The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois supports House Bill 1, and hope that this measure’s enactment will provide some comfort and ease to people across the State who are wracked by pain and discomfort due to cancer, AIDS and other serious illnesses.

We urge Governor Quinn to sign the measure into law.

Colleen Connell, Executive Director

One hardly knows where to begin with a columnist like Dennis Byrne (“Traditional values under legal attack,” Commentary, May 7). Byrne singles out three pieces of legislation supported by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois and declares that we wish to “dismantle the traditional family.”

Byrne laments the reduction of “traditional” values; problem is that his “traditional” values are not those of most Americans.

He supports discrimination, ignorance and exclusion.

We support fairness, knowledge and inclusion.

I’m comfortable with the side that the ACLU is on.

Byrne’s first target is legislation in Springfield that removes an antiquated requirement under Illinois law that forces medical authorities to inform school principals of the names of students with HIV.

This process invades the privacy of and stigmatizes students — leaving them open to discrimination — when the principals (as the law allows) share the information as they see fit.

No other state still requires this disclosure, a relic of a bygone age in which we did not understand HIV and AIDS.

Byrne them turns his eye to a House bill that modernizes sexual health education for public school students in grades six through 12 in Illinois.

For Byrne (and others), the bill is troubling because it provides age-appropriate information about sexual health to students, in curricula that are evidence-based.

Countless studies have demonstrated that “abstinence-only-until-marriage” curricula, endorsed by Byrne, are ineffective and do not serve young people well when they make decisions throughout their lives.

Byrne apparently would prefer our students be ignorant about their sexual health rather than learn information that is accurate and age-appropriate.

Finally, Byrne critiques a measure to update and modernize the parenting laws in Illinois. He suggests that legislators should ignore the changes in family formation, and that they should fail to ensure that each child’s bonded relationship with his or her parents is protected, whether the child’s parents have married, entered into a civil union or otherwise established a formal legal relationship that extends to their children.

(For the record, there are parts of the rewrite of the parenting bill that the ACLU still opposes, but we understand and support the need to update these laws.)

Byrne’s column reflects a dangerous trend in the media today.

The word “traditional” tends to be assigned in discussion of values only to a narrow set of beliefs, held by a smaller group of individuals, whose protection has a negative impact on a wide range of people.

Happily, most Illinois voters and most Illinois legislators recognize Byrne’s arguments for what they are: relics of a bygone era that do not reflect the way we live today as a society.

While it is vexing that this minority view is given such prominence, it is comforting to know that it is a minority view.

— Colleen K. Connell, executive director, ACLU of Illinois, Chicago

Women make up almost half the workforce today, and, if they become pregnant, most will work throughout their pregnancy. Given this reality, you probably think the stories below are works of a bygone era. Well, you’d be wrong.

• A woman was 16 weeks pregnant and worked as a cashier at a large retailer in New York City. One day she fainted and was taken to the emergency room. Despite doctor’s orders that she remain vigilant about drinking water, she was severely dehydrated. When the physician asked why she was not drinking enough fluids, she said that her boss would not allow her to drink water while working at the cash register.
• When Shelly (not her real name) became pregnant, she was working two jobs in Indiana to support her family: the overnight shift stocking shelves for a major national retail chain and the day shift packing items to ship for a medical supply company. Her doctor advised her not to lift more than 20 pounds. The medical supply company immediately accommodated these restrictions, but the major national retailer refused to modify her duties. She experienced a lot of pain while doing the heavy lifting and miscarried shortly thereafter.
• An airline ticket agent in Louisiana was told by her doctor not to lift anything heavy at work. Her employer refused to provide her with a “light duty” assignment and told her that she would be placed on unpaid leave if she brought a doctor’s note. Not having an income wasn’t an option, so throughout her pregnancy, she continued to lift heavy bags and spent 10- and 12-hour days on her feet. Toward the end of her pregnancy, she suffered stress-induced toxemia and went into labor prematurely. Her child suffered numerous health complications.
• Julie worked as a full-time driver at UPS. During some months, the size and weight of the packages explode and the work can be physically exhausting. When she became pregnant, she requested a light duty position, just as she had done when she had been injured on the job. But UPS refused to accommodate her and put her on unpaid leave for the rest of her pregnancy.

Stories like these are all too common, and that’s why we need the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), which was introduced in Congress today.

Despite the passage of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act over 30 years ago, which prohibits discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, some employers continue to deny pregnant women the minor job modifications that could protect not only a woman’s pregnancy but also a family’s economic security, forcing pregnant women out of their jobs.

The PWFA would make it crystal clear to employers that they can’t treat pregnant women worse than other workers who have certain job limitations and instead must make reasonable accommodations if doing so doesn’t pose an undue hardship on the business.

Even though Mother’s Day is over, do one more thing for your mom and all the other moms out there: call your members of Congress and ask them to co-sponsor the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act today.

You can find the phone number for your representative here and your senators here.

This article was re-posted from The Blog of Rights.

Many thanks to photographer Dave Waycie.

Over many years, the ACLU of Illinois represented the AFSC and Michael as they pursued their missions of peace and social justice. In everything that he did, Michael displayed a powerful intelligence, serene dignity and an unwavering commitment to the common good that served as an inspiration to all who knew him.

In 2002, the AFSC served as the organizing facilitators to plan demonstrations in opposition to the Trans-Atlantic Business Dialogue, a group of international business leaders meeting in Chicago. Despite the fact that the AFSC had an 80-year history of pacifism and peaceful protest, the Chicago Police Department sent an undercover officer into the planning meetings. Michael, always ready to defend freedom of association and speech went to court with ACLU and reaffirmed AFSC good standing in the community through a settlement with the City. In this, and in many other instances, we were proud to stand with Michael and the AFSC.

ACLU of Legal Director Harvey Grossman, a long-time friend of Michael’s, remembered him as “a true champion for social justice and peace. He was a loving, decent, gentle man, who had a fierce determination to seek equality for all. He will be dearly missed.”

We are all plaintiffs seeking the freedom to marry in the two current lawsuits by Lambda Legal and the ACLU of Illinois and like you we are all residents of Illinois. We have been waiting for the freedom to marry for years, some of us for decades. We are writing because we need your help to win the freedom to marry – we are inches away from the finish line and right now, you have the power to help end the inequality and bring greater security and dignity to our families. Please call your representative in the Illinois House and tell them to vote YES on the marriage bill. We are in the home stretch of the legislative effort, and your phone calls and volunteer time are needed.

Every one of us has a story to tell about why marriage is important to our families and why civil unions are not enough –our stories reflect thousands of other stories across the state.

Ryan Cannon and Daphne Scott-Henderson are raising three children – Sebastian, 4, Sonnet, 15, and Autumn, 12 years old. They are a close and loving family, and dream of a time when they can be married. Although the couple planned for the birth of Sebastian together, the hospital attempted to keep Sonnet and Autumn from visiting their new little brother because they were not considered “siblings”. The family routinely faces reminders they are not a married family. When Daphne takes Sebastian to the doctor, there are always issues, even though it’s supposed to be on record that she can make medical decisions for Sebastian as his parent. At Sebastian’s school, Ryan signs all the papers and notes that require a parent’s signature in order to avoid situations that are hurtful to Sebastian, who is made to feel as though his family isn’t a real family. The school always asks for “the mother,” as if they are not both Sebastian’s mothers. They explain that it’s policy. If Daphne and Ryan could marry, there would be no mistake about their relationship to each other or to their children.

Ed Hamilton and Gary Magruder first met in at a mutual friend’s party in 1964. Over nearly a half-century as a loving, committed couple, they have built a life together, filled with family, with friends and shared memories. The walls of their home are filled with artwork that Gary painted. One entire room is given over to a massive compact disc collection and a large piano. Books can be found everywhere. The home has an easy, comfortable feeling of things being settled, peaceful. On the 40th anniversary of their meeting, they gave into the urging of friends and flew to Toronto to be married in Canada. Gary saved the flowers from their lapels that day. In their “golden years,” however, they simply want their marriage recognized in Illinois. For them, they have waited long enough.

Some of us are represented by Lambda Legal and others of us by the ACLU of Illinois – and all of us are in this fight for our families and all the other families of same-sex couples across this state. We urge you to call your House Representatives and tell them this is important to you too – we know that we have supporters in every corner of Illinois – make your voices heard.

Find your representatives: http://illinoisunites.org/LetsWin
Volunteer to phone bank.

Sincerely,
Angelica Lopez & Claudia Mercado, Chicago, IL (4th District)
Michelle Mascaro and Corynne Romine, Oak Park , IL (8th District)
Mercedes Santos & Theresa Volpe, Chicago, IL (16th District)
LaKeesha Harris and Janean Watkins, Chicago, IL (16th District)
Julie Barton & Pat Garcia, Evanston, IL (18th District)
Richard Rykhus and Carlos Briones, Evanston, IL (18th District)
Tanya Lazaro and Elizabeth “Liz” Matos, Chicago, IL (20th District)
James Darby & Patrick Bova, Chicago, IL (25th District)
Kirsten and Tanya Lyonsford, Aurora, IL (49th District)
Laura Hartman and Anne Dickey, Rock Island, IL (72nd District)
Brian Fletcher & Robert Hickok, Oak Park, IL (78th District)
Daryl Rizzo and Jaime Garcia, LaGrange, IL (82nd District)
Lee Korty & Bert Morton, Springfield, IL (87th District)
Peggy Burton & Donna O’Crowly, Bloomington, IL (88th District)
Suzanna “Suzie” Hutton and Danielle Cook, Bloomington, IL (88th District)
Hector Martinez and Bob Proctor, Peoria, IL (92nd District)
Edwin Hamilton and Gary Magruder, Plainfield, IL (97th District)
Randy Walden and Robert “Bob” Carey, Springfield, IL (96th District)
Brandon and Kevin Bowersox-Johnson, Urbana, IL (103rd District)
Kathie Spegal and Lynn Sprout, Champaign, IL (103rd District)
Michelle Franke & Michelle Chappell, Champaign, IL (103rd District)
Ryan Cannon & Daphne Scott-Henderson, Champaign, IL (103rd District)
Lynne Burnett & Robyne Omara, Godfrey, IL (111th District)
Donald Julian & Timothy Rice, Alto Pass, IL (115th District)
Tim Kee and Rick Wade, Marion, IL (117th District)

The contraceptive rule, which requires health plans to include coverage for contraceptive care without a co-pay or deductible, ensures that millions of women will have access to affordable birth control, and represents one of the greatest advancements for women’s health in decades. Ignoring this fact and the fact that the contraceptive rule is constitutional, the companies and their owners argue that providing health insurance coverage for contraception to their collective 1,168 employees imposes a “substantial burden” on their religious exercise. We strongly disagree.

An independent decision by an employee to use her health plan (which is a benefit earned during employment — just like salary) to obtain health care, including contraception, that her employer personally objects to does not substantially burden the employer’s religious exercise. As we noted in the brief, the contraceptive rule does not compel or coerce employers to use or purchase contraception themselves. The rule simply requires employers to provide their employees with a comprehensive health plan.

If the companies and their owners prevailed, it would allow employers to impose their religious beliefs on their employees, which the courts have repeatedly held is improper. For example, the courts have said that an employer cannot pay men and women differently based on the owner’s religious belief that men should be paid more because the Bible considers them head of the household. The Seventh Circuit should follow these cases and refuse to allow employers to deny equal rights and benefits to their employees — who themselves have free exercise rights under the Constitution.

Also joining the ACLU on the brief are the Anti-Defamation League; Catholics for Choice; Hadassah, the Women’s Zionist Organization of America; the Interfaith Alliance Foundation; the National Coalition of American Nuns; the National Council of Jewish Women; Protestants for the Common Good; the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice; the Religious Institute; the Unitarian Universalist Association; and the Unitarian Universalist Women’s Federation.

Download a copy of the brief.

Cross-posted at the Blog of Rights.

The unmanned drones of the future pose a far greater danger to our privacy than the manned airplanes and helicopters of the past. Drones are far less expensive, so they will be far more common. Drones are small and quiet, so they can be secretly deployed. Drones are highly maneuverable, so they can move in very close to the surveillance target.

Reasonable people expect that the government is not tracking our movements in public places, storing that information in a dossier, and later using it against us. When the government monitors where we are, it learns who we are: whether we went to a political protest, a union meeting, a controversial movie, a psychiatrist, a church, or a criminal defense lawyer.

Download a copy of his testimony.

Dawn was awarded the Roger Baldwin Lifetime Achievement Award in 2002 for her life’s work in the classroom, in the courts, and in public to consistently, and with a strong voice, advance the efforts of civil rights and civil liberties.

Dawn Clark Netsch will be missed.

A memorial service for Dawn Clark Netsch will be held at 2 p.m. on Saturday, April 13, in Thorne Auditorium at the Northwestern University School of Law, 375 E. Chicago Ave.

Dawn Clark Netsch discussing civil liberties at a 2010 event with Steve Shapiro, ACLU National Legal Director