backyard. parole for at least two more years. This decision came after Native American as well as the two FBI agents were killed. and that an evidentiary hearing on COINTELPRO was re­ This was the work of a self-appointed vigilante group, Hill and his attorneys had been informed that his release was After five days of deliberation, the all·white jury acquit­ quired. However, rather than open up the COINTELPRO known as ROAR of Rosedale. They patrolled the neighbor­ imminent, in line with the spirit of the Governor's message ted both defendants. The trial was highlighted by the ap­ dossiers on the black movement, the United States Attorney's hood in cars, and pursued white families who sold their pardoning every other indicted inmate and the one indicted pearances of FBI Director Clarence Kelley and Senator Frank office in New Orleans moved to dismiss the indictment. houses to blacks. state trooper because the evidence of crimes by law enforce­ Church as witnesses for the defense. (Liz Schneider and William M. Kunstler) Two men were arrested and tried by federal authorities ment personnel involved in the re-taking of the prison had (William Kunstler, Margaret L. Ratner, Doris Peterson, John for the bombing, one, an avowed ROAR member. Despite been hopelessly mismanaged. Because of this and the fact Lowe, Bruce Ellison, R. Fred Dumbaugh, Michael Foley and overwhelming evidence of guilt, the two defendants were ac­ that Hill is the only person in jail as a result of the Attica re- Jack Schwartz) 5. United States v. John David Hughey III quitted by an all white jury. ROAR demanded that the police In May, 1970, John David Hughey III pleaded guilty to the remove the Spencers' guard and the protection was with­ conspiracy count of an indictment against him, admitting drawn, although threats against the Spencers continued. participation in a plan to destroy government property by vir­ Tony Spencer was charged with possession of a weapon, tue of his attendance at a meeting with Samuel Melville and reckless endangerment, and menacing. CCR attorneys Jane Alpert in 1969. Patricia Swinton was indicted with them pressed to obtain dismissal of the proceedings in the intere~t but was not in custody when the three simultaneously en- of justice. In April, 1976, the District Attorney's olhce of

4 5 positions. Two of these women brought an action under the its certification policy "dubious," and "not a legally tol­ Federal Civil IUghts laws, claiming violations of the Four­ erable substitute for final clarification of the validity of the NO WOMAN SHOULD HAVE teenth Amendment's ban on race and sex discrimination, and Administrative Letter." TO UVE 1N the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments' rights to privacy The State appealed the second injunction to the FEAR and procreative liberty. Supreme Court (Toia v. Klein). The result in Klein is likely to The District Court for the Northern District of Mississ­ be determined by the court's decision in a similar case Women's Rights ippi ruled for the plaintiffs on the grounds that the policy was challenging Connecticut's restrictive abortion policy (Maher unrelated to the person's qualifications and excellence as a v. Roe). CCR attorneys assisted the attorney in Maher to pre­ teacher, and constituted sex discrimination, despite the pare for the argument. The Court is expected to rule by the superintendent's claim that he would apply the policy to men close of this term. if their status as fathers of out-of-wedlock children were ever (Rhonda Capelon, Nancy Stearns with Jerame Seidel for the discovered. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit affirmed unan­ NYCLU) imously without reaching the sex discrimination issue. The 16. McRae v. Matthews 12. Bruno et al. v. Codd et al. United States Supreme Court granted the school board's pet­ CCR attorneys, in conjunction with women's groups, de­ ition for certiorari and Rhonda Copelon and Charles Victor CCR's experience litigating against New York State's re­ The problems of battered wives, long whispered about but not veloped a comprehensive Sterilization Guidelines and Con­ McTeer argued the case before the Court. strictive Medicaid abortion reimbursement policy in Klein v. confronted, are finally being recognized as widespread and sent Form which should help to ensure that all sterilizations Two months later, without explanation, the Supreme Nas.~au County Medical Center (see above) was invaluable in serious. In New York City alone, tens of thousands of women performed in City Hospitals are the result of knowing and Court dismissed the petition for certiorari as having been im­ achieving immediate and successive victories against the fed­ are beaten regularly by their husbands: more than 40'io of all voluntary agreement by the women who choose to have them. providently granted, leaving the Fifth Circuit's favorable eral government's attempt to exclude from the federal Med­ requests for police assistance and protection come from This form has become a national model for other groups. Af­ decision standing. icaid program all but life-saving abortions. women who have been battered or threatened by their hus­ ter many meetings with the sub-committee of Chiefs of We are presently litigating our right to be awarded attor­ Immediately after the Hyde Amendment prohibiting bands. For years, women subjected to violence in the home Ob/Gyn Services of City Hospitals, a final set of guidelines ney's fees under the new Civil Rights Attorneys' Fees Statute medicaid abortions went into effect on October 1,"1977, attor­ have remained hidden until their wounds healed sufficiently and consent forms were agreed upon and passed by the Board enacted in October, 1976. neys for CCR, Planned Parenthood and the ACLU filed an ac­ not to arouse comment. When through fear and desperation of Health and Hospitals Corporation, and went into effect (Rhanda Copelan, Liz Schneider, Nancy Stearns, Morton tion challenging the constitutionality of the bar. they attempt to get help, their husbands' brutal behavior is November 1, 1975. Stavis, with Charles Victor McTeer) The suit was consolidated by a similar one brought by tacitly and sometimes overtly condoned by the courts and po­ These guidelines expand the minimal protections in­ the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation chal­ lice. cluded in the State and federal guidelines. Perhaps the most 15. Klein v. Nassau County Medical Center lenging the amendment. A temporary restraining order CCR lawyers, working with lawyers from other legal important aspect is the imposition of a 30-day waiting period This was the first federal lawsuit to challenge and invalidate (TRO) was entered by Judge Dooling enabling Cora McRae to organizations, have launched an attack on the callous prac­ 'bet wen the time the woman is fully informed of the risks and restrictions on state Medicaid reimbursement for abortion. It obtain an abortion and directing the federal government to tices of the police and the courts to force them to provide le­ benefits of sterilization and told of alternate birth control provided the theory and precedent for courts around the continue reimbursements for medicaid abortions. gal remedies to which women are entitled by law, but denied techniques, and the time the operation is performed. This 30- country to sustain constitutional challenges to such re­ Because of the widespread publicity surrounding the in practice. A massive class action complaint was filed in day period allows her to think through whether she truly strictions. original passage of the Hyde Amendment and HEW's failure Manhattan Supreme Court in December, 1976, and in wants this irreversible operation. Another important provi­ It began when several indigent pregnant women were to notify its regional offices concerning the TRO money, March, the defendants filed answers denying any illegal con­ sion prohibits obtaining consent immediately before, during, denied abortions in the spring of 1972 at the Nassau County women and health care providers were unaware that Medic­ duct. Our motion asking that the case be certified as a class or after abortion or childbirth because these are such stress­ Medical Center, the only public hospital in the county. aid reimbursement for abortions was available. As a result, action was submitted to the court in April, documented with ful periods. The pretext for refusing to perform the abortions was a the court ordered HEW to send notification of the order to its testimony from more than 70 women detailing their mis­ In January, 1976, a lawsuit was filed by several promi­ regulation issued by the New York State Commissioner of regional oHices. treatment by the courts and police. nent Ob/Gyn's from New York City teaching hospitals, chal­ Social Services excluding so-called "elective" abortions from On October 22, 1976, Judge Dooling entered a prelimi­ The litigation is designed to force the courts and police to lenging the constitutionality of New York City' guidelines as reimbursement under Medicaid. In spite of the State's claim nary injunction against the Amendment and on October 29th, recognize and respect a woman's right not to be beaten. A ju­ well as the State and federal guidelines, claiming they inter­ that the regulation did not restrict abortions, a three-judge denied the government's request to amend the order to make dicial declaration that married women in New York are no fere with the doctor's right to practice medicine and a pa­ federal court in the Eastern District of New York unani­ any reimbursements recoupable should the Order be re­ longer to be subjected to discrimination when they try to en­ tient's right to be sterilized. mously enjoined enforcement of the regulation. As this de­ versed on appeal. force their right to survive against violent, criminal behavior CCR attorneys intervened in the action on behalf of cision pre-dated the U.S. Supreme Court's decision declaring The federal government, Senators Buckley, Helms and would necessarily pave the way for similar litigation in other women and groups concerned about involuntary steriliza­ abortion to be a constitutional right, the district court based Hyde and Isabella Pernicone, who were permitted to inter­ states and serve as a catalyst to development of public aware­ tion, to ensure a vigorous defense of the Guidelines. Since our its injunction on the theory that both abortion and child­ vene in the action as defendants, filed jurisdictional state­ ness, concern and action on behalf of battered women every­ last Report, the plaintiff doctors have been steadily losing birth are elective options and to provide Medicaid re­ ments with the Supreme Court contesting the preliminary in­ where. ground. Five doctors have been dismissed with prejudice for imbursement and hospital services for one and not the other junction. (John W. Corwin and Doris Peterson with Laurie Woods, failing to respond to questions served on them. Discussions unconstitutionally coerces the indigent to bear children. Plaintiffs' have opposed a grant of jurisdiction arguing Nancy Biberman, MFY Legal Services, Inc; Marjory D. concerning the possibility of settlement are progressing with The State appealed this victory to the U.S. Supreme that as a result of the abolition of three-judge courts in cases Fields, Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation B; John E. the sixth plaintiff. Court, which remanded the case, without a hearing, for re­ such as this, jurisdiction lies in the Court of Appeals and if Kirklin, the Legal Aid Saciety) (Nancy Stearns and Rhanda Copelan with Nadine Taub, consideration in light of its decision recognizing abortion as a jurisdiction is granted, the District Court's order should be Rutgers Women's Litigation Clinic) fundamental right. The district court issued an interim con­ summarily aHirmed. ference memorandum indicating that the restrictive policy No action has been taken by the Supreme Court to date. 13. Douglas et al v. Holloman, et al. 14. Drew Municipal School District v. was unconstitutional, and in March, 1976, again enjoined (Rhonda Copelan. Nancy Stearns with Sylvia Law, Harriet Each year in New York City, thousands of women are steri­ Andrews enforcement of the regulation statewide. Pilpel, Eve Paul, Jill Goodman, Ellen Leitzerand Nadine lized without their informed consent or because they have The Center's founding experience in groundbreaking litiga­ In an effort to save the regulation, the state took the po­ Taub). been misinformed about the irreversibility of the operation or tion combatting race discrimination, and our more recent sition that it required only that a doctor certify the abortion as "medically indicated" and that it would not question the coerced into consenting. Statistically, black and Puerto lUcan focus on sex discrimination and reproductive freedom com ­ 17. NOW v. Federal Communications women have been the chief victims of this mass steri.Jization bined to bring victory in this case. Five black women, ele­ doctor's judgment. We demonstrated however that the reg- campaign in an apparent effort to "control" the population of mentary school teachers' aides in a Mississippi school dis­ -- ulation functioned in fact to encumber poor women's access Commission, WABC-TV and WRC-TV these oppressed segments of society. (Chicanas in California trict, were denied teaching jobs in the spring of 1972 on the to abortion in areas where anti-abortion groups were strong, In May, 1972, the National Organization for Women filed a and the Southwest, and American Indians in the Mid- and basis of a policy instituted by the school superintendent bar­ and to inhibit doctors from performing abortions for challenge to the license renewal application of WABC- TV al­ Northwest have also been subjected to mass sterilization.) ring parents of out-of-wedlock children from all but janitorial Medicaid patients. The court rejected the state's plea, calling leging sexism in programming, employment, and ascertain- 6 7 ment procedures (the method by which the station investi­ In the amicus brief we argued that the right of a woman young men were convicted of sexual abuse and assault of a The issue was before the Court in these two cases which gates the problems and needs of the community). After to terminate her pregnancy is a personal right which cannot young woman in Queens. The amicus brief analyzed New presented the question whether an employer's disability in­ lengthy negotiations concerning settlement NOW decided to be conditioned on the consent of her husband or father. Tore­ York's new statute barring evidence of t he victim's prior sex­ surance program must cover disability occasioned by normal proceed with the challenge on the petition to deny. By the fall quire a husband's consent for abortion would be tantamount ual conduct from the t rial except in the most limited cir­ pregnancy. Together with feminist legal organizations, CCR of 1974, one and a half years had passed and the FCC had still to resurrecting the common Jaw notion of "coverture" under cumstances. That statute, CCR attorneys argued, does not prepared an amicus brief. The brief supported t he EEOC taken no action. NOW applied to the Court of Appeals for an which a woman was viewed as her husband's property. deny defendants their rights of confrontation, but rather nor­ Guidelines by demonstrating through historical and socio­ order requiring the FCC to act on their petition. In January, Finally, the amicus brief argued that a husband's right malizes the evidentiary rules in rape cases so they will be economic material the relationship of pregnancy-based dis­ 1975, the Court of Appeals so ordered and on March 19, 1975, to procreate does not entitle him to use an unwiJling wife's treated like all other criminal cases. In addition, the amicus crimination to maintaining women as marginal, second class the FCC denied NOW's petition without a hearing. body for that purpose, and that to legally sanction his veto brief discussed the inadmissibility of any prior rape com­ citizens in the work force. The brief also analyzed the impact The FCC's decision was appealed to the U.S . Court of power would be to subject a woman to involuntary servitude. plaints made by the victim and records concerning prior com­ of pregnancy discrimination on the liberty to procreate, and Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and was consoli­ (Rhonda Cope/on, Nancy Stearns with Alice Price and mittment to a mental hospital when the committment was disproved the claim that it is too expensive to cover preg­ dated with the challenge of the D.C. chapter of NOW and Barbara Brown) unrelated to the victims' ability to perceive and relate events. nancy on the same bases as other temporary disabilities in a several other community organizations to the license renewal (Liz Schneider and Nancy Stearns) company's benefit plan. of WRC-TV, the local ABC affiliate. 20. Maggu v. Carey (Amicus) In a shocking decision in the Gilbert case (which the court used to decide the issues in both cases) last February, On Aprilll, 1977, the Court of Appeals affirmed the de­ In June, 1976, New York enacted a law criminalizing loiter­ cision of the FCC although it did suggest that had the FCC ing for the purpose of prostitution in order to give the appear­ the Court invalidated EEOC's Maternity Guidelines at least for the purpose of allowing the exclusion of pregnancy from not changed ascertainment requirements in the interim, ac­ ance of cleaning up the streets for the Democratic National 23. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Wetzel tion would have been appropriate on WABC's failure to as­ Convention. General Electric Co. v. Gilbert (Amici) employers' disability programs. The Supreme Court's deci­ certain leaders of the women's movement. The Legal Aid Society brought a federal civil action in sion ignores both the statute's direction to treat matters Although a hearing was denied, the NOW challenge has the Southern District of New York challenging the constitu­ After the Supreme Court ruled that under t he Constitution, which have an adverse impact on women as discriminatory been used as a national model for similar challenges to TV tionality of the statute (Maggu v. Carey). Recognizing the discrimination against pregnant women was not sex-based and the expert conclusion of the EEOC that pregnancy is part stations for sex discrimination. Perhaps more important, the danger posed by the statute to any woman walking the street, but rather an inoffensive distinction between " pregnant per­ of the system of sex discrimination in employment. challenge has been termed responsible for significant in­ CCR lawyers filed an amicus brief demonstrating that the Jaw sons and non-pregnant persons," we turned our attention to A broad-based coalition has been formed to press for creases in employment of women, particularly in on-camera discriminated against women since it would not be applied to preserving the Equal Employment Opportunities Commis­ federal legislation expressly prohibiting pregnancy-based dis­ positions and improvements in programming to meet the men. The brief traced the historic double standard of all pros­ sion Maternity Guidelines under Title VII to the 1964 Civil crimination. (Rhonda Cope/on with Wendy Williams, Equal Rights needs of the women's community. titution Jaws, which have always been aimed at women and Rights Act, which prohibit all forms of discrimination against (Nancy Stearn.~. Rhonda Cope/on, with Nancy Stanley, not the men who harass them. The case has been stayed pregnant women in the labor force. Aduocate.~) Janice Goodman and Gladys Kessler) pending determination by the New York State courts of the constitutional question in a "Nlated case, People v. Smith. 18. Monell, et al. v. Department of Social (Elizabeth M. Schneider and Nancy Stearns) Services, et al. 21. Coker v. Georgia (Amicus) The lawsuit, begun in 1971, challenged the compulsory-ma­ CCR and ACLU attorneys filed an amicus brief on behalf of ternity leave provisions of the New York City Board of Edu­ CCR, the ACLU, NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, cation and Department of Social Services. Although both the Women's Law Project, the Center for Women Policy agencies changed their policies during the course of the Jaw­ Studies, the Women's Legal Defense Fund and Equal Rights suit, we continued to fight for back pay for the women dis­ Advocates in Coker v. Georgia, a case challenging the uncon­ criminated against. The District Court dismissed the action stitutionality of the death sentence in rape cases. in April 1975, stating that a person could not obtain mone­ The brief traced the origin of the death penalty to the tary relief from the Board of Education, the Department of long-standing view of rape as a crime of property against the Social Services, or officials of those agencies sued in their victim's husband or father and the Southern tradition that a official capacity under 42 USC 1983 (the 1871 Civil Rights white woman's value is measured by her purity and chastity Act). It further ruled that the Amendments to Title VII, effec­ which are the exclusive possessions of white men. tive in 1972, which made the federal equal employment law The brief further considers the double standard of jus­ applicable to state and city employees was not retroactive tice that developed for black and white defendants under and therefore did not protect women placed on maternity which the death penalty has been reserved almost exclusive­ leave prior to 1972. The dismissal was affirmed by the Sec­ ly for blacks. ond Circuit. By outlining the variety of special evidentiary require­ The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the 1983 issue, ments in rape cases, which indicates severe suspicion of the which will be argued in the Fall1977 term (the Court did not victim, the brief shows the weakness of the argument that the agree to consider the Title VII issue, presumably because of death penalty for rape was enacted out of concern for the vic­ its decision in G.E. v. Gilbert, in which it refused to apply Ti­ tim herself. tle VII protections to discrimination relating to pregnancy.) Lawyers for amici also made the point that death or other (Nancy Stearns with Oscar Chase and Gregory Abbey) extreme penalties short of death, have in practice acted more as a deterrent to conviction than to commission of the crime. 19 Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri (Liz Schneider, Nancy Stearns with Marjorie Smith, ACLU) v. Danforth (Amicus) Attorneys for CCR and the Women's Law Project in Phila­ 22. People of the State of New York v. delphia filed an amicus brief in this case in which the U.S. Mandel (Amicus) Supreme Court struck down portions of Missouri's restrictive CCR lawyers filed an amicus brief on behalf of Queens abortion Jaw requiring parental and spousal consent for abor­ Women against Rape and the New York City Chapter of the tion and prohibiting the use of the saline technique. National Organization for Women in a case in which three 8 9 ing in our favor would be a significant breakthrough for all answer was tiled admitting to a series of what the F.B.I. called national security litigation. " black bag jobs" (burglaries) at the house of Clavir and (Rhonda Copelan, with Michael Ratner and Jeremiah Albert. The F.B.I. also admitted it had placed a bug in the Gutman) house. Discovery has begun and at the deposition the first F.B.I. agent took the Fifth Amendment, on all questions but his Government Misconduct 26. McSurely v. McClellan name. This suit by Alan and Margaret McSurely has literally been F.B.I. Director Kelley has disclaimed responsibility for pending since 1968. The McSurelys are seeking damages the actions of his agents but it is believed that he was not against Senator McClellan, some members of his staff, and without knowledge of some of their activities. Kentucky state officials for illegal search and seizure and be­ We expect discovery to take a year, and believe that we cause Senate Committee officials received and disseminated will uncover many more illegal actions by the F.B.I., which illegally seized documents, some of which were private and should result in the indictment of various F.B.I. officials. 24. Delfin Ramos Colon v. United S~ates Panther Party, the Chicago 8 defendants, and a number of personal papers concededly outside the business of the Com­ (Michael Ratner with Paul Cheuigny, NYCLU) Attorney for the District of Puerto Rico anti-war groups. In Kinoy, the government originally denied mittee. The case is developing into a major constitutional con­ In 1974, Center lawyers were called upon to defend Delfin wiretapping, and in both cases refused to disclose them. Un­ 28. Southern Africa Committee v. Clarence frontation. On October 28, 1975, the Court of Appeals for the Ramos, an active supporter of and organizer for Puerto Rican der pressure of discovery the government has been gradually M. Kelley District of Columbia, in a 2-to-1 decision, held that the independence. (United States v. Delfin Ramos Colon). Ramos forced to turn over to plaintiffs significant portions of the Senator and some of his staff were entitled to immunity, even The Southern Africa Committee is one of several citizens' was charged with violating the Federal Explosives Control records of so-called "national security" surveillance. if their actions were outside the scope of their duties, as long groups opposed to racism and colonialism in Southern Africa Act, in the first federal political prosecution on explosive In Dellinger, we obtained and analysed thousands of as they appeared to be "facially legislative." CCR attorneys which have been subjected to various forms of harassment by charges since the anti-colonial upheavals of the 1950's. After pages of surveillance materials, which revealed for the first tiled a petition for rehearing en bane. The petition was grant­ the FBI and the Department of Justice. A request, under the eighteen months' litigation of extensive pre-trial motions, on time the massiveness of the government's wiretapping ed, and, on December 21, 1976, the Court of Appeals reversed Freedom of Information Act, for the FBI's tile on SAC was the second day of trial the charges against Delfin Ramos were program for "domestic security" purposes. These records, its previous decision and held that Congressional immunity denied by Director Kelley on the ground that the Committee dismissed on motion of the United States Attorney, who ad­ which we shared with the Senate Select Committee on In­ did not extend to the private, personal papers which were out­ was, indeed, under active investigation by the FBI Suit was mitted that the government had insufficient evidence to telligence Activities (Church Committee) document the side the business of the Committee. The government has filed filed in the Southern District of New York in November, 1975, prosecute. spuriousness of any domestic security rationale as well as the a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court. demanding production of the files and an end to the harass­ The trial judge called this action by the United States government's deliberate deception of the courts as to the (Morton Stauis, Nancy Stearns) ment. Attorney's office in Puerto Rico the most outrageous conduct nature and purposes of its domestic wiretap program. As a result, the investigation was officially terminated in by government attorneys that he had ever seen. CCR lawyers Kinoy v. Mitchell involves both domestic and so-called December, 1976 and substantially all of the F.O.I.A. material quickly moved for the appointment of a special prosecutor to foreign security wiretapping, and addresses the question left 27. Cia vir et al. v. Levi, et al. requested has been produced by the FBI. open by the Supreme Court in United States u. United States prosecute the government for its misconduct, claiming that (Michael Daui.~ and Peter Weiss) District Court, i.e. the legality of warrantless foreign security This case concerns the discovery of an illegal tracking device there was ample evidence to support contempt charges, fed­ on a car owned by Judy Clavir and Stew Albert, friends of eral criminal violations (including obstruction of justice and surveillance. It involves a significant battle against the 29. Macbtinger and Mogulescu government's claims of privilege, which are intended to pre­ Center attorneys Bill Kunstler and Margaret Ratner. Clavir conspiracy to deprive civil rights), and bar disciplinary pro­ and Albert had come from upstate New York to visit them The recent investigation by the Civil Rights Division of the ceedings, but the judge denied the motion. In order to more vent. our having discovery of the taps and the extent of wrong­ doing. when a small electronic device called a beeper, which emits Justice Department has indicated the scope of illegal break­ fully expose the cover-up and prosecution of Delfin Ramos as periodic signals that can be picked up on a radio frequency, ins and other tactics used by the FBI "Weatherfug" unit an example of the government's efforts to discredit the Puerto In a landmark decision in 1975, the district court denied the government's motion for summary judgement which was discovered under the rear bumper of the car. The beeping (which claims to have been searching for Weather Under­ Rican independence movement both here and on the island, device, it was later discovered, was number 107 of an ap­ ground fugitives), despite the Bureau's denial of illegal ac­ CCR attorneys have appealed the District Court's denial of claimed the foreign taps were legal. The court also rejected the government's claim that the court's decision should be parently large number of such devices used by police and the tivity. the motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the First F.B.I. As they were leaving the city, Cia vir and Albert noticed The earliest disclosed targets of the burglaries and elec­ Circuit. based on secret (e.t parte in camera) submissions by the government and rejected former Attorney General Richard­ a three-car tail following them. They decided not to leave and tronic and other surveillance were several members of (LIZ Schneider, Jose Antonio Lugo, William Schaap, Juan son's claim of "state secrets" privilege as being insufficient. joined Ratner and Kunstler for dinner at a local restaurant. Howard Machtinger's family. Machtinger is claimed to be in Ramon Aceuedo) The court ordered Attorney General Levi to reconsider the Two young women entered the restaurant, took a flash pic­ the Weather Underground. privilege claim, but he did not repudiate the Nixon Admini­ ture of them and left. There was also evidence of a live tap on To discover the extent of the "Weatherfug" unit's illegal stration's coverup posture and reasserted the privilege on all the telephone where they were staying. activities, CCR has filed Freedom of Information Act re­ the taps, even though some are over 25 years old. More recent­ On the basis of these facts and other instances of sur­ quests on behalf of several family members who are long-time 25. Kinoy v. Mitchell ly, under pressure from the district court, Attorney General veillance on Clavir and Albert, a federal civil rights action civil rights activists. Dellinger v. Mitchell Bell has reconsidered the privilege claims. He too has adhered was filed in March, 1976. Information relating to the Weatherfug operations has When the government's program of warrantless electronic to the coverup posture, claiming privilege on all taps but the The F.B.I. answered the complaint in June, admitting not yet been released, although a number of FBI field offices surveillance was a strong but unproven suspicion, CCR filed one that had already been disclosed by the Senate Com­ various kinds of surveillance against Kunstler, Clavir and have admitted the existence of documents. The highly ex­ two of the first civil actions seeking an injunction against this mittee's investigation. Albert, including mail covers, bumper beepers, physical sur­ cised documents relating to Mogulescu, turned over by the program and damages for its victims. Kinoy v. Mitchell was If the government succeeds in submitting secret exhibits veillance and wiretapping. Minnesota Field Office of the FBI reveal that they had him tiled on behalf of Arthur Kinoy, movement lawyer, law pro­ to the courts and if its claims that the surveillances are pri­ About two months later, as a result of a grand jury in­ under constant surveillance. fessor and a founder of CCR, and his daughter Joanne, both of vileged from disclosure prevail, it will have achieved effective vestigation into illegal activities by the F.B.I., an amended (Rhonda Copelon) whom were two of the earliest victims of grand jury abuse. immunity on two levels. The illegality of warrantless foreign (Arthur Kinoy was also responsible for the crucial victory in security surveillance will not be adjudicated and its actions United States v. United States District Court in which the will not be punished through injunctions or damage awards. Supreme Court unanimously declared warrantless electronic In Kinoy, we have been urging the court to rule that a claim of surveillance for domestic security purposes unconstitu­ privilege does not bar disclosure to plaintiffs and their coun­ tional). The Kinoycase won an early decision establishing the sel unless they can be shown to be inherently unreliable. Such right to bring a civil action without having proof of wire­ disclosure would allow us to contest the government's secrecy tapping. Dellinger v. Mitchell was filed on behalf of the Black claim. The court is presently considering this question. A rul- 10 11 34. In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Served on and Nemikin were held in contempt of the grand jury and in­ Bishop Milton L. Wood, Bishop John M. carcerated until the grand jury's term expires in late April Allin, Maria Cueto and Raisa Nemikin 1978. (Amicus) (Dori.~ Peter.~on with Linda Backiel of the Grand Jury Project) Several persons connected with the Episcopal Church and its Grand Juries National Commission on Hispanic Affairs were subpoenaed 35. In re Copleman to a New York federal grand jury which was allegedly investi­ Martha Copleman, an attorney who worked on the Wounded gating the activities of the FALN. CCR was asked to file a Knee cases, was subpoenaed to testify before a federal grand brief amicus curiae on behalf of various church groups and jury in Des Moines, Iowa, about her client, Frank Black , officials in support ofthe motion to quash. We argued that the Horse's failure to appear for trial in May, 1975. A motion to subpoenas, which sought the travel, financial and other rec­ quash the subpoena was filed, but the district court ordered J ords of the Hispanic Commission and the testimony of its Di­ her to either testify in open court, answer a deposition, or go ment of the Puerto Rican independence movement by the rector and Secretary, represented a profound threat to free­ before a grand jury. As testifying in any manner would vio­ 30. In re Shinnick dom of religion and the separation of church and state FBI. late the attorney-client privilege and destroy trust, Copleman The grand jury of the United States District Court for the guaranteed by the First Amendment. has appealed the decision to the Eighth Circuit. No date has Middle District of Pennsylvania subpoenaed Dr. Phillip Kent Although his motion to quash and subsequent appeal were denied, the Court held that Badillo (a third party to the On February 8, 1977, U.S. District Judge Lawrence W. been set for argument. Shinnick, a professor at Livingston College, Rutgers Univer­ Pierce denied the motion to quash, making an interpretation Black Horse and the Wounded Knee Legal Defense/Of­ sity, and sought to have him produce his fingerprints, hand­ subpoena) had standing to challenge the subpoena and re­ jected the government's attempt to by-pass the serious issues of the church's social ministry that severely threatens the fense Committee have been granted permission to intervene writing and a sample of his hair in connection with the sup­ pastoral work of all religious bodies. He ruled that while the on her behalf, but the American Indian Movement was not. posed harboring of Patty Hearst and William and Emily he raised. The extent of the FBI's illegal use of the grand jury pro­ work performed by Cueto and Nemikin was under spiritual AIM is appealing the court's denial of its motion. Harris. Shinnick refused on Fifth Amendment grounds and auspices, it was not social ministry but social work. Cueto (Margaret Ratner) on the further grounds that the grand jury was being grossly cess emerged at a hearing on a Motion for a Protective Order, abused and used as an investigative tool by the FBI and the in which we attempted to prevent disclosure to the FBI of U.S. Attorney's otbce. documents subpoenaed by the grand jury. The government Litigation on the matter continued from May to Novem­ argued successfully that it had an absolute right to turn over ber, 1976, going all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Shin­ to the FBI any evidence or materials subpoenaed to the grand nick was incarcerated on November 30, 1976. jury even if the grand jury itself had never seen them. While Shinnick was in jail, his case came to the attention (Jose Antonio Lugo, Doris Peterson) of Tom Wicker of the New York Times, who wrote a column exposing the grand jury abuse in his case and CBS's 60 Manutes made arrangements to film Shinnick in prison. The 33. Pedro Archuleta, et al. (Intervention) government, without explanation, promptly released Shin­ The United States District Attorney for the Southern District nick. (Morton Stauis, Doris Peterson) of New York subpoenaed Pedro Archuleta, a Chicano ac­ tivist from Tierra Amarillo, New Mexico, to a New York fed­ eral grand jury conducting the alleged FALN bombing inves­ tigation. Mr. Archuleta had already been subpoenaed to 31. Inre Jack and Micki Scott another grand jury in Chicago in connection with the same After more than a year of attempting to force Jack and Micki matter. In fact, it was while Mr. Archuleta's challenge to the McGee Scott to testify before a federal grand jury in the Mid­ composition of the grand jury (alleging unconstitutional un­ dle District of Pennsylvania on the alleged harboring of der-representation of Latinos) was being litigated in Chi­ Patricia Hearst, the government finally capitulated and dis­ cago, that the government subpoenaed him to New York. missed the grand jury without returning any indictments. It CCR attorneys helped counsel for Mr. Archuleta in the is believed that the steadfast resistance of the Scotts to testi­ preparation of papers and appeared as co-counsel on his mo­ fying against each other or anyone else, caused the govern­ tion to quash. ment to decide to end the matter insofar as the Scotts were One of the grounds for this motion was the government's concerned. self-serving violation of grand jury secrecy which resulted in a (William M. Kunstler, Margaret Ratner and Holly lengthy innuendo-filled article in the New York Times and Maguigan) other newspapers in this country and Puerto Rico. This at­ tempt to bypass the grand jury and subject individuals and organizations to a "trial ..,y media" was so outrageous that 45 groups and individuals filed a separate motion to intervene in 32. Americo Badillo Veiga Archuleta's case. CCR attorneys represented the bulk of these When Americo Badillo refused to talk to FBI agents claiming intervenors, including Local 6 of the International Printing t to be investigating bombings for which the FALN is alleged to and Graphic Communications Union, the Puerto Rican Soli­ have taken credit, his American Express credit card records darity Committee, the Coalition to End Grand Jury Abuse, were subpoenaed. the Grand Jury Project, the National Lawyers Guild, and the Badillo, who is a doctoral candidate in sociology and an­ Board of National Ministries of the American Baptist Church thropology at Fordham University, a long time anti-draft, in the U.S.A. ' community and student rights activist, and a former mem­ Although both the motion to quash and the motions to ber of EL COMITE-MINP (Movimiento Izquierdo Nacional intervene were denied, the Court did order an investigation of Puertorriquena), resisted this subpoena on the grounds that the government's leaks of grand jury matters to the press. the grand jury was being used for investigation and harass- (Morton Stauis, Doris Peterson and Jose Antonio Lugo) 12 13 American adoptive families and six others have been re­ established policy of New York State against such acquies­ united with their families as a result of individual lawsuits. cence is operative." A petition for re-hearing is pending. Several Vietnamese parents and relatives are still seek­ (Peter Weiss and Michael Davis, with Dougla.~ Wacholz and ing return of Babylift children in the U.S. and in some in­ Michael Peay of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Right.~) stances, the refusal of adoption agencies and the INS to tell them where the children are has made litigation even more International costly and time consuming, which will ultimately hurt the 40. State of New York v. Danny White, et children most of all. at. Center lawyers are presently litigating the validity of a protective order which prohibits them and their co-counsel In October, 1974, the State of New York filed suit in federal from divulging several children's whereabouts to Vietnamese court seeking a declaration that Ganienkeh, the land re­ settled by Mohawk Indians, was State land and demanding parents and relatives desirous of initiating individual law­ eviction of the Indians. That action was dismissed by the Dis­ suits to seek custody of family members brought here on the trict Court for failure to state a federal question. The Second Bahylift. Circuit atlirmed that decision in January, 1976, and remand­ 36. The Death of Charles Horman the then secret report prepared by the U.S. Embassy in Center attorneys tiled a Petition for mandamus with the ed the case to permit the State to amend its complaint. The Argentina for submission to Congress by the State Depart­ Ninth Circuit seeking review of the protective order, but the Shortly after the 1973 coup in Chile, Charles Horman, a State did so, and attorneys from CCR and the Institute for ment. The coalition, including the Council on Hemispheric Petition was denied without full consideration. A Petition for young American filmmaker, was killed under circumstances the Development of Indian Law again moved to dismiss the suggesting that the Chilean junta and the United States mil­ Affairs, the National Council of Churches, Clergy and Laity reconsideration en bane had been submitted to the Court of Concerned, Friends Committee on National Legislation, Appeals. case, arguing that the Six Nations Confederacy and the Mo­ itary and embassy command wanted him dead because he hawk Nation were indispensible parties to the litigation Americans for Democratic Action, and the World Ministries "knew too much."' There is evidence that Horman was under (Nancy Stearn.~. with Mort Cohen, Thomas Miller, Neil because it is they, not individual Indians who claim owner­ Commission of the Church of the Brethern, alleged wide­ surveillance by United States authorities because he had Gotanda, Dennis Roberts and Michael Davis) ship of the land. Further, as sovereign nations, they cannot be spread torture by Argentine police and army personnel, as been identified as sympathetic to the Allende government. At sued without their consent. We also argued that the question well as other routine violations of human rights. the time of the coup he was on the Chilean coast, where he of the validity of Indian treaties (under which the State In December, 1976, while the FOIA request was still witnessed United States naval support operations and had claimed ownership of the land) is a political question which pending, the State Department released declassified versions conversations with military personnel which implicated the must be resolved by either the executive or legislative branch United States in the coup. of its human rights reports on Argentina and five other coun­ 39. American Committee on Africa, et at. v. tries. The report acknowledged detention of numerous people, New York Times of the government, and not the courts. Chilean authorities picked up Horman and took him to On March 19, 1977, the District Court granted our mo­ torture by security forces, and governmental "acquiescence" the stadium where Chilean and foreign prisoners were held. In October, 1972, the American Committee on Africa and a tion to dismiss. While the court did not reach the question of in more widespread violations. Sometime after being arrested he was executed. Unlike other number of other organizations and individuals filed a com­ whether the Six Nations and Mohawk nation were sovereign, Despite these acknowledged violations of human rights, governments, which went into the stadium to search out their plaint with the New York City Commission on Human it did rule that they were indispensible parties to the litiga­ the State Department report advised continued security nationals, the United States did not act in accordance with Rights, charging that the publication by the New York Times tion which nonetheless could not be joined in the litigation. assistance to Argentina. its duties and powers under American and international law of employment advertisements for executive and academic Before the State could appeal, attorneys for the On February 24, 1977, the Carter Administration an­ to protect the lives of United States citizens in Chile. Had it positions in South Africa were racially discriminatory on their Mohawks were able to work out a settlement with the State. nounced that it would reduce foreign aid to Argentina (and done so, it could have saved Horman's life. Beyond that, face. The Time.~ challenged the complaint on the ground that Under the settlement, the people of Ganienkeh will move to a Ethiopia and Uruguay) as a result of human rights violations United States government officials pretended they had no the proposed hearing by the Commission would constitute an new, larger parcel of land which is much better suited to their knowledge of Horman's death while his father and widow in those countries. In response, Argentina rejected all bi­ unconstitutional interference in the foreign affairs power of lateral security assistance from the United States. However, needs. spent several agonizing weeks in Chile trying to find out what the federal government, and an abridgement of the Time.~· (Nancy Stearns with Tim Coulter, Institute for the multilateral funds to Argentina remain unaffected and some had happened to him. At this very time, Kissinger's nomina­ First Amendment rights. Development of Indian Law) tion for Secretary of State was being considered by Congress, members of Congress are therefore urging the same human Both the Commission and the New York County and Chile was a highly sensitive subject. Horman's body was rights provisos on U.S. approval of multilateral aid. Supreme Court rejected this jurisdictional challenge pre­ not returned to the family until six months after his death. (Rhonda Copelon, John Corwin, Nancy Stearns, Peter Weiss) liminarily, and following extensive hearings in January, 1974, As a preliminary step in providing legal redress to Hor­ on July 19th, the Commission handed down a landmark deci­ 41. Six Nations Confederacy v. Andrus man's parents and widow and to exposing the full story of sion holding that, although the advertisements were for This action, brought on behalf of the Six Nations Con· United States' actions regarding this murder, the Center is 38. Nguyen da Yen et at. v. Kissinger et at. employment in a foreign country, the Times, in publishing federacy, challenges the constitutionality of certain provi­ seeking information through the Freedom of Information Act. In March, 1977, after a year of nearly monthly hearings, them. was "aiding or abetting discrimination" in New York sions of the Indian Claims Commission Act, under which an The documents obtained so far confirm that United States Judge Spencer Williams dismissed the class action aspects of City. The Times appealed to the Supreme Court of New York individual Indian may file a monetary claim on behalf of an oflicials knew of his arrest, detention and death despite their our lawsuit seeking to reunite families divided by the U.S. County and Justice Helman reversed the Commission, entire Indian nation without actually having the nation's denials. funded Vietnamese babylift. He stated that " ... the prob­ adopting the Times' foreign affairs argument but rejecting its authorization to do so. The Hormans however are still being denied access to lems of managing some 2000 individual determinations of First Amendment argument. The Appellate Division The Six Nations Confederacy is made up of the Onon· many documents and CCR is pressing administrative appeals both illegal conduct by the defendants and intervenors and affirmed, but a petition for leave to appeal to the New York daga, Seneca, Mohawk, Oneida, Cayuga and Tuscarora na­ of these denials. · the right course of future action for each plaintiff would over­ Court of Appeals was granted. tions; it is governed by a Grand Council and adheres to (Rhonda Copelon, John Corwin, Nancy Stearns and Peter whelm this court's abilities." His ruling was appealed to the On February 10, 1977, the New York Court of Appeals traditional ways. Weiss.) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which has still affirmed the Appellate Division, by a vote of 5 to 2, holding This lawsuit challenges the ruling of the Indian Claims not scheduled argument in the case although all briefs were that ••it was beyond the ken of the City Commission on Commission on a claim filed without the authorization of the 37. Human Rights Violations in Argentina filed last summer. Human Rights to enforce local anti-discrimination laws by Six Nations; that ruling purports to discharge the obliga­ The subject of human rights violations throughout the world Tracing in Vietnam of the parents of the three named imposing an economic boycott of the Republic of South tions of the U.S. government under 22 separate treaties. Un­ has belatedly become a domestic political issue. Under leg­ plaintiffs was ordered by the District Court, but when the Africa." Justices Fuchs berg and Cooke wrote a strong dis­ der one of those treaties, the 1784 Treaty of Fort Stanwix, the islation enacted last year, the State Department must report international agency involved notified the court in October. sent, holding that the words "South Africa", in the adver­ U.S. agreed to guarantee the Six Nations peaceful possession to Congress gross violations of human rights in countries 1976, that they had been unable to locate the family, there­ tisements, were code words connoting "Only Whites Need of their lands, the vast majority of which has been unlawfully which are potential recipients of foreign aid. maining parties agreed to a dismissal of the action as to those Apply" and that "there being no present policy of the Ex­ taken from them. Late in 1976, CCR attorneys represented a broad coali­ three children without prejudice. ecutive Branch of the United States government ... requir­ CCR and the Institute for Development of Indian Law tion of organizations concerned with human rights violations Since the litigation began, a number of Vietnamese chil­ ing acquiescence in the United States in the discrimination are seeking to enjoin the awards made by the Claims Com­ seeking disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act of dren have been returned to their parents voluntarily by practiced by the South African government, the well- mission. The government has moved to dismiss the action 14 15 and a hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction was district's obdurate refusal to take any corrective action. The held in May. The judge has made no ruling to date. Family Court of Suffolk County had previously ordered her to (Nanr:y Stearns, with Tim Coulter and Alex Skibine of the return her child to school, which she has refused to do. In the lnstitutd amicus curiae filed, supporters for Baum include Dr. Kenneth Clark, Distinguished Professor of Psychology Emeritus, City 42. Jeanne Baum College of the College of New York; Dr. Henry Saltzman, An appeal to the Appellate Division Second Department educational consultant; David Seeley, director of the Public Labor (New York), has just been filed on behalf of Jeanne Baum, a Education Association of New York; Marilyn Braveman, Blackfoot Native American, who withdrew her daughter from director of education, American Jewish Committee, and a Selden, Long Island, junior high school because of acts of many more. overt racism on the part of one of her teachers and the schnol (William Kun.~tler with Annie Stein and Robert Moore)

46. United States v. Union Nacional de real reasons for the prosecution were the Union's militance in Trabajadores, et al. (UNT) representing the interests of the rank-and-file and its support The Puerto Rican Union Nacional de Trabajadores (UNT) is of Puerto Rican independence. a militant, independent, rank-and.;ile-controlled union The District Judge acquitted the President of the UNT, which has come under attack by the National Labor Rela­ Arturo Grant, but convicted Secretary-General Radames tions Board (NLRB) because of its pro-labor stance and its Acosta Cepeda, and the Union itself. However, the case re­ commitment to Puerto Rican independence, ceived wide support on the island and several important labor Attacks on Lawyers The UNT struck a construction site operated by a North leaders were prepared to testify that the NLRB's actions were American-owned company during a labor dispute. In re­ intended to destroy the rank-and-file's trust in the Union's sponse, the NLRB obtained an anti-strike injunction in fed­ ability to represent their interests by forcing the Union eral court against the Union. Then, several weeks after the leadership to call a halt to the strike. The case has been ap. strike had been settled and civil contempt proceedings dis­ pealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Cir­ missed, the Board sought criminal charges against the Union cuit. and two of its officers for failing to end the strike. (Liz Schneider, Jose Antonio Lugo with Mark Amsterdam 43. Turco v. Monroe County Bar 44. Right of William Kunstler to Appear as Pre-trial, Center lawyers challenged the constitution­ and Paul Schachter) Association, et al. Counsel in the Assata Shakur case. ality of a rule which goes to the heart of the colonial After Assata Shakur's indictment (see Docket No.9), her at­ relationship between the United States and Puerto Rico-the CCR attorneys brought an action to prevent the disbarment torney, William Kunstler, was admitted to the New Jersey requirement that the English language be used in federal of attorney Arthur Turco and to obtain a declaration from the bar pro hac uice (on his own motion). After he was admitted, court proceedings on the island. They also moved for dis­ 47. NLRB v. Union Nacional de federal courts that the procedure followed in New York State he was served with an order to show cause why his pro hac closure of illegal electronic surveillance of the defendants and Trabajadores denying attorneys a right to appeal from disciplinary judge­ uice admission should not be withdrawn because of certain re­ their attorneys. Despite lengthy affidavits detailing the bases In these four unfair labor practice cases brought against the ments against them is unconstitutional. Attorneys are the marks he made at a lecture at Rutgers University with re­ for their claim, including information received from individ­ Union Nacional de Trabajadores, the NLRB sought and ob­ only litigants in New York courts who do not have that right. spect to the conditions of Shakur's imprisonment as well as a uals employed by the Puerto Rican Telephone Company that tained a broad cease and desist order which effectively pro­ Arthur Turco had been charged with murder while he number of other comments. the phones of the defendants and at least one of their attor­ hibits the Union from organizing in Puerto Rico. CCR attor­ was an attorney for the Baltimore Black Panthers. After On the third day of a hearing at which important consti­ neys had been tapped, the judge denied the motion. CCR at­ neys, together with other North American and Puerto Rican eleven months of pretrial confinement in Maryland, Turco tutional issues of free speech and the right of counsel of one's torneys sought a writ of mandamus in the United States lawyers, have appealed the order on a variety of constitution­ finally went to trial. The jury was hung in his case, and the choice were raised, the court withdrew its order to show cause Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to require the judge to al grounds, and argued that this extraordinary and severe State threatened to try him again. Rather than go through and permitted Kunstler to proceed. order disclosure. In a landmark decision, the Circuit granted remedy was issued solely because of the Union's militance many more months of pre-trial confinement, Turco pleaded (Morton Stauis) the mandamus, thus validating this procedure as a remedy and political perspective. The cease and desist order was up­ guilty to a misdemeanor, all the while stating his innocence. for resolving pre-trial wiretap issues. held by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Cir· After Turco returned to New York to resume the practice 45. Kurt Groenewold At trial, the NLRB rested its case on the claim that the cuit and the Supreme Court has denied petition for certiorari. of law, he was disbarred by the New York Appellate Division The West German government has been roundly condemned Union leader's presence at an anti-NLRB demonstration was (Liz Schneider, with Paul Schachter, Dauid Scribner and which took as fact all the unproven allegations of the Mary­ in the European press for over-reacting to the terrorist ac· proof of criminal contempt. Center lawyers argued that the Ralph Shapiro). land prosecutor. His disbarment has been stayed until his tivities of a small group of urban guerillas by passing legisla­ case is resolved. tion severely restricting freedom of expression, the right to The United States District Court ultimately dismissed counsel and due process in criminal trials. the complaint but stayed the effect of its decisions pending In 1974, Center for Constitutional Rights attorneys sub­ review by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second mitted a brief to a German court protesting against re · Circuit. On April 21, 1977, the Second Circuit sustained dis­ strictions on the right to counsel, on the basis of U.S. prece· missal of the case on the grounds that, in accordance with re­ dents. One such counsel, Kurt Groenewold, is currently fac· cent decisions limiting the jurisdiction of federal courts, it ing disbarment proceeding in Hamburg. CCR associate, had no jurisdiction in the matter. William Schaap, attended the opening of this trial as an ob­ The case illustrates in stark fashion the result of this server in February of this year. The trial has been adjourned trend limiting federal jurisdiction, because the circuit court sine die due to the death of the presiding judge. CCR volun· acknowledged that except for this obstacle it would not "con­ teer statf attorney, Peter Weiss, expects to attend when it re · sider the due process argument as entirely frivolo~s." sumes. An article by Peter Weiss entitled "McCarthy is Alive CCR attorneys expect to file a petition for writ of and Well and Living in West Germany" is about to appear in certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States. the NYU Journal of International Law. (Morton Stauis and Doris Peterson) (William H. Schaap, Peter Weiss) 16 17 f,~ ,.,.,V wAHf"~P f"H£111. tV 1101~&/r;JM(Nf" lll.l4f"5. T14fll .,.,lY WNlf"llP TIICIIC. 4<1. ~~~~NO~!NT" I Education /UIIIHTJ IJ~., rlltY J

w AI('( ALL ni!IR. rt. 11#H'r5··· First Amendment Throughout its eleven year history, the Center has endeav­ CCR is now conducting its own survey of some 400 teach­ ored to make both its legal victories and defeats worthwhile ing hospitals in the United States because of our concern by keeping the public informed of the constitutional issues in­ about the dual problems of involuntary sterilization and the volved in our work. Nixon's legacy, the current Supreme imposition of unconstitutional requirements for becoming -- Court, has continued to curtail constitutional rights, creat­ voluntarily sterilized. We are seeking to learn whether in­ ing an environment in which repression can thrive. CCR has creased awareness of the problem of involuntary sterilization redoubled its efforts to protect and enhance those rights, for has led hospitals to improve their procedures to insure truly 48. International General v. Commissioner 49. Foreign Agents Registration Act which so many have struggled. informed consent. We will make public the results of our sur­ of Customs (The Donald Duck Case) The Foreign Agents Registration Act, which was designed This year CCR has truly been able to expand its educa­ vey when it has been completed. principally to provide a system of disclosure for the activities tional program. We have used new forums and techniques for As a result of our groundbreaking work in developing During the short-lived reign of the Popular Unity Govern­ of paid lobbyists for foreign governments, has been used by bringing our concerns and experience to the public. guidelines to protect women from involuntary sterilization in ment in Chile, two professors at the University of Chile pro· the Department of Justice as an instrument of ha1Tassment New York City hospitals (see Docket No. 13), the Center has duced a serious work of scholarship entitled How to Read for purely voluntary groups and individuals in this country been able to help to expand women's protection against these Donald Duck: Imperialist Ideology in the Disney Comic. speaking for unpopular causes. In addition to the Southern Congressional Testimony abuses even further. At the request of the New York City Their book became a minor classic, going through one Italian Africa Committee (see Docket No. 28), CCR has provided The political use of federal grand juries, which abated during Council, Nancy Steams twice testified before its Health Com­ and fifteen Spanish editions since 1971. In 1975 it was trans­ legal counsel for two victims of such harrassment. Watergate, has returned with a vengeance, and the Center's mittee concerning the advisability and constitutionality of es­ lated into English, but the first shipment to the United States In March, 1976, the Department's Internal Security Sec­ tablishing guidelines comparable to those passed by the from Europe was detained by the Commissioner of Customs experience combatting these abuses has been heavily used. tion ordered the Committee for a Free Mozambique, a small CCR attorneys were asked to testify before the Commit­ Health and Hospitals Corporation to cover all sterilizations on the ground that the illustrations appearing in the book anti-colonialist group staffed entirely by part-time volun­ tee on Grand Jury Reform of the House of Representatives performed in New York City, not merely those performed in may constitute infringements of copyrights owned by Walt teers, to register as a foreign agent. In April, 1977, a similar Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, city hospitals. These new guidelines were passed and went Disney Productions. order was issued to Mrs. Carmel Budiardjo, a British citizen Citizenship and International Law. These were the first such into effect on May 28, 1977. CCR lawyers, believing that the illustrations (which whose husband is a political prisoner in Indonesia, upon her hearings in this country's 200 year history. Our participation acknowledge Walt Disney's copyright) are a classic case of arrival in the United States for a speaking tour on political re­ in the hearings was particularly appropriate because they "fair use" of copyrightable material, while the seizure of the pression in Indonesia. came about as a result of abuses of the grand jury system un­ books is a classic case of abuse of the laws to suppress politi· National Jury Project CCR attorneys submitted arguments opposing both or­ covered in the Fort Worth Five case, litigated by CCR attor­ cal dissent and unpopular opinions, filed extensive argu• Founded in early 1975, the National Jury Project (NJP) is co­ ders and, to date, nothing further has been heard from the neys in 1972-1973 with Paul O'Dwyer and Frank Durkan. ments in favor of the admissibility of the books with the Com­ sponsored by CCR, the National Lawyers Guild, the Na­ Department in either case. The staff of the Senate Foreign Center lawyers Doris Peterson and Rhonda Copelon missioner of Customs. On June 9, 1976, the Commissioner ac ­ tional Conference of Black Lawyers, the Civil Liberties De­ Relations Committee is currently undertaking a review of the presented a detailed written analysis of the proposed reform cepted CCR's arguments and permitted the entry of the fense Fund and the National Emergency Civil Liberties Com­ Foreign Agents Registration Act and CCR has been asked to bills, with recommendations for dealing with the massive gov­ books. Walt Disney has petitioned for a rehearing. mittee. The N,Jp was formed to counter prejudice in the jury submit information on its experience with the Act. ernment abuse of the federal grand jury process. On March system through jury composition challenges, analysis of ju­ (Peter Weiss u.~ith Ellen Seeherman) (Peter Weiss, Michael Davis) 17, 1977, they made an oral presentation and answered the ror's attitudes, screening selection techniques, and legal and Committee's questions. The Committee requested addition­ educational campaigns to preserve the unanimous jury ver· al materials, which are presently being prepared by CCR diet. CCR staffpersons have been actively involved with the staff. The full hearing will be printed by the Committee in the NJP since its inception, serving on its Executive Board and near future, and copies of our testimony are available on re­ the Steering Committee, and providing consultation on a quest. CCR worked closely with the other participants on the number of Project cases. panel, historian John Anthony Scott, Robert Borosage of the In the past year, Rhonda Copelon and Nancy Stearns Center for National Security Studies, and Linda Backiel of worked with Project experts to devise a linguistic survey (for the Grand Jury Project. an amicus brief on appeal) on the affect on jury members of On April 19, 1977, volunteer staff attorney Peter Weiss the prosecution's using words like " baby boy" in the case of testified before the Congressional Subcommittee on Interna­ Dr. Edelin, who was convicted of manslaughter for having tional Economic Policy and Trade of the Committee on Inter­ performed an abortion. (His conviction was overturned.) The national Relations regarding the Trading With the Enemy Project also assisted us on the major challenge to the English Act. He presented an historical analysis of the Act, showing language requirement for federal jury service in Puerto Rico, through applicable international and common law principles begun in UNT and Ramos (see Dockets Nos. 46 and 24 ), and how it had been perverted, particularly since the Cold War, to in the selection of the jury in the Ramos case. give the President powers which Congress never intended him to have. The testimony also dealt with the First Amendment aspects of the Act as it has been applied in the last 20 years. Public Forums This year the Center staff has criss-crossed the country, speaking at law schools, colleges, lawyers' organizations, Sterilization community groups, and public meetings, on a range of topics In 1974, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare including reproductive freedom, grand juries, battered wives, promulgated guidelines governing federally funded steriliza­ government spying, criminal defense, and international tion. Surveys done after the guidelines were issued indicated affairs, to name a few. We have appeared on many television that the vast majority of hospitals were not complying. and radio programs; most recently one of CCR's founders, 18 19 Morton Stavis, was interviewed in a segment of CBS' 60 The Center shares its legal experience by writing articles Minutes about the Philip Shinnick case. (see Docket No. 30). for magazines such as First Pn'nciples, published by the Pro­ Recognizing the importance of being informed about ject on National Security and Civil Liberties, /{co News, and parallel legal situations in other countries, CCR sent legal ob­ the National Lawyers Guild newspaper. Center lawyers have [ Tabl;ofCases . · I servers to Germany (see Docket No. 45) and to Chile. In addi­ also acted as consultants to the Lawyers Guild Grand Jury tion, we met with lawyers· from other countries, including Project, which publishes Quash, a newsletter about grand Frank Kuitenbrouwer, a lawyer/journalist from the Nether­ juries, and Seven Days magazine. lands, and German law students Axel Matthiessen and Finally, CCR gets many calls each week from attorneys Heinrich Comes, who spent several weeks at CCR. Visits such and paraprofessionals around the country and in Puerto Rico A.C.O.A. v. New York Times, No. 1658ln3 Nguyen Da Yen et al v. Kissinger et al, 528 F.2d 1194 (9th Cir. as these help us to learn more about foreign legal systems and seeking legal papers, advice, and information. The distribu­ Briggs et al v. Goodwin etal, Civ. Act. No. 74-803 (D.D.C.) 1975), 2nd appeal No. 76-1833, mandamus No. 76-3593 to get a fresh perspective on our own work. tion of briefs, motions, and memoranda to hundreds of people Brunoet al v. Codd et al, Sup, Ct. N.Y. Co. 21946n6 NLRB v. UNT, 97 S.Ct. 736 (1977) has undoubtedly benefited countless defendants and plain· Cia vir et al v. Levi et al, 76 Civ. 1071 (S.D.N. Y.) NOW v. FCC, WABC-TVand WRC-TV, No. 74-1853 tiffs whose rights were being violated. For example, as a result Coker v. Georgia, No. 75-544 (S.Ct.) (D.C.Cir. 4/11m) Teaching and Consulting of sending out a press release after filing our battered wives Dellinger et al v. Mitchell, 143 U.S. App. D.C. 60, 442 F.2d People v. Brown, sub nom People v. Valentine, 53 A.D. 2d 832 Three Center lawyers continue to teach "Women and the litigation (Docket No. 12), we received letters and telephone 782 (1971) (1st Dept. 1976) Law" courses at law schools. In addition, a staff Ia wyer was on calls from battered women, women's groups, attorneys and Douglaset al v. Holloman et al, 76 Civ. 6 (S.D.N.Y.) People v. Spencer, Cr. Docket No. Q-521658-61, Queens the steering committee of the Eighth National Conference on service organizations in almost every state. Although it is not Drew Mun. School Dist. v. Andrews, 507 F.2d 611 (5th Cir. Criminal Court (1976) Women and the Law, and several staff lawyers prepared and financially feasible to print the dozens of major briefs pro­ 1975) affirming 371 F.Supp. 27 (N.D. Miss. 1973), cert People v. White et al, 528 F.2d 336 (2nd Cir. 1975), remanded participated in workshops on various topics for the con­ duced by the Center each year, we have kept interested peo­ dismissed as improvidently granted 96 S.Ct. (1976) 74 Cv. 370 (N.D.N.Y., 3/19n7) ference. CCR lawyers have run training sessions and work­ ple informed of our work though the yearly distribution of the General Electric Co. v. Gilbert, 97 S.Ct. 401 (1976) Planned Parenthood of Central Mo. v. Danforth, 96 S.Ct. shops in their areas of specialization for numerous groups, in­ Annual and Docket Reports. This too results in a great many In re Archuleta (intervention), M11-188, _ F.Supp._ 2831 (1976) cluding the National Lawyers Guild and the National Coun­ requests for legal papers and information with which we com· In re Badillo, M11-188, _F.Supp._ Ramos v. United States Attorney for the District of Puerto cil of Churches. ply as quickly as possible. In this way, attorneys and others In re Copleman (S.D. Iowa) Rico (United States v. Ramos), 76-1537, 1st Cir. CCR Director Marilyn Clement and Doris Peterson are kept informed of new legal techniques and novel uses of In re Scott, No. 4641 MCD (M.D.Pa.) Six Nations v. Andrus, 77-515 (D.D.C.) served as consultants on grand jury matters at the national established law as they are developed. In re Shinnick, Civ. No. 4643 MCD (M.D.Pa) State v. Wanrow, 14 Wash. App. 115, 538 P .2d 849 (1976), 88 hoard meeting of the National Council of Churches (NCC). Kinoy v. Mitchell, 331 F.Supp. 379 (S.D.N.Y. 1971), 67 FRO Wn. 2nd 271, 559 P.2d 548 (1977) The NCC Governing Board adopted procedures to be followed Pre-Trial Detainees Manual 1 (S.D.N.Y. l975) Turcov. Monroe County Bar Ass. et al, Civ. App. No. 76-7380 by church agencies, members, and employees for responding Members of the Brooklyn House of Detention Project and the Klein v. Nassau County Medical Center, 347 F.Supp. 496 (2nd Cir.) to government inquiries, and urged support for reform leg­ Center staff have been working on the creation of a legal (E.D.N.Y. 1972), vac. and rem. 412 U.S. 925 (1973), on United States v. Brown, 539 F.2d 467 (5th Cir. 1976) islation. It also adopted a resolution in support of Maria manual to be used by persons incarcerated and awaiting trial. remand409F.Supp. 731 (E.D.N.Y.l976), appeal United States v. Hughey, 76 Cr. 496 (S.D.N .Y.) Cueto and Raisa Nemikin, two members of the Hispanic The manual is being printed by the Columbia Human Rights docketed sub nom Toia v. Klein, No. 75-1749 United States v. Union Nacional de Trabajadores, Cr. No. Commission of the Episcopal Church jailed for their refusal to Law Review. It takes the detainee through each step from Maggu v. Carey (S.D.N.Y.) 164-73 (D.P.R.) testify before a federal grand jury (see Docket No. 34). The arrest to trial and contains "how to" information to assist the McRae v. Matthews, No. 76 C.l80, Califano v. McRae, Nos. Wright v. Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass., _FRO_ (S.D.N.Y. NCC is a federation of 31 national Protestant and Eastern detainees in filing their own civil rights actions and to do work 76-113 and 76-694 (S.Ct.) 1976) Orthodox church denominations representing an 1 ggregate on their own cases. The manual will be published this Sep­ McSurely v. McClellan, Civ. Act. No. 516-69 (D.D.C.) membership of 42,000,000 in the United States. tember. Monell v. Dept. of Social Services and Bd. of Education, 532 F.2d 259 (2nd Cir. 1976), No. 75-1914 (S.Ct.)

~

Credlls: p. 3, Rick Smolan/Contact; p. 6, Rachel Burger/cpf; p. 10, R. Cobb/L.A. Free Press/LNS; p. 12, Stan Sierakowski; p. 14, LNS, p. 16, Colonial Notes; p. 17, Claridad; p. 19, Woman Behind Bars; Composition and Printing, U.S. Lithograph Inc.; design by Kathie Brown and Elizabeth Bochnak.

20 21 Report of Certified Public Accowttants •

March 10, 1977 Center for Constitutional Rights 853 Broadway New York, New York 10003

Gentlemen:

We have examined the balance sheet of the Center for Constitutional Rights as of December 31, 1976 and the related statements of income, expenditures and changes in fund balance and functional expenses for the year then ended. Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, and ac­ cordingly included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.

In our opinion, the aforementioned financial statements present fairly the financial position of the Center for Constitutional Rights at December 31, 1976 and the results of its operations and changes in fund balance for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles applied on a basis consistent with that of the preceding year.

ZISMAN, TRAURIG & ELBLONK

CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS BALANCE SHEET STATEMENT OF INCOME, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE DECEMBER 31, 1976 FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1976 ASSETS Current Assets: Income: Cash ...... $ 52,697 Contributions $337,696 Accrued interest receivable ...... 82 - Honoraria ...... 1,824 Prepaid expenses ...... 2,777 Interest ...... 872 Total Current Assets ...... $ 55,556 Total Income ...... $340,392 Fixed Assets- at Cost: Expenditures: Office equipment ...... , .. . . , . . . . 3,105 Program Services: Leasehold improvements ..... •...... 2,641 Litigation ...... $175,519 5,746 Education ...... 52,898 Less: accumulated depreciation ...... 1,603 Total Program Services ...... 228,417 Net Fixed Assets ...... 4,143 Supporting Services: Other Assets: Management and general ...... 38,546 Security deposits ...... 1,683 Fund raising ...... 30,229 $ 61,582 Total Supporting Services ...... 68,775 Total Expenditures ...... 297,192 LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE Excess of income over expenditures ...... 43,200 Current Liabilities: Fund balance-January 1, 1976 ...... 6,210 Accounts payable ...... , $ 5,866 Fund Balance-December31, 1976 ...... $ 49,41'0 Payroll taxes payable ... . , ... . , . . . , .. , , , , 4,019 Accrued expenses ...... 2,287 Total Current Liabilities ...... $ 12,172 Commitments and Contingencies . . ... , , . , , , , • , , . , ...... 49,410 Fund balance ...... , .... , , , . , . , $ 6i";5B2 Contributions are tax-deductible and within the provisions of the new Tax Reform Act.

22 ~------, I I I CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS I I 853 Broadway I 1 New York, N.Y. 10003 1

1 Enclosed is my tax deductible contribution to help 1 I the Center continue its outstanding and important I I legal work. I I I I _ $1,000; _ $500; _$250; _ $100; _ $50; I _ $25; _ $15; $_ 1 I NAME ------I I ADDRESS ------I CITY/ STATE I I I L------~