style="float: center; margin: 10px 0px 10px 0px;" width="495" />

Photo: Pedro Guzman with his brother Juan Carlos Chabes today in Lancaster

Pedro Guzman, the U.S. citizen illegally deported from a Los Angeles County jail on May 11, was reunited with his family August 7 at a Lancaster courthouse after nearly three months lost in Mexico. It ends a harrowing three-month search by the family while the ACLU of Southern California and the law firm of Van Der Hout, Brigagliano and Nightingale sought in vain for assistance from the U.S. government.

"This has been a horrific experience for Mr. Guzman and his family," said ACLU/SC legal director Mark Rosenbaum. "Pedro Guzman is safe today not by the actions or compassion of the government that illegally deported him, but by the love and strength of his family."

Little is known about Mr. Guzman's time in Mexico. He told his family that he attempted to cross the border several times but was turned away. He said he walked from Tijuana to Mexicali, a distance of more than 100 miles, and ate out of trash cans as he looked for a way back into the U.S. His family says he was nearly unrecognizable, and that they are seeking immediate medical attention for him.

Border agents detained Mr. Guzman as he attempted to cross into the U.S. near Calexico early Sunday morning. County officials had issued a warrant for his failure to appear at probation hearings, despite attempts by the family and ACLU/SC to explain to probation officials that he had been wrongfully deported. The government had promised to immediately notify the family and their attorneys if it found Mr. Guzman. Instead, it took 36 hours for the family to be notified.

Mr. Guzman spent two days in jail before Superior Court Judge Carlos Chung ordered him released Tuesday morning, August 7. Late Monday night, ACLU/SC staff had met with Mr. Guzman at Men's Central Jail and confirmed his identity. This afternoon, Sheriff's Department officials transported him from downtown Los Angeles to the Antelope Valley Courthouse, where he was reunited with his mother, Maria Carbajal.

The family's last contact with Mr. Guzman was May 11, when he called his sister-in-law from a borrowed cell phone to say he had been deported to Tijuana. The call cut off, and Carbajal rushed to Tijuana but was unable to locate him.

Immediately after learning of the case, the ACLU/SC and Van Der Hout, Brigagliano and Nightingale went to federal court on June 11 to seek government assistance in the search.

Remember "vote-swapping"? That was a free-speech experiment launched by a number of websites during the 2000 presidential campaign between George W. Bush and Al Gore. The websites allowed third-party supporters of Ralph Nader in swing states to strategize with major-party voters in "safe" states about "trading" their votes.

A threat of criminal prosecution by the California secretary of state shut the websites down. Nearly seven years later, a federal court decided the Constitution protects vote swaps — just in time for 2008.

"Technology changes the way politics work, but it doesn't alter the basic principles of democracy," said the ACLU/SC's Peter Eliasberg, who argued the case.

The decision will be an important precedent protecting the right of website operators and voters to maintain and use such sites in future presidential elections.

Read the 9th Circuit Court's decision about vote-trading (pdf)

LOS ANGELES - In a decision stemming from a dispute during the controversial presidential election of 2000, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that so-called 'vote-swapping' websites are protected by the First Amendment.

A number of these websites sprung up in the last weeks of the 2000 campaign between George W. Bush and Al Gore that allowed third-party supporters of Ralph Nader in swing states to strategize with major-party voters in 'safe' states about 'trading' their votes to avoid handing the election to their least-preferred candidate.

The sites were quickly shut down when then-California Secretary of State Bill Jones sent letters to operators of a website threatening to prosecute them for what he called 'vote-buying,' even though no money or other type of financial benefit changed hands.

The ACLU of Southern California and the National Voting Rights Institute represented website operators Alan Porter (voteswap2000.com) and William Cody (voterexchange2000.com) and two individual voters, Patrick Kerr and Steven Lewis. The case, originally filed in November 2000, argued in part that the threats by Jones violated the First Amendment rights of the website operators and exceeded the scope of Jones' authority under California's election code. The National Voting Rights Institute is now affiliated with Demos, a national, non-partisan public policy, research and advocacy center.

The Ninth Circuit's ruling now establishes that the activities that Secretary Jones attempted to squelch 'are at the heart of the liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment' and cannot be prosecuted under vote-buying statutes. The decision will be an important precedent protecting the right of website operators and voters to maintain and use such sites in future presidential elections.

'Technology changes the way politics work, but it doesn't alter the basic principles of democracy,' said Peter Eliasberg, the ACLU/SC's Manheim Family Attorney for First Amendment Rights. 'Voters of any political persuasion should be able to meet like-minded voters wherever they are and organize for their candidates without threats to their freedom of speech.'

'The court's decision today recognizes the importance of the Internet as a low-cost means of political communication and a vibrant forum for debate about the presidential election,' said Lisa Danetz, senior counsel at Demos.

This is the second ruling by the 9th Circuit Court that protects the rights of vote-trading websites. In 2005, the appeals court overruled a federal district court that had dismissed the case shortly after the 2000 election. Today's decision confirms that vote swaps are constitutionally protected.