-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/807eee144853a652137a4e513e065984.pdf
88a9c8521fc686e6c1d477b79c8a1cf3
PDF Text
Text
060893 1120
10:521
:
. "
u.s.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
iOFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS
OFFI.CE OF THE DIRECTOR
i
. i
I
I
')"
I
I
.
FAX TRANSMISSION COVER $HEET
FROM
TO
Na~e: ~ IJ~IT</l
~
Name: ~t/~
__________~__~
Address:
;
;
!
I '
Office for Civil Rights
Office of the Director
Room 5400, Cohen Building
330 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 2020'
Phone:
FAX:
Phone:
FAX':
(202) 619-0403
(202) 619·3437
I
-'7-0cJ--.--:-':-JF
-Jf-~-(,--
fTr .., ,
MESSAGE:
y,-"~,,...-- ~~':
--;7r~.,
�0608931120
IV 1,UCOU:fJ4J't
I
fUUo/UZI
'
BAY AREA COALITION FOR CIVIL RlGHTSt ANALYSIS OF ACA41
I
!
I
%•
INTRODUCTION ~ND SUMMARY.
Assembly Conltil\uionalltwendment 41 (hereinafter MACA 47") is an
.
, inappropriate and unnecessary a~empt to amend the California Constitution to e1iminaIe
the use of all YOhlDtary affirmative action programs in pubJic employment., eduCllion and
c::Onll'atting. These are program~ which pubJic entities, be they the swe, scbool diSlridta
or municipalities. have voluntarily initiated in order to give meaning to the promise of'
equality to all in the state of California.
I
Under current federal law', state and local governments can voluntarily impJ....J,,:
a race-consdous affinnative ~tion plan only ill one very narrow situation: wbere die
plan is intended to address identified discrirrunation against specific racial groUP$;'~" Cit!
gfBjchmond v, J.I\ CrosoD Co.,1488 U.S. 469 (1989), In addition, even where.
, preference 'program is determined to be justified, courts will further scrutinize the pia to
ensure that it is narrowly tailored. Jg. Therefore, f'ederallaw assures that only:t4~",
afWma~ve action policies \JIihjcb\protect against ~just and ~bitr~preference$~cQ \~
vohm,tanly unc:lertaken, ACA 47.utempts to restnct affirmauvc a(;1;&on tbnher b
.:"",
forbiddin.a any voluntary artemp~ to' address pasl discriminato!)' practices.. If" :It'
wowd hah over SO years of pm~en fOv.r.uds creating equality in America.
Affinnative action in the Un;ted States encompasses a rieh history oftalWJa ~OJ1
to"equitably_il1tegrateJinc1errepre~,eated.gr..:!>~~~int<?-thc-mainstream.culture. Such poJici.~
a're rootCain thef3th-and 14th Amendments to tbe United Stales ConstitUtioD "'j~
I
' " '''''' ,
'
received widespread bi-pariisan ~ppoJ1 from Presidents, Congress, and the U . " . - . ' ,
Supreme Coun. Congress recogcized the' imponance n,f affi.rmative action wheDil'.,..Mit.:~~~,
the first federal law forbidding eniployment discrimination based OD sex. race, natio= .';:':', " \
origin» or religion. ' Civil Rights-~ct-of-l.964,42-U..s.C.-§-20QOe ~ Wl This was
'
followed by the issuance 6fExecutive_Otaer~rr246]ji:::r90S::wb.ich required feder.t,\:::,:
0.
. ,
'----;-l--""-"~, - .~--- ~--~----•. •
'"\:,
contractors to undertake affirmatlye action procedures to UlcreB$e Ifttnont'y repR__~1l
in their workforce. The Nixon adhrinistratiQo introduced the concept of usiq "~~,.!i'
time.tablei' to make feder~ns~ction companies more racially diverse. In 1970~-- ,
p'fcsrtfent Nixon added women to the list of those who should be included in a.ffirmalive '
action programs. Executive Ordei 113S1.
."
I
I
I
While the most obvious indieia of discrimination have dissipated and signs in
windows ftO longer read "Only W"hites Need Apply," discrimination still has a 1'Ja\l~
impact in our economy_ For example. most women aDd minorities are stilljnJhe ,
payiDsJobs in oW' workforce and jobs remain predominantly geader segre"'gated
.
199-05.· In recognition of the need to break do'Ml historic barriers to a truly intes;rated : '
, '
. '.
,
.,f'
,
'1~~~
.:
','
�01/06/95
4'AVW
•
,.
n~~w
~~
18: :53
~~vn~
{
¥
" I
1
060893 1120
lV "1J'OI~J4JI
rUUo/Ull
�societY, businesses have p.mbra~cd affimU'itive Gcrion as a lool to ovcroome centUries of
discrimination. This suppon in~Jud~$ Jarse cQfPOra~ons IItId manufacrurers. In face, in
1984, over 90% of Chief Exeeuttve OffiQers .oflarge corporations sai.d tbat char
aftinnarive action policies were Imeant nor only (0 meet government regulations but also
to satisfy corporate objectives. An even higher percentage said t.hey would c:ontin1.lc to
use goals and .timetables to rrack, the progress of women and minorities. Fomme, Sept
16. 1985 It 28.
I
I
•
,
I
ACA 47 could have a major impact on voluntary employment, contraecin& .4: .
educational policies that ha"/e be6 adopted within our state in order to equalize ~tnic
oPP9~ti~=for-tKe-people_of.~;"'-It-ha~cthe-pot~!ttial:to-=-a1f'ect~e~.:no-n;rcaO!..t~
0(ub~~_.in_Ca1if~~~::inCIU~,·ng~~ery-state~enCY_,·and-~p:ll11lpenttP~~~,g~~~,Is').
\~d ~verslttes; local a?es ~~~ountles; rede~elopn:ent ~enC1es~~~
agCll~es;~other~p-ub!lc-enD.~~such.~hosp.ltals;::llbranes.and-81rports.
•
.
I
.
Section II of this paper foGuses on the potential impact of ACA 41 on the state and
its subdivisions. The section desCribes the major swe programs and local c:ontractiq .
pol1cies that could be subject to l~gal challenge if ACA 47 is adopted
I
Section manalyzes how ~e passaae of ACA 47 would limit the ability ~floc;i
governments to meet their obligation under the United States ConstirutioD and federal
staiUtOiYllaw to remedy discrimin~tion. and also foree these agencies to give up federal
funds to avoid potentially costly litigation for claims ofviola1i.ng ACA 41. The
amendment directly conflicts witbJthe Equal Protection Clause ofthe Fourteenth
Amendment because it significan~y restricts the ability of state and local govemments.to
conform to federal Jaws which allow and sometimes requires government entities to
voluntarily identify and remedy p~ discrimination. Using the City and County of SID
Francisco as an example. we evahiate the impact of ACA 47 on local programs. We also
discuss how ACA 47 is likely to l~ad to unnecessary and costly litigation because it
restricts the ability of local gove~ents to settle antidiscrimination lawsuits.
,
i
FiZlal.ly, Section IV discussels how the proposed amendment vio~_th~_E_q}W
Protection~Clause of the U.S.
Constitution. First. because the-amendment embodies au
expli.~· of race, it is subje<;t to ~aict scrutiny. Here, there is no evidence that the loal
of ACA 47. namely the elimination. of affinnative action programs, is compelled by any
legitimate legis;la.tive end. No showing has ucc:n made that state and local afiirmative
action programs h~ve toany extent\adversely affected the state's nonminority populatiolL
Moreover. ACA 41 rallt the secon~ prong of the strict !)~ruti.Dv test because rh~
�aui'l:O"Wilciu
IS
hot riarrowtY;~tailoredt The amendment seeks t~ eliminate Dot only -t4ose
specificprogr~$ wh.ich p(9pom:nts~ believem,;1Y be Cllu3inginjury,to tlte ~rate'~
j{~'
I
..p.
,
I "
... _----_....__ ......_.- - - - -
: ~'
l ~~
.~l
::.',
.,..,
.'
'
�13613893 11213
iV l'U'Ol~J4J
.
r
I
nonminortty popuJation,,,but an ~uch programs. fne1udinl those that may be required by
federal law.
I
•
,
'
I '
:
,
Second, the amcn~enr 'i0lates equal pro,tection because ir is racially mo~
and seeks to reduce the level.ofprotection provf~ed to racial minorities and womeD under
the U.S. ConstitUtion. A stare caMo' provide leSs protection than what is required by
federal law.
I
~
I
,.
.
,
!
Third, ACA 47 violates eqUal protection ~cause itin1iingcs upon the riptsof
minorities to participate on an eqUaJ basis in the political process. It removes tAe
authority of lo~ officials to addtess problems ~at specifically burden people ofcolor
and women while not similarly ~tricting the abijity ofthcse same officials to redress
discrimination apiDst others (c. g.! older people. ~sabJed people, lesbilDS and pys). By
selecting .. race and gender issues for ditferenti8J treatment. ACA 41 violates the U.S.
out
'.
I
,
C01'lS1:ltuaOft.
: \
\
n.
IHfACJ:.
Section n will discp,ss how
Fe passage ofi;-CA 41 may call into question the
viability ofnumerous sta.T.e and lOdu affinnattve
,
~OD proyams.
Pan A oftbis scalOD
,
will list major stateemploymenc, e~ucation, and p~blic contracting pI'OgJ1WlS that oould
I
1
,
be subject to thaUeage if the 8meac;tmmt passu. fan B azW)2ea the pQtaltial efrectqt
I
,
:
.
ACA 47 OD local contracting pt'OgnIms. It shows ~ow 1he 3IDendmeat may force 10c:a1
I
governments to dism1qltle exiS1in& rhluority and women bumaess enterprise pro~
I
systems.
. !
'J
, I
'.
A.
Mfjor state programs ~ch may be ~allen~ by ACA 4Z.
1.
EmPloymegt Programs.
I
The foUowinglaws pettaiDiug to public employment are represeuUltive afme ~,j
I
\
,
of' programs wbi~b potentially will b~ affected if th~ amendment passes:
,~
I
I
.~
-3 ..
"
"
�I
01/06/95
vA
..
~U ~~
~~ ••• ~~
'"VW ny~V
005
10: 55,
~~
rUU~/Ull
~~VA~
.i.
..
..
i
\'
h
~
1·
I, '
t!
Government Code Section
CIVIL SERVICE
• ,AFFIRMATrvr. ~crION1919Q et seq_. STATEprovides duu all 6-=
PRQCRAM. whioh
agencies and depar;tments estabJisq an effective affirmative action progam,
including ~e setting of i0als and timetables to overeomc any identified
underutilization ofminorities and women.
""l"'"
•
I
'
•
GGverume~t Code: Section 1%990~: NONDISCRIMIriAnON AND
COMPLIANC.Y. EMPf..,OVMENJr PROCRAMS, which requires 8IIY
employer Who is oriwants to beco~e a contractor ~th the state for public
works or for goods or services·tn !~bmit a Dondiscrin::&iaariolt program to tho
state for approval ~d certification.' Submission of an affirmative action
program may be tiled with the state to !t~tisfy compliance standards.
I
•
•
' .
I
Labor Code Section 3075.1,APPRENTTCESHIP PR.OCRAMS. which
encOurages the utili~tion of apprenticeship as a form of on.the..job
training, and \\Ihich requires state aDd localpuhlic ageneies haviriS SDeb
programs to impJez:nbt affilmau.ve action goals.
I
.'
I
'
'.
Health ~ S.If'ety Code Section 437.7. AREA HEALTH PLANNING
AGENCY, which r~quires all area health planning agencies to:file 'With the
,Advisory Health CoUncil an affum~vc action employment plan.
,
I
'
.
i
I
•
Realth& Safety Co1de Section S07~S et seq" RENTAL HOUSINC
CONSTRU,€TIONIPROGRAM·. which requires that all contractors arid
subcontractors engaged in the construction of rental housing under this
section use ~atite action in hiring.'
"
•
GovernmenfCode S;ectioD 8546, STATE AUDITOR.. which require! the
State Audito~to esta~lish an affirmarive action program in hiring.
•
Governmen~Code S~ctiOD19400 et:seq., UPWARD MOSll.ITY, which
requires all d~anments and agencies of SWe government to establish aD
effective pro!ram of~pward mobility in low-paying occupations in or4erto
help the state}meet itsl affirmative actiongoaJs.
'
~,I
Ji'f.
~
"
\
.
1
'
,
.
2. Education.
,
Th~ follO"loving arc tcprc.se.nta~ve edu(.;(iUOD s~tu[es which may be impacted by
ACA41:
'1
'.
-4
"
.'
�I
01/06/95
IbV~ n~~~
~~
006
060893 1120
10:56
IV
~~~n~
ruu~/ Ull
ltU,OI:1.)4JI
!
!
"
•
I
Education Code S~tfoDs 871U()...87107, Affirmative ActioD Hiria"
which requires communitY- col1eges to adopt affirmative aerion biri",
policies and sub~fj:iOgrcss-rePorts to the Board of Governors of
Comm1ll1.i'Y CoUeg~s.
,
•
I
Educatioa Code SetdoDS 44100....... 105, Affirmative Actio. Empio)'llMllt.'
~ch requires scjl~l-distri~s to adopt policies to increase the hiMS of
women and minorities at aU employment levels.
I
•
'
Education Code Se~tfo.ll71020 Poweraad Duda ofColl11DWlity
eOUeges, which req~rcs the Board ofGovemors ofComm'Wlity Colleges
.to submit affirmativ~ action reports to the Governor every three years
concerning its own ~embership. ina uding an assessment of its
representation of minorities, women. and people with disabilities.
I
•
I
Educ:atioD Code Sec~oD 66952, MoDitoMI of PerformaDcc, which
allows me Legislature to monitor the efforts of~\'e'lSity of California.
California State University. and community colleges to divernty their
$tuclcUt bodies, facultY. non-faculty academic staff. cd admipisttative
positions.
i
Education Code
Reports to LegislatuJ'e
• . "NtUch requires the:SectioD 263,Posueconc:ia.ry-f4ueazioDoct Govemor.
ca:Ufotnia
Commission to
report to Legislature
and Govem~tlie~DtatioD and UtilizatiOllOf
ethmc l'Dinorities and -WOmen among academic, administrative. auG other
employees within the Pommunity coUege. California Stare University. lid
University of Califo~a systems.
l
•
i
EducatJoa Code SKtiOD 69560, Stucleat 0PP0ll1.waJt)' aDd Acccsi
.1
Program, ~ch pro~des funding of projects desiped to increase the
acee,.ibility of po5t~ndary ed\lcational opportunities to low income mel
ethnic minority stUdm~s.
3.
'.
l'ublic Contms;tW Prn'&PJm s.
l
The following public contrac~g programs are potentially subject to challeD&e,jf
the 8D1eDdment passes:
•
'
~~
PubUc CODtract CodelSettioD lOllS et seq, MINORITY AND
WOMEN BUSlN'ESS ip_~TlcrP ATION GOALS FOR 'STATE
I
I
I~
\I,
5
f-
�01/06/95
.,
~"W~
..
.
~,
ftw~U ~~
060893 1120
10:5~
IV l'U~OI:lJ4J:1
~~~A~
007
rUIU/Ull
CONTRAcrS. w~ch provides dlat all contracr~ awarded by any Stale
agency, departmen~, officer or other state governmental entity fot
construction. profeSsional services. materials, !liupplies, equipment. .
a1terabon,'repair oi:improvemenr shall have statewide participation goals of
IS percent for min~rity owned businesses. and S pereeftt for women owned
businesses. The act was substantially modified in 199210 meet the
requirements of CitY of RiGhmond v. lA. Cmsm. 488 lIS. 469 (1919).
I
•
Gevenuueot Code Seetlo. 14132 et KIL, CONTRACTS FOR.
PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL SERVICES, wltich requires that
public contracts awarded by the state (or the services of engineers.
architects, surveyor~, planners, or environmental specialists comply with
the provisions of California Public Contract Code section 1011 Set seq.
I
(S\lpra).
I
I
., •
Callforuia EdueatioD Code Section 71028, POSTSECONDARY
EDUCAnON, wh.i~h requires that public contracts awarded by any
California Community College comply with the Dlinority and women
bUSiness enterprise gbals set forth in Public Contract Code section lOllS
,
I
(SURra).
i
I
,',
•
i
I
.
PubUc Contract Co~e Section 2000 et seq., RESPONSIVE BIDDERS.
which was drafted in ~TespoDse to litigation arising over city charter
requirements thar bi~ be given to "the lowest responsible bidder,- This
"Section provides that ~oca1 agencies may require their "lowest respoasible
bidders" to meet min~rity and women business enterprise goals.
!
•
PUb6c UtiDtics Code\SeCEioD 8ZS1 et seq., WOMEN AND MINORITY
BUSINESS ENrERfRISES, which requires regulated public utilities to
make the efi'ons to a*d. )0% or more of their contracts to women,
minority and disabled jveteran business enterprises.
•
Health" Safety Cod~ Section S0900et seq., CALIFORNIA :aOUSING
FINANCE AGENC'\t. which requires all contracts for the managcmea.t,
construction or rehabilitation of low income housing developm.ents be',
procured purSWl!lt to
,
an afti.n:nativc acLiun pro&rarn.
I
I
I
•
.PtlbU~ Contract Cod~'Scetion 104'0 et seq., MINORITY BUSINESS
PARTICIPATION, Which requires that all public contracts awarded for.
state correctional fadlj1cies and'progroms havc 3tatcwiLle participation goals
!
I
I
-6
�01/06/95
\/,
II" .,.J 11".'11""
~'I\\ilq I\""V
1'"
10:57
"'1111.1.0
IV
'
060893 1120
l'U'OI~J4Jf
008
rUIllUll
o( 15 pcreem for nlinorhy business enterprises and S percent for women
business ente""rises.
~~
I
'
i
!
•
Public CODtract ~ode SectioD 10500 el seq.. UN[VERSITY OF
CALIJI'OItNIA C9MPETI1'IVE BIDDINC. which requ.ite,s the
University of CaIif~mJa to adopt policies aDd procedures to ensure that a
(air proportion of all univer$ity contracts be awarded to disadvantaged and
women business en1erprises.
1
•
PubUc Contratt Code SectioD 2012', SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA
IlA.PID TRANSITIDISTRlCT, which authorizes the Sill Francisco Bay
Area Rapid Transit District to establish public: contracti.ng participatiOll·
goals for minority-o:wned businesses and womeD..owned .businesses..
.
!
•
Public Utilities Cod~ SecdoD 130239, POWERS AND 'UNcnONS,
I
i
which authorizes th~ Southern California Rapid Transit Distriet todevc1op
public contracting p~gpation goals fur mmority-o'Nlled businesses and
women-ovmed busi~esses.
•
'
Cal1foJ'Dia PubUe U,tWty Code Seeflo:a 8281 et seq•• WOMEN AND
Mn-lORiTV BUS'fESS ENTERPRISES, whicb requires public U1il1tie$
to develop plans to increase procurement from minority and wome:a
1..
•
•
I
~usmeS$ enterpnses.~
I
•.
Cautonda Go"e~'Dt Code Seetloll 8790.10 et seq., MINORITY ANI>
WOMEN BUSINESS PARTICIPATION GOALS FOR STATE
CONTRACfS: ~bh re~uires that all public conttacts awarded pursuant
to Chapter 9.7,. StJPERCONDUCTING SUPER COLLIDER., shall have
statewide participation goals of IS percent foJ' minority business c:nt.crpEises
and S percent for wo~en business enterprises.
.
B.
Local CO,ntracrin& Programs,
,
i
I
In 1989 the United States Supreme Court restricted the ability ofloc.al
, !
I
'
gOvenm:leJ1lS to utilize race-consci9us contracting programs. ~ City ofRicbmoA4 y.
I
.lA. Croson Cp.• 488 U. S. 469 (19~9). The Coun hel d'that state ane! local aovermnents
caD
implement these programs onl}i when they serve a compelling governmental purpose
I
�I
01/06/95
\14
..,..,
Ve. • • I" ,'"
..,""
,'J\VJ'i ~"'J",V
""
060893 1120
10:5~
IV JGU,OL:fJ4JI
"l>\7t\~
009
fUIUUll
.,.
and if thcyare narrowly tailored to address the identified discrimination. Since the
.1
CroSon decision, alleast 20 govc~cntaf agen~ies in Northern California ha\fe adopted
I
or are in the proc:ess of adopting ra~ and gender--consciou$ contraerift8 prosrams. t
Before loing forth with these proivams, all of these jurisdictions hired privare consultants
I
1
to study whether discriminatory f~rces affected their procurement systems. After
1
.
extensive .statistical and anecdotall analysis. these srudies concluded that. systemic
disCrimination against minority ari1d WOmen business enterpris~ C'MlWBEs") c::on1iDue to
limit their 'ability to compete for ~ntracts in a wide rang~ ofindustries. 2 The
i
methodology used to support thes~ programs has been upheld by federa1murts as
,
,'
consistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the United States CoDStitution. ~""
I
.
~.
.
!
I ·
AQCe v. CoalitiRJ1 for Econ~mic Egyity, 9S0 F.2d 1401 (9th Cu. 1991) (refUsina to
.
I
. I
enjoin San Fnmeisco's COlltractingiprogram); Coral CODst Co.v. Kin&Countr-, 941
~.2d
:t
i
910 (9th Cir. 1991).
,
The IOGal agCZlcies iDclude: Alameda County; Contra Coaa County; COUIIty ad City of
SlID FrlD.cis~q~ CitY ofSan lose; Santa Clan County; Se. Fraa~ aecll'Ve1C!1'JlleQt~M-gy; Su
F1'8ncisco Unined School District; Sag-mento County; City orSac:rammtOj C"Jty of
;
City orRichmolld; City of Oalda.o.d; Oakland Unified School District; Bay JU'Ia lbpid fan.
District (BARTI: A.la.mwlContta CoSta TJ'IllI.£it Di£trlot (AC Traasit); Ccz.b'al CoaU'a Costa
Transit Authority; Golda Gale Bridge ~way and
Tr~ort8tioll District; SiD Franciscol MUDicipalllailway; San Maleo COUllI)' TrUlSit ~
and SiD.!& Clara CoUllty Traa.9portatioD. Agau:;y.
J
;i:;.
'.!
I
The programs use4 br·these ~ctiO.llS rauge from condu~ outreach to miIlorit)' ad
wOllam lNaiD.ess eacCipriscs ("M/W9E5"), l'",vid.in.s t.h~ wiIh pret\reaces ill tile biddiDg process,
md ietti:Da .MIWBE patticipatioD goalS.
.
I
I
,
These studies aa~the under.udJizatioJ1 ofMIWBEs in both the public a4 private
sectors for priEDe and subcontracts mcODstructiOn. professional service~ and the supplY ofgoods
a.od products. ID. additioD. they ~ti7.P. temCDony by thou.u.uds Of1XrmODty or WOI»OA buaiaGSS
OWDerJ ~O desgribed speomc examples of discri.minattoD that they personally experieo.oed while
operating their busiGesses.
I
.
-8
--_._--
:~,
!
�UI
V,J ,,\I
vc.. 't H
01/06/95
1'1
r l\VN ,,\t.,v- In,
0608931120
10:58
I,-f..UI\I.
IV l'U")i~J4j'(
!
010
YU 1J/U, 1
I
Be~e ACA ~Lattempt's-toJimitth~powcr-or.local-lo~cmments_~ address
I
I
dis.gimination-lhroUiILV.Ot.wlt.q~a.ffinnatiY.e_actiun_programStjts-passaa~Lc'ou1~ call into
i "
,
.--~
.qu!!~n-thel~-~s-of:!~e_~~~~gJ~~p;wns. D~~avfnl_strOng_~deI!.ec of
i
d.i~rinUnati~ft in_their_pr~cum:n~t-SY$tqns, an~thori'Y-undc:u:he_U.S-,,_Co~h1ri~n to
Wc~Il:&Gtian. many of ch~e jurisdictions will be re) UClant to implement proanms
.
!
that potentially open themselves 6p to challenges under.statc law. Ii these jurisdictiQDS
I
dismantJe their pn:;,lrams. mjn()ri~. and women.owned businesses, who were largclr
I
e:xcludedfrom public; contracting!prior to the adoption of these prosr=s. arc liJcclr to
I
experience Curther discrimination.:
m.
1]P; AMENDMENT WQt[LD CREATE DIFFICil1TIES FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS IN MEETING THEIR OBLlGATIOl!lS UNDEB
FEDEftA,LLAW.
A
The amendment ~ts with the federal Equal ProtcetiQD OalHc krausc '
is resgjcts the abiMtvQfState and IOcalgovqpme;ts to develop remedies'
that address'stJ,sqjmtllabOn.
.
I
I
State and loc.algoverume:nts have a duty UDder federal law. as inte:rpreled by the
I
I
United. Slat!:s Supreme Court. to take affinnati ve measures to redress di~minatiOD in
I
.
tbeirpublic contracting practices.. ,City pfRichmond v. Ctosog, 488 U.S. 469, 504
.
I
(1989). see also at 480. opinion efiO'Connor> 1. joined by the Chief Justice, White 8Ild
I
I
Kennedy. 11. Further, pursuant to ~e Equal ProtectioD Oause, all public employers ~
under a clear command to eliminate every vestige of racial segregatioD. and discrimination
,
I
in the sc;hools. Pursuant to that go~. race conscious remedial action may be wammt¢
I
i
..
�01/06/95
In
v.J
::J,J
V{".'tI&AII
l'£\V.I'l.
lI."l.v-nv
011
060893 1120
10:59
IV
.~r.\J1\1.
I'UI41021
!£U,OJ~j4j'(
,
Wyglt V, Jackson Board of EduCation. 476 U.S. 267. 277 (1986): see also KeeGo" of
sbe l,lniversjty ofCalifomia v,
B~e, 438 U.S. 265, 30()'304 (1978). This affirmative
chny also arises frOm Title vn. I~bpson v. TransportatioD Ag~cy of Santa CID- 480
!
U.S. 616, 637..638.
·1
To illustrate what types ofl1oc.al programs will be affected by ACA 47. we will
analyze its impact 011 program! th¥ have been adopted by the City and Co\Dlty of San
.
I.'
-
Francisco ("San Franasco"). PursUant to the mandates of federallaw,CSinJ~'J~like
:
I
nurru:rOU8 municipalities across th~ state, has implemented a variety of programs desisned
"I
.. '
!
., t
to remedy the effects of disCrimination in a number of different areas. For example, the
I
,
dty promotes affirmative aaion in Ithe hiring of chy employees where it identifies areas
.
,
~!
I
of Wldcrutilizatioll ofminorities and women. ~ San Francisco Administrative Code
I
,
seCtion 16.9..24. The program has
" ~
'.1
.,
i
been successful in integrating San Francisco's
I
11':
.
-
worlc£orce.
Sm Francisco also promores\greater diversity (and thus comperition)m its public
works contractiug through its MinontylWomenlLocal Business UtiliutiOD Ordinance.
.
!
Sail. Fraucisco Administrative Codeisection 12D. The innovative program contaim an
!
outreach component, biel preference~ for certain disadvantaged minority. women and
i
locaUy-owned businesses., and pa.rti91pation goals for women aDd minority owned
I
1
•
businesses. In the public prOcureDu~nt context. this program has succeeded in opening
previously shut doors ofeconomic opporruniries for minorities and women.
I
,
1,
"
I
I
,
�01/06/95.
".
y",
"J
\Ie.. 't
II PI
I
060893 1120
IV llUltJU:/J4J'{
10:59,
,,1\VfIl 1\1.&'\1-1'''' Lr.VAi.
012
POl5/0l1
Ii
!
San francisco's local law ~so prohibits employe:rs who are awarded city conaw
I
from discriminaring'in the hiriftl,!promotion and treatment of their workfo,.,es. San .
I
I
_
Francisco AdminisU'ative Code Section 12B. In order to be eligible to bid ora a city
I
i
..onll'flCl, potential conn-actors must subnrit an affinnalive action PlOpam to the awarding
"
I
I:
I
r
ascnc::y. The pI'OplIm includes job training and apprenticeship activities as well IS
,',
!
I
I
promotiua the panidpation of all
euuuc groups ia the contrad'Or's pe:rfonnance ordle
h
.
I
:
coDeraof.
,
I'
hi San Francisco admiJl1strative Code Section
128--4.
I '
i
The proposed amendment
"? the State Constitution would prohibit local
i
sovemments &om using "f1K;C, sex~ color, ethDicity or national origill as a critmiOD" for
"ganUna pref'ercntiallreatm.ent"
to: any group in the areas otpublic contract'in&
I
eduea1ion or employment. A1J demoDstram1 below, local agende.s will be caught between
.,
I
.
Ita rcclc ad a llard place." .011 tile Joe had, a.loc:aL~~n~-_-t.auS.:1O-take-affinnaDve
"
.
st~PS~(o-.::-aQaresLdiscnm~bn~~..-:be-violating-fedcral.law, but ~~g-su.cb-af!irmative
$t~SJ:D&y~bc_a_violatioD-of.ACA~. This is aD unteaable positioD for local SOvcrDmalts
c.:__.
. lI
I
".;:
because \\bicllevc:r position is uItim;ately fakeD will surely result in lltipdou..
L
,
:
I
B.
,
The am~ent amlQ cncbmger local SOYeT'A!D.el1tB' a'bilUy to obblip fcdet!!
mIm·
!
IfACA 41 is adopted, local governments which comply with the amendment may
I
be forced to fO..!!go_milliODS7of_doUa1rs-iD.federaLgrm!S. In partiCul3T, local gOVemJDGlts
I
rely beavily OD federal graats to
f\m~. their public
works projects. These federal
i
pis,
I
however, arc awarded oaly if the pant recipient agrees to impJement affirmative actiOD
,
r
I
!
i
I' ;
l'
i
'
I'
"
I'
I", '
(
I
,
.i
----
- - - - - --
------
�,
I
Ul-UJ-~J UG;\lrN
060893 1120
01/06/95
11:00
fAVM Av~U' n~ LtuAL I
TU lZUlOHIJ4J'(
013
P016/021
...
plans designed to increase mino9'Y and women participation. For instance. the San
,
I
Francisco International Airport receives approximately $24 million in federal JI'IIII
,
I
I
monies from the Federal Avi81io~ Administratio~ ("FAA") for various capiraJ .
I
improvemenc projects. San FranCisco also receives millions of dollars jn grant monies .
.
.
I
I
from the Federal Highway Authority and the federal Transportation Authority. The
FcdcraI Oepartment ofTrIIISpO,,*on requires Ihat all CODlnICtors who participale ill
FM FTA and FHA funded con~ agree to ensure that disadvanta;ed business
entcirprises have the maximum opportUnity to participate ill the performance ofcontracts
I
and subcontracts. 49 C.r.R. Part 23:' Contractors are required to take !1l "reasonable
and necesSBlY steps to increase ~e opportunities for these businesses to participate in the
ft
I
performance ofthe contract by utilizing policies that are clearly race-- and gender
,
I
I
I
,
conscious.
As a RcipicQt of federal f~. San Pranciseo also has a dUty under title",VI, of the
1
'
Civil Rights Act of 1964 to not dis~ate on the grounds of ra.ce, color or national
orisjD. in the administration of its ptograms. 42 U.S.C. Section 20004 The Supreme·
Court has recoguized that Title VI prohibits not only intentional discrimination but iE can
\
I
also probibit practices that have th~ effect of disCriminating against minorities unless the
I
'
I
practiQCS can be justified. Guardian Association v, Civil Servig; Commission, 463 U.S.
I
:
I
582 (1983). Although Section (f) otthe proposed amendment allo'W$local agencies to
,
A "disadvantaged bUsDlCSS eDt~rise" includes all smaD business COIlCCI'US whic.b. are .
owaed and controlled. by women, Afiiean-Americms t Hispanic Americans, Asi,an.Americans, and
Native Americans. 49 C,F.ll Pan 23, Subpart D.
'
!
'
!
-12
;
�y.
VV
!!Iv
,.£
060893 1120
11:0~
01/06/95
vc., It"
IV
£' AVoN I\v"V-II1.1 "!.I1/\1.
014
yo 1'rlU2 1
I£U'tH:lJ4J'f
take aetion CO maintain eli&ibilitylfor federal programs, h Is unclear exactly what types of
actions eve a\lu.orizecl by this pro~sion. for instance. it an agency discovers that its
I
pro. . .s \&Aintoalionally ~eludel piU1i~ipiition by certain minority sroup" does Section
I
.
(f) authorize it to take raec-wnsdrUS seeps to .dw-cIS lhis dispalare impact? Or does
aseney have to first exhaust all ~ssible race,.neulral alternatives, and Ihereby lose federal
fimds duriaslhe interim period., Jrore it can take
I
ra~nscious measures?
Because
,
amendment severely limits the ability of local
!
gOVermtlCfttl
to address disaiminarory
. 1'"
!
effects. a local aaency that tries to lcomply \Nith Tide VI is likely to nm afoul ofACA 47
and race potcDtiallitigatiolL Tn short. the proposed ameucimeiat to die State CoDStitulion
I
I
.
would place all10cal governmental recipi ents of federal graats iD a position where ther
may believe it is QeQ:SSazy to Corgo federal grant moni~ in order
I
litiptiOD.
..
10
awid. ooctly
i
I
. C.- ACA47's pmhibitiop against wlUUtNY af.firmatiye adiQJJ will force state
and local ggvmwenis to engage iQ ypwanted apd mmeccssart litigation.
,
I
.
I
The proposed amendment wbuld increase litigation because a public entity could
I
I
.
undertake a race· or lender..(:oJlSci~us affi.rmative action policy under ollly one
~": whcu
Goccies
it is subject to ia COWl order. ACA 47. therefore, requires public
,
I
.
c~ wah to be sued a,efore tb~ c:.m W1de~e affirmative acUoD - even if they
aware: that their c.u.1iuC's bave violaI~d the law and a remcd)' is necessary. In these
.
\
.
difficv.lt oCODomio timQ. rcquiriDg ~tigalion to settle recogDizecl50cial problems is a
Waste of tax paycnf money QD.d the ~reeious resources of the couns.
I
-13
�01/06/95
VI
V~
~~
V'.t!C~
rAV~ ft~LU-~~
11:0t
~~u~~
060893 1120
!U IlUtbl~J4n
1U16/021
015
I:
<t.
I
,
"
"ii
i:
•
!
liti~tion. baCh the plaintik and defendant fTcquenlly have
SITong intcn:m in settJin& lawsui~ raCher lIIan pursuinJ a litigarcdjudamenl. Consent
<
In anti·discrimination
d~. in panicular~ have beco~ an effective and wiideiy-used ranedy for addmiing
discrimination in the public secto~. See United States v. Annour &:. Co., 402 U.S. 673.
.
I .
681 (1911). Consent decrees allow panics to be flexible and creative in developing
d:'
all
.
settlemmts. 'b
gecausc c:onsent ea:ees reqwre mum consent, t hJIve pames more
ey ·
C011IrDI over the _
ofthe oblipnons and duties
.
:
Ih~ wi1I ari.. ti'om any setdemOlll.
.I .
By resolving a dispu.te through a cOnsent decree or thro~gh other forms of voluntary
.
I·
.
81TCC1'D.Cftt. the parties avoid the inperent risks and the konnous c:om involved in
pursuiDaalitigatedjudgment. See: &odi v. Vcnte1UOlo.l941
I
("By foregoing bitter end
•
F.2d22~ 27 (lsi Cir. 1991)
litigatio~J the' parties save ti.m~. defray expense, and shield
I
•
I
themselves from the risks of u.tter ~efeal.. It).
!
I
..If adopted, ACA 47 will m&:ke it more difficult for state and local governments to
I.
L
. . ,.
'
...
.J_
.Au
.
settle discnmmatlon clauns thrOU~ a race· or genUQ-consaous rem-"'l even !I'tbe scope
u.
of the remedy i. Ilcc:esomy to
addr~S the cballenged hal. ACA 47 attempls to prohibit
the State of California and its politiical iUbdivisions and agents from implementing ill the
fUture any race- or geu.der<Dnscio~s programs that do not arise Ollt of a <:ourt order. By
tyiDl the huds of state and local agencies in this mann
I
dr. governments will be unable to
use an affirmative BettOI1 remedy t~ settle even the most egregious lawsuits." Since some
..
for mstm<:o, if ACA 47 had b~en in effect wbeu minority firefighters chllllengecl the San
. Frmcisco Fire Depam:neo.t'$ ("SFFD">: emplo)'D1C'Dt practices) die city would bAve beeD \mabie to
I (eont i.nueCl ••• )
,
~'
-14,;,.
.
�I
VI
V;.o
3:.1 V4.'tJll'l
.
01/06/95
rtWlll l\v""V-I'"
&..tIIlU.
016
060893 1120
11: 011
.
fUl~/OZl
IV l'U'1J1~J4.,n
couns have eoncluded that cons~t decrees are fundamentally voluntary in nanuet sueh a
.,
I
I
prohibition would likeJy also apply 10 consent decrees.'
.
BecaUse ACA 47
.
~ul<1 nJ longer allow public entities to voluntarily ranedy the
I
effects of disc:riminadon, state and local govemmen~ may be forced to divert scarce
public funds 10 defend lawsuits
~I woWd olherwise nle. be brouaJlt or woald
otherwise settle. Not only wiU the proposed amendmJt increase couns' doc:kets, but it is
I
1
!
'
.
also likely to haYe the effect of m~ng it more CtiffiCult for Victims of disc:rimination to
I
viadi_ their ria;hts. SlIch a poHey Ill.. In the face oflnllDlerollS Sllpreme Court
decisions ~(jj.b mvuJlr wdorse me idea thar public entities: should voluntarily rectifY
.
I·
I
,
.A._..
.
'
-"
•.
.'
the eueocs 0 ( eli tcram.maUoD. au d UDp1CDlcnl. mcaswl:S to prevent u,","C di""""""'-:· .
~U.u.a.u.lauOll.
..
I
!
I
.
.s.tt. ~ CiLv ofRiehmoDd ".1.A; Cros9D. 109 S.Ct at 729; JsL. at 734 (KClmedy, 1.,
CODcum..s);
1,Qca! No. 93. Tm1
".Lc. orWlightc:rs...l
Cj1ygfClWAlUI. 478 U.S. SOl,
S 15·1 7 (1986).
C ( •••
continued)
!
settle the dUpute thto9 a
ra~... aDd .adcr-COllsc10US OOJ.'l..Seat decree.
Prior to the'; tiling ofthe
lawsWJ., DO WOIDeD. had ever beera hired by SFFD. ad oft.bc few DlirIorities who were lairid.mauy
were racia1lr harassed.. The climict oOutl bad cODcJu.dcd thatl 'IQallwassmeat was "out ot
cOlluor" IIld til. SFFD wes UIlwiDi:D! to prohibit such behavior ia tin: workplaoc. U.S. v. City
g.d CS'OalV orsil~
696 F.S~.p. 12~,J:~98 (N.D·iCal19BB) (approval oftha CODSeIDt
decree :~i~~jJ the dtep-tOoted ho~ agamsz rr.dnorities Ind womca coul4 'be
.
elimilllatcd hm d1c.
o~ thioup a pulil,..")' that tlkes ra(;e and tender Into accotmt, the city
__
sealed the lawsuit prior to trial
I
\1..
!
So. u. EpsJlLYB.rqs:h. NMtpv. SClpe\t 20 F.3d1489, HOS (11th Cir.1994)(COun
held thi." fo r equ.a.\ prot~iOD purposeS, the consent decrees ~ its case should be treatecl as .
o
yoJuatU)' afJiriDalM! amoll. pIautl).
:
.
-15 ..
�017
1
IJ j -VO-:10 U': III rl\1
01/06/95
HIJM A\,I.V-IH.
060893 1120
1
11 : 01
t.I1AI.
POlO/Oll
'W IlUltiJ 9J43'{
I
,.
IV, THE PBQPOSED CQNSJ:ITUTIONAL AMENDMENT VIOLATES TNg
fEDERAL EQUAL PR~n:cr CLAOS,t:. :\
I
1
A.
The proposed Amendment neither serves a compelling govemmenlll
RUIpOsC nor is it §ufficiently n3l1.'2wty tallored.
i
I
:
~.
I
ACA 47 i. unlikely to wi~d a constitutiona,l challenge based upon the EqUal
Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. ACA 47 is desisned to abolish staze
8pOa.sored aftinuative
a(,;ti~n pro~; its passage W01d eliminate the ability ofstare
:
I
and loca1ao'Vemments to Voluntarily ameliorate the effects of past disc:riminatioD. The
.
I
.
I
.
proposed amendment embodies an e~plicit. although allegedlY benign, use ofrace,
.
prohibitiDs the state or any of its ~litical subdivisions fom using race (or other suspect
classifications) as a.criteri~n for ~tU).g pre[e£ential:tr~tment to an)' individual in .
pub~p'19)OZI,...t, ~uc:a.lon_or_J",!ra,ctinJ!', Thoreforl,it ;~~jU~a1
c::= ----
scru~Ia. order to
~.
~
l ~~~~-,~
:0
I
with$\aDd the naors of suc:.b scrutiziy, the amendment must be
justified,py a C:O~-ST.aIe int~est and the· means eJployed must be narroMy.tail~red .
to
further that interest. CroSon. 48~ U.S. at 493.
i
I
~
:
The first prong ofjuclicial scfutiny requires the s~e to show a oompellil:ls interest;
~,
that Is. "a goal important ea..ough to
481 V.S. at 493. Here,
;warrant the use of a highly suspect rool."
Ct9§9Q,
th~ is no ¥dence that th. ul~.t. goal ofACA 41, DlIIDely, lb.
:':~'
I
i :
i
eliru.iaatioD ofaftirmative action pr~gam.s, is compelled.\bY or is even reasonably related
,
I
.
to, any legitimate legi.slauve:end ~e proponents ma~ argue that ACA 47 is designed
to prevent special tn:atmcnt oC minorities, no sho\ViD.g
,
."
affirma.tive action prog.uuns,'owhic:h
i
can be made that state and local
i
~e dcsig.m:c.l to overclme the col1Unuing effects of
-16
�I
01/06/95
UI-UJ-~~ U':4Ir~
060893 1120
11:02
rKUM ALLU-NL LtuAL
'1'0
:
llUltil~J4:r(
018
P021/021
I
past cliserimiftabon. ha~ to any *tenladversely atfecrecl die state's nonminority
popuJOIiOIl. llldoocl, the
~. uf permissible staI~ 8IId local a/linnalive &;lion
i
I
I
r
I
!
propam. have'betrn narrowly cirdumsaibed by the sukeme Coun, 'WhIch MdWrell
I
I
.-"1
public enlll)". aflinnlli vc&clfon
and which limit, the means
~1fo1U
10 be: booed on
i.
showing or past dlscrilllilllliOn
adopt~d 10 measureS chat J: intended to ~edy oDly the
i
I
....
.'
.
remainini effects of that speciSe discriminalioar ,Ss;llruL.; Pni\laO' or CaJifomia
:
I
Beuntl v. Bakk,c. 438 U.S. 26S (1:97&); lrice v. ChiI Service Comrpissjoq,. 26 Cal. 3d
.:
I
251 (1980). Given the continuing ~stenoe ofa racial ilJDballlIloe iD the publico
emploYment, educaJiOD aDd coft~n& arenas, it Jtretc~eJ the imaainadon to imply a
i
•
I
compelling SUlte inteRst sufficient ito warrant eliminati0i of reasonable affim:talive acUon
mechanisms. Absent specific evjd~ce of harm caused 10 innocent persaDS by
I'
.
I
I
iri:lpJementation ofsuch reasonablyidesigned atmmative action prOgraml~ !be suite can
I
show DO compelli.Ds m=est iA eliD#nasiD.g their use.
Moreover, ACA 47 fails the !second prong of the strict sQUtiny test which requires
I
i
it to be IWTowty.-tailored. The amcndmeuc seeks to eliminate not omy mose .y--i e
-";f
~
~!
I
progr~ which proponents believe: may be causing inju& to the Sta&e's DOnminOrity
I
population. but state: aDd local a.fflrzDalive action programs as a whole. at least those·1hat
.
.
i
I
ate not dependeDt UPOD federal ftm~g or that have Dot ieen put in plac;;e by court order.
.
I
.
I
.
NeedlcsslO say, such -'bolesale ~atiOl1 of Ibe
•
slate', entire aflinDati.e adiOll
system
cannot be regarded as imposing the least restrictive means possibJe. as required by
I
-1.7
I
I
�Ul-U~-~~ Ul: ~lifM
.
.
I
13613893 11213
131/136/95
11 : 132
HUM At,;l,U-f4\; 1.t:1;Ai.
,•
1319
P002/0I9
TO llUZ.1i 19J4 3'f
f
1
i
!
\
"
cuelaw. Hiatt v. Cirv of Ber1scley~ 130 Cal. App. 3d 298, 319 (1982); ~ 26 Cal.3d at
I
282.
ACA.41 »oJates theCaual protection clause ~eause it is motivated by a
.
,
B.
~:
Qlscn!JURAlOty pwm:;s·
'-..:
~
I
On ilS lUCIe, ACA 41 stares f:hat persons arc not to 'be t::reatcd differently, either
thn.ugh diaorimiaation or by
pref'eRnC;oIlRa1mcn~ on Lunt ofthcir
race. I n _
ouch as WlllliDl!l!lD v. Pl"4I. 426 &.S. 229 (1976). Arlilgroll Heish!s 'V, MetropoIj!ap
I
I
•
. I
HouaM Developmenl Com.., 42917.S. 252 (1911) and Per§QDJlel AdminjstrptO[ v.
Fs;mey.. 442 U_S. 256 (1919). the
.
S~preme Court bas elushed that a faci.aUy lIeutral
;
I
I
__
law may still be unconstitutional i.tit-is-motivated.by-a.discrimi.t2atorv ft~se. "In.
'-"'r
.
-htr";;;;;~T
detenniQj~g whether such a pnrnnsb was the motivatingIthe raciaUv
ractnr, ' ,
.
-rI
I
di.~oportionatc.cffcctq( official
action provides '@D.important·st:ar.tiEi:pointttf
CrAwford
I
y.
Los An&cles Board of EducatiollJ, 458 U.S. 521, 544, quoting Eeency. 442 U.S. at 274.
I
I.
_
.
•
_
See also Reitmg v, Mylkcv. 381 U~S. 369 (1967).'
In CriMm the Coun upheld a California initiajve restricting the lISe ofbusiDi
to achieve 0001 inlegratiOIi in the Ifs Angeles Unified jchool District. In doillg so, the
C
In Ileirm.n the Supreme Cowtlhetd that I facially Ileuttal amc:admeat to Califomia's
CODstitutiOn. PrOiemoll 14, which would have prohibited the state from intcrfcriag with a
private Dulividuah ri2ht to 5dl or rent property to whomever he
wanted. com:tituted di.scrimmttory state aCdmi. In tilln eAse, the COW!'\: -Steed with the California
Supreme CoUlt that the amadment was intended to authorize'discrimiD.ation. IsL at 380. Since
the amendment was neutral on it, flee. 'the Cowtleached this !determiDa'CiOll by eYamjning its
ultim.ate effeet. which would be to allo'\-lr dlose pr.scticing d..iscrimmauon ta "mvoke express
constirutional authority, &ee from censUre or mterfereuee of m~!!om officisl sources.· Id..
at 377. Ahhough Proposition 14 did n~texpressly eDcourage"
, • alio11, eIle Court founcfihe
etY.cts oCtb.o ameadmQC to 'be invidious.
I
.
I:
I
I
.
.
�i
01/06/95
Ul·U~·~~ Ul:~~rM '~KOM A~LU-NC LeijAL
. 020
060893 tt20
11:03
P003/019
TO 12026193437
'
r
'
.
I.
,
I i '
Court ftOted that a slate is tree to repeal an existing anQlldisc:riminauonlaw, 50 Ions as it
I
):
'
I
;,
r
continues to adhere to the standards of the FOW1eenth Amcndment.fdat Sl8. Thus,
:
'
~,
I
Crawford staAds for the propositioh that a elate is not r.rcci to "do morelll than the
'
I' '"
!
i
,
Fourteen.th Amendment requires. It is clear, however. that a stale is not free to lower the
foodmol COIllliNliorud SIlIIIdard," teA 47 would in
i
pr~hibjtiD&stale IIDCi local
'
'
, aovenunents fn;,m ,enacting nce.c:c)nscious programs au~wed. by the Fowtec:nth
I'
,
I
,
;
:
Amendment. '
Here. a coure could
~y JDclude that the purpqse of ACA 41 is to lower the
:
I
level protection provided to racial #Dorities WIder the federal Equal ProtectiOD. CIJlIC by
govonun~ts
.pIObibitil1S arad local
from VOIWltarilY!usinll nce-COIIsCious pmgnnns
.
i i ,
'
to It.ddress identified disc:rimiDatioDi Even supporters or: ACA 47 must reco&nizc'that thc
I
'
I
'
amendment affects m!h: affirmativeiacuoDpoucies that ~efit either racial minorities or
women. It does not purport to ball Jmmlllive action
Therefore. the only people Who
mUlorities and womea ' Moreover.
,
OD
any odler characIl:rii1ic. .
willi beadverse1y affected by the amer:adment are racial '
,I
,
"
+
.
,
i,
,
dowts have clearly held that the equal protection
I
;
'
I
i
provisions mboth the Califomia Conmru.tion and the U.S. Constitution proVide -any
, .
I i ,
P~SOI1 the equal protection ~f laws ik plain aad UDequiVQ~ language aud Without
"
,I
i
qualiii catiOll.•. 1I HiIn, 130 Cal. APP-id at 308. Courts hie frequ=tly 'and repeatedly
struck down a8innative action progrb,s when they fail
to address specifie.ally identified
i i ,
I
"
I
-1'· .
'
,
�01/06/95
¥ROM AClU-NG LEuAl
UI-O~-9~ Ul:~8fM
I
I
060893 1120
11:03
021
rOO4l019
TO 1ZUZti J 9343"
I
..
'
disQ1mination or if the scope oft~e race-conscious provisions is too broad.? Given that
J10runinorilies are pn;tected by bob lh. stale and [<deL eonstiluDons and the harm ofdte
.
.
!
I
amendment is limited to onJy two :protecred groups (inOrities and women), a court is
likely co conclude that ACA 47 is :motivated by a discriminatory purpose. thereby
I ·
I
!
viqlating the Equal Protection Clafue.
,
By Prohibiting the State Wi Q!hY PubliC( Entities From Implemeutinc
C.
Remedial Race...eonfijous Affim1ative A~tism PoliciA. ACA 47 Would
Place Special Burdens In the Political PrOcess Upon Racial M'inorities and
Thw Violate thy rcdyraI I!g\lal P,",21~c;t:ioh Ch!u§c,
Tho rillbt of oili""". to
~cipale equally in th1 politic.il J>IOCC$S i. a c;ore
p.S.
democratic value czi1.bodied in the
Constitution. 8 fhe Equal ProtcetioD Clause
.
I
!
guarantees aU citizens "the fun~enr.a1 risht to participate equally m the political.
process and 0 any attempt to
mrn.l.ge on an independJt1Y ideati1iable grouP'$ ability tQ
.
I
,
excra.se that right is subject to mi~t jyclicial ~C1Uriny." Eyaps v. RQmer, 854 P.2d 1210,
1276 (Colo. S.Ct. 1993) (emphasis added).
>! . ~ Note, Developments in th~ Law:
. II1~D.Q
electiOn-).
Elections, 88 H.uv.
t. &;:£.
1111, 1114 (J97S) ("ltO
ia mDre OcDtraf to the UDit.4 States' S)'steJn of represcutatiyo dC:QlQcracy tb..aJl rue
.
~
-20
.
�01-05-95 02:58PM
131/136/95
FROM
I
11 : 1341
AC~U-NC
LEGAL
13613893 11213
1322
TO 120261930'{
I
P005/019
" The ristn 10 participate equalUy in the polldcal process has been estIblfsbed in a
lIumber or an:&$. The \J .5.
upon !be dgllllD VOle.
&
su~e Court
u.. ~ Viwni! Del.I
has invalidJed .<IIemo. rhat direcdy i1nphigc
v.
;
oCEle'i!lpns. 313 U.S. 663
I
(1966) (poll 1M); Carrtoaoo y. RaSh. 380 U.S. 89 (196') (chiUans only); Xramer y. '
. .
I ,
I
1JDiRn Free School Disl, No.1 S. 3~S U.S. 621 (1969) (propcny oWDCfs . .d parenl8 only).
The Coun has S1I1lCk down
ido"lifiabl.. SJQ"P'" ...<11 ..
dect~ systems which ~y dilute die >OIinc JIO""" of
aco~hiC _po
R,s;)'l!pIsIi v, Sjllllo 377 U. S. 533 (I
ballot ac:c:e" by candidates. ~
'.
i)'
in
rcawlrtioruuCDt
It has also
G&5CS.
Sss. S&.
fo1d ....coaSliMiOllal rutrictions on
'u. WiUiami v. .Rhodes, 393 U.S. 23 (1961); DJimi &
I
!
I
.
Stare.Board, ofSlm;ligDs v. Soc:iaU$ Workers Panv, 440 U.S. 173 (1979).
equ~y ;1J. the politieal ~c:ess is also ....bodied ill ca.....
holding thai &o~eot .may
piace special burdens ~ ideolifiabl. groups. such as
• racialmillorities. witbin die polJd1' process. For ~c:e. in
v. Erickso!!, 393
The ript 10 participate
!
I .
I
J
i
not
Hllllter
U.S. 38S (1969). the voters passed ~ referendum amending the city charter
I
,
or Akron,
I
I
Ohio to provide that au.y ordiDance!wbic:h regulates real property on the basis ofrace.
I
national origiA. or religion must fir~t be approved by a majori,), of the wters. BCCI1lSe
,
.
.
cirher laws regu\1IiD.g rW propeny
I
~Y needed the 4va1 of the oity ccnmciJ. die
amendment siD&led out anti-discrinlinatioD laws for additional requirements. The
c~ amendmenl as villa1ive ofequal prolt:cliOD
because it pl-.l "special burdens ~n racial minoriti.. 1thin the "",,,,,,,,,....a! process.•
I
.
Supreme Coun invalidated rhe
I
393 U.S. 81'391. The charter amenfhnent ~ passed with the "clear purpose ofmakiDi it
-21.
l
j
.
I
I
I
!
,r
i
t
�01·05-95 02:58PM
.,
131/136/95
11 :134!
fROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
m~re difficult
13613893 1120
TO 120Z61934H
P006/019
1323
for certain racial ~d religious minorities to achieve Je&fslation that [was]
in their interest." 393 U.S, at 39s1 (Harlan. 1.. concurring). The Coun held:
A State may no more disadvantage any partieular sro"p by makin, it more
difficult to enact le~5lation in its behalr than it may dilute any person" vote
or give ally group a $ma11er representation than another of comparable size.
393 U.S. at 393.
Similarly, in :YIY,bingtOn v~ Seattle School Di§trict No.1, 4S& u.s. 4S7t the Court
i
I
suuck down a staJe inidative pro~bitiDS local school boards ftom implementing race-
cODscious busing policies on grounds that the measure had impennissibly interfered with
I
the political process and unlawfully burdened the efforts of minority groups to secure
.
I
.
\
sUch legislation. The initiative pr6hibited local school lx;)ards from requiring any student
I
to aztc:Dd a facility other th,an the s~hool geographically nearest to his or her place or
~~,
';
I
I
residence. but it contained' exceptipus for virtually all orher purposes except racial
dcscgegation. SUbsequerit to p+e of the initiative, desegregation (;Quld only be
I
I
I
i
i
i
'obtained. from Che state legislature! Like the ACA 47, the effect of the Washington
!Diuadve was to prohibit local eD.ti.~es from carrying out voluntarily enacted race
CiOnsg.OUS programs to fi.u:tb.er integration. The CoWl, relying OU HUAIer v, HOdaPp.
fOWld that the iDitiauvc did "not allempt to allocate govemmental powa- on the basis (ff
any general priuciple," but. ins1eadl used the "'radal nature of an issue to define the
bW'dens Oil racial minorities." W&shin&ton, 458 U.S. at 470. Rather t:b.aD affecting the
i
"mere repeal" of an existiaS deseiegation law, the uutiative burdez:lecl all futw'"e au~tS
I
-22
I
I
,
�01/06/95
01-05-95 02:58PM
11:04i
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
060893 1120
TO l2026193431
024
POO1l019
,
.
r
!
10 !nrqrare
WashinFoncs schools I"by lodsing decision-makin& authoricy at a new and
I
remote level of government." lhe.,by subjccrin5 racial minoricic.s to -direct Ulet
undeniable burdens."
1& at 4a3-1~. While "'one group ClmDOC alWII)'S be e.x.pec;\Cd 10
.
I
Win,' by the same token one group cannot be subjec;ted to dcbilitaring and often
I
I
insu.m1oWltable disadvantage.
If
lSi, at 484 (ciwio~ omitted).
.
I
Like the initiatives il1valida~ed in Jiyntu and WashinPm. ACA 41 would piece
ff~ia1
I
burdens" upon racial mintrities' within governmental processes by malcins ir
!
very difficult, if not impossible. to obtain race-conscious remedial prosrams in the cas
. :
.
ofp\lbUe educ:ation, contracting., .pd employment ACA 47 would prohibit state:me! .
local entities trom u.sirJg "race, s~ color. etJmicity. or national origiD" in these areas as 8
I
criterion fDt discriminating apinsi or granting preferential treatment. The oaly
"
i
exceptioDS to !his pDeraI prohibitiOD are Men a public c:utity is SIlbject to: (l) a CODSCDt
,
.
,
decree or QJurt order that is in force on the date the proposed amendmCDt takes di'cct _
I
(Section '(e»; (2) a future coW't order that remedies the effect of a governments OWl'l
.1
.
. I
.
discrimination (SectiOIl. (g»); and (3) federal funding requirements (SeaiOIl (C)).
I
Thus UDder ACA 41, racial iminorities C8.1lDot seek remedial ~coa.seious
I
I
policies or le~slation establishing ;tace-conscious policies for the executive or legislative .
.
I ·
!
Althoup we oDly upc that fl,.CA 47 ir:l1iiBges OD the ript ofracUl mmol"itMs to
patticipate Oil aD equal basis m thel,!Jitica1 J)rocess, courts have recogzUzed wt this clocuiDc
protects other ROUP', Gomoll v.
'a, -403 U.S. 1 (J971)~OJlJVs ~~ 854 P.2cll2.10
(Colo. S.Ct. 1993). These eases mdieate that suiCl s.erutmy
be app
to ally J~ or
stltc cOD,sUmtional lmeadmeDt wiUehiiDfiiDges upon tllc riut of aD iaeutifiabl. class ofpersoas to
pudcipate equ.a1l)' iD thepoliti(;JJ proCess. Because AeA 47 also reancu lIle abDby ot
g~vemmea.t enwes to adare.ss gender d.iseriminatiou, the ua.tysis cliscussecl ill dUs sectiOll would
likewise apply tD uy elaim DlIde oD,the behalf ofwOIilCZl.
.
.. .
-2l ...
�01-05-95 02:58PM
'01/06/95
FROM ACLU~NC
11:05
060893 1120
TO 12026193437
LEGAL
025
POD8/019
.,
•
i
I
b~ches even if they are entitled to such pro&rams under the federal Con~titution. ,~
,
Assoc. Gen. Contt or Cal. v. City Ind County ofS.F., gl3 F.2d 922.929 (9th Cir. 1987)
I
(state and political subdi'Visions h~ve the constitutional duty to ascettain wbelher they ate
!
denying citizens cqUIl protection ",d to take correcLive steps). Nor could they seck a
remedial order of the state judiciaz;y requiring race-conscious relief absent a 5ndins of a
federal mar&date or an exception cc;,ntained in Sections (e) or (g). Barred. flom the I1Ol11lal
.
I
•
political process, racial minorities lcould only obtain reUefby amending the California
i
Constitution and repealing in who~e or 52IQ mn!2 ACA 47's provisions, aD. effort thal must
,
,
,
be approved by the voters ofthe s1fite. "[B]y lodging decisionmaking authority over the
question at a new and remote lev~ of government, ACA 41 "burdens allihture attemptsff
I
by racial minorities to obtain legisiation to address the effects of discrimiDation.
)lVashipgtDp, 4S8 U.S. at 483. As in Washin&t2Q., the right ofminorities to participate
equally in the political process is ~learly affected by ACA 41 because it bars thcmJj'OllL
!
having an eff'eet1ve 'VOice in gov.ental affairs in$Ofar as they seek beneficial
legislation or regulations. Rather ~an withdrawing antidiscrimination issues (or i$SUes
,
invo1viDa public sector contrac~, education. and em.ployment) as a whole from stale
i
and local Control, ACA 47 singles ;out certain forms of discrl..mination lO and removes its
redress nom considcranon by the normal political processes. In ~oing so, the amcudment
�01/06/95
026
060893 1120
11:0~
TO 12026193437
01-05-95 02:58PM FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
'009/019
rails to "allocate political power o~ tho ba.5is of any general principles." and instead., uses
,
,
the racial nature of' an issue to d.n,ne the deoision-making SU'\lCNrC.
ACA 41 also '·expressly r~ces OUE [] independently idcnd5ablc poup(s]."
~
Romer. 8'. P.2d at J 28S. Like HUJ'Itsr,
~ch
ClIPs
,
1
singled ou.t people "who would benefit
i
from laws bamng racial. rcligiow.lor ancesU"al discriminations," 393 U.S. at 39J, ACA
,
I
!
singles out racial minorities and ~men as tbe classes ofpersons who would be waal'tle to
I
!
i
i
obtain remedial programs through ihc normal political processes. No other pups daBl
I
I
,
face discrimination are required to :obtain a constitutional amendment before state and
i
!
i
~
,
;
'
local entities can develop such rem~dial programs. For instance. ,eYeD if ACA 41 is
i
adopted. gays; lesbians. people
wi; physiCal or menial disabilities. veterans. aDd otheu
i
I
I
I
who face disc;rimination will be able to seek beDefidal policies in the areas of public
,
i
wDuacting, education and employment. By CODstimtionalizing the requi.remeat that DO
1
government entity can voluntarily p;rovide race- or g=dcr-.consciou.s..re:a:nedies.m these •
areas, ACA 47 singles out and prohibits these classes of people from participar:i.nl equally
mthe political pro~ess.
I
Because s~ch a prohibition violates the Equal Protection Clause
I
ofthe U.S. Constitution, ACA 47 i~ unlikely to sur'\tive judicial sc:ru.ti.ny. n
1
I
i
!
i
I
II
The fact that ACA 41 oa.1ts Ca~ Is race-and' gender-neurral is irrelevant 10 the ~sis of
whether it in1iiDges Upon equal prOledloD. rit~:rthese identifia~1e group me=bcrs. In
iuvalidating Akron's Chuter Imezadm=t. the
COWl reco~ that the amadmea.t also
drew "11.0 distinca.ons amoElg raciallDdireligious ~oups." lhmfer. 393 U.S. at 390. However.
the Coun recog:cizcd. that ill. "r~:'1he lJurden I1DpOSCc! Oyi.'iie
:
~
!
amsdmCllt Deces~ rell "un the minority.· Id.. at 391. In effe~ 'die coun recognized that tbe
mumdm.eDl served as aD "explicitly racial classilicatioD treating racia1 hou.sm!matter d.i!fereutlv
from other racial ed housia, matters. "! 1!1. •t 389. S~ IWl ReRmal v, M
387 U.S. 369,
373 (1967) (ill evaluatiDg aD equal protection chaDeng~ to ,law. coutts SliD re,.;ew th.e law III
light ofits immediate objective. RS UhiJ:D.atoefFcet. its historical c01J.text, aDd
conditioDS
(cone inued •.• ) ,
Ii'
me
-25-
OJ
\
I
I
�VI-Uj - ~:l Ul: OUtlll
. .,
.
060893 1120
01/06/95.
11:06
r l(VM A\,LV-IH.. l.illA!.. I
TV 1,U,~I~J4j'{
027
fOlO/OIS
, l
':
I.
,
~
Conclusion
Bued on our analysis of ACA 47, we believe .the amendment is unnecessary.
would seriously hum Ihe interesrs of minorities and women., and is also unconstitutional.
For au the foregoing reasons, we believe that ACA 47 should not be submitted to the
voters of Callfomia as a ballot measure.
August 2, 1994
Respectfully submitted
Ju.dith Kurtz
Bqual Rights Advocates
] 66] Mission St. Suite SSO
San Francisco, CA 94103
TeL (415) 621·0672
l"heodoreHsien Wang
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights oCthe San
Francisco Bay Area
301 Mission St, Suite 400
San Fr811cisco, CA 9410S
Tel. (415) S4:3-9444
By:
Thcocon: Hsicn W.
Attorneys for lhe B
Civil Rights
'( •.• continued)
exlstia« prior to its aaaotmeat). Like the ImcndmCllt inlIuotc;r. ACA 41 also mates
Clas.siflcatiODS subject to strict scn.I1Dlyand treats raee and gender d.i.scrlmiDatiOD in public sector
eollU8~ educltiollll1d employment diffcrC'Dtly both rromother issues m
these sectors and.
from oth~ aatidilcri.millation maft".s.
-26
�UI-UJ-~J UZ:~6fM
•
••
..
. 028
060893 1120
01/06/95
11:06
;~OM ACLU~NC L~GAL
TO 12026193437
POll/019
l"
C.C.R.I.
,
. . "I
California Civil Rights Initiative
P.O. Box 11795 • Berkeley, CI\ 94701-2795 • (510) 644-4l56
•
,4",
Mardi J1. 1994
'!'':;.:~
'.
''''4
'~.
't?.e.
.......,).
Dear Friend:
.
.. ,I'
~ 7,..
..,
v~
~.
.c......
'1'.
'i."
We write to bring you up to date on CCRr. the pr~posc:d initiative constitutional'"
amendment to prohibit preferences and discrimina.tion on the basis of race, se:r; anti ethnicity in
an of Calitornia·,
P\lbli~ (;Ontr8(;tins,
request your suppan In our efron
to
pubHc education and public employment. We also write to
place CCRI before lhe voll:n in 1996.
Qualifyin; a ~n$t;!Utio!:z.! .!.-ne~~rn=:!t i:!i!jatiy·~ !n Ce.!lf'!!mla h .II tfimcult ;lind e'l:pensfVB
undertakinB. ,Some 615,000 qualified signatures are required, which usually COStS about
S750,000. Alrhough we did not succeed in raising the money to qualify CeRI for the November
1994 ballot. momentum Is building rapidly rowards qualifying It for 1996.
Several recont cI~velopmf;nu are particularly noteworthy:
•
On Octob8r l' of laSt year. CCRI was filed with the State Attorney General, who
is required by Jaw to provide initiatives with an offic:ial title and summary. Our summary
esthnated the potential taX savings from passage of CCRI In the lens and hundreds of millions of
dollars annually. This estimate has drawn the. Imerest of me Howard Ja.rv1s Taxpayer"s
AIJO(;lildon, whlclt. lmends to co~rributC $7'.000 towards a 100,000 piece ttlal cUrect mamng ror
CCRI ShOrtly after the November 1994 elections. We have cOntacled specialist! In d.lreet mail
and poUtlcal campaigning who are. convinced that CCRt does in fact have enormous djrect mall
pDtCntial, If the lesponse from the HITA·!inanced trial direct mailing is what these speei8lisu
expect. they are prepared to bankroll a large rollout of 2·3 million mailings early next year. and
another of me same,size after the initiative has been reflled (probably In March of 1995) fDr rhc
1996 ballot.
CCIU recently received official endorsemenL' from the Libertarian and RepubH~
•
PJ,rtl~s.of !.he SUlI.t: of California. The Exeeutlve Committee of the L.ibertArian PflIt)' ~tC.d-tO-=-";
end~ eeRI in principle on February 21, and will be LaIdn, up the acrual1.tXL at Its next .
meeting. The General Assembly of the RepubJican ratty's statewide convention in BurJin,ame
voted to endorse eCRI on February 27.
The ptEltlon for endorsement by the CaUlornia Republican Party was signed by four state
legislators: Rob Hum, Bill Leonard, Tom Campbell and John Lewis. Sen. Tom Campbell (R'w
Stanford) presented the petition LO lWO committees which endorsed CC.RI unanimously.
endorsement by the General Assembly was also unanimous.
The
These endorsements arc important milestones in our errons to build a muttipartisan
coalition of men and women of good will and of aJl races and ethnicitles. We are currently
wua-kln5 un lIc;;ulnG the c:;ndorsement of orner oreal1llatlons aM politiCal nSures. lnCIU(Jlng
prominent Democrats.
U
"1.
>
�01/06/95
01-05-95 02:58PM
11:07
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
029
060893 1120
TO i2026193431
P012/0l9
2
•
CCRt hu anractcd a great deal ur favorable media coverage, panic:ularly in the
last four weeks. Important items in Ibis area includo a Scripps-Howard news story by Tom
Elias. anel nationally $)'n~eat~d-columns-~y'-Wil!!am P. Buckle),. Paul Greenberg and »>It
Buclwwt. (The nrst nationally syndicated colur6h to draw auention to car was by WilUam
Rusher.) Proponents for the initiative have alSO appeared on a San Francisco Bay At.. public
u:Jcvision talk show (KQED's Faee-to-Face) as well as a number of raclle talk shows arowicl the
country.
.
•
As a rc$ult of the publicity. our databuc has been ,rowing rapidly. To dare
1.'12 individuals have contacted us by phono or mail. Of theae, 1,085 are Callforn1a resi4cmts,
and 427 are from other states. Sianific;antl)', the rate of groW'!h In the darabase IS acceler.ating:
667 individuals. or 44". have responded wIthin the last four wech. Of these 667 individual.,
401 are California rt:lid""ts. Yld 266 an:: !y.)!!~!'~!l!!~::~!.
We all need to work to keep the momenrum building toward 1996. A number of action
Items are particularly ufgcnt, though how many of them can be managed depends largely OD
whether we are able to raise enou,h funds 10 open .e. 3L1lCwide tlfnc:e. Important action items
include:
• StaitinS the suttewide office itself. whi<;h is badly needed. Cumndy, alJ work on the
Initiative bas been done by 2·3 Individuals working on a patHlme basis.. This srrangement is no
long;:r adequaIC. for the last Jour wc;:ks, in panicular. we have been sU"ained far beyond our
resources.
•
Continuo to agsrcssivcJy pursue media I,;oycrqe.
• Stan a month)' ncwsJettet to k.c:ep SUppall€rS of th~ lnitiative Informed abOUt imporcuit
developments and in touch with each other.
.
• Anist individuals In other stares who have contacted us about qualIfying CCRl·J1ke
Initiatives in their own states. (The twenty-two other states that permit initiatives like
California'S are: Arizona, Arkansas. Coloratio, florida, Idaho, JIlino's. Maine, Massachusetts,
Michigan, MississIppi, MIssouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakoca. Ohio. Oklahoma,
Oregon, South Dakota. Utah. Washlnlton and Wyomln,.)
• Use the statewide office as a clearinghouse for news and developments affecting the
Inhlativo in Califomia and in other states.
• St.art Usenet discussion groups and bulletin boards about CCRI and similar initiatives on
thc natien's electronic Information superhighway.
• Put CCRI supponers in different irc:as around !he stine In touch wIth each olher so they
can stan local Celtl action groups. At first. we will try to organlu: 'Chese groups by area codes.
As tho movement builds, we: will try (0 organize tbem by electoral diS[ricts.
• Line up a speakers bureau.
• Line up an edItorial hnrt'.$l1l co product written mall;ri;d about CeRl'ln the form of
an1cles, op~ed pieces, press rcleasei elC.
• Contact trade, professional, political, cdUl:alional, civic, philanthropic and 'other
or,anizadons to c:nns~ their suppon.
. .
• . Organize CCRI supporters around the sta~c into political ace Ton ,groups. We have already
coJ'ltacted .everal state lesJslatou wl10 ~ c;onsiderln o tiU<lIchlng hostile; amendments to
.,
I
�030
060893 1120
P013/019
TO 12026193437
01-05-95 02:58PM
,
.~
'.
,
I
.
1
,
3
preferentIal ancI
dl5Cfimi~tDl')'
legislation that comes to dlo floor
gr tho stare }Olislatutc. Ie is
Important CD have an oraan.izcd, grassroots movement to back up rbeir JeSiS}alive efforts. ;
,:;
"
'
: 4'?...:..;?
Prom the forelomg Jist, the twO most Important Items of business are: (1) ftIiidi'aiSing for
fhc purposo of staning a siacewlde office, and (2) or,anlzing CCRI's supporter.s 811he local Jevel
around the ltall:. We are 'eurremly hard at work on the first project. and If all loes 'ell on that
front, will be moving on the sec:ond whllin the next several,weeks, NOTE: If )'ou WIIlt to be
put in touch
00.... CClu supporters in 'your arQ::....or It you are a raJelen' or ODe or the
tweaty..two states listed above, with supporters of the initiative fdea in your state-dlldc. the
appropriate ba.x on the retum (onn which you will find in fbe eonclosecl n)'V, detadl IUId
mail it to 'US. Let us
also if you would like to take the lead in the organizlna ,effort. In ),our
""tit
lena,.
.area.
There are other important ways
)'01.1
could help. including:
•
Financial !;ontributlons (considc;r making monlhly or quanerJy donations).
•
Volunteer work (e.e .• panicipatinlln telephone
tree~ fO
keep jnform9.llon flowins).
•
•
Fundraising.
.
Sending to CCRI news clippings and other items that may be of mterest 10 others.
• Contributing articles, op-e4 pie~$ and news Items to a CCRJ newsletter; or to a
"
newsletter for your local aClion group.
., Providing 'proiGs151Dillu and c::On~uJdnJ anbUUlCc (editorial, nnanCI81, campU!el1nd.
database work. graphics dcsitpl. mass mailing servl,cs. elc.)
.. '.
'
AS we have mentioned, all of the work on the initiative to date haS been done by'a very
small ,roup of pan-time volunteers. That we have come so far so fast is a measure of lite power
and timeliness of me Idea behind CCR1. Events, In faet, are outStripping our ability to keep up
with them. Until recently,Jlfor example, we were able to keep the turn-arou~ time on phone and
mail inquiries
fO
leu thiU{~U ~ks, but recently this has exteMed to five weeks, for which we
apologiz:e.
:,~~
Ai~
'{I
We
need now to brqaden our base of a!;tivitie5 and to
enlist the SUppOR or large numbers
you -will decide to join with us in our historic effort 10 re<:apwre for
CaUfornla-and e~nt\lally for the entire nation-the origina\ meaning and purpose of the U.S.
CivJ1 Ri,hts Act of 1964. ~
of people. I hope
Ullt
Sincerely,
'~~
OHTS lNITlATIVE
THOMAS E. WOOD
Enclosure
�01/06/95
11:08
060893 1120
01-05-95 02:58PM PROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
'.-
10 12026193431
031
fU14/U19
Filet Sheet #1
Equal Rights Advocates
1663 MissioD Street, Suite SSO
San Francisco, Califcmil 9-410}
415/621'()67Z Fax: 415/621-6744
I
,
Questions & Am~ Abol4'
.
!
~
Assembly Constitutional Amendment 2
;
,
t
. What II the goat of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 21
To (&merui rhe Odi.fomill Comtiturion in orrin- ta.::.elimin.ate.IIILvotfl.nttlry_tl}fimJ4ti~~
1?!Er!·~.mJ-in~~ublic_fimpluyrnenr._eJuO!tiJm_tt.!lJ_contrtzaiflg·
Do government entities have the right to develop and implement volu.nta!y affirmative
action programs undtr all cirtumstam:cs and wh~nC'Ver they chose?
~. UntJer current federalltI.w, seare and local gawrnmenu GIIn only wlwnl4riJy implement a
J'4«.con,aOIlI IIjJirmllriw. llaion pliln when tlNl p14~ is intmJeJ to .JJtWI idrntifial
disl:rimirultioll against specific .,4daJ grouPJ. Even ~here" rl'~ prog'IlIm is tketmlruJ to
be jllStijierJ.. COllins will junhe, scrutinize zhe pun l(1jt'nsure thtt.t it is nawo'llJly r.ilort:tl.
?
:j
~
•
d
.~.
;.j;1
I~
If ACA '2 it passed. what government agencies ~ould be rcstri~ in their ability to
equalize ecortomie aud educational policies thr,?ugh voluntary aCl'irmatiyc ac.tfon
pro,rains?
..
,;1'·
41
,~
,
All "on{eJIN,,1 ptlblk ",rib. in Odifomiil, indsJ,'ng f!'rJ#!? *U "'gency .nJ Jep.nment; ,JJ
public schools lind uniwrsitier; loca/: cities lind COU~l,~; Tedevelt1pmem 4gmcies; cransptn'ttl.ticm
agmcies; pl4bltc bospi.r.al.s. libraries and. airpOTtJ: ac.:·~) .
if
.!r.
.
,
I
What type. of programs that seek to remedy p~ discrimination c:ould be dIsmantled if
ACA 2 is passed!
"'
~
,11 '
Emplopnent programs. such lIS: StattCiflil Servi1, A/fi:mJ4liw Aaion Progrtlm wbose
PU'fJO" iI ~o o~mc 4ny Ulanrififli H,n4crutilizanr?,'n of minoriries tint:! womm in .JJ f'f"tM,C
apndG anJ Jepa1trn.ents; EducatJo.n I!,rogralns, s~~h as: Student Opportunity .rJ A«us
Progr4m thAt pt'fJ'IliJrs funding to in~ ACCesS to Po$lsecond4ry education for JO'ltJ incMtJt "nJ
edmic minority strIIienrs; State ContraCting prog~~ms, Juch as: Women ana Minrmty
Bllrin. Entrrprises which requi7'eS regulated public~r.ilil;es £0 make effum ro 4TJJtl,,] 30% or
more of thei".. contracts to wom~ mi710riry t.md diubled 'Veteran busintss enrerprisaj a.nJ Local
Contracting programs being Ililopred throughout i9Ji/omiA t.ha.r tSdJnISS the system it:
I
j
!
I
1
i
f
!
i
f
I
I
!
;
,
discri.mi'l4r:wn "',t.ili1m mino,-i'y arid ,U;umcn J,u)i"/~~. (,"II.f:~ •
:,·t
.J
:l~
1
I
'I
I
I
.
�01/06/95
01-05-95 02:58PM
riAl
[,:'
P015/019
TO 12026193431
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
032
060893 1120
11:0~
":.• ' l)
Equal Rights Advocates
166) Mi5sion Street, S\lite 550
Sail Fl"Iltlcisc:o, CaliEol"nlil 94103
41S/621-067Z Fax: 415/621-6744
"
A HISTORY OF AFFIRMA11VE ACTION
"In: order to get beyond racism. we must fitst t.ake account of
race. There;3 DO other way. And
order to tr~c
ie
pe~~ns_cguaIly:.=,!~~,'==mUSt:treat~them.-diff~_ntJy. "
-JUstice Hatty A. Blackam,n
Uni'tJef"Siry CJi/Qmia Regents
.
..
0/
11.
,
Bakke
.
, Stattiag' i.Q dl~' 1940$, the'fedenl government took tbe lead in promoting ..,otkp~ce
&:qui!ity' with a' series DC measures prohihiring discrim.inl'uio.Q in fed.enal employment.
Tweaty yea.rs later, the Civil RightS Act of 1964 was enacted to prohibit employment
discrimination based Oll. sex, r.u;;c. national origin, or relipon. The followjflg y~:tr. ill 19&51
President Lyndon Johnson. signed an executive order thaf required federal COntncr:ors to
w-.ld.ertakc aEfllJ:r:l2ti~ion to incre-.ue the number of minorities (hey employed.
IEl 1969, mer Depanment of L2bol" hearings uncovered widespte."\d raee discrimination in
tb. cOlUtruaioa: i.Ddusuy, t}te ~j1f.o.n administr.niofl. developed (he concept ot using -goals
and timerables- to measure the progress federal constn.lction companies wete making in.
increaJi.ng-~he number of bhckc 00 (heir pllyrolls. 1\ rear lafer. President Nixon extended
, the' use of goals md timetables to~ll federal contractors, Uid four years later declared. that
such affirrnliltivc action prJgrams should also include womAn. Tod:lY, fed.erul regula.tioD.C
require my feder.a1 contta~~Ol w,i"h fifry or more employees or ,3 federal contract worth
lDo~e thin $50,000 to adop'1 an a££i!m:'lCive ::action progr..un.
Over the past ~e.uty.£iVl :y8'.1I'$) the most bl~mlnt forms of disc:timination have, become Jess
~OtDmO~. No longec do w:e see help·W'.1nted ,,,,ds divided into "mf!n's· and ·women·s· jobs,
do we see signs in sior~ windows $t~ting th.u "Only Whites Need Apply-fot avaibble
jobs. However, r.lcisrn Qn~;selCi,mj$ri.ll hl\....e .\ pO'lllfct-ful impact on [he structure of the U.S.
work force :Lnd ewnomy. k~OSt ~omen and people of color are still relegated to [he
lowest-paying jobs. while Elte bette~ jobs-including, rh~ '\r.)St m:ljoritr of lucrative
gov~~rnent cont~cts-go r{spropdrtic:m:nely to white peopJe and men.
.aOt
~OdaY's :J.ffi~a~ive aClion&'rogram's fit into
:l proud history of people struggling not only
to open doors to illdividui~~\ but to cb:,ngerhe Srl"l.lCmrC of the U.S. work force and
economr ~o rCd'su·ib\ltc ju,~~ ~tnd r~sources ;lcr:oroing lO merit r.u:her than custom.
:~;h
t,
, <~
:
'
't~ ,
~f'
~('
t,
....:...... .
",
'
",'\'
.
,~"
~~.
Jl"
v~::'':
I
i
�,~
01/06/95.fl 11 : 09
FROM ACLU-t~G E:EGAL
'~.
060893 1120
TO 12026193437
033
POlS/019
Foet Sheet 113
•
~~qual Rights Advocates
;~
\I •
.~
1663 Mission Screet, Suite SSO
S:ln Fr3nciseo. California 94103
415/621..0672 F:1X: 4151621-6744
.
!
?
.•
f
l.l
. Ii
!
I
i
;
Why Affir~?-tiVe Action Is Good Public Policy
~
1i.
!
?r
Affirmative action benefits everyone.
While there ;an: numelOUS practical and economic reasons why affirmative actioA is the
right thing 1;0 do, the moet:;',£uudamenrnl re-dSon is that jpstic:c-dc::manda} .i~. It La simply I,lU\
fait that, foZ" deo;;ades, '9Iom~' :md minorities have: been shut_o}Jt of educational
.
opponunities ana have hadXto settle for the lowe$[.p:lying :lnd 1~:t.sI'-dtsirab1.& jobs.
Affirmative action works tQcorrect these injustices, to create a futvre in which jobs and'
apponunides ate d.i$lribuc~~oretJcquitably.
.
Affirmalive action
br~gs_thejtiy.ene-$kills.-knowledge.-::I..nd-abiliti~of-'Women:::..and
Ilueoriti~ U.u.u ~be U.S. JOI1(~t' market ~Dd increases competitiveness. For example, beause
min.ority- and wornan-own~ bUliness enterprise (MBE/WBE) programs increase the
numbel" of bid.clel"S' lor gov~nmcnt.iAl,Pumr.\cu, the goyel"nJften'C~fle.n pay les.s ~c.l
receive higher-quality goodf1and s(evices. Affirm1uive ;lction also increases prodllctivity.
It's no secret that motiv.ucq.1workers are productive workt'!r~. l,.iving with harusmel1t,
feeling un~elcomet :lnd beHevin1S th:u there is nU ch~nc.e fo( "dvanc:ement take a heavy IOU
on a wurkee's mutiv:ltion.:Amrmative ;.\c.rion works to eliminate such feelings in the
workplace and in the busin.~~s community. Furchef.mol'e. affirmative action incrusts
opportunities Coe people w~p Me oor disadv\\RU;ed (0 exp.lnd. and improve business. For
. example, studies show th:lt!~inoritr-owned businesses make investments :lnd provide jobs
in urban arm that otber b~iness~.igDore. When minority businesses develop, chc::y
improve the cQnditi.ons oC q•.u least~c;vc:luped (';<.>mlnur'lities.
.
&.~,
,~.
Finally...ffirm:1f\vlC :u:tion p,rovicle:1 role_~od.el,. Thl!' presence of minorities and -omen in
jobs and businesses from wl~ich (her li.:lve' been tr~\ditionallr excluded teUs young people
thilt the future c:an look different. It inspires thenuo seek new skills. and become better
prepared for the job m~llkt:~i
.
~;
"';
.
.
These kinds of benefits ll;lv~gener~~~d bro:.1d·b~'\$ed support lor :lffir~tive action in'the
private seCtor. In May of 1~285. tbe directors of [he N;llional Association of Manuf::lC:~urers
endorsed a policy nOlcementf~th"t S\,pported ;lHiuu:lllVt: ~,,:[ion. with its goals ':lnd timet:lbh:s.
\1
.
as "'''ooel business po[i~r.· i~
1
.
9 i '!\
l:j
;J.t
)i~,
·f1f:
~;~ .
~~t
J~Li
..
~
?~.
'/.1'
"i'.~
~i~ t'
'\
I .
~:~'
i~.
.q~
;,
~~
1
�131/136/95
Ol-05-95 02:58PM
11:139
1334
13613893 11213
P017/019
TO 12026193431
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
Coalition for Civil Rights
For /mmetiiar.e Reig41e August 10, 1994
'.
Contact: Gail. Kaufman 415/621-0672
Coalition for Civil Rights
D~fends Voll1nt:uy Affirthativc:: Action
at California Assembly Judiciary
Committee Hearings
Persons Testifying:
Eva J Pa~erson, Chair, Bay Area CoaJi[ion for Civil Rights
Executive DirKtor, J.a-:.vyers" CommittP.P. for Civil Rights
of the SaA Francisco Bay Area
' . '<.,
CiaooI- ....
!
J"Jiu, E.
,
s . - ....."
~~~---'-
Kurtz, Managing Attorney, Equal Rights Advocates
Frederick /r:rrri4.n. California Business Council of OrganizatioDs
for Equal Opport\AJ'lities
/tola7',ju ATango, C3Ufornla liisp::tnic Professionals A$!oC'iation.
HdYOtd Yet, Council of Asian. Americ:1.n Business Assocations
:and Asian Bu.siness AS30ciation3
~fWIO
Manuel ROSalt1t California I Iispanie Cbarnber of CODlnlerce
W.__ IlMA .............. O.......
"~1'vfId
SACRAMENTO, August 10 1994-At hearings before the Califomia Assembly
Judiciary Committee, the Say Area Coalition for Civil Righrs will testily ag:Un&t :l
proposed amendmellt to California's Constitution that would prohibit v.oluat:uy
affirmative action· progr<lnlS ill California. The Imcndmect"s goal is to eliminate all
voluntary affirmative action progr.lrtl~ in public employment. education and
contracting. A my liad of affitmative action progca.l1l3 turrectlr in ex1stCllCe would
be o1iminat~d or threatened; SUI..I. ~I) prugrams in school districts, pollee departments,
local municipalities that h:ave been developed to address identified discrimination
.apnsl: !p~,(i(" "aei~l groups.
Of
In its
;...."..... QII....... CaoodIII'I 01
IIIdrT..... 1.IA-.
, . ..... QW1.Io!;I •
00IiIWtd. . . . ,
t~timony
the Coalition argues that thp. proposad. a.tr1endmen.: is
unnecessary due to the fact that federal law assures that only those affirmative action
'policies 'Which prOlet:l ag;tlml unjust aud atbitr.uy preferences can be volunt:J.rily
undertaken ,md that the bin would restrict Or deny 'Women and people of color their
ri,hts as provided by the U.S. Constitution.
Judith K\\tu;. M.., nnging Attorney for Equal RIghts Advo~!ltes. lsrnenl:S that,
"rr: is :t uc.1 d:\y for the people of C~,lifol'tlj~\ when our represen(~[ives ate spending
their ~ime trying to dism~\ntle longstanding efforts to remedy the discrimination
hced by women ;md minorities - esped::lUy wh~n C~liEorni:1 .,.,i:U become the only
c':tue w}u:.re tUI.\v,;t~e:. will lie a Ul:1jurity of the population in the next fIve reus."
w..-'. --..ft" " -
""--~--
Ell;' IJ:\cerson, Ch:\jr of cile Co~\lition (or Civil R.ights, is :ld<Ul'lant .~bou[ the
·Study :\ftt"r study in the: P"St few re:lfS h:.ls proved that discrimination
\ll)o.in:n: pl!Opl:: of color .\nct ..... Oll!t:1J i:. aliv~ :lnd well in this society. I myselt 2.m. a
.succtSS 5l0ry or ;\Uicmative ~~lion ~ if women :lnd pegplc of (;01<,11 at'.;;: nt>L even
:\lIo~ed to get throu.e" rht: ({tiM. ho'lV !\~4' they goinS to 1:l\;hicvc thel.· t'0t;C,lti.J?
I~ct th;,H.
00' MlsslQn· SO-Nt. Solte 4,(1), Sun f'r;snc:iS<:Q. COIIifcwnla $4105
�11:10~
HOM ACLU-NC HGAL ~'
01/06/95
01-05-95 02: 5BPM
060893 1120
TO 1202619343"(
035
P018/0I9
EQUAL RIGHTS ADVOCA TES
1663 MISSION ST., STE.S50 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103 415/621.0672
,I
August
FAX: 4151621-67·", .
3. 1994
,
I
&semhlrmember Phillip Isenberg
Assembly Jud.iciary Com.mittce
State Capitol, Room 6005
P.O. Box 942848
Sacramento, CA 94248·0001
Dear Asscmblymembcr Isen.berg:
Equal Righti Advocate" md the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San
Francisco Ba.y Area ar~ writing to ~k yuu ~o oppose Assembly Constitutional Amendmcrn,
47 (hereinafter • ACA 47") which will be heard in. the Assembly Judiciary Committee OD.'
August 10, 1994. ACA 47 is an inappropriate and \,Lnnecessuy attempt to am~"ld the
California COllStitution to eliminate the use of all volunt:try affirmative action programs in
public employment, educatioll 2nd contracting.
~ yO\1. may know, ER.A and the Lawyers Committee h~ve been in the forefront of
the fight to end race-and sex·balied di~cr;min:2tinn rh.rO,"'gh both litigation :mel publie polic::r
over the past twenty years. Both organizatio[1s ate members of the Coalition for Civil
Rights (CCR) and oil behalf of CCR prepared an. extensive position paper analyzla, the
legality of this proposed amendment. III this Jetter we sutn.l'.EW".izc, for your information,
that paper and would be happy to make the entice paper' available to you at your request.
If ACA were to be enacted, a myriad of affirmative action programs currently in
existence would be eli.m.ili'lted or thruttntd.These a.ce p,o~rams which public entities, be
th~ the sta.tc:, school districtS, police departments, or local municipalities. have voluntarily
initiated in order to giVf. meaning to the promise of eCiu:.li,y to 311 in tb.e state of
California. Some examples of programs which could be affected by ACA 47 include
minority and women business contracting policies like that found in Public; Contract Code
section 10115 et !ISl.;the state civil serviee affirm~\!:ive action prog:-am establisbed by
Government Code section 19790 .!U WI.; and Educa.tion Code section 6~560 • the sludent
opportuniry 3.Od access pt'ogram which is intended to make posuecondary edut:atiomd
oppoctunities availllble to 1o~ income Olnd ethnic minoriry students.
. 1
<:;."".,,"".
a...NI or DI_..,..., Sv:llolU\C \,.,.ny.crc. ClIoir; :-",11, M"'lIft. \'",. ~ ;"'to,. 1\..."'. 1\.,11,,, &. C:1\1~r.ltI. e ..."'...... ~. Fllp,.-,. l.il\illft ~ <.:r.,~, MI,i.",
n. W_... m. ,.,"..._ .. L Wo,\t.......... \I...,.......:tt ~~\"'. \,.,."", ptcl'r..·.~ Ol.. ~" L4.~ •• C:':.rt\,. a,.;"'' "-........ O(~wo:\h ."-1IIUt1i. 1':.. th.1CCfl ~T"'l"N'r~ a_ff: N.\My L ~.(.. i"
I_h. OINl:.... : Mlllb IIbtftC" S«tIT AM"',!! T~~C'\I!I:. ~~.... ""'...,; 1Wr,! L 00(10". F(fIuw; I-Iory ,11,"1\( Cwt(flo&Y. F~ ~ ........ &.!'.ro. StatJ "'_;. S~nJ(..
QuI"'If......
'IIMI"_III: Ontl M. ~.""''''3''. "",weld/( Ob~O"I C.a.."... A.. 1:10"". Difw'JIf. f ......un
PiI!prUot Ii""""" 1 ltA Ii. &:a.rc. ~""""wI"I~:
....
MI".!~"':I", Al'Jlli\U"Gfi", ",,,,... t: \))..1' Tr l.!!. Lor.." SIC"...,.
I....
11.,.,_
I
I
J
�1211/0'6/95
01-05-95 02:58PM
..
11: H:ll~
1216121893 112121
TO 12026193431
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
P019/019
12136
2
AI you already may know, uhder cur~cnt federal law-, state-and;J~Lg()YflTnmentS
CUt vol'Ollltaruy implement a race-conscious affirmative actiO'n plan 2!!!% in one very narrO'w
.i,uatiotl: where the plan is intended to a.ddress id~ntj£ied-d.iscrimin'it1on;:-aga.in.st spocific
racial groups.
CitY of Richmood VO LA. Croson ~o.) 488 U.s. 469 (198?). In addition.
eve.a. wh~re a preference progr3M i~ determined co be j\\sti£icd. coutts will further scrutinize
the pIan to ensure that it is ,narrowly tailorcd" Therefore, this proposed CO'nstitu.tional
Amendmerlt is UlUlCCessary due "0 rhe fact that federal l,aw usures that oAly t:b.05C::
, aHirmative action policies whic:h, pr<?,tec:t .;:Unst unju.stand arbitn111 preferenc:es em be
voluDurily undenak.en. ACA 47 aftempts to restrict affirmative action fun-her by
forbiddin.g lU'ly volunt2ry am·mpr..!: to ~d"r4?SS: p:ut diserirninarory praedeas. If passed, it
'Would halt over 50 years of progress toward... cre3ting equality in America.
As Justice Harry A. Blackmun once said, "In order to get beyond. racism, "IIU'e must
first take account of race. There is no other way. And in ordcr to' treat some penoD.$
equally, we, must treat, them differently.· Regents ot University of California Vo Bakke.
438 U.s. 265, 407. ACA 47 attempts to mak.e taking account of race and gender
impossible. thereby lim.i.ting the ,oVel1'wlI':l.lt'S ability to create equ-ality.
obvious inpiei::&-oLdSst::ciaUl?:,l1.tlon have dinipatcd and signs U'l
Windows no longer read "Only Wbites Need Apply,~ discrimination still has a. powerful
impact in our economy. For example. uJo,n~O_Ql~~nP.riti.~-are_S'CiJJ,in the lowest·
payin& jobs in our workforce and jobs remain preCiornin:lJldy ml1e or female in the 1~~Os.
I.a. reeognition of the need to break down hisroric barrier! to :I. [Nly integrated society,
businesses have elnuraced affirmative action as a tool to overcome centuries of
discrimination. This ~P?Ort indlJdes.la1ge corporations and mallufact1.lcers. In. fact. ill
1984, over 90% of Chief E~e,'Utive Officers of large corporations said that their affirmative
action policies were meant 'not onlyro mc:c:tgovermnentregulations but also to satisfy
coxporatc objectives. An even hisher pCl\:ont:\gc :;v.iJ they W'ould con.t;,l.Q\olO to U:JC ,uais a..n 4
timetables to track the progress of women .lod minorities. CQuune Magazine. September
16, 1985 at 28.
\"Q}'ile the
'"OSt
the passage of ACA 47 would limit the ablljty of local Jtovemments co meet tbelr
obligation under the United Sutes Constitution and federal statutory hlw to remedy ,
diserimination. and also force these agencies to fo(&o federal funds to avoid potentially
conly litigation for claims of viol"ting ACf\. 47. "rht Amendment directly conflicts with
the Equal Protection Clciu~e of the Fourteenth Amendment because it significancly restricts
the ability o( it:lC. n.Ad local government:. to conform to the: federa.llllW whid.!. allow:; and
sometimeS requires government cnlllies to idemify and. remedy past discrimin;ation
voluntarily. Furthermore. ACA 47 is likely to lead to unnece~!;ary :and. costly lidgl\tion
because it restricts the ability of loc:tl ~':"crnnu~nts cc):)&::ule anti·discril'l'Wlad.on la'V,uits.
c'
1
,f'
I
1
!
,
�01/06/95
Gl·05-9S 03:16PM
.... ,.
FROM
ACLU~NC
037
11:11 ~
LEGAL
\"
060893 1120
POOZl003
TO 12026193431
'.
3
•
",
Additionally, di~' propo$~ ~mendment violares the ·Equal Protcetio~ Clause because
it embodies an explicit Use of n.~e m:'lking it subject to nric', scrutiny. CtOJSU. 488 U.s.
469. Here, there is no evidp.ru:0"that the goal of ACA 47, namely the el.imiftariol1. of
affirmative aaion programs, .is ~~,mpelJed by 2ny legitimate legislative t4d.. No .howiag
has betA .made that state and local :tf£irmacivc atcion prograDlS have to any exteDI: adversely
Jfoctcd the state's 4on.m.inoritypopuIltlorl. Moreover. ACA 47 fails the seeoncipro.ag of
the StriCt serutiny tcst because the amendment i~ not' narrowly tailored. It seeks to
eli.rz:aiaate aot oely chose specific: programs which proponenrs believe may be causiag iajuty
to the statels non-minoritY popularic>;a., but aU such 'pfogr:uus. iacludiag. those·that m:a:r be
, required by federallc.w.
'
Second. the am.endmeclt v~'el<Ue¥ the Equal Protection Clause because it is racially
motivated and seeks to reduce the level of protection provided to racial minorities susd
'Women llJlder the U.S. CORstitutinl1.A state cmnot pro,\,jde less protection than what is
required by fedenllaw. CJ-a!dord Y.":!.!ts Angeles~.w. of Educ-.ui2!l, 4S8 U.S. 5Z7 (1982). '
Third, ACA 'Violates equal protect:ion betause it wringe$ upon the rights of
nUnocities to participate on an equal basis in the polir.ical pro(;css. It removes the authority
of local offieillc to addrc:ss problelIls th:tt specifically burden people of color aod 'lVomea.
while not simlllIly restricting the'abiliry of these sune officials fO redress discrimination
agtiDst others (e,e- older people. disabled people, lesbians and gays). By seleaiAg out nee
and gender problems for differential t~eat.m.eflt. ACA 47 vioJates the Constitution.
)XTasAiArlpa "'.. Seattle Sellool DinKies ~o. a, "58 u.s. 457 (1982).
We urge you to vote against ACA 47. It i~ both bad public poliq because it takes
out of the hands of local authorities the ability [0 rem.edy previous discri.m.ination and
illegal under the federal c.onstitution. We would be h~ppy to ansv.'er acy additional
questi0.t15 you may h,~e,
"
Sincerely,
:Equ:d Rights Advocntes
621·0672
~, (41~)
J
"
~ 1{,1kJ~
wr;/;rr;
j Theodore Hsien Wang
'~
b'O!yl':rt Camwnce
.~ (415) S43·94H
c:c: Assemblymetnbe-I" Ridm:t
"'j..d..m.i"
(01'
Civil Kights
�01/06/95
11:11
060893 1120
P003/003
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
TO 12026193431
\ "'~--'.._.__ ..""'" ......
01-Q~-9S03:16P~
._-_., .,...··':·jijr~"ii·~ l~llU
f
.
~
-0
I1t.iLU
PtA-
Ui'" VJr IV&:.
'lill.~dfJ
Or"
rl1"
r,Ve:.
MJ.
T e next freight train
HIN THE Mthrts
str;ke.s" paohgl of
c:rhne lecss1auon was
wlvoUCMl lAst )'tIllr - and later
",hill' ic ',"nt on che \lo11ot
Dclnoa-atto ItB'.taU", 10ad8r.
WJ11ie 8ro\llJa end BtD Lotkyer
and ~mocr.tio aubernetortal
candldatoi; Kathleen Brown lind
JOhD O'r"mGncU jUtltpcd out or
the way. Thoy touleS spot ..
trell'ht traift bat'feUnr aoWl! ~he
trac1c. ami folOftlJ c!6,,' vote.
. It _II l\1I'd~r whon Pl'CIj)osi.
LlOD 1''1 came aloft&', "nlat. mea·
811r., which. pels.d by a 8.,
mlrgin, WOU)(i, if doem.ed con
W
.titultonel, deft)" .dl,lelt;oh aftd
JlOn.tno~ney
health 'b,n.nt,s
lUo,.1 immtcranb. It "'ag fu
eled. IS)' 'IOcor rllp at tppa)'W
monoy being u"d to PlY for
thoae a"rvieol, end that rAgl
Wtl, atokod hy.Gov. Pete Wil.
son'. re-election campaiin,
to
whlo1\. bilWighlwC 'he th~m••
But PlOpo<lOD 187 .truek at
iomt of ttle core values of Oem
oet.tlc 6.ctlvllJtl, cIvil I1boftart·
and Hieptntc groupe, ma.ny
of wnqm don't hltUeV8 ohUaren
.hou.lcl be d.oniolll acc•• s co
health 81\d educltion beoau$e of
wnore tholt pal1J"ta ohoote to
1.1\1
ltve. MOlt DtrnoCr8~\c candl·
datea oppesoO the meu\U'e and
tor n1,n)'. Including Katl'l1een
Brown. 'he lain" contributed w
uid.
I
Pouncs IN REVIEW
v a 1\)
rilf it. t .
Gart
or
'rnoeretfc Partys oore con
fte
8til,\ulnoles: liberal.. mlnorlti"
and publiC empl~)'.e utilons.
I
NTRODUO£D AS a
co~
.a»1",aJx1w9h1;::nt Ber
liii
}'e8l' ry
len,' an
nie Rltht9f. a..ohleo, the !nea·
,ur. WO\llcl-,rohlbt\ the .ta~ or
any or Ue potitiolll 8ubcllvialonJ
rrom uatn, fA", lOX. t(llor••th
nlel~ or ntlUona) oricin .8 • ori·
tl3rioJ\ for .tther dlseriminatln,
qnind. or Ifantlns prerervntiel
treatment to, IlftY builvid",.l 91"
fA th~ DPtI"8UOn 01 the
state II 'i'st,~ of public eMploy.
ment. public education or pl..ll1le
D
pu,
•
coturaetln••
What. &bIll meana, in ahort is
no.oIMlf'tIh:natioft, 'But mOl'9I",<
pOr'.III.,
Po
amt~4.tb:e_.QUon
program. roi-womcn-or-iTlinorl·
tlca, ef\hl!r. No prcr.I·CrlOBS tor
ndl\~j", oon~'a .. torl (8
'
can-'p'poiftt~4
Rapullli.
at-ate Supreme
Court JUlit amrmed t1l. ".UdiU
.tatrSt" David
By John Ja.cobs
Political EdItOr
~.. de.
ialue forc:aJ1 Clll1diil,tea
r~nninr in 1.996. particularly
Democrat. in nU)tt~r&" and oon
91 &\lob. proCTam~ last week in a
Help
tIe. to eollege; no .pat:i$l race·
ba'9d programs fot guvemrnent
job.,' tneJuclina- pollt.A and litO·
ftgMlflg, Polls have 8hovm r.h6t
lUeb programs are highly un
BIM RICHTER'S
me.llun: came up IDSt.
)'tar. it dr04 11\ t.he
Asstmblt .Ju41dary c::ommit~t.
The 1••gl~l.~h'!._tn.ok-C;:f1uey.s .
and Hill~c:.Oaucwc.tiOth-op;J
~ it: !!Ibue's-lltUe'doubfln
m1-iiilM that If thl, bill po
forward,· Aslilmbl)'Wotl1an BM
'bare Lte, D·O.1cl.n4, chalr of
'he Legisl.~i'" ~ll\eJr 0 ..\\0\10,
nllinr
-------",--
&.1 ciecfsionlj flO &p~elal pro·
gram. for aril'lisaiol'l or 'niM&i
popularwhh voters.
Ii'three strikes' and
Proposition 187 were
freight trains, this
initiative could be a
h@at-seeking missile
that, if it's not
disarmed, explodes
the Democratic PS1·ty
aervativt dlatricts. Doc.! thil
V6 lJolldlty .. Republican
Illajority? I beUuve jtdoItSl.~
W
eaid at the &ime, -We wiD ha~
turned the clock hack 30 40 Dr
1
50 yean." Ma,yb. 10, but <-JJl09.t ,
voter. .4on!\:see:lt-t.hat.,way, In
cludin,:Doznoefll.t.s,
'The~ ought to 'be • Dt!mo
oratic r.5'on,. to thil Immedi.
atelY." IMud one top 18sit]aUvo
stlffor. ~lthel' W~ dQal ..... It.h like
Issue or emhrtce it. But "'0 ean't
s~inl we're
araitlst it end der.ncllftB' lhe
statu. quo. Thes.~J'roJr8ms
we have-8upport9cl::&nd~Nndd
be out lnere just
and iJiiny:naVe:~'D:8\1«O'rruJ.
But'they-ate-vfl')'-"hlU'd-tO do
lind. It', like 'throe strikes.'
wl1ich sounds 10 logics.l ttl th.
coalition.
their dofc.ot.
Now comes a me.ture, the
Car
. i \
• Ifliti.·
~ichttr
Reads. "that thU will De
public:'
IF "three efrikQ" ~nd Proposi.
tion IB7 were (te;sht trains, I.hil;
initiptivI could be a huol,"seek·
lng milan. that. if it's not dis
One option would be to 1ibgr
Oem.ocral. to voto the... cUo<
tricta and proYldo &nouc'h 'VOte.
a~
.rmlCl, o2Cplodes tho Democratie
to approve ltV8laJ bOl. In the
AlSelllhly and Sen.te t.o end
thest program•• It Wilson
introduce ii ,,&in in the new
sesaioD- Bepubticatllt $1:111 it 8S a
,Igntd them into law In 1996, it
\v(lUld be hard co ar«'te th., an
intt.latIve WQuld be lIeconary ,
Party ~e.lltiot).
Rll~ht'.!lr
plans to
wtd•• i.uuethoc. 'hey wl1Qld
love 1.0. put on the November
1998 ballot. if the Legilliturf'
.!",.,. 'lui 8pJlrrive it (Gild 1'06l5ib.l)
even it it. doel). Last week WU·
IOn tam_ close to endorsing it.
tJemoetatic inC\lmbp'lts would
be fo'r064 to eh6~~ between vot
ing to protect race·bued pro·
erarns, whLeh w~uld In{,,,',i,ce
the fcllowln,year.
'·n•.,. b . ptoblC!rD wnh
.this strategy, however. Rientor's
I
•
ia •
~n!Ut\1UoNd
amelldrnont. that
would &Upr18J1)on' tho IIIH.
would require 64 "'Gtel, which
mean. at. least 14 Assembb
Democrats WDuld haw to "wol·
low It.
than, voter•• inchuHng-anSty
If a significant number ot
w~ltunaJ~ wh6""eeovorwnelrh- .
D.~r.-r.la cpUt CJ'¥'8r nac:e and
:
i!\g-R9pu"bUcan votes last No
over wbether &0 fepu4l11Je am~ I
v~bQ" ..aye thf! GOP et-ntrol of
maUve ac:tion proIT.tn. thoy
~nrrltu md pouibly the !tate
have spon~r.~d (or 20 )"ErQP'Il. 'he
1\(llembly.'\Or they eO\lhi "ot~
81J{IIlnst lIu<:h prugranH; Ind
retrlbl.llion.to foUow could make
draw the int or minority Acti,;·
the ~nt tlPeaker$hlp war, 'y
il;tSl, who wouldVlIni:lh th~m.
comparison. look like a. waDe In
''We beHevt' Vir)' lItrollt;ly,"
the park.
!
"
�1211/1216/95
OI~05-95
02:41PM
..
'I"
• \
0,
.
.~.: ;"
..
I
11:
FROM ACLU-NC LEGAL
.-
J
•
1214121
P003/021
TO
~
. .••• "
J
-2
a that the Constitution of the State be
•. . adding Section 31 to Article I thereof, to
.
.
. ."
"
. (a) Neither the State of California nor any
subdivisigni or .,ents shall use race, sex,
b(1.itI~Ol()r
, or national origin as a criterion for either {
against, or FUlting preferential
any individual or group in the operation of
system. of public employment, public
1
public contracting.
11
"hl$:i$ecl:ton shall apply only to nate action. tak~
12
ett.1ectlve date of thb section.
13
""
remedies for violation of this section
14 .
. normal and customary attorney·, fees.•.
15
•.
in this section shall be intetpre~6~t~
16 iiiJP1:'O{!lOll:tn!;t!i!'" assifications based on sex that ;;are
17
to the ·normal operation of Jihe
18
of
employment or public education. '
19
in this section shall be interpreted as
20
court order or eonsent decree that is in
!l
effective date of this section.
'
22
in this section shall be interpreted as
23
action that is necessary to establish:or
for any federal program., 'where ~
24
25
result in .10s5 of federal funds tc)the
26.
27 .
othihil in this section shall be construed 'as
.public agency from obeying a court order
28
curls1deration of racial, ethnic, national
SW
.or religious characteristics to remedy the
30
"C·:'I"I,UJn pal\t disC'rim.inatory practices.
.
31
32 .
or parts of this section are foune,- to
. federal law or the United States
33
.. ... •• v . . .'." the section shall be implemented to the
'"
34
JtUI1um G.YI',plI'\r permitted by federal law and the
Constitution. Any provision held Invalid
C:Auilfpo
e from the remaining portions of this
pOlitt·¢i&l
f:
~~
. :. ..•....,
...
'",
I'
.:~.
'.
i,
.. ',,,!'
,.
- I'
,"
.
,.~,~,
':.
be
o
,
"
.,
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Stephen Warnath - Civil Rights Series
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domestic Policy Council
Stephen Warnath
Civil Rights Series
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1997
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36406" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/641686" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Description
An account of the resource
Stephen Warnath served as Senior Policy Analyst in the Domestic Policy Council. The Civil Rights Series includes material pertaining to the Civil Rights Working Group and topics such as affirmative action, English only, age discrimination, religious freedom, and voting rights. The records also include confirmation briefing materials for Department of Justice (DOJ) and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) nominees. The records include briefing papers, correspondence, schedules, testimony, reports, clippings, articles, legislative referral memoranda, and memos. The majority of the memos are internal between the Domestic Policy Council staff and the staff of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and between the Domestic Policy Council staff and Congress.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
134 folders in 13 boxes
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[Bay Area Coalition for Civil Rights Analysis of ACA - Assembly Constitutional Amendment 47
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Domestic Policy Council
Steven Warnath
Civil Rights Series
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 2
<a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/Systematic/Warnath-DPC-Civil-Rights.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/641686" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2/8/2012
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
641686-bay-area-coalition-civil-rights-aca
641686