Now Is the Time: An Invitation from the Editors ACLU Argues Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood Before the Supreme Court Patriot Act Update: Don't Believe the Spin Insult to Injury: President Bush is Lying to Public About Torture Practices Freedom Wire: 2005 Stand Up for Freedom Contest: Let the Judging Begin! In the States: New York School Fired Single Teacher for Pregnancy Bush Staffers Silenced Denver Town Hall Participants YOU CAN HELP PROTECT OUR BASIC FREEDOMS ...by joining with nearly 400,000 card-carrying members of the ACLU. Our rights as individuals -- the very foundation of our great democracy -- depend on our willingness to defend them, and as an ACLU member, you'll be doing your part. Click below to safeguard our Bill of Rights by becoming an ACLU member: Click here to safeguard our Bill of Rights by becoming an ACLU member. Racial Profiling, the next episode of The ACLU Freedom Files will air on Link TV next Thursday, December 8th and will be available for viewing online at www.aclu.tv on Friday, December 9th. This dramatic episode tells the real-life stories of how racial profiling has destroyed families, careers and the peace of mind of innocent families. New York School Fired Single Teacher for Pregnancy The New York Civil Liberties Union last week charged a private Catholic school with discriminating against an unmarried Catholic schoolteacher by firing her because she became pregnant. Michelle McCusker's employment was terminated even as school officials praised her teaching ability and her "high degree of professionalism." The NYCLU's Reproductive Rights Project has filed a complaint on McCusker's behalf with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. McCusker was hired to teach pre-kindergartners at the St. Rose of Lima School in Queens in September 2005. Her teaching contract was to last for one year. A month after school began, McCusker, who is single, informed the school's principal that she was pregnant and planned to have the child. Two days later, the principal told McCusker that she was being terminated because she violated the school's religious principles by becoming pregnant while unmarried. The school principal said she could work only until the end of October. "I have been devastated over this incident," said Michelle McCusker. "This was my first teaching position and I was excited and looking forward to the school year with my young students. I don't understand how a religion that prides itself on being forgiving could terminate me because I am unmarried and choose to have a baby." The NYCLU complaint charges that the school's decision to fire McCusker was intentional and unlawful discrimination based on her gender and pregnancy. The school enforced its policy of prohibiting sex outside of marriage only after learning that McCusker was pregnant. In addition to losing her job, McCusker is facing difficulties finding full-time employment, as the school year has begun and most institutions are no longer hiring, Stubbs noted. To learn more, go here. FREEDOMWIRE: 2005 Stand Up for Freedom Contest: Let the Judging Begin! We've received more than 3,000 entries for this year's contest, and contestants' fates now rest in the hands of our stellar panel of judges. Winners will be announced in late January, so stay tuned. In the meantime, be sure to check out the latest youth and student info at www.aclu.org/freedomwire Do you know somebody who would be interested in getting news about the ACLU and what we're doing to protect civil liberties? Help us spread the word about ACLU Online -- forward this newsletter to a friend. December 1, 2005 Now Is the Time An Invitation from the Editors The ACLU and its members are deeply engaged in protecting our fundamental freedoms, from building momentum for Patriot Act reform, to leading the charge on free speech, reproductive rights, accountability for government-sanctioned torture, and religious liberty, including challenges to "intelligent design” in our children's classrooms. As a reader of ACLU Online, you are already invested in the battles we are fighting and winning. Today, we face unprecedented challenges, and our 500,000 members are more important than ever in helping to preserve the liberties we all hold dear. If you aren't a member, we urge you to join the ACLU and stand with us now. Become a card-carrying member of the ACLU. If you are already a member, please help us increase our strength by inviting your friends and family to join you in standing up for freedom with the ACLU. Every new member will add their voice to the chorus that is growing louder every day, questioning the policies and practices that put our freedoms at risk and taking action to remedy them. Your membership will make a difference. Now is the time. Join us today. Gerri Engel and Jed Miller, Editors ACLU Argues Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood Before the Supreme Court Yesterday, Jennifer Dalven, Deputy Director of the ACLU's Reproductive Freedom Project, stood before the newly-constituted Supreme Court and argued the first abortion-related case to reach the Court in five years. Louise Melling, Director of the ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, answers questions about the Ayotte case here. Since its founding in 1920, the ACLU has recognized that personal privacy and reproductive rights are among our most important constitutional liberties. Review the history of reproductive rights in our nation at our Timeline of Important Reproductive Freedom Cases Decided by the Supreme Court. Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England could fundamentally change the legal landscape for reproductive rights. An adverse ruling by the Court could undermine the fundamental principle that women's health must remain the paramount concern when lawmakers regulate abortion. It could also significantly alter the ability of doctors and women to challenge abortion restrictions before they harm women. "If the Court accepts the government's arguments in this case, it will give a green light to states to pass abortion restrictions that will harm women's health in medical emergencies," said Ms. Dalven. The case began as a challenge to a New Hampshire law that prevents doctors from performing an abortion for a teenager under the age of 18 until 48 hours after a parent has been notified. Contrary to Supreme Court precedent, the law contains no medical emergency exception to protect a pregnant teenager's health. The lower courts struck down the law because of this omission. For more information, go to: http://www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/abortion/21140res20051128.html Patriot Act Update: Don’t Believe the Spin The effort to renew the Patriot Act is not going according to the White House script. Two weeks ago the Administration attempted to force through a reauthorization bill that would make most of the provisions of the Patriot Act permanent and make other provisions even worse. We were told that this bill was a done deal and a vote was going to take place at any moment. Fortunately the White House did not anticipate the resolve of Americans who refuse to sacrifice our most cherished civil liberties. Thanks to your phone calls, a bipartisan group of principled and courageous Senators has publically rebuked the Bush Administration and blocked the vote, demanding that real reforms be a part of any Patriot Act reauthorization bill. The reauthorization vote is now on hold, but the Bush Administration is undertaking a fierce campaign to get the bill that it wants and is pressuring Senators to drop their opposition. It is critical that you continue to keep pressure on your Members of Congress by calling them and encouraging your friends to call as well. Tell them to stand fast against any Patriot Act reauthorization bill that lacks real reforms to protect our civil liberties. Backers of the current proposals are touting the "major” changes it makes to the Patriot Act, but in reality these changes are just window dressing hiding the absence of any real reforms in the bill. They are trying to twist the discussion about real Patriot Act reform into a phony debate about the length of "sunset" (or expiration) clauses. But the issue here isn't whether the Patriot Act’s most sweeping powers are extended for four years or seven years. The real issue here is whether Congress is going to give the Bush Administration a blank check to investigate and keep records about ordinary Americans who have no connection to terrorism. You can read more about recent events and the coming "spin" debate on our Patriot Act Blog. To call Congress, you can use the ACLU Action Center at: http://action.aclu.org/patriot If you've already called Congress yourself, please encourage your friends to call. It only takes a minute to send our e-card. President Bush is Lying to Public About Torture Practices In a hard-hitting editorial, ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero describes the failure of the Bush Administration and Congress to meet their obligation to end the torture and abuse of detainees in U.S. military custody and restore faith in America's commitment to human rights. Insult to Injury By Anthony D. Romero President Bush is lying to the American people. Those are words that I have never uttered before in public. To make such a serious allegation against my country's leader is not something I do lightly. The ACLU and Human Rights First have filed a federal lawsuit charging that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld bears direct responsibility for the torture and abuse of detainees. Find out more about the lawsuit. Ann Beeson, ACLU Associate Legal Director described first-hand accounts from torture victims after her visit to Amnesty International’s Global Struggle Against Torture Conference in London. Read her compelling report on our blog. Consider the President's words in Panama: "We are finding terrorists and bringing them to justice. We are gathering information about where the terrorists may be hiding. We are trying to disrupt their plots and plans. Anything we do ... to that end in this effort, any activity we conduct, is within the law. We do not torture." As the President well knows, the sad fact for all Americans is that many of the interrogations we have conducted are not within the law. As many current and former government and military officials recently told PBS' Frontline, we have tortured - and even killed - prisoners in our custody. Government documents obtained through our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit describe hundreds of incidents of torture and abuse in excruciating detail. It is clear that these are not the actions of a few rogue soldiers. The mere existence of thousands of government documents on torture underscores the systemic nature of the problem. There are also videos and photos showing torture and abuse that government lawyers are fighting like mad to suppress. If the President really wished to solve the torture scandal that has marred America's standing at home and abroad, he would own up to what has happened. He would ask the Attorney General to appoint a special counsel to investigate and prosecute the torture and abuse in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. He would not threaten to veto the legislation proposed by Senate Republicans led by Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham, which would ensure that no one is above the law, and no one - regardless of their office or rank - can order anyone else to break the rules and abuse detainees. Holding high-level government officials accountable for torture and abuse is the only way to ensure that we will not repeat these mistakes. And upholding the rules of war will help ensure that no member of the U.S. military is subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment when they are captured by the enemy. But our President's lies merely add insult to the very real injury that has already occurred. Bush Staffers Silenced Denver Town Hall Participants White House event staffers unlawfully removed two Denver residents from a town hall discussion with President Bush because of an anti-war bumper sticker on their car, the ACLU charged in a federal lawsuit filed recently. "The government should not be in the business of silencing Americans who are perceived to be critical of certain policy decisions," said ACLU Senior Staff Attorney Chris Hansen, the lead counsel in this case. "The President should be willing to be in the same room with people who might disagree with him, especially at a public, taxpayer-funded town hall." The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Leslie Weise and Alex Young, who gained national attention after being removed from a March 21 event with President Bush. The presidential visit was open to the public and advertised as a town hall "conversation" on Social Security reform. Weise and Young, who had obtained tickets for the event from the office of Representative Bob Beauprez and had caused no disruption at the town hall, were removed from the event solely because of their perceived political views. At the event, Weise and Young approached the security metal detectors. Weise was asked to show her identification, while Young was allowed in. The staff at the event then told her that she had to wait for the Secret Service to arrive. Eventually, Michael Casper, who wore a dark suit, earpiece and lapel pin arrived. He told Weise that if she had any ill intentions she would be arrested. Weise assured him that she did not and was allowed to proceed to her seat, where Young was waiting. Casper consulted with other White House event staffers who advised him of a White House policy prohibiting people from attending this public event if they held a viewpoint other than that of the President. Casper then ran back to Weise and Young and forced them to leave. After the incident, Secret Service confirmed to Weise and Young that they were removed because a White House event staffer noticed that Weise had a "No More Blood for Oil" bumper sticker on her car. Eight of the nine members of the Colorado congressional delegation, including Democrats and Republicans, have since publicly condemned what happened to Weise and Young, and have called for answers from the White House. Similar incidents have occurred at presidential visits across the country. According to news reports, individuals considered to have critical viewpoints were removed or excluded from Social Security town hall meetings in Arizona, North Dakota and New Hampshire. For a copy of the lawsuit go here. Privacy Statement This mail is never sent unsolicited. You, or someone on your behalf, has subscribed to receive this information from the American Civil Liberties Union. At the ACLU Web site, the ACLU gathers anonymous summary statistics on the responses to our email newsletters in order to better serve list subscribes and ACLU members. To review our Privacy Statement, click here.