L\Rne{\Can . C\\J\\ \..\Be{T\Es \9'00-\9'0A

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

L\Rne{\Can . C\\J\\ \..\Be{T\Es \9'00-\9'0A I/ I I \ne l\rne{\can . C\\J\\ \..\be{t\es Dn,on ~eco{dS and . ?ub\\CO.\\Qt'\S \9'00-\9'0A \)\)oa\e Pro uesf Start here. This volume is a finding aid to a ProQuest Research Collection in Microform. To learn more visit: www.proquest.com or call (800) 521-0600 About ProQuest: ProQuest connects people with vetted, reliable information. Key to serious research, the company has forged a 70-year reputation as a gateway to the world's knowledge -from dissertations to governmental and cultural archives to news, in all its forms. Its role is essential to libraries and other organizations whose missions depend on the delivery of complete, trustworthy information. 789 E. Eisenhower Parkway • P.O Box 1346 • Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 • USA •Tel: 734.461.4700 • Toll-free 800-521-0600 • www.proquest.com University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA HISTORY CREATES OUR CLIENTS: THE ACLU'S 57-YEAR RECORD by Alan Reitman Associate Director American Civil Liberties Union If this nation possesses a Constitution, a Bill of Rights, courts dedicated to legal principles, and in theory just about everybody believes individual rights should be protected impartially--of what possible use is an organization like the American Civil Liberties Union? The civil liberties chronicle of the last 57 years, which matches some of the most chaotic decades in American history, clearly reveals how badly needed is this private, non-partisan organization devoted solely to the protection of the Bill of Rights. A leading constitutional scholar, the late Professor Zechariah Chafee, once asserted that "the life-span of the ACLU has coincided with the whole constitutional development of freedom of speech." This brief introduction is insufficient to record the Union's half-century defense of civil liberties. The following summary of some high points in the life of a unique organization points up the truth of an ACLU maxim: "History. the social pressures of each era, create our clients." Born out of the crucible of World War I, in the 1920's the Union fought to preserve liberty in the face of fear-motivated attacks on aliens, unorthodox political groups and trade unions. The government, driven by anxiety over the success of the Russian Revolution, conducted wholesale deportation of aliens suspected of radical beliefs through the notorious Palmer raids. The ACLU defended the right of trade unions to hold meetings and to organize. State and local police were used in pitched battles to deny workers even the right to strike--a right corollary to freedom of expression--because of public fright that unions were the vanguard of another American Revolution. IrlPaterson, textile strikers enlisted the ACLU's aid in challenging restrictions of their freedom of speech. They were successful, but not until after a prosecution for unlawful assembly put Roger Baldwin and five other strikers in jail. Key cases, now casually cited in history books, enlarged public consciousness of civil liberties values. In 1925 the Union attacked Tennessee's anti-evolution law in the famous Scopes trial. While Scopes was convicted and fined $100, the Bryan-Darrow courtroom confrontation was instrumental in ending a serious governmental threat to freedom of thought and academic liberty. The Sacco-Vanzetti case, crystallizing all the hatred and fear of radical political belief, saw the ACLU strive to assure the defendants a fair trial. The Union went again and again to the courts in landmark cases to attack multiplying criminal syndicalism and sedition laws. 2 The ravages of the Depression 30's created social strains that cut deeply into civil liberties but also paved the way to fresh advances. The eviction of the Bonus Army from Washington, through the use of tear gas on men, women and children in the dead of night, provoked sharp protest and opposition from the ACLU. The federal (Fish) investigating committee unearthed so-called ''plots" and "Communist intrigues.'' Their flimsy charges fell apart once their guilt by association base was exposed, but not before people were pilloried by the pitiless exposure to the publicity such hearings attracted. The attacks on labor unions were sparked anew by such New Deal social reform measures as the Wagner Act's collective bargaining guarantees, which fostered the organization of industrial unions. Court-obtained injunctions aimed at threatening labor's rights to strike, speak, and peaceably assemble were fought by ACLU lawyers. The zenith was reached when the ACLU, together with the CIO, took its fight against Mayor ("I Am The Law") Hague's violation of free speech and assembly in Jersey City to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ended all municipal bans on peaceful assembly anywhere in the U.S. Demonstrating the ACLU's belief in equal application of the law, we successfully argued in the Supreme Court against the NLRB's denial of free speech to the Ford Motor Company as long as their anti-union statements to employees were not accompanied by coercion. While the economic reform-marked 30's swelled the ACLU case files, interest was stirred in other areas, too. The festering sores of racial prejudice, dramatically illustrated in the Scottsboro case, were laid open by an ACLU field investigation; and we aided the appeal which led to eventual Supreme Court reversal of the rape charge on the ground that the nine Negro boys had not had a fair trial. The never-ending battle against censorship was spotlighted by the historic decision admitting James Joyce's Ulysses to the U.S., a long legal struggle backed by ACLU. Surprisingly the incursions of freedom in the war-time 40's were not as monstrous as in World War I. The Union decided that military conscrip­ tion in the face of fascism's overt threat should not be challenged and noted that rights of dissenters were better protected. But while the scope of violations may have lessened, there still were depredations of freedom that required ACLU action. The most glaring was the tragic military order evacuating 100,000 Japanese-Americans into Pacific coast detention centers. The national ACLU joined the California and Washington state affiliates in several test cases and protests but to no avail. The confinement of the Japanese-Americans, their treatment in camps, their final release and the restoration of their rights were matters of major importance to the ACLU. Political repression was fought in the first Smith act prosecution, against the Trotskyite Socialist Workers Party, based not on acts of violence but statements of policy in SWP publications. The struggle for minority rights cast a long shadow over the civil liberties scene. The Supreme Court, under ACLU prodding, reversed its ruling that Jehovah Witnesses· children could be expelled from school for 3 refusing to salute the flag. Successes were scored in abolishing Texas· white primary, desegregating black children in New Jersey schools and in winning the franchise for Indians in Arizona and New Mexico. However, such victories could not offset the ominous clouds of Cold-War repression that first hung over the nation in the latter part of the decade. As war-time cooperation with Russia palled, the old fear of Soviet aggression produced fresh domestic anxieties. The government instigated a loyalty-security program that found ACLU arguing strenuously against violations of free speech and due process. State legislatures adopted similar stringent measures. The House Un-American Activities Committee initiated new forays into colleges and professions which under­ scored the ACLU's call for the Committee's abolition. On the more physical level, veterans' groups provoked a riot against a Paul Robeson concert in Peekskill, N.Y In a major public report, the ACLU protested the denial to the concert-goers of freedom of assembly and successfully thwarted an ordinance designed to prevent such outbreaks from recurring by denying the right to hold meetings! Historians have correctly characterized the 1950's as the period in which civil liberties faced its most severe threat because of the inexorable pressure of the US-USSR confrontation. And the dark night of McCarthyism called up the Union's most vigorous and vigilant efforts. Whether it was the Wisconsin Senator's vicious assault on the Union itself, or State Department and Army personnel; the unrelenting hearings of HUAC; the scare-induced firings of teachers for refusing to inform on past associates; the witch-hunts of the government's security investigations, paralleled by state and local probes; loyalty oaths and investigations in private industry (the ACLU report on blacklisting of radio and TV performers exposed the entertainment world's fear-inspired anti-Communist hiring policies); the government's bans on foreign travel-­ the ACLU was challenged again. It backed or led numerous court tests which resulted in the Supreme Court checking the maurauding of investigating committees, voiding loyalty oaths, and creating an improved climate of respect for individual rights. Even though unceasing effort was required to make the yeast of freedom rise over the Cold War oven, other areas were not neglected. The wall between church and state was cemented in decisions ending Bible reading and prayers in schools. For the first time, movies were legally recognized as enjoying the protection of the First Amendment. The evil of government news suppression was exposed in a detailed report on the abuses of burgeoning government departments in the Truman and Eisen- hower administrations. The major civil rights break-throughs, the high court's 1954 Brown educational desegregation decision and the Civil Rights Act of 1957, involved the Union litigatively and legislatively The importance of the slogan, "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty,'' was illustrated in fighting the Congressional campaign to punish the Supreme Court's pro-civil liberties stand by crippling the Court's power to 1eview cases in key a1eas.
Recommended publications
  • Tributes to Derrick Bell
    35559-nys_69-1 Sheet No. 4 Side A 10/20/2014 11:50:05 \\jciprod01\productn\n\nys\69-1\FRONT691.txt unknown Seq: 7 20-OCT-14 8:41 This Volume of New York University Annual Survey of American Law is respectfully dedicated in memoriam to DERRICK BELL VISITING PROFESSOR, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 35559-nys_69-1 Sheet No. 4 Side A 10/20/2014 11:50:05 35559-nys_69-1 Sheet No. 4 Side B 10/20/2014 11:50:05 \\jciprod01\productn\n\nys\69-1\FRONT691.txt unknown Seq: 8 20-OCT-14 8:41 35559-nys_69-1 Sheet No. 4 Side B 10/20/2014 11:50:05 PROFESSOR DERRICK BELL 35559-nys_69-1 Sheet No. 5 Side A 10/20/2014 11:50:05 \\jciprod01\productn\n\nys\69-1\FRONT691.txt unknown Seq: 9 20-OCT-14 8:41 IN MEMORIAM: DERRICK BELL (1930–2011) Derrick Bell was a full-time visiting professor at N.Y.U. School of Law from 1990 until he passed away on October 5, 2011. For more than fifty years, Professor Bell profoundly shaped the legal commu- nity with his unwavering passion for civil rights and community jus- tice, and through his leadership as a scholar, teacher, and activist. As a devoted professor of constitutional law, Professor Bell instilled in his students a deep sense of professional and ethical responsibility and encouraged them to confront complex issues about race and difference. Professor Bell received his undergraduate degree from Du- quesne University and served as a lieutenant in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey New
    RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY NEW BRUNSWICK AN INTERVIEW WITH GARA LAMARCHE FOR THE RUTGERS ORAL HISTORY ARCHIVES INTERVIEW CONDUCTED BY SHAUN ILLINGWORTH NEW YORK NEW YORK MAY 11, 2015 TRANSCRIPT BY JESSE BRADDELL Shaun Illingworth: This begins an interview with Gara LaMarche on May 11, 2015 in New Yok, New York as part of the ACLU Oral History Project for the Rutgers Oral History Archives. Thank you very much for having me back. Gara LaMarche: Thank you. SI: To begin, I wanted to ask a little bit more about the period when you were working under Ira Glasser. Your job had been created out of what had been, I think you said, seven jobs staffing the committees. Then the committee system was going away and you said you split your time between special projects for Ira Glasser and staffing the committees. Do you remember any examples of what those special projects would be? What he would have you do? It was a short time. You said it was maybe six months. GL: Yes. It would have been from January ‘78 to--is that right? No. It would’ve been from October of ‘78 when he came on, or a little after that, to August of the following year. It might be eight months at the most. Well, first thing, the committees weren’t going away yet. I think it probably took another twenty years probably for the committees to go away. I was actually a co- chair, I think, with Susan Herman, who’s now the ACLU President.
    [Show full text]
  • A TALE of TWO HANDS: One Clapping; One Not
    A TALE OF TWO HANDS: One Clapping; One Not Burt Neuborne* My thanks to the editors of the Arizona State Law Journal for organizing this symposium celebrating the 100th anniversary of Judge Learned Hand’s brilliant and courageous, if unsuccessful, effort in Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten1 to slow down the repressive train that was running amok over Americans who vigorously spoke out against America’s entry into World War I. While many have chronicled the major Supreme Court cases from Schenck to Gitlow failing to protect free speech during and after World War I,2 they usually don’t go beneath the surface of the Supreme Court to plumb the massive wave of repression that swept the nation in the summer and fall of 1917, fanned by jingoism, fear of immigrants, war fever, fear of communism, and President Woodrow Wilson’s streak of fanaticism.3 Convinced that he was doing God’s work in committing the nation to a war to make the world safe for democracy, Wilson, a baffling figure who was an appalling racist, an economic reformer, an idealistic internationalist, and the first President to appoint a Jew to the Supreme Court,4 had no qualms about * Norman Dorsen Professor in Civil Liberties, New York University School of Law. I’m sorry that we lost my longtime friend and colleague, Norman Dorsen, who died on July 1, 2017, before he had a chance to join in the festivities. Much of what I say in this essay emerged from almost fifty years of conversations with Norman. We would have enjoyed writing this one together.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Legal Studies University of Massachusetts-Amherst 110 Gordon Hall 418 N
    THOMAS M. HILBINK Department of Legal Studies University of Massachusetts-Amherst 110 Gordon Hall 418 N. Pleasant Street, Suite C Amherst, MA 01002 413-545-2003 413-545-1640 (fax) [email protected] www.umass.edu/legal/Hilbink EDUCATION Ph.D. Candidate New York University Institute for Law & Society (A.B.D.) J.D. New York University School of Law (Magna Cum Laude), 1999 A.B. Columbia College (Columbia University), 1993 PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS Assistant Professor, Department of Legal Studies, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 2003 - present. Fellow/Lecturer, Law & Society Program, University of California-Santa Barbara, 2002-2003. Law Clerk, Judge Stephanie Seymour, United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, 2001-2002. Consulting Historian, American Civil Liberties Union National Legal Department, 2001. Fellow, Public Interest Law Center, NYU School of Law, 2001. Curriculum Developer, Education for Democracy Project, NYU School of Education, Summer 2000. Oral Historian, Supreme Court Historical Society Project on the Office of Solicitor General, Washington, D.C., Summer 2000. CEO and Co-Director, Democracy & Equality Project, Inc., Brooklyn, NY, 1999-2001. Intern, International Law Commission of the United Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, Summer 1998. Curriculum Developer, S.O.S. Racisme-Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain, Summer 1997. Intern, Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, Summer 1996. Assistant to the President, American Civil Liberties Union, New York, NY, 1993-1995. Archivist, American Civil Liberties Union, New York, NY, 1991-1993. HONORS AND AWARDS 2001 J. Willard Hurst Legal History Fellow, University of Wisconsin 2001 Law & Society Association Graduate Student Workshop Grant 1999 Order of the Coif 1999 Law & Society Association Graduate Student Workshop Grant 1998 United Nations International Law Commission Fellow 1997 Robert McKay Scholar 1996-pres.
    [Show full text]
  • Convert Finding Aid To
    Morris Leopold Ernst: An Inventory of His Papers at the Harry Ransom Center Descriptive Summary Creator: Ernst, Morris Leopold, 1888-1976 Title: Morris Leopold Ernst Papers Dates: 1904-2000, undated Extent: 590 boxes (260.93 linear feet), 47 galley folders (gf), 30 oversize folders (osf) Abstract: The career and personal life of American attorney and author Morris L. Ernst are documented from 1904 to 2000 through correspondence and memoranda; research materials and notes; minutes, reports, briefs, and other legal documents; handwritten and typed manuscripts; galley proofs; clippings; scrapbooks; audio recordings; photographs; and ephemera. The papers chiefly reflect the variety of issues Ernst dealt with professionally, notably regarding literary censorship and obscenity, but also civil liberties and free speech; privacy; birth control; unions and organized labor; copyright, libel, and slander; big business and monopolies; postal rates; literacy; and many other topics. Call Number: Manuscript Collection MS-1331 Language: English Note: The Ransom Center gratefully acknowledges the assistance of the National Endowment for the Humanities, which provided funds for the preservation and cataloging of this collection. Access: Open for research Administrative Information Acquisition: Gifts and purchases, 1961-2010 (R549, R1916, R1917, R1918, R1919, R1920, R3287, R6041, G1431, 09-06-0006-G, 10-10-0008-G) Processed by: Nicole Davis, Elizabeth Garver, Jennifer Hecker, and Alex Jasinski, with assistance from Kelsey Handler and Molly Odintz, 2009-2012 Repository: The University of Texas at Austin, Harry Ransom Center Ernst, Morris Leopold, 1888-1976 Manuscript Collection MS-1331 Biographical Sketch One of the most influential civil liberties lawyers of the twentieth century, Morris Ernst championed cases that expanded Americans' rights to privacy and freedom from censorship.
    [Show full text]
  • The Clerks of the Four Horsemen, 39 J
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 2014 The leC rks of the Four Horsemen Barry Cushman Notre Dame Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship Part of the Courts Commons, and the Legal Commons Recommended Citation Barry Cushman, The Clerks of the Four Horsemen, 39 J. Sup. Ct. Hist. 386 (2014). Available at: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/628 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Publications at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal Articles by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Clerks of the Four Horsemen (Part I) BARRY CUSHMAN Recent years have witnessed a flowering Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland, and of scholarship concerning the Supreme Court Pierce Butler—thus have received little clerkship. Yet most of this literature focuses on attention. With the exception of Sutherland, the more modern Justices. And for the Justices these more “conservative” contemporaries of who served in the years between Justice Holmes and Brandeis are typically rated as Horace Gray’s appointment in 1882, when the judicial “failures.”1 The biographical litera- Supreme Court clerkship was created, and ture on each of them is not nearly as thick,2 Franklin D. Roosevelt’s appointment of Hugo and the remaining private papers are neither as Black in 1937, the literature leans heavily extensive nor as revealing.3 And only two of toward those generally thought to be “liberal”: the thirty‐five young men who clerked for Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Louis D.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribute to Norman Dorsen
    TRIBUTE TO NORMAN DORSEN I am honored to have the opportunity to write about Norman Dorsen. My relationship with Norman began when I was a law stu­ dent. I am one of some 200 people who have been Arthur Garfield Hays fellows (or fellowettes), a program created by Norman Dorsen at New York University School of Law. When I was a "Hays," Nor­ man ran the program with Professor Sylvia Law; more recently, they have beenjoined by Professor Helen Hershkoff. I am therefore the recipient of a very special education, and I will sketch briefly some of what I have learned as a student of Norman's. A word of explanation is in order about the Hays Fellowship. In 1958, a fund was endowed at NYU School of Law in honor of Arthur Garfield Hays, the great civil libertarian. Since then, a small number of third-year NYU students annually are chosen as "Hays Fellows." As a Hays, one receives money towards tuition as well as course credits, and one does a mixture of academic research and hands-on work on issues such as free speech or welfare rights. Hays fellows have helped on many cases that went to the Supreme Court (such as Flast v. Cohen,l the Pentagon Papers litigation,2 and United States v. Nixon3 ) , as well as on thousands of lawsuits in the lower courts, on topics from discriminatory denial of homeowners insur­ ance, to unlawful limitations of access to abortion, to refusals to treat HIV patients. While I was a Hays, in 1974-75, I worked on a First Amendment book burning case, under the tutelage of Burt Neuborne and Alan Levine, who were then at the American and the New York Civil Lib­ erties Unions.
    [Show full text]
  • REGULATING RACIST SPEECH on CAMPUS: a MODEST PROPOSAL?T
    REGULATING RACIST SPEECH ON CAMPUS: A MODEST PROPOSAL?t NADINE STROSSEN* TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................... 487 I. Some Limited Forms of Campus Hate Speech May Be Regulable Under Current Constitutional Doctrine .......... 495 A. General ConstitutionalPrinciples Applicable to Regulating Campus Hate Speech ...................... 495 B. ParticularSpeech-Limiting Doctrines Potentially Applicable to Campus Hate Speech .................... 507 1. Fighting Words ................................... 508 2. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress ......... 514 t The title is drawn from Jonathan Swift's essay A Modest Proposalfor preventing the Children of poor Peoplefrom being a Burthen to their Parentsor the Country, andfor Making them Beneficial to the Public (Dublin 1729), in JONATHAN SwIFr 492 (A. Ross & D. Woolley eds. 1984). This Article not only responds to the specific points made in Lawrence, If He Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus, 1990 DUKE L.J. 431 [hereinafter Lawrence], but also addresses the general issues raised by the many recent proposals to regulate racist and other forms of hate speech on campus. Professor Strossen's Article, as well as Professor Lawrence's, are expanded versions of oral presentations that they made at the Biennial Conference of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in Madison, Wisconsin on June 16, 1989 (available from author). After discussion of these presentations, the Conference adopted the following resolution: The ACLU should undertake educational activities to counter incidents of racist, sexist, anti-semitic and homophobic behavior (including speech) on school campuses and should encourage school administrators to speak out vigorously against such incidents. At the same time, the ACLU should undertake educational activities to counter efforts to limit or punish speech on university campuses.
    [Show full text]
  • Norman Dorsen
    Celebrating 5o Years: New York University School of Law Honors Norman Dorsen Frederick I. and Grace A. Stokes Professor of Law Co-Director of the Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program Counselor to the President, New York University may 18, 2011 Norman, the Law School community thanks you for half a century of remarkable service. • • ORMAN DORSEN is a graduate of Columbia College and and See v. Seattle, a leading Fourth Amendment decision. In 1971 he argued U.S. v. Harvard Law School, where he was an editor of the Harvard Vuitch, the first abortion rights case heard by the Court, and he helped write the brief Law Review. In his first year after law school, he served in the and was counsel of record in Roe v. Wade. He wrote the brief in Brandenburg v. Ohio, office of the Secretary of the Army, where he helped represent a leading political speech case, and he wrote briefs amicus curiae in many leading the Army against Senator Joe McCarthy during the celebrated cases, including Gideon v. Wainwright, The Pentagon Papers Case, and U.S. v. Nixon Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954. Following a Fulbright grant (the Tapes case). In 1969 he brought one of the earliest petitions for certiorari chal- to the London School of Economics in 1955–1956, he was law clerk to Chief Judge lenging discrimination against gay people. Many Arthur Garfield Hays Fellows, most NCalvert Magruder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and to Justice of whom he mentored, worked on these cases and those of the other Hays directors.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 February 4, 2014 the Honorable
    WASHINGTON LEGISLATIVE OFFICE February 4, 2014 The Honorable John A. Koskinen Commissioner of Internal Revenue CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-134417-13), Room 5205 Internal Revenue Service 1111 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, DC 20224 Re: Comments on Draft Guidance for Tax-Exempt Social Welfare AMERICAN CIVIL Organizations on Candidate-Related Political Activities LIBERTIES UNION WASHINGTON LEGISLATIVE OFFICE Dear Commissioner Koskinen: 915 15th STREET, NW, 6 TH FL WASHINGTON, DC 20005 T/202.544.1681 The American Civil Liberties Union (“ACLU”) respectfully submits these F/202.546.0738 WWW.ACLU.ORG comments in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the “Notice”) issued by the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS” or “Service”) and the LAURA W. MURPHY 1 DIRECTOR Treasury Department on November 29, 2013. NATIONAL OFFICE 125 BROAD STREET, 18 TH FL. I. Executive Summary NEW YORK, NY 10004-2400 T/212.549.2500 As we explain in detail in our comments below, while we support replacing OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS SUSAN N. HERMAN the current “facts and circumstances” test for political activity by affected PRESIDENT tax-exempt organizations with a bright-line standard, we have serious ANTHONY D. ROMERO concerns with the rule as proposed in the Notice, both from a First EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Amendment perspective and as a simple matter of workability. ROBERT REMAR TREASURER We comment below on: The danger with the Service’s proposed “electioneering communications-plus” approach in the definition of candidate-related political activity (“CRPA”), which would cover any public communication that refers to a candidate within 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election, or, in the 60 days before a general election, refers to a political party; Why the proposed “functional equivalence” test, which would count as CRPA any communication that is “susceptible of no reasonable interpretation” other than one in support of or opposition to a 1 Guidance for Tax-Exempt Social Welfare Organizations on Candidate- Related Political Activities, 78 Fed.
    [Show full text]
  • Federalism, Localism, and Public Interest Advocacy
    Why the Local Matters: Federalism, Localism, and Public Interest Advocacy !"#$%"&$'()*+$,*%%&-./$$ 0&1&-*+2.34$'()*+2.34$*51$$ 678+2)$95%&-&.%$:1;()*)# Papers from the Eleventh Annual Liman Colloquium! at Yale Law School, 2008 Published by the Liman Public Interest Program at Yale Law School and the National State Attorneys General Program at Columbia Law School CONTENTS ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS..............................................................................iii INTRODUCTION: ACTION ACROSS THE LANDSCAPE OF FEDERALISM ........ 1 Kathleen Claussen Class of 2010, Yale Law School; Member, Arthur Liman Public Interest Program Student Board Adam Grogg Class of 2010, Yale Law School; Member, Arthur Liman Public Interest Program Student Board Sarah French Russell Associate Research Scholar in Law and Clinical Lecturer in Law, Yale Law School; Director, Arthur Liman Public Interest Program I. THE ROLE OF LOCAL LEADERSHIP: REVISING THE HISTORY AND UNDERSTANDING THE PRESENT Civil Rights History Before, and Beyond, Brown ............................11 Risa Goluboff Professor of Law, Professor of History, Caddell & Chapman Research Professor, University of Virginia School of Law American Federalism and the American Civil Liberties Union ..... 21 Norman Dorsen Stokes Professor of Law, and Co-Director, Arthur Garfield Hays Civil Liberties Program, New York University Law School; former President, American Civil Liberties Union Susan N. Herman President, American Civil Liberties Union; Centennial Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School II. STATES AND CITIES AS ADVOCATES FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST The Progressive City ........................................................................39 Richard C. Schragger Professor of Law, Class of 1948 Professor in Scholarly Research in Law, University of Virginia School of Law !"#$%"&$'()*+$<%2++$,*%%&-./$$ San Francisco and the Rising Culture of Engagement$ in Local Public Law Offices0&1&-*+2.34$'()*+2.34$*51$678+2)$95%&-&.%$:1;()*)#........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Seminal Issues As Viewed Through the Lens of the Progressive Case
    Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law LARC @ Cardozo Law Articles Faculty 2005 Transcript of Weapons of Mass Destruction, National Security, and a Free Press: Seminal Issues as Viewed through the Lens of the Progressive Case David Rudenstine Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, [email protected] James R. Schlesinger Norman Dorsen Robert E. Cattanach Brady Williamson See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation David Rudenstine, James R. Schlesinger, Norman Dorsen, Robert E. Cattanach, Brady Williamson, Frank Tuerkheimer, Howard Morland, Gary Milhollin & Anthony Lewis, Transcript of Weapons of Mass Destruction, National Security, and a Free Press: Seminal Issues as Viewed through the Lens of the Progressive Case, 26 Cardozo Law Review 1337 (2005). Available at: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/168 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty at LARC @ Cardozo Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of LARC @ Cardozo Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Authors David Rudenstine, James R. Schlesinger, Norman Dorsen, Robert E. Cattanach, Brady Williamson, Frank Tuerkheimer, Howard Morland, Gary Milhollin, and Anthony Lewis This article is available at LARC @ Cardozo Law: https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/168 TRANSCRIPT OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, NATIONAL SECURITY, AND A FREE PRESS: SEMINAL ISSUES AS VIEWED THROUGH THE LENS OF THE PROGRESSIVE CASE' WELCOME David Rudenstine^ It is wonderful having you all here for this very special twenty-fifth anniversary commemoration of this historic case involving the publication of the article by The Progressive magazine.
    [Show full text]