LOS ANGELES -- A California Superior Court today reversed the conviction of a Santa Barbara man who was cited for violating the city's ordinance prohibiting sleeping, human habitation or camping in a recreational vehicle on city streets (Santa Barbara Municipal Code section 15.16.080). The court ruled that the City of Santa Barbara did not provide an adequate housing alternative to the man.

The defendant, David Ridley, his companion of four years Dena Conroy and their dog reside in a motor home (RV) which they normally park in various industrial parks throughout the city. On the evening of October 18, 2000 a police officer was called to the location of the couple's RV to investigate reports of a loud generator. The officer discovered that the noise was coming from within the RV and cited both Mr. Ridley and his companion with violating SBMC 15.16.080; the generator did not violate the city's noise ordinance. Mr. Ridley claimed that there was no alternative to residing in his RV because the only available option was a homeless shelter which did not allow pets, was unsanitary, would require him to be separated from his companion and most importantly required residents to listen to a religious message.

"The court's ruling rests on a crucial First Amendment principle: the state can't force citizens to give up religious freedom in exchange for personal liberty," said Ted Boutrous Jr. whose firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher argued the amicus brief on behalf of the ACLU of Southern California.

The court agreed with Mr. Ridley's claim that forcing a homeless person to either face criminal prosecution or be required to participate in a religious service violates the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution. It also held that the Rescue Mission shelter was an inadequate affordable alternative for those who have nowhere to sleep.

"The court's reversal of the conviction was wonderful news," said Peter Eliasberg, Managing Attorney with the ACLU/SC. " It is bad enough that the city of Santa Barbara was trying to criminalize not having enough money to rent an apartment in a very expensive location. It was worse still that the city was forcing Mr. Ridley and Ms. Conroy to give up their religious freedom in order to stay out of jail. The participation of Tanya Acker and Ted Boutrous Jr. from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP is in the highest tradition of law firms doing great pro bono work."

LOS ANGELES - The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California together with the law firm of Greines Martin, Stein & Richland and the American Library Association have asked the Norwalk-La Mirada School District and La Mirada High School to return the novel Sophie's Choice to the school's library collection after the book was pulled by La Mirada High School's principal. The book was apparently removed from the school's library after a parent complained about certain isolated portions of the novel.

Sophie's Choice by William Styron is a widely acclaimed novel dealing with the grueling experiences of a Holocaust survivor. It has received the National Book Award and was also made into an Oscar-winning film in which actress Meryl Streep delivers what is widely regarded as one of her best performances.

"The fact that the school would choose to pull this book is extremely alarming," said Peter Eliasberg, Managing Attorney at the ACLU/SC. "This is an excellent novel by one of the country's finest authors. It is a novel dealing with one woman's struggle to come to terms with the consequences of the Holocaust. A school library should be a place where students can expand their minds and choose among all sorts of books, especially great books like Sophie's Choice."

The ACLU/SC is also troubled by the way the decision to pull the acclaimed novel was made. The school district has a policy in place that calls for a systematic review of challenged materials. In this case, La Mirada High School's principal simply decided that the book would be removed from the library without review of the material in question.

"Courts have time and again held that school boards cannot remove books from their libraries simply because they don't like the ideas contained in those books," said Judith F. Krug, Director of the Office for Intellectual Freedom of the American Library Association. "The First Amendment guarantees the free flow of ideas and just because one parent may be uncomfortable with certain aspects of a particular work does not mean they have the right to impose their beliefs on other people's children. Parents know their children best and should guide their own children's reading."

The ACLU/SC, Greines Martin, Stein & Richland have asked the high school and the school board to return Sophie's Choice to the school's library promptly.

"The First Amendment exists for a reason," stated Jens Koepke of Greines Martin, Stein & Richland, "one person should not be allowed to determine everyone else's literary tastes. Children's education should not be restricted because one individual decided he or she did not like a particular novel."

LOS ANGELES - The ACLU of Southern California today stepped up its campaign to make available brochures in English, Spanish and Arabic advising people about their rights when stopped by the FBI, police or INS officials. The pamphlet ? "Know Your Rights: What to Do If You're Stopped by the Police, the FBI, the INS or the Customs Service" ? contains information for citizens and non-citizens alike. It is intended to inform those who might become innocent targets caught in the Justice Department's increasingly expanding dragnet. The FBI recently announced they are seeking to interview over 5,000 men who have entered the United States on non-immigrant visas from January 1, 2000 to the present.

"These brochures will not only inform, but reassure people of their rights when speaking to law enforcement," said Ramona Ripston, Executive Director of the ACLU/SC. "We are concerned by Attorney General Ashcroft's announcement that the FBI will be questioning thousands of young men from Middle Eastern countries simply because of where they are from and not based on suspicion ? this sets a very dangerous precedent. The probability that innocent people will have their rights trampled upon is very troubling; when you cast such a wide net inevitably a good number of people with no connection to terrorism will be caught in it, we don't want to do something that later generations will have to apologize for."

"While we recognize that interviews are necessary in conducting an investigation," said Michel Shehadeh, West Coast Director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), "we are troubled by the fact that this list seems to target people on the basis of their age, gender and national origin. These pamphlets will inform people of their rights and help minimize the potential for civil liberties abuses."

The ACLU/SC immediately met with Arab-American and Muslim community groups to discuss concerns within those communities in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks. In response to reports of discrimination against Muslims and Arab-Americans after September 11, the ACLU/SC set up a Hotline to register harassment and discrimination complaints and created the 'Know Your Rights' brochures.

The ACLU has expressed concern that some people currently under investigation have been detained and held without notification of family members or access to legal council. A coalition of civil liberties, human rights and electronic privacy organizations joined the ACLU in filing a Freedom of Information Act request for information about the detainees on October 29, 2001. The Justice Department has not answered the request.

The "Know Your Rights" brochures are available at the ACLU/SC office and can be obtained by calling the discrimination Hotline at 213/977-5291. Alternatively, the brochures can be downloaded at the ACLU/SC Homepage.