Importance of the ACLU
...ckdown!”, I was able to come to these conclusions while reading various pieces of ACLU-supplied reading material. Some of these were ACLU “Briefing Papers.” Each paper is an in-depth look at the ACLU’s views on a controversial issue. These helped me understand what a difference the ACLU is able to make by informing people of essential rights and offering important remedies for oppressive minority situations. One “Briefing Paper” that I read called “Hate Speech on Campus” was especially interesting as it surprised me that the ACLU “defends free speech for racists, sexists, homophobes and other bigots”(Hate Speech on Campus). I quickly was able to agree with their position once I heard their reasoning: “Restricting the speech of one group or individual jeopardizes everyone’s rights because the same laws or regulations used to silence bigots can be used to silence you”( Hate Speech on Campus). While it is hard to imagine not wanting to silence a bigot, I agree that we need to realize these laws would not distinguish between a bigot and an anti-war activist in dealing with free speech. They go on further to say that speech codes for schools are ineffective at fixing the problem and “simply [deter] students from saying out loud what they will continue to think in private [and] merely drive biases underground where they can’t be addressed”(Hate Speech on Campus). This is an agreeable idea since punishing or silencing a bigot who has a problem with a group of people might, if anything, make him madder and not really solve anything permanently. Another “Briefing Paper” that I read while volunteering was “The Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered People”(LGBT) which is packed with concrete, factual information on this current controversial issue. It demonstrates the massive amount of work that must go into these newsletters. A part of the paper that I found particularly intriguing was the “Constitutional Basis for LGBT Rights,” which is “equal protection of the law, … the right to privacy, … and freedom of speech and association”. It also states that “Equal protection of the law is guaranteed by” two Amendments, the Fifth (“No person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”[Wikipedia]) and the Fourteenth which contains the Equal Protection Clause. The Equal Protection Clause (as interpreted by the courts) currently only outlaws discrimination based on “gender, religion, and disability”. The ACLU is attempting to broaden the protection of the Equal Protection Clause to include LGBT people. The “right to privacy” is protected by four amendments: the Fifth, the Fourteenth, the Fourth (the right to be secure in one’s home from unreasonable searches) and the Ninth (the right to not have your rights limited to those listed in the Constitution). “Freedom of speech and association” is guaranteed in the First Amendment which allows the LGBT people to gather and contemplate ways to convince the government to “end discrimination, … recognize lesbian and gay relationships, and to adopt laws prohibiting discrimination in the private sector”. I loved reading this “Briefing Paper” because I felt it did a really good job of laying out the argument for gay marriage by providing a relentless amount of facts. I think this shows how thorough of a job the ACLU is doing in creating factual information that is easy to understand and helpful when informing the public of their work. A different ACLU piece of reading material that I read was “Taking Back the Nation: The Civil Liberties Union of Northern California,” an annual report on the ACLU of Northern California (ACLU-NC). After reading this, I was able to see how effective and how important the ACLU is in our every day lives because of the court cases it wins. In the section called “Police Practices,” a “Landmark Racial Profiling Settlement” is highlighted which involves a case called Rodriguez v. CHP. In this case, a man named Curtis Rodriguez was stopped and asked by a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer if the officer could search his car for weapons. Rodriguez claims he did not give consent to have his car searched. Curtis and the passenger noticed that the CHP had pulled over approximately ten other Mexicans within the time they were stopped and racial profiling was an obvious explanation. (Keker & Van ...