News & Commentary

CLICK HERE FOR A COPY OF Senator Altes' email to Bill Vines FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASENovember 29, 2007

October 29, 2007LITTLE ROCK--Today the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas announced that it is part of a coalition working for fair and equal treatment and due process for immigrants, and those perceived to be immigrants, in Arkansas.  The new group, the Arkansas Friendship Coalition, consists of leaders in the faith, business, and social justice communities."Arkansas has seen one of the country's fastest growing Latino populations over the last ten years and the reception has not always been warm," said ACLU of Arkansas executive director Rita Sklar.  "Some local and state government officials have tried to portray every immigrant as a criminal, a gang member or drug abuser who is a drain on society.  This coalition hopes to counter that view and ensure that no one's rights are violated because of the color of their skin or their ability to speak English."The press release issued by the Friendship CoalitionWe are a nation of immigrants.  The very foundations of our country were built on the hopes, dreams and aspirations of immigrants.  Those were hopes and dreams of a land of opportunity that would provide a better life for their families.  It is those same hopes, dreams and aspirations that today imbue the over 100,000 immigrants who have come to call Arkansas home. Through their hopes and dreams, immigrants are making a huge contribution to Arkansas.  We, as a group of leaders in this state, have come together to form a coalition to encourage a reasonable and respectful approach to the immigration debate in Arkansas.Our core beliefs are:

LITTLE ROCK, AR – The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas filed a letter today with the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Commission in support of State Appeals Court Judge Wendell Griffen, who is facing disciplinary action by the commission for making public statements that are critical of the Bush administration. The ACLU said that any discipline by the commission would violate the judge's right to freedom of speech."The state cannot require judges to stand for election and then deprive them of ?the ability to comment on important issues of the day," said Rita Sklar, Executive? Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. "If a litigant thinks a judge's views reveal a?ground for recusal, then that is the way to handle questions of impartiality or ?the appearance of impartiality.  But an elected judge's First Amendment rights should? not be extinguished.  As a prominent African American and Baptist pastor in a small ?southern state, Judge Griffen is a community leader in a strong position to inform? public debate on today's social problems."The ACLU said that Judge Griffen's speech is protected by the First Amendment ?because the judge's comments were made on matters of great public concern or? importance, which cuts to the core values of the First Amendment, and that these ?comments did not concern matters that are likely to come before him as a judge.?  Furthermore, the ACLU says in its letter that forbidding judges from speaking on? matters of public concern would do nothing to ensure impartiality, but instead? would conceal partiality that they might otherwise reveal in their remarks.The ACLU cited the United States Supreme Court decision in Republican Party of? Minnesota v. White, which held that Minnesota's policy of barring judges from? discussing political views was unconstitutional. That decision, written by Justice? Antonin Scalia in 2002, identified two ways for handling real or perceived? problems arising from judges speaking on public matters: disqualifying a judge ?from hearing a case because of a potential conflict of interest, or voting to ?remove a judge from office.Judge Griffen faces discipline charges for the following incidents:

Little Rock, AR - The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas filed a lawsuit today in federal court in Pine Bluff demanding that the Arkansas Department of Correction allow those viewing executions to see the entire process from the moment the condemned person is brought into the room until the moment the body is taken out.“America is an open society, and we do not carry on trials or carry out executions in secret,” said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “The freedom we treasure is based on the idea that the government acts with the permission of the people, and not the other way around. If we are going to give the state the power to execute people in our name, we have a right and responsibility to see exactly what goes on.”The ACLU of Arkansas filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Northwest Arkansas Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists, the Arkansas Times, Inc., and journalist Max Brantley. The ACLU contends that the First Amendment compels a right of public viewing for all phases of a lethal injection because the event is a matter of public concern and debate, and “Because the First Amendment guarantees the public and the press a qualified right of access to governmental proceedings … [preventing the press and the public] ... from viewing the execution from beginning to end violates their First Amendment right of access. ”The lawsuit asks the Court to require that “all phases of the execution be conducted in full and open view of the assembled witnesses to that execution.”In Arkansas a limited number of people, including members of the media, are allowed to witness state executions. Under current execution procedure curtains in the execution chamber are opened only after the prisoner has been strapped to a gurney and the intravenous tubes inserted into the prisoner’s veins. The curtains remain open while the poison is injected and the prisoner dies, and then close again as technicians take out the tubes and do whatever else is necessary to remove the body from the room.The ACLU complaint describes the execution procedure in more detail:“The [prison] does not allow the public and media witnesses to view an execution in its entirety. Specifically,

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEMarch 12, 2007LITTLE ROCK, AR – The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas condemns the decision of an Arkansas Senate committee this morning to send to the floor SB 959, a bill that would ban gay people and most unmarried heterosexual couples who live together from adopting or serving as foster parents.“This bill is bad for our state and our children for many reasons, not the least of which is that it will rob parents of the ability to decide who will care for their children if something happens to them,” said Rita Sklar, executive director of the ACLU of Arkansas. “If you want your gay brother or your lesbian aunt to adopt and raise your children if you die, your wishes will be disregarded by the state if this bill passes.”SB 959, introduced just months after the state Supreme Court unanimously struck down a ban on fostering by gay people, was approved to go to the full Senate this morning by the Public Health, Welfare, and Labor Committee. If passed, SB 959 would categorically ban lesbian and gay Arkansans from adopting or serving as foster parents, even if they’re relatives of the children in question. It would also ban unmarried heterosexual couples who live together unless they’re related to the child, which could prevent godparents or family friends from caring for a child if the parents die or can’t keep the child.The ACLU of Arkansas pointed out several other problems with SB 959:

Senate Bill 370 Sponsor: Madison

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEMarch 5, 2007LITTLE ROCK, AR – The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas today firmly denounced a bill introduced to the Arkansas State Legislature that would ban gay people and most unmarried heterosexual couples who live together from adopting or serving as foster parents. The bill was introduced today, just months after the state supreme court unanimously struck down a ban on fostering by gay people.“This bill flies in the face of what all respected child welfare organizations, social scientists, and Arkansans themselves know about what’s best for the children in our foster care system,” said Jim Harper, L.C.S.W., L.M.F.T., a Little Rock social worker who works with abused children and their families. “Foster care and adoptive placements should be made after careful, individualized screening of each potential parent, regardless of who he or she is. A blanket exclusion of any group of people that might be able to provide loving, stable homes when we have so many children in need of homes in our state foster care system is unconscionable.”SB 959, introduced today by Shawn Womack (R-Mountain Home), would categorically ban lesbian and gay Arkansans from adopting or serving as foster parents, even if they’re relatives of the children in question. It would also ban unmarried heterosexual couples who live together unless they’re related to the child, which could prevent godparents or family friends from caring for a child if the parents die or can’t keep the child. “SB 959 is a heavy-handed and ill-conceived attempt to do an end run around the Arkansas Supreme Court, which has already struck down a regulation that didn’t even go as far as this bill does,” said Rita Sklar, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arkansas.  “The proponents of this bill only care about singling out gay people and unmarried couples at the expense of children in need of good homes.  They don’t care if an applicant is the child’s aunt or uncle, if that applicant has already been caring for the child or has a strong bond with the child – that child will be denied the comfort of that home if the applicant is gay.”Arkansas’s Child Welfare Agency Review Board had established a policy in 1999 that banned gay people from serving as foster parents, and the Arkansas Supreme Court struck it down after a seven-year legal battle between the state and the ACLU. Several prominent child welfare groups took an interest in the case, with friend-of-the-court briefs being submitted by Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, the Child Welfare League of America, the National Association of Social Workers and its Arkansas chapter, the American Psychological Association and its Arkansas chapter, and the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute. These groups urged the court to strike down the exclusion because it worked against the best interests of foster children.In overturning the earlier ban, the Arkansas Supreme Court wrote, “(T)he driving force behind adoption of the regulation was not to promote the health, safety, and welfare of foster children, but rather based upon the Board’s view of morality and its bias against homosexuals.” The individualized assessments of potential adoptive or foster parents favored by child welfare organizations and social scientists are supported by most Arkansans as well. According to a 2005 poll conducted by the University of Arkansas, nearly two thirds of the respondents favored allowing placements with gay people if they pass the screening requirements that apply to everyone else.More information on the ACLU case that overturned the earlier ban can be found online at http://www.aclu.org/lgbt/parenting/12137res20050301.html.

Please see document referenced below in the documents section.

ACLU of Arkansas Action Results in Removal of Evolution Disclaimers From Science TextbooksFebruary 10, 2005