An editorial from the Chicago Tribune addresses the growing debate on the use of unmanned aircraft inside the United States. The ACLU supports Senate Bill 1587, the Freedom from Drone Surveillance Act, which would places regulations on the use of drone technology by police departments in the state.

The Tribune writes:

But for the same reason, they could significantly impinge on privacy. The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois wants the General Assembly to limit their use to a few purposes, such as preventing a suspect from escaping, locating missing people and averting imminent harm to life or property. Aside from those circumstances, police would need a search warrant.

A drone regulation bill sponsored by state Sen. Daniel Biss, D-Evanston, passed out of a Senate committee last week. It's a good starting place for debate.

Read the whole thing.

Dear Fellow Illinoisans,

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)

Today, the ACLU and the ACLU of Illinois filed a friend-of-the-court brief in two additional appeals challenging the Affordable Care Act’s (“ACA”) contraceptive coverage rule. Our brief urges the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to reject requests by secular, for-profit companies and their owners to block enforcement of the rule. The district court in both cases refused to grant the companies’ requests, and they seek to overturn those decisions.

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.