Entries Tagged 'ACLU of AZ' ↓

A Community Education Forum on the Privacy Implications of Data Mining and the War on Terror

Government-sponsored fusion centers vary widely, but generally are centers intended to improve the sharing of anti-terrorism intelligence among state, local and federal government agencies and the private sector. To date, over 40 of these centers have been established around the nation, including Arizona.

Fusion centers are raising many questions about privacy and government openness and must be carefully bounded and monitored to ensure that they remain a legitimate and effective law enforcement tool.

“We all want our government agencies to talk to each other and share appropriate law enforcement information,” said Mike German, ACLU Policy Counsel. “What we don’t want to see is the emergence of secretive, out-of-control units that collect and sift through masses of personal information on innocent people.”

What: East Valley Chapter of the ACLU of Arizona hosts their annual Lasagna Bash Fundraising Event about the privacy implications of data mining and the War on Terror.

Who: Michael German; Intelligence expert, former FBI agent and ACLU National Security Counsel.

Where?… Continue reading →

A man by the name of Ward Connerly wants to put his initiative on the Arizona ballot this November–an initiative which is designed to dismantle all of Arizona’s equal opportunity programs that address race and gender barriers in public education, public employment and public contracting.

Right now, Connerly is trying to get the Arizona Legislature to pass HCR 2041. If it passes, Connerly would get his anti-equal opportunity initiative on the ballot this November “for free”-meaning he would not be required to gather the 300,000 signatures that are needed to get on the Arizona ballot.

Connerly is a former Board of Regent in California who works to eliminate equal opportunity programs in states around the country. He has already destroyed equal opportunity in California, Michigan, and Washington. This year, he has targeted Arizona.

Why should we fight HCR 2041? Continue reading →

Today, at Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona’s (PPAA) annual Roe v. Wade event, Governor Napolitano announced that Arizona will no longer accept federal Title V, Abstinence Only funding!!  At the event, the governor called for more accurate health information and stated she does not believe Arizona should spend money on “an educational system that doesn’t educate.”

Napolitano added she will send a letter next week to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announcing her intention to reject the federal, Title V abstinence-only funds, affirmatively refusing any money that will not fund “real, complete sex education in our schools.”

With this announcement, Arizona becomes the 16th state to turn down federal dollars that support abstinence-only programs.

The decision to cut the abstinence-only funds in Arizona comes on the heels of similar efforts by 15 other Governors from across the country, including New Mexico, Washington, Ohio and Wisconsin, who have recently rejected federal, Title V abstinence-only funding.

Continue reading →

The American Civil Liberties Union today applauded the Arizona Supreme Court’s refusal to review a lower court decision allowing prisoners to access timely, safe, and legal abortions.  The court’s action, announced late yesterday, ensures that women prisoners in Arizona will be able to obtain the medical care they need.

“A woman does not give up her right to have an abortion any more than she gives up her right to have a child just because she is incarcerated,” said Brigitte Amiri, a Staff Attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.  “This was a case of policy gone awry.  We are please that at every step of the way the courts have recognized the need to protect women’s reproductive health.”

At issue was an unwritten Maricopa County Jail policy denying women in prison access to abortion care.  The policy prohibited jail officials from transporting a prisoner for an abortion unless she first obtained a court order.  The jail transports prisoners without a court order for all other necessary medical care, including prenatal care and childbirth.  The jail also regularly transports prisoners for various non-medical reasons, including visits with terminally ill family members or attendance at relatives’ funerals.

“Prison officials must attend to all serious medical needs, including abortion care, regardless of whether or not they agree with the decision to end a pregnancy,” said Alessandra Soler Meetze, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arizona.  “Women prisoners should not be subjected to the ideological whims of prison officials.”

After weeks of being denied access to abortion care, a pregnant prisoner filed the case in May 2004 on behalf of herself and future prisoners seeking abortions.  In August 2005, the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, struck down the jail’s policy, holding that it violates women’s reproductive rights and serves “no legitimate penological purpose.”  In January 2007, the Arizona Court of Appeals upheld that decision.

On Monday, the ACLU asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to uphold a lower court ruling in a similar case, Roe v. Crawford.  In 2005, prison officials in Missouri went to extreme lengths to deny a woman prisoner access to abortion care.  The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri ruled in July 2006 that women prisoners do not lose their constitutional right to abortion care, and as with all other serious medical needs, prison officials must transport prisoners offsite for treatment if necessary.  A decision is expected in that case later this year.

According to the ACLU’s brief in the Arizona challenge, Joe Arpaio, the sheriff in charge of Maricopa County Jail, has “maintained the Policy throughout his tenure, consistent with his well-publicized stance against abortion and his ‘America’s toughest sheriff’ persona.”  Arpaio himself has admitted that under this policy, “The gal may have the baby by the time it gets through the court system.”

Today’s case is Doe v. Arpaio, CV-07-0104-PR.  Lawyers on the case include Amiri and Talcott Camp with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.

To read the ACLU’s brief visit: www.aclu.org/reproductiverights/abortion/25553lgl20060512.html

The request by Plaintiff Dan Frazier for a Preliminary Injunction in the case of Frazier v. Boomsma, et al, Case No. 07-CV-8040, will be heard by U.S. District Court Judge Neil V. Wake at 2:00 pm on Thursday, August 23, 2007, in the federal courthouse in Phoenix.

Dan Frazier is the one scheduled witness. He is asking that the Court stay the effective date of the Senate Bill 1014 until a determination has been made as to the constitutionality of this legislation in this lawsuit. The ACLU of Arizona is representing Dan Frazier and, as seen in the below Motion, maintains that the Senate Bill clearly violates Mr. Frazier’s First Amendment rights of free speech and expression, and is an attempt by the Arizona Governor and legislature to keep the human toll of the Iraq War out of the public discourse.

Read the motion here. Memo here.

Photos of the Day of Action:

Video of speeches available on my work blog: here.

For those folks unable to be in DC with us this morning for the “Day of Action to Restore Law and Justice” go to http://www.juneaction.org at 10am EST for a live webcast!