News & Commentary

On April 23, 2010, Arizona enacted a state racial profiling law, SB 1070, that has generated fear and confusion among the public about the treatment and rights of Americans in the State of Arizona. Although the law is not scheduled to go into effect until July 29, 2010, and multiple lawsuits have already been filed to prevent it from taking effect at all, a history of rampant racial profiling by law enforcement officials in Maricopa County, Arizona (which includes the cities of Phoenix, Glendale, Mesa, and Scottsdale) and a stated policy of "attrition through enforcement" adopted by lawmakers in the state give credible reason to be concerned even before the date SB 1070 is supposed to go into effect. The law will requir

Conforme se aproxima el fin de semana feriado, la ACLU del estado de Arkansas difunde alerta a residentes del estado que viajen a Arizona

Please see document referenced below in the documents section.

Please see document referenced below in the documents section.

Please see document referenced below in the documents section.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEDecember 15, 2009LITTLE ROCK, AR – A federal judge this week granted a request by the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas that a temporary Winter Solstice display be allowed to be erected on the grounds of the state Capitol.   ?The ACLU of Arkansas filed a federal lawsuit last week charging Arkansas Secretary of State Charlie Daniels with violating the free speech rights of the Arkansas Society of Freethinkers by illegally barring them from putting up their display, despite the fact that it meets the requirements of the state capitol display policy and despite the presence of another display on the grounds.??"This is a victory for freedom of speech in America," said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. "People cannot be arbitrarily denied their constitutionally protected right to free expression in a public forum, and that is exactly what had happened in this case."In 1993, the Arkansas Secretary of State adopted a policy for "Temporary Displays on State Capitol Grounds." The policy set up a system whereby any person or group could put up a temporary display by meeting certain requirements, including sturdiness and non-interference with pedestrian traffic. The Freethinkers' proposed display met the guidelines of the policy, but was nonetheless rejected by Daniels, who cited an Arkansas statute providing authority to the state capitol police to maintain "proper order and decorum."On further inquiry, the Secretary of State's office asserted that the proposed display did not have the proper "tone." Later, the office added that a Winter Solstice display would not be consistent with the other displays and decorations at the Capitol. According to court papers filed by the ACLU, the only other temporary display on state capitol grounds is "a crèche with a wood exterior and nativity figures carved out of wood. The display is not decorated with lights or ornamentation of any kind and is devoid of a festive tone."The Arkansas Society of Freethinkers is a statewide non-profit organization in part dedicated to promoting education and awareness of Freethinkers, their history, activities and holidays. The group filed a written application to put up a display October 16, describing the meaning and history of the Winter Solstice holiday. Though the Society of Freethinkers could have sought to have the existing nativity scene removed, the suit did not request this relief.  Instead, the Society of Freethinkers sought and obtained permission to include their display as part of the celebration, as was intended by the Secretary of State's policy and by the First Amendment.The Winter Solstice celebration is an ancient tradition that is celebrated by the Freethinkers annually from approximately November 15 to January 5. The Society of Freethinkers asserts that the purpose of the Winter Solstice display is to express some of the members' beliefs and to educate the public about the Winter Solstice and Freethinkers.Pictures of the Freethinkers display can be seen at: wintersolsticedisplay.info and more information about the ACLU's work on Religious Freedom and Belief can be found at http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief .Attached:Opinion and Order Granting Preliminary Injunction - December 16, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE?December 10, 2009??LITTLE ROCK, AR – The ACLU of Arkansas filed a federal lawsuit today charging Arkansas Secretary of State Charlie Daniels with violating the free speech rights of The Arkansas Society of Freethinkers by barring them from erecting a temporary Winter Solstice display on the grounds of the state Capitol.  An application by the Freethinkers to erect a display was rejected despite  the fact that the proposed display meets the requirements of the state capitol display policy and despite the presence of another display on the grounds.??The ACLU lawsuit asks the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas to order Daniels to grant the Freethinkers permission to put up their display.??In 1993 the Arkansas Secretary of State adopted a policy for "Temporary Displays on State Capitol Grounds." The policy set up a system whereby any person or group could put up a temporary display by meeting certain requirements, including sturdiness and non-interference with pedestrian traffic. The Freethinkers' proposed display met the guidelines of the policy, but was rejected.??"It's clear that the only reason the Freethinkers' application has been turned down is that the Secretary of State doesn't like the message of the display," said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. "The Secretary of State didn't have to allow anyone to put up a display on the Capitol grounds, but when the Office adopted the temporary display policy it set up a public forum where anyone with any message could install a display if they followed the policy."??The Arkansas Society of Freethinkers is a statewide non-profit organization in part dedicated to promoting education and awareness of Freethinkers, their history, activities and holidays. The group filed a written application to put up a display October 16, describing the meaning and history of the Winter Solstice holiday. The Secretary of State rejected the application in November, citing an Arkansas statute that provides authority to the state capitol police to maintain "proper order and decorum." On further inquiry, the Secretary of State's office asserted that the proposed display did not have the proper "tone." Later, the office added that a Winter Solstice display would not be consistent with the other displays and decorations at the Capitol.??According to court papers filed by the ACLU, the only other temporary display on state capitol grounds is "a crèche with a wood exterior and nativity figures carved out of wood. The display is not decorated with lights or ornamentation of any kind and is devoid of a festive tone."??When the ACLU submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for the file on the 16-year-old policy for the past 10 years, the only documents provided were the applications filed the past two years by the Freethinkers, the denials of these applications and the policy listing the requirements that must be met in order to erect a temporary display. There were no applications or permits related to the other display.??ACLU attorneys met with representatives of the Secretary of State's office to request clarification of the reasons the Freethinkers' display was turned down, and to ask how the other display was put up every year without any apparent documentation. When they received no answer, the ACLU lawyers informed Secretary of State officials that denying the Freethinkers permission to erect their display was unconstitutional and that litigation was likely.??"Our goal is to be included in the holiday season, which we think is big enough to accommodate everyone," said Bill Parker, an Arkansas Society of Freethinkers officer.  "All we want is to be treated fairly, and have the same access to express ourselves on public grounds that other groups have."??The Winter Solstice celebration is an ancient tradition that is celebrated around the time of the winter solstice, December 21.  Some Freethinkers celebrate it annually from approximately November 15 to January 5. The Society of Freethinkers asserts that the purpose of the Winter Solstice display is to express some of the members' beliefs and to educate the public about the Winter Solstice and Freethinkers.??In court papers the ACLU says that the Secretary of State is preventing the Freethinkers Society "from exercising its First Amendment rights," and that they "suffer, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm" if the society is "not permitted to install its display on the state capitol grounds as soon as possible."??The ACLU complaint further states that the Secretary of State's action "violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it conditions access to the designated public forum" on his "personal acceptance of content and viewpoint […of…] constitutionally protected speech."??Pictures of the Freethinkers display can be seen at: wintersolsticedisplay.info.Attached:ACLU Complaint in The Arkansas Society Of Freethinkers vs. Charlie Daniels (PDF) Arkansas Secretary of State policy on "Temporary Displays on State Capitol Grounds" (PDF)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEAugust 27, 2009LITTLE ROCK, AR – The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Arkansas filed a lawsuit today in a federal court in Arkansas challenging Arkansas Secretary of State Charlie Daniels’ decertification of the Green Party of Arkansas as a political party.The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Arkansas voters and the Green Party, charges that the decision violates state law and the free speech rights of third parties.“The First Amendment protects not only the right of third parties to compete in the political arena but also the right of individual voters to support the candidates who best reflect their political views,” said Bryan Sells, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Voting Rights Project. “A lot of voters are dissatisfied with the choices offered by the major parties, and Secretary Daniels’ decision means that the voters of Arkansas could have even fewer choices on the ballot when they go to the polls in the next election.”Daniels’ decision to decertify the Green Party stems from a state law requiring a political party’s candidates to earn at least 3% of the total votes cast in gubernatorial or presidential elections in order to retain access to the ballot in the next election cycle.In the 2008 election, the Green Party’s candidates received hundreds of thousands of votes, far surpassing the 3 percent threshold. Green Party candidate Richard Carroll won a seat in the State House of Representatives, and several other Green Party candidates for the U.S. House and Senate earned over 20 percent of the vote. Daniels nonetheless decertified the Green Party because its candidate for president, Cynthia McKinney, did not earn more than 3 percent of the vote in the presidential race.“The Green Party clearly represents the interests of a large number of Arkansans,” said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “But the Democratic and Republican parties have set up an unconstitutional system to deny ballot access to legitimate third parties that have substantial voter support in order to shield themselves from competition. That’s just not the way democracy is supposed to work.”According to the ACLU, Arkansas’ party-recognition regulation also illegally forces political parties to compete in gubernatorial and presidential elections. Third parties like the Green Party do not always have gubernatorial or presidential candidates, making it impossible to earn 3 percent of the vote for candidates in those elections.The ACLU of Arkansas has urged lawmakers to pass legislation that would bring Arkansas law in line with the U.S. Constitution, because without a legislative cure, parties and persons wishing to exercise their First Amendment rights are forced to file lawsuits to have those rights respected.Attorneys on the case are Sells and Laughlin McDonald of the national ACLU Voting Rights Project and Holly Dickson of the ACLU of Arkansas.The complaint in the case, Green Party of Arkansas et al. v. Daniels, is available online at: http://www.aclu.org/votingrights/access/40856lgl20090827.html More information on the work of the ACLU Voting Rights Project is available at: www.votingrights.org More information about the ACLU of Arkansas is available at: www.acluarkansas.org/

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE?October 2, 2009NEW YORK - Ruling in the case of an Arkansas woman who was shackled to her hospital bed while in labor in 2003, a federal appeals court today said that constitutional protections against shackling pregnant women during labor had been clearly established by decisions of the Supreme Court and the lower courts. This is the first time a circuit court has made such a determination. The full Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals made the ruling today in the case of ACLU client Shawanna Nelson.“This is a historic decision by a U.S. Court of Appeals that affirms the dignity of all women and mothers in America,” said Elizabeth Alexander, Director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Prison Project. “Correctional officials across the country are now on notice that they can no longer engage in this widespread practice.”Nelson was a 29-year-old non-violent offender who was six months pregnant with her second child when she was incarcerated bythe Arkansas Department of Corrections (ADOC) in June 2003. Three months later, after going into labor, she was taken to a local hospital where correctional officers shackled her legs to opposite sides of the bed. Nelson remained shackled to the bed for several hours of labor until she was finally taken to the delivery room.The shackles caused Nelson cramps and intense pain, as she could not adjust her position during contractions. She was unshackled during delivery, but was immediately re-shackled after the birth of her son. After childbirth, the use of shackles caused her to soil the sheets of her bed because she could not be unshackled quickly enough to get to a bathroom.“Restraining a pregnant woman can pose undue health risks to the woman and her pregnancy,” said Diana Kasdan, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. “Today’s decision reaffirms that pregnant women in prison do not lose their right to safe and humane treatment.”Nelson filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against ADOC and several ADOC officials, and a federal district court judge ruled that a jury should decide whether her treatment violated the constitution. A three-judge panel of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, dismissed Nelson’s case by ruling that her shackling was not unconstitutional. The ACLU represented Nelson in a subsequent hearing before the full Eighth Circuit Court which found that legal precedent clearly establishes the constitutional protections against shackling pregnant women in labor, paving the way for Nelson’s lawsuit to go to trial.“Shackling pregnant women is not only dangerous it is inhumane,” said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “The importance of this decision cannot be overstated.”The National Perinatal Association, American College of Nurse Midwives, American Medical Women’s Association, the Rebecca Project for Human Rights and dozens of other public health and advocacy organizations that are dedicated to protecting the health and rights of women and their children also opposed the prison's shackling of Nelson.A copy of today’s ruling by the Eighth Circuit is available online at: www.aclu.org/prison/medical/41232lgl20091002.html