News & Commentary

There could be no more important victory for civil liberties in Connecticut than repeal of the death penalty, which the governor signed into law even before the legislative session ended Wednesday.But there were many other successes, from legalizing medical marijuana to blocking red light cameras.The death penalty repeal, which replaces capital punishment with a sentence of life imprisonment, is not retroactive, which means the 11 men now on Connecticut's death row will remain there. It was also amended to require a level of solitary confinement that the ACLU of Connecticut believes to be unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. (S.B. 280)"This is a huge victory. There will be no new death penalty cases in Connecticut, no perpetuation of a system that was proven over and over again to be racially biased and prone to error," said Andrew Schneider, executive director of the ACLU-CT. "The bill was not perfect but it was a historic and critical advance in civil rights in our state, the result of decades of hard work."There were many other significant victories, as well.Red light cameras. Year after year, the ACLU of Connecticut has led successful fights against red light cameras, which violate the right to due process and threaten privacy while enriching the private companies that own them. This year ACLU-CT organized a coalition, launched a media campaign, created a website (stopthecameras.org), brought in experts to testify before the legislature, held a rally and with the help of its members kept the pressure on legislators with a blizzard of evidence that red light cameras are dangerous and ineffective. Supporters of red light cameras failed to line up enough votes in the state House of Representatives to bring the bill to a vote before the session ended. (H.B. 5458)Medical marijuana. With a doctor's prescription, seriously ill people in Connecticut will now have the alternative of marijuana to relieve their suffering. In supporting the bill, the ACLU of Connecticut joined a host of public interest groups, health care professionals and ordinary people who were being denied the most effective treatment for their symptoms. After lengthy debates in both houses, the legislature agreed and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he will sign the bill. (H.B. 5389)Racial profiling. The legislature passed revisions to the Alvin W. Penn Racial Profiling Prohibition Act to enforce the collection of traffic stop data by Connecticut police departments. Most notably, the new law transfers the responsibility for collecting and reporting on the data from the underfunded African American Affairs Commission to the state Office of Policy and Management. Unfortunately, other important changes sought by the ACLU-CT were not adopted, including provisions to make the law effective immediately, to remove loopholes that could allow non-compliance and to require law enforcement officers to report perceptions of a driver's religion. The ACLU-CT will continue to monitor compliance with the law and seek changes as necessary. (S.B. 364)Electronic harassment. After hearing testimony from the ACLU-CT and the Connecticut Daily Newspapers Association on a bill that would have made it illegal to "harass or annoy" people on the Internet, the Judiciary Committee let the measure die without a vote. The measure would not offer additional protection to people who are being criminally harassed but would create "a new and powerful way to chill a substantial amount of speech protected by the First Amendment," ACLU-CT Legal Director Sandra Staub testified. (S.B. 456)Voting rights. The legislature passed three measures to expand access to the polls, including a bill that guarantees permanently disabled voters access to absentee ballots (S.B. 214) and another that allows election-day voter registration (H.B. 5024). A resolution to amend the state Constitution to remove all restrictions on obtaining absentee ballots moved forward, but did not receive enough votes to be placed on the November 2012 ballot. If approved by a simple majority in the legislature again next year, it will go on the ballot in November 2014. (H.J. 2) The ACLU-CT supported all three measures because they remove barriers to voting by the elderly, people with disabilities, low-income voters and students.Campaign finance reform. Despite objections from several organizations, including the ACLU-CT and the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, the legislature passed a campaign finance reform bill aimed at Super PACs but written in a way that would restrict the free speech rights of issue advocacy organizations. Efforts to correct language requiring disclosure of donors who contribute to non-partisan organizations fell short, but citing the constitutional objections, Malloy's administration has indicated the possibility of a veto. (H.B. 5556)Public indecency. This bill would have added five years to the sentence of an inmate convicted of public indecency in a correctional institution and would have required the inmate to register as a sex offender. The penalty could have added decades to the sentences of prisoners, at great public expense, and could have been applied to those with psychiatric disorders involving exhibitionism. An amended version passed in the Senate but did not come to a vote in the House. (S.B. 367)The string of successes is encouraging, but there is no shortage of civil liberties issues to address in the next legislative session. Red light cameras and other threats to civil liberties are almost certain to be revived and several digital privacy and police accountability issues remain unaddressed.Time ran out in the recent session on a bill that would have required law enforcement agencies to discard license plate scan data, but prospects look good for the measure to be reintroduced next year. The ACLU-CT wants to ensure that the scans are used only to enforce traffic laws and solve crimes and not for retroactive surveillance to track the movements of innocent Americans. (H.B. 5391)Time also ran out on a bill, passed by the Senate but not taken up in the House, that would have affirmed the right of civilians to take photographs and video of police officers in the public performance of their duties. While the ACLU-CT believes the right to make such recordings is clearly established by the Constitution, the bill would have given unequivocal notice to law enforcement officers that they may not arrest photographers, confiscate their cameras, erase photos or video or otherwise harass people who are exercising their right to record. (S.B. 245)Two more Connecticut residents died in the past six months after being Tasered, bringing the total to at least 11 deaths since 2005. With the increasing use of electronic weapons and new evidence suggesting that Tasers can cause heart attacks, the ACLU-CT will continue to push for minimum training requirements for police officers and mandatory reporting of Taser deployments.The work will continue with the help of the many volunteers, donors and supporters of the ACLU of Connecticut. Thank you for your help. After all, liberty can't protect itself. 

Protecting students' free speech rights and protecting them from each other can be difficult goals to reconcile, according to three experts who spoke Tuesday at the annual Milton Sorokin Symposium.The symposium featured a panel discussion on the topic of "Rights in Conflict: Protecting Kids from Bullying vs. Protecting Free Speech." It was sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Foundation of Connecticut and the University of Connecticut School of Law, and was held in the law school's Starr Reading Room.The panelists examined the effectiveness of laws designed to prevent bullying, the distinctions between the free speech rights of adults and children and the line between intervention and punishment for bullying behavior."Intervention is different from punishment," said Maria Kayanan, associate legal director of the ACLU of Florida. "Anything that smacks of being punitive I think triggers a really hard look at whether it's a violation of the First Amendment, whether a student is being punished for protected speech."Jo Ann Frieberg, a consultant on school environment for the state Department of Education, said adults should always speak up when they see children being mean-spirited but that punitive measures often don't work. "From a best practice standpoint, I would agree wholeheartedly that punishment, whether it's detention, suspension, expulsion, or keeping them in from recess, doesn't do any good," she said. "We're really talking about fostering positive relationships rather than separating them and saying 'We don't want you in school.' "One issue, said Daniel Weddle, a professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law, is overreaction. "The problem with some of these bullying statutes is that they encourage kind of draconian responses to what ought to be teachable moments," said Weddle, a researcher and expert on bullying issues.While Weddle proposed a set of criteria for determining whether off-campus behavior should be addressed by school officials, Kayanan said parents should be in charge of discipline for what happens outside of school. If the behavior is criminal, she said, police should be involved."Do you really want the heavy arm of the state following your child home from school?" she asked.About 100 people attended the symposium and lined up to ask questions afterward. The program, moderated by ACLU of Connecticut past President Don Noel, also featured awards for winners of the annual First Amendment High School Essay Contest, which also addressed questions of bullying and free speech.

The winners were announced and prizes awarded by Jeremy Paul, dean of the University of Connecticut School of Law, at the annual Milton Sorokin Symposium on Tuesday. The symposium is sponsored by the ACLU Foundation and the law school.This year's essay topic was bullying and free speech: A new Connecticut law requires schools to prohibit bullying, including communication that causes “emotional harm.” Explain whether the mandate to stop bullying can be reconciled with the right to freedom of speech and support your argument.Andrew Schneider, executive director of the ACLU of Connecticut, noted that the student essays addressed the same complex and difficult questions that the adult experts on the symposium panel tackled Tuesday. Dean Paul congratulated them for writing at the level of college students.Sam Savitz, the first place winner, participates in the Debate Club, Israel Club, and "We The People" Constitutional Law Competition team at Greenwich High School. His academic interests include foreign languages and political science. Outside of school he is on Greenwich Crew's varsity team and on the board of the local chapter of United Synagogue Youth. He plans to study international relations in college and hopes to have a career in foreign service.Rita Ping Newman, who won second place, is a math and science tutor at the Academy of Information Technology and Engineering in Stamford, a member of the school's debate team and a volunteer at Stamford Hospital. Rita plans to study mechanical engineering and industrial design with the goal of designing disaster relief housing for humanitarian purposes.Olivia Rowley, who won third place, plays alto saxophone and is very active in the Newtown High School band program. She's a member of the marching band, the jazz band, and the pit orchestra. Writing is one of her passions. She will attend Tufts University in the fall, and plans to study international relations and Spanish with the goal of joining the Peace Corps.The essay contest and the symposium are legacies of the Center of First Amendment Rights, which merged with the ACLU of Connecticut in 2008. 

The chance to help repeal the death penalty and advance other important civil liberties issues drew more than 200 people to the state Capitol on Feb. 29 for the ACLU of Connecticut's second annual Lobby Day.The session was preceded by a news conference at which relatives of murder victims called for repeal of the death penalty.After an introduction by ACLU-CT President Andy Schatz, lobbyists Betty Gallo and Joe Grabarz of Betty Gallo & Company, advised the participants on how to talk with their legislators and explained the four key issues on the ACLU of Connecticut's legislative agenda this year. They are:Abolition of the death penalty. The state House and Senate passed repeal of the death penalty two years ago, only to have the bill vetoed by then Gov. M. Jodi Rell. If another repeal bill is passed, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he'll sign it. A close vote is expected in the state Senate.Legalization of marijuana for medical purposes. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia already allow the compassionate use of marijuana for medical purposes and a poll last year found that 79 percent of Connecticut residents support it. A bill legalizing marijuana for medical purposes passed the state Legislature in 2007 but Rell vetoed it. Malloy, however, supports the legislation.Prohibition on the use of traffic cameras. Another push is on to allow red light cameras in Connecticut, a form of taxation by citation that violates constitutional rights and has been shown to be ineffective at improving safety. The ACLU-CT is preparing to fight this measure, once again.Strengthening and enforcement of laws against racial profiling. Since 1999, police departments in Connecticut have been required to report each occasion when they pull a car over, including information about the race of the driver. Compliance has been poor but a review of the available data by The Hartford Courant has shown that people of color are more likely to be ticketed for a given offense than a white person. The ACLU-CT wants to make sure the data is collected and analyzed.After the lobbyists' presentation, participants dispersed to lobby their state representatives and senators at the Capitol and in the nearby Legislative Office Building."We were excited by the turnout and the enthusiasm," said Isa Mujahid, field organizer for the ACLU-CT. "The participants have done great lobbying and we look forward to doing this again next year." 

Students, schools and free speech in the age of the Internet was the theme of the 2011 First Amendment Conference, held Oct. 24, 2011 at Saint Joseph College in West Hartford. The annual conference, sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, drew students from Conard High School in West Hartford, Stonington High School and the Greater Hartford Academy of the Arts.

Panelists at the annual Banned Books Reading included Hartford Councilman Luis Cotto, author Susan Schoenberger, Dr. Kerry Driscoll of Saint Joseph College, Capital Preparatory Magnet School students Haddiyyah Ali and Aleyah Seabrook, WFSB Anchor Dennis House and Enfield Public Library Director Henry Dutcher. The program at the Hartford Public Library, sponsored by the library and the ACLU of Connecticut, drew about 75 people.Censorship and its targets, from Mark Twain to Michael Moore, sparked a vigorous discussion Monday at the annual Banned Books Reading at the Hartford Public Library.Panelists read excerpts from banned and challenged books and then talked about the issues behind those books with each other and the audience. About 75 people attended the event, moderated by WNPR radio host Colin McEnroe and sponsored by the library and the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut.Henry Dutcher, director of the Enfield Public Library, showed excerpts from Michael Moore’s documentary Sicko. Earlier this year Dutcher was told by the Enfield Town Council to cancel a showing of the film at the library. He was later able to reschedule it as part of a compromise that included showing a documentary with an opposing view on national health care.Dutcher told the crowd Monday that when Sicko was finally shown, the audience included John Graham, a 9/11 first responder who was featured in the documentary and who came to support the library's right to show it. The movie describes how Graham’s decision to volunteer his help at Ground Zero left him sick, uninsured and destitute.“I’m sorry but I feel that any public library in the United States should be able to show that to their patrons,” Dutcher said.The panel also featured two sophomores from Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Hartford who read excerpts from The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, which they have been studying in a cooperative program with the Mark Twain House and Museum. They were accompanied by Kerry Driscoll, a professor at Saint Joseph College who is a faculty member on the Twain project.Asked about their reactions to the racist language in Huckleberry Finn, the students said they had found perspective on it.“It didn’t really offend me in any way because I know that’s our history,” Aleyah Seabrook said.Haddiyyah Ali said she didn’t see it as racism. “I see it as Mark Twain working through his issues on race.” Yet when she read the excerpt, she found herself too uncomfortable to read the most offensive words.Dennis House, a news anchor for WFSB Channel 3, said that when covering controversy over the book, his station also decided not to say the word nigger.Even so, when McEnroe asked the panelists about a newly sanitized version of Huckleberry Finn that expunges the racist words, panelists agreed that they prefer the original version.“I’d rather see the book read in its original form, or not read,” said Susan Schoenberger, author of A Watershed Year. She said that authors will hear from readers about the words they choose, including profanity, “but you have to be true to the message you’re trying to send.”When it comes to teaching books with offensive language to children, the question is “how is this being contextualized,” added Luis Cotto, a panelist and member of the Hartford City Council.Schools and public libraries use different criteria when choosing books, Dutcher said. At the library, it’s up to parents to decide what material their children check out, he said.“The public library is for everyone," he concluded. "It’s not just for that 8-year-old child.”

Every year hundreds of attempts to remove books from classrooms and libraries are reported in the United States, and the American Library Association estimates that four or five times as many attempts go unreported.Challenges are most often based on complaints of sexually explicit material, offensive language, violence, homosexuality and unpopular religious viewpoints. And with libraries expanding their collections into other media, challenges are no longer limited to books.Earlier this year the Enfield Town Council instructed the town's public library to cancel a planned showing of Michael Moore's documentary "Sicko." The screening was rescheduled after a compromise was reached to show a documentary with an opposite viewpoint, as well.Henry Dutcher, director of the Enfield Public Library, will be one of the panelists at a reading of banned and challenged books on Monday, Sept. 26, at the Hartford Public Library. The event, sponsored by the library and the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut, will begin with refreshments at 6 p.m., with the program to follow at 6:30.WNPR radio host Colin McEnroe will moderate and the readers will include Hartford Councilman Luis Cotto, author Susan Schoenberger, Channel 3 anchor Dennis House and students from the Capital Preparatory Magnet School. Admission is free and open to the public.The books on the program include Mark Twain's classic The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Bless Me, Ultima by Rudolfo Anaya, Ulysses by James Joyce, and The Adventures of Super Diaper Baby by George Beard and Harold Hutchins.

The U.S. Constitution turns 224 on Saturday, Sept. 17, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut is marking the occasion with several days of educational programs and presentations.Executive Director Andrew Schneider talked with students and faculty at Manchester Community College on Thursday about the history and mission of the ACLU. He described several past and current cases, and fielded questions on topics ranging from efforts to block the Enfield schools from holding graduations in a church to the decriminalization of marijuana and the application of constitutional rights to prisoners at Guantanamo Bay."The fact is that our Constitution does not just protect citizens but any person on American soil," Schneider explained. "And Guantanamo Bay is American soil."The lecture was one of a series of three on constitutional topics at the college Thursday. Martin Margulies, a professor emeritus at the Quinnipiac College School of Law and a volunteer attorney for the ACLU, spoke about “The Tea Party and the Constitution.” And attorney Richard Voigt addressed “The Big Gamble: Article VI and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”On Thursday afternoon, ACLU-CT legal director Sandy Staub spoke to about 70 students at the University of New Haven about the death penalty, particularly as it has been applied in Connecticut. In a lively discussion that followed, students also asked about a wide range of constitutional issues.On Tuesday, ACLU board member Don Noel kicked off an annual program aimed at educating secondary school students about the Constitution with a presentation at Jumoke Academy in Hartford. On Friday, a group of lawyers, law students and other trained volunteers set out to carry that message to schools throughout the state.

"Secular discussion of religious material is possible and rewarding," prize-winning student Connor Harris wrote, "but it requires teachers to be sensitive to constitutional concerns [and] their students' beliefs."Harris was awarded the $1,000 first prize in the Ethel S. Sorokin First Amendment Essay Contest.He and other winners were recognized at this year's Milton Sorokin Symposium by state Supreme Court Justice Richard N. Palmer.The assigned topic: "Under what circumstances, if any, can the Ten Commandments or other sacred texts be taught or brought up for discussion in the classroom?" About 42 entries were submitted; most, as ACLU-CT hopes in sponsoring the contest, did homework on court decisions and referred to several of those decisions in elaborating their own views.Harris drew on his own experience in a course called Literature of the Ancient World, which included religious texts such as the Old Testament and the Hindu Bhagavad Gita. The teacher's approach, he said, "helped us understand the Old Testament's origins and Abrahamic religions without ever pressuring us to adopt a certain religious belief."The winner of the $500 second prize, Jennifer Hilibrand, also of Greenwich High, , took largely the same position as Harris, but argued that "the ‘wall of separation'. . . has severe shortcomings. Religion is deeply rooted within American culture, and may never be truly severed from the public educational system. . . . Instead of absolutism, an appealing criterion for determining the permissibility of religious content in the American educational system is coercive effect."Greenwich High's Will Hallisey, winner of the $250 third prize, wrote that "I struggle with sanctioning religious text in the classroom. . . . [because] even if only reference, [it] introduces the discomfiting situation of a secular authority figure with a personal belief system, which a child can easily misconstrued. . ." He concludes that "while individuals' belief systems cannot be entirely absent. . . they must ultimately subjugate themselves to the Constitution's determination that God and Governance remain unlinked."Runner-up Gabriel Borelli of West Haven High was awarded Honorable Mention and a signed copy of In Defense of Our America by Anthony Romero. Borelli concluded that religious texts may be discussed when relevant to a course such as anthropology, or in a "strictly neutral class such as global studies or world religions," or in a government class analyzing the "limits and boundaries of the First Amendment's freedom of religion in various Supreme Court cases."