New DPLP Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DRUG POLICY LITIGATION PROJECT A Report of Activities, 1999-2001 An ACLU Report DRUG POLICY LITIGATION PROJECT A Report of Activities, 1999-2001 An ACLU Report ACLU DRUG POLICY LITIGATION PROJECT A Report of Activities, 1999-2001 Compiled and written by Fatema Gunja Edited by Graham Boyd and Norma Fritz Design by Sara Glover Published March 2002 Drug Policy Litigation Project 85 Willow Street New Haven, CT 06511 tel: 203 787-4188 fax: 203 787-4199 www.aclu.org/drugpolicy TABLE OF CONTENTS DPLP Staff . .ii Public Policy & Education . .13 DPLP Initiatives . .13 Mission Statement . .iii Civil Asset Forfeiture . .13 Drug Education . .13 A Message from the Director . .iv Drug Testing . .14 Felony Disenfranchisement . .14 The Assault on Civil Liberties Harm Reduction . .15 1 & Civil Rights . Higher Education Act . .15 1 Rights Under Attack . Medical Marijuana . .15 1 Litigation . Methadone . .16 1 Civil Asset Forfeiture . Pain . .17 2 Drug Testing . Policy Reform . .17 2 Schools . Prisons . .17 4 Women . Racial Justice . .17 5 Workplace . Raves . .18 6 Vehicle Searches . DPLP in the Media . .19 6 Drug Zones . DPLP Publications . .20 Government Benefits Policy . .7 8 Harm Reduction . Funding . .21 Medical Marijuana . .9 Racial Justice . .9 Raves . .10 Religious Freedom . .11 Voting Rights . .12 i DPLP STAFF Back row (L-R): Tania Galloni, Graham Boyd, Alicia Young, Gabriel Freiman Front row (L-R): Deborah Ahrens, Anne Leone, Irene Gutierrez, Fatema Gunja Graham Boyd, Director Alicia Young, Staff Attorney Deborah Ahrens, Legal Fellow Fatema Gunja, Office Manager/Paralegal The DPLP would like to thank the following interns for their hard work and support: Gabriel Bankier-Plotkin, Jordan Bass, Dugan Bliss, Cliff Bloomfield, Sumana Cooppan, Alexandra Cox, Martin de Santos, Gabriel Frieman, Tania Galloni, Irene Gutierrez, Mary Hahn, Mary Beth Hickcox-Howard, Ari Holtzblatt, Todd Kennedy, Anne Leone, Flora Lichtman, Daniel Low, Oana Marian, Julia Markovits, Celine Mizrahi, Shankar Narayan, Joanna Norland, Chrystiane Pereira, Homer Robinson, Shane Stansbury, Mary Taft- McPhee, Mateo Taussig-Rubbo, Olivia Wang, Amy Weber, Harry Williams The DPLP would also like to thank our former staff attorney, Nelson Tebbe, for his hard work and dedication. ii MISSION STATEMENT “Graham Boyd and his colleagues at the ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project are play- ing a pivotal role in the emerging drug policy reform movement with their combi- nation of sophisticated litigation strategies and savvy PR. Their string of victories in one court after another – on issues ranging from drug testing to medical marijuana to the rights of drug users and drug offenders – are helping to turn the tide in the courts and with the public.” – Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance “The ACLU’s Drug Policy Litigation Project has given the drug policy reform move- ment its first (and long-desired) nationwide and systematic litigation capacity.” – Ira Glasser, Former Executive Director of the ACLU “[W]hen the First Amendment right of Free Speech is violated by the government in the name of the War on Drugs, and when the First Amendment violation is arguably not even helping in the War on Drugs, it is the duty of the Courts to enjoin the gov- ernment from violating the rights of innocent people.” – U.S. Federal Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. in his ruling in McClure v. Ashcroft Founded in January 1999, the ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project (DPLP) conducts the only national litigation program addressing civil rights and civil liberties violations arising from the War on Drugs. Based in New Haven, CT with an office in New York City, the DPLP has litigated cases in federal courts dealing with drug testing, electronic music culture, government benefits policies, harm reduction, medical marijuana, racial justice, religious freedom, and voting rights. The DPLP also provides legal support to ACLU drug reform efforts at the local, state and national levels. The ACLU has been an outspoken critic of the War on Drugs since the Reagan administration renewed efforts to stamp out illicit drugs in the early 1980s. Despite decades of criminal prohibition, intensive law enforcement, and efforts to rid the country of illegal drugs, violent traffickers still endanger life in our cities, a steady stream of drug offenders still pours into our jails and prisons, and tons of cocaine, heroin and marijuana still cross our borders unimpeded. The ACLU opposes the criminal prohibition of drugs; not only is prohibition a proven failure as a drug control strate- gy, but it subjects otherwise law-abiding citizens to arrest, prosecution and imprisonment for what they do in private. Moreover, African American and Latino people are disproportionately victimized by the War on Drugs, although they do not use or traffic in drugs more than other Americans do. The ACLU believes that unless they do harm to others, people should not be punished, even if they do harm to themselves. There are better ways to address drug use – ways that will ultimately lead to a healthier, freer and less crime-ridden society. iii A MESSAGE FROM THE DIRECTOR When we first began this project, I never imagined that, in three short years, our nation would see such broad interest in and support for reform of the United States’ misguided drug policies. State ballot victories on medical marijuana, sentencing reform, and forfeiture abuses reflect a growing rejection of current laws and the legislative gridlock that defends them. The public has begun to question the logic of the War on Drugs, and courts seem ever less willing to grant the government a drug-war exception to the Bill of Rights. For decades, a case involving drugs was almost certain to lead to new limitations on our freedoms. Our record in the courts – 10 victories and 0 losses – is reversing that trend, showing the public that the drug war- riors have abused their power and that our rights will not be held hostage by the government’s War on Drugs. Indeed, the ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project (DPLP) was founded with precisely this vision of reforming our nation’s drug policies through a cohesive litigation strategy. Today, as I look back on what we have accomplished, I am proud of the impact we have already made on shaping the public discourse on drug policy. By successfully litigating cases on a broad range of issues, we have changed the nature of the debate. We have shown that the drug war is not just ineffective; it violates the most basic principles of democracy and freedom. As encouraged as I am by our successes so far, the War on Drugs remains a juggernaut. It has slipped the reins of metaphor to become a literal war with civilian casualties and constant attempts to subvert our civil liberties. This machinery of a prison system that has especially ensnared young African-American and Latino men must be stopped. To do so, we are committed to even more of a concentrated attack on the status quo. We need to break through the moral stigma and fear sur- rounding drugs that have given the government a blank check to invade our private lives. Our nation accommodates diverse views on drug use, but we must remain united in insisting that privacy, lib- erty, and free speech cannot be sacrificed to the War on Drugs. To this end, my goals for the future are straightforward: to expand our litigation capacity, to educate the public, and to build coalitions. Over the past 3 years, we have grown from 1 part-time lawyer to a full-time staff of 4 and dozens of interns. We have litigated cases in federal courts throughout the country and on a diverse array of issues, but our resources remain too few to con- front the many constitutional abuses perpetrated in the name of fighting drugs. As we expand, we are committed to increasing our public education efforts, of which this report is an important step. Through our website, special reports, publications, newsletters, and the press, we hope to alert the American people to the caustic effects of the War on Drugs and encourage them to join our fight. Finally, we realize that we cannot succeed by ourselves. We need to build even stronger relationships with other drug reform activists as well as civil rights organizations. Many challenges lie ahead. But with our strength, determination, and conviction, we are con- fident of our impending victories. We want to thank our courageous and dedicated clients, our col- leagues in the ACLU and state affiliates, our partners in other drug reform organizations, and our generous and steadfast supporters for all of their help and strength. Graham Boyd iv Director, ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project THE ASSAULT ON CIVIL LIBERTIES & CIVIL RIGHTS & CIVIL RIGHTS ON CIVIL LIBERTIES THE ASSAULT Rights Under Attack The War on Drugs has corroded one of the most fundamental institutions of American democracy: the Bill of Rights. Basic freedoms and liberties enumerated, protected, and enshrined in the Bill of Rights have been sacrificed for the “higher cause” of a drug-free America. These include: First Amendment: Freedoms of speech, association, expression, & religion Fourth Amendment: Protection from unreasonable search & seizure Fifth Amendment: Guarantee of due process of law Eight Amendment: Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment Fourteenth Amendment: Right of equal protection under the law Fifteenth Amendment: Guarantee of voting rights regardless of race or ethnicity By using the United States Constitution as armor against the civil liberties and civil rights abuses that have arisen from the War on Drugs, the DPLP has fought to uphold and preserve the rights of all Americans. Litigation In coordination with ACLU state affiliates, the DPLP has successfully litigated in the following areas: CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE involved Jacob King, an African-American, and Hector Herrera, a Latino, who were stopped for Despite the Fifth Amendment’s promise questioning by law enforcement officials at that no person “be deprived of .