The ACLU of Southern California today filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the City of Pasadena on behalf of several community activists challenging a new ordinance restricting the distribution of handbills, leaflets, fliers and other written material to businesses and residences.

In June, the Pasadena City Council adopted the ordinance as an amendment to its anti-littering law. The handbill ordinance makes it a crime to distribute "unsolicited written material" to businesses or residences where the owners have listed themselves on a "refusal register" at City Hall or have posted a "No Solicitation" sign on or near the entrance or front door. The law also prohibits distributing unsolicited material to businesses or residences that "reasonably appear to be vacant" or to any location other than at the "doorknob or doorstep."

Lorna Moore, an environmental activist and one of the plaintiffs, said, "If this ordinance had been in effect two years ago when a group of us opposed the widening of a nearby residential street or recently when we objected to the 710 Freeway, our voice would not have been heard." She added that "this ordinance would have made it a crime for 61 volunteers to hand-deliver 15,000 educational pamphlets throughout Pasadena, without first paying a fee and cross-checking everything with City Hall."

The ACLU lawsuit claims that the handbill ordinance violates the First Amendment and the California constitution since it imposes unwarranted burdens on individuals and groups who want to distribute political, religious, environmental or other literature but cannot afford expensive direct mail campaigns or radio and television advertising.

"Throughout American history, handbills and pamphlets distributed door-to-door have been a vital means of political expression protected by the First Amendment," stated Stephen Rohde, a cooperating attorney with the ACLU, who prepared the lawsuit. "Citizens who want to communicate with their neighbors on matters of local or national interest should not have obstacles put in their way," Rohde said.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of Lorna Moore, the founder and chairperson of Eminent Reclaim; Marvin Schachter, chair of the Senior Advocacy Council of Pasadena; Ralph McKnight, President of the Democratic Club of Pasadena Foothills and Margaret Belton, a community activist.

Rohde points out that under the ordinance the owner of a multiple dwelling could list the entire building on the "refusal registry" and thereby prevent all of the tenants from receiving notices on rent control or other issues of general concern. Furthermore, since the ordinance exempts notices or other written material distributed by persons employed by or acting at the behest of the City, state of California or the federal government, the lawsuit contends that opponents of the government, who are subject to the new restrictions, are being discriminated against.

The lawsuit seeks to enjoin the handbill ordinance and asks for a declaratory judgment finding that the ordinance violates the plaintiffs' constitutional rights to freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of association and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

On August 25th, Garden State Newspapers, Inc., owner of the Pasadena Star-News and The Star Newspapers, filed suit challenging the handbill ordinance in United States Federal Court.

In addition to Rohde, the plaintiffs are represented by Mark Rosenbaum, Legal Director of the ACLU of Southern California, and David R. Fertig, of Pasadena.

The ACLU of Southern California today announced its intention to file an amended complaint in its federal class action lawsuit [Kaitlyn Baca vs City of Los Angeles 98-2865 R(RCx)] against the City of Los Angeles and its Department of Recreation and Parks to include all girls who wish to participate in City-sponsored softball and other athletic programs run by the City. The ACLU claims that the overwhelming majority of girls in Los Angeles do not have equal access to either City-sponsored softball leagues or to the many athletic programs paid for and run by the City currently available to boys.

The California Women's Law Center, dedicated to ensuring equality for women and girls, and the law firm of Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & Handler now also represent plaintiffs along with the ACLU.

In a letter sent to the City Attorney's Office the ACLU contends that the City has never adequately addressed the unequal and discriminatory treatment of the original plaintiffs, the West Valley Girls' Softball, a 400-member privately-run, non-profit organizational sponsor of girls' softball begun in 1969. The ACLU says that as a result of investigation undertaken as part of the lawsuit, it is abundantly clear that girls city-wide are denied access to the City's recreational programs, services and facilities that are freely and abundantly available to young men.

"There can be no justification for the City of Los Angeles to deny any child the opportunity to play an athletic team sport because she is a girl," said ACLU attorney Rocio Cordoba. "Such treatment of our City's female youth is not only illegal, it is debasing and brands girls as inferior, second class citizens. Denying girls access to public playing fields, and relegating them to temporary, inferior facilities, only serves to perpetuate gender-based stereotypes that girls' athletics somehow are less deserving or inferior to boys' athletics. These over-broad generalizations about different talents, capacities and preferences of males and females historically have served to deny women equal protection of the laws and thus cannot be tolerated."

The April lawsuit was the first brought against a city or county park department for discriminatory treatment of girls in the use of public recreational facilities. The suit was filed after repeated attempts by the WVGS to get a permit for permanent facilities at City-run parks. WVGS members were forced to spend significant time and resources to secure piecemeal temporary permits to play in sub-standard school fields, even to the point of carrying in dirt to improve the only fields made available to them. Plaintiffs claim that not only does Recreation and Parks give the boys' leagues permanent access to smooth, safe and well-maintained park fields with bleachers, dug-outs and concession stands, it also sponsors three West Valley boys' leagues.

The ACLU of Southern California today won a significant victory in its federal lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) on behalf of disabled bus riders in Los Angeles County. Judge Consuelo Marshall granted plaintiffs' motion to certify the lawsuit as a class action, thus the litigation will now represent disabled riders throughout Los Angeles County.

Speaking following the ruling, ACLU attorney Dan Tokaji said, "People who use wheelchairs have the same right as anyone else to use MTA buses. But throughout the Los Angeles area, mobility-impaired riders have repeatedly had the doors to MTA buses slammed in their faces. The court's ruling today is an important first step toward bringing the MTA into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. By certifying this case as a class action, the court's ruling will ensure that any orders issued in this case will protect the rights of all mobility-impaired riders in the MTA system."

The lawsuit Beauchamp et al. v. Los Angeles County MTA 98-0402-CBM (BQRx), was filed in January to force the MTA to meet the basic transportation needs of mobility-impaired bus riders. The suit charges that the MTA is failing miserably in its obligation to provide "full and equal access" to disabled bus riders. Last June, the ACLU sought a preliminary injunction to force defendants to move on their promises to correct the problems before a trial. That motion is still pending. If granted, the MTA and its subcontractors would be required to keep its wheelchair lifts and safety equipment safe and operable, to promptly repair any broken equipment, and provide alternative transportation for mobility-impaired passengers who are not able to board.

Plaintiffs charge that the MTA is breaking the law, by failing to keep its wheelchair lifts in proper working order and that, on some lines, the lifts are broken more than 60% of the time. Repeatedly, mobility-impaired riders have been passed by completely, often without any explanation at all. The MTA has also endangered riders in wheelchairs, by failing to keep its safety equipment in working order or to use this equipment properly. The deplorable conditions on MTA buses have resulted in physical injuries, humiliation, emotional distress, and loss of wages to plaintiffs. Mobility- impaired riders have repeatedly complained about the failure to accommodate their disabilities, to no avail.