On Monday, November 16 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin joined Representative Mark Pocan, Senator Jon Erpenbach, patients and advocates in a press conference for the Jacki Rickert Medical Marijuana Act (AB 554 and SB 368), a popular and common sense measure to reform laws on the medical use of marijuana.
Medical marijuana users should not be treated like criminals. But without law reform, Wisconsin will continue to confuse criminal behavior with medical necessity – a practice that subjects people seeking relief from severe illnesses to searches, fines and imprisonment. Eleven states have legalized marijuana for medical purposes and more have passed legislation on the freedom of scientific research to be done on its health benefits. The War on Drugs should not be a war on sick people.
Reforming Wisconsin law on medical marijuana is the right thing to do for patients in our home state. States have a right to determine what is legal and illegal under state law. While we need progress for drug reform nationally, the need is urgent for Wisconsinites who face chronic pain and suffering from their illnesses. Wisconsin cannot wait for Congress to settle on health care reform while an affordable and natural option can be made available to seriously ill patients to relieve chronic pain, intractable nausea and the side effects of chemotherapy, radiation, and HIV/AIDS medications.
Wisconsin, like the rest of the country, needs to address all the ways that drug laws are discriminatory, irrational and are the root of unprecedented levels of incarceration. Legalizing marijuana for medical use would be a step in the right direction for Wisconsin.
Find out more about the work of the national ACLU on drug law reform at http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Monday, November 9, 2009
Assembly passes Healthy Youth Act
The ACLU of Wisconsin applauds the state Assembly for passing AB 458, the Healthy Youth Act. Find out how your Assembly representative voted on the bill.
If passed by the state Senate and signed by the Governor in early 2010, this bill will raise state standards for human growth and development curriculum (a.k.a sex ed) to a comprehensive sexuality education model which would be the educational link to make a positive, public health impact on teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection rates. Comprehensive sexuality education would ensure that Wisconsin public school students get effective, age-appropriate and medically accurate information about reproduction, contraception and relationships.
There has been criticism of this bill that suggests it would override local control of school boards’ decisions about sex ed. To the contrary, this bill is far from a mandate. If passed, it would raise state standards on “human growth and development” curricula that are taught in the state. Local school boards can choose what ever curriculum they want, but if it fails to meet state standards, they can’t define it as “human growth and development” curriculum under the new state statute. And if schools aren’t teaching students the facts, they have to send a letter to parents saying so. As with current law, any parent can opt their children out of whatever human growth and development lessons are being offered.
The ACLU of Wisconsin will be working to encourage the state Senate to vote "yes" on SB 324 early in 2010.
If passed by the state Senate and signed by the Governor in early 2010, this bill will raise state standards for human growth and development curriculum (a.k.a sex ed) to a comprehensive sexuality education model which would be the educational link to make a positive, public health impact on teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection rates. Comprehensive sexuality education would ensure that Wisconsin public school students get effective, age-appropriate and medically accurate information about reproduction, contraception and relationships.
There has been criticism of this bill that suggests it would override local control of school boards’ decisions about sex ed. To the contrary, this bill is far from a mandate. If passed, it would raise state standards on “human growth and development” curricula that are taught in the state. Local school boards can choose what ever curriculum they want, but if it fails to meet state standards, they can’t define it as “human growth and development” curriculum under the new state statute. And if schools aren’t teaching students the facts, they have to send a letter to parents saying so. As with current law, any parent can opt their children out of whatever human growth and development lessons are being offered.
The ACLU of Wisconsin will be working to encourage the state Senate to vote "yes" on SB 324 early in 2010.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Victory! Challenge to Domestic Partner Registry Thrown Out by State Supreme Court
Committed Couples Can Continue To Enjoy Limited Protections Offered By Registry
On Wednesday, November 4 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union celebrated a decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to dismiss a challenge to the state’s recently-enacted domestic partnership registry. The Court also rejected a request from board members of Wisconsin Family Action that the registry be declared unconstitutional and put indefinitely on hold. The ACLU represents five same-sex couples who asked to be allowed to participate in the case.
“The registry certainly doesn’t offer anywhere close to the protections that marriage would, but we’re grateful that the couples we represented can at least hang onto the limited legal protections it gives them, such as the ability to visit each other in the hospital,” said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project.
Board members of Wisconsin Family Action had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex couples from marriage. The dismissal of the case by the Wisconsin Supreme Court means that these petitioners may not begin their case in the Wisconsin Supreme Court but may re-file their case in a circuit court (a lower court), where both sides will be able to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“The Wisconsin Supreme Court did the right thing rejecting this premature and ill-defined challenge. If the petitioners want to deprive thousands of families of some very basic protections, they should not be allowed to short-circuit the legal process of proving their case to a trial judge,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “We’re certain that if we end up having to deal with these arguments in a trial, we’ll be able to show how the limited protections offered by the domestic partnership registry in no way violate the marriage ban.”
The five couples represented by the ACLU had also asked the court to let them join the lawsuit so that they could help defend the new domestic partnership registry. That motion was denied as moot, since the lawsuit was dismissed. Fair Wisconsin, an LGBT advocacy organization whose members include same-sex couples who have registered as domestic partners under the new law, also sought to intervene in the lawsuit to help defend the law.
In addition to Dupuis and Knight, the legal team representing the couples includes Linda Hansen, David Froiland, Jason Plowman, Daniel Manna and David Goroff of Foley & Lardner, LLP.
Additional information about the ACLU’s motion, including bios and photographs of the couples, the legal documents filed and a fact sheet containing some of the comments made by the anti-gay activists seeking to strike the law, is available online.
Press coverage of the decision thus far has been limited, but there was coverage in the UW Badger Herald and a story on this morning's Wisconsin Public Radio headlines.
On Wednesday, November 4 2009, the American Civil Liberties Union celebrated a decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to dismiss a challenge to the state’s recently-enacted domestic partnership registry. The Court also rejected a request from board members of Wisconsin Family Action that the registry be declared unconstitutional and put indefinitely on hold. The ACLU represents five same-sex couples who asked to be allowed to participate in the case.
“The registry certainly doesn’t offer anywhere close to the protections that marriage would, but we’re grateful that the couples we represented can at least hang onto the limited legal protections it gives them, such as the ability to visit each other in the hospital,” said John Knight, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT Project.
Board members of Wisconsin Family Action had asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down the domestic partner law as inconsistent with the amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex couples from marriage. The dismissal of the case by the Wisconsin Supreme Court means that these petitioners may not begin their case in the Wisconsin Supreme Court but may re-file their case in a circuit court (a lower court), where both sides will be able to have a trial and present evidence to support their cases.
“The Wisconsin Supreme Court did the right thing rejecting this premature and ill-defined challenge. If the petitioners want to deprive thousands of families of some very basic protections, they should not be allowed to short-circuit the legal process of proving their case to a trial judge,” said Larry Dupuis, legal director of the ACLU of Wisconsin. “We’re certain that if we end up having to deal with these arguments in a trial, we’ll be able to show how the limited protections offered by the domestic partnership registry in no way violate the marriage ban.”
The five couples represented by the ACLU had also asked the court to let them join the lawsuit so that they could help defend the new domestic partnership registry. That motion was denied as moot, since the lawsuit was dismissed. Fair Wisconsin, an LGBT advocacy organization whose members include same-sex couples who have registered as domestic partners under the new law, also sought to intervene in the lawsuit to help defend the law.
In addition to Dupuis and Knight, the legal team representing the couples includes Linda Hansen, David Froiland, Jason Plowman, Daniel Manna and David Goroff of Foley & Lardner, LLP.
Additional information about the ACLU’s motion, including bios and photographs of the couples, the legal documents filed and a fact sheet containing some of the comments made by the anti-gay activists seeking to strike the law, is available online.
Press coverage of the decision thus far has been limited, but there was coverage in the UW Badger Herald and a story on this morning's Wisconsin Public Radio headlines.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Healthy Youth Act Stalled by Assembly Republicans
Republicans block progress on effective sex ed in WI public schools (read the story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) Stay tuned for the Assembly to take up the vote on Thursday.
You can still call your Assembly rep! Read more about taking action on this issue.
The issue got more press coverage in addition to what we shared on our blog earlier this week: Fox 6 in Milwaukee (with video); Janesville Gazette; WBAY 2 Green Bay (with video); WKOW 27 Madison (with video); Post Crescent
You can still call your Assembly rep! Read more about taking action on this issue.
The issue got more press coverage in addition to what we shared on our blog earlier this week: Fox 6 in Milwaukee (with video); Janesville Gazette; WBAY 2 Green Bay (with video); WKOW 27 Madison (with video); Post Crescent
Monday, November 2, 2009
Action alert: call your Assembly rep to vote YES on the Healthy Youth Act
The ACLU of Wisconsin urges the state Assembly to pass AB 458, the Healthy Youth Act. This bill would raise state standards for human growth and development curriculum (a.k.a sex ed) to a comprehensive sexuality education model which would be the educational link to make a positive, public health impact on teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection rates. Comprehensive sexuality education would ensure that Wisconsin public school students get effective, age-appropriate and medically accurate information about reproduction, contraception and relationships. We've blogged before on why this issue is important.
“We know that parents are the best people to instill values in their children,” said ACLU of Wisconsin Community Advocate Stacy Harbaugh. “But we should all agree that public schools should be in the business of teaching the facts about health and reproduction. The Healthy Youth Act would get us back to teaching students science-based facts. All teens, even those who choose abstinence, should know how their bodies work.”
There has been criticism of this bill that suggests it would override local control of school boards’ decisions about sex ed. To the contrary, this bill is far from a mandate. If passed, it would raise state standards on “human growth and development” curricula that is taught in the state. Local school boards can choose what ever curriculum they want, but if it fails to meet state standards, they can’t call it “human growth and development.” And if schools aren’t teaching students the facts, they have to send a letter to parents saying so. As with current law, any parent can opt their children out of whatever human growth and development lessons are being offered.
Comprehensive sexuality education is an important issue for civil libertarians. There are many curricula options that are effective and have a broad base of support from medical and educational advocacy organizations. But the Healthy Youth Act is also non-discriminatory and honors free speech. Specific provisions of the bill would require that sex ed be taught without bias in gender or sexual orientation. And rather than muzzling teachers in abstinence-only mandates, the Healthy Youth Act would let teachers answer students’ questions about reproduction with honesty and accuracy.
ACLU members are encouraged to call their legislators and ask them to vote “yes” on AB 458/SB 240 and pass the Healthy Youth Act in 2009 (find your legislators' contact info here). The ACLU of Wisconsin is a member of the Healthy Youth Alliance, a coalition supporting the bill. The Healthy Youth Alliance noted that there were 90 bill supporters in the Assembly Education Committee hearing (with 41 opponents registering or testifying) and 64 bill supporters at the Senate Education Committee hearing (with 26 opponents). Your phone calls, emails and registrations at hearings count!
There has been much press coverage on the issue and people are blogging about it:
The latest is a blog from the national Huffington Post making the case that students have a right to comprehensive sex ed.
Kids and Their Kids – opinion on the bill’s public health impact from Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin’s legislative director Chris Taylor on the fightingbob blog.
Bill could lower Latina birth rates – Opinion from a Spanish-community educator in the Wisconsin State Journal.
Sex Ed Bill Gets Senate Hearing - Wisconsin Radio Network coverage with audio from Sen. Erpenbach, a Madison-area adolescent pediatrician, and anti-contraception advocates.
Lehman, Legislature Tackle Sex Ed When Abstinence Wasn’t Good Enough - Racine Post’s companion blog includes teen pregnancy and STI rates in Wisconsin as well as a rundown of what is being taught in Racine area schools.
Bill Would Rewrite Rules About Sex Ed - WI State Journal overview.
Human Growth Education Bill Creates Divisions – Eau Claire Telegram article overview with statements from Eau Claire area legislators.
Abstinence-only education not right for Wisconsin schools - Milwaukee Examiner opinion.
Wisconsin Sex Ed Bill Sparks Controversy – Isthmus overview with many pro and con advocates’ statements (bill has had a suggested amendment to allow greater access for parents to review curricula).
Bill Would Change Wisconsin Sex Education - Wausau FOX blog with Rep. Molepske statements.
Sex Education for Good Health - Opinion from a Milwaukee Public Schools staffer.
Jerks of the Week, Abstinence-Only Advocates - Milwaukee’s Shepherd Express recognizes both the Healthy Youth Act as well as the ex-felon voting rights issue the ACLU of Wisconsin is supporting.
“We know that parents are the best people to instill values in their children,” said ACLU of Wisconsin Community Advocate Stacy Harbaugh. “But we should all agree that public schools should be in the business of teaching the facts about health and reproduction. The Healthy Youth Act would get us back to teaching students science-based facts. All teens, even those who choose abstinence, should know how their bodies work.”
There has been criticism of this bill that suggests it would override local control of school boards’ decisions about sex ed. To the contrary, this bill is far from a mandate. If passed, it would raise state standards on “human growth and development” curricula that is taught in the state. Local school boards can choose what ever curriculum they want, but if it fails to meet state standards, they can’t call it “human growth and development.” And if schools aren’t teaching students the facts, they have to send a letter to parents saying so. As with current law, any parent can opt their children out of whatever human growth and development lessons are being offered.
Comprehensive sexuality education is an important issue for civil libertarians. There are many curricula options that are effective and have a broad base of support from medical and educational advocacy organizations. But the Healthy Youth Act is also non-discriminatory and honors free speech. Specific provisions of the bill would require that sex ed be taught without bias in gender or sexual orientation. And rather than muzzling teachers in abstinence-only mandates, the Healthy Youth Act would let teachers answer students’ questions about reproduction with honesty and accuracy.
ACLU members are encouraged to call their legislators and ask them to vote “yes” on AB 458/SB 240 and pass the Healthy Youth Act in 2009 (find your legislators' contact info here). The ACLU of Wisconsin is a member of the Healthy Youth Alliance, a coalition supporting the bill. The Healthy Youth Alliance noted that there were 90 bill supporters in the Assembly Education Committee hearing (with 41 opponents registering or testifying) and 64 bill supporters at the Senate Education Committee hearing (with 26 opponents). Your phone calls, emails and registrations at hearings count!
There has been much press coverage on the issue and people are blogging about it:
The latest is a blog from the national Huffington Post making the case that students have a right to comprehensive sex ed.
Kids and Their Kids – opinion on the bill’s public health impact from Planned Parenthood Advocates of Wisconsin’s legislative director Chris Taylor on the fightingbob blog.
Bill could lower Latina birth rates – Opinion from a Spanish-community educator in the Wisconsin State Journal.
Sex Ed Bill Gets Senate Hearing - Wisconsin Radio Network coverage with audio from Sen. Erpenbach, a Madison-area adolescent pediatrician, and anti-contraception advocates.
Lehman, Legislature Tackle Sex Ed When Abstinence Wasn’t Good Enough - Racine Post’s companion blog includes teen pregnancy and STI rates in Wisconsin as well as a rundown of what is being taught in Racine area schools.
Bill Would Rewrite Rules About Sex Ed - WI State Journal overview.
Human Growth Education Bill Creates Divisions – Eau Claire Telegram article overview with statements from Eau Claire area legislators.
Abstinence-only education not right for Wisconsin schools - Milwaukee Examiner opinion.
Wisconsin Sex Ed Bill Sparks Controversy – Isthmus overview with many pro and con advocates’ statements (bill has had a suggested amendment to allow greater access for parents to review curricula).
Bill Would Change Wisconsin Sex Education - Wausau FOX blog with Rep. Molepske statements.
Sex Education for Good Health - Opinion from a Milwaukee Public Schools staffer.
Jerks of the Week, Abstinence-Only Advocates - Milwaukee’s Shepherd Express recognizes both the Healthy Youth Act as well as the ex-felon voting rights issue the ACLU of Wisconsin is supporting.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Denying H1N1 vaccines to prisoners would harm public health
Are pregnant women behind bars less worthy of the H1N1 flu shot than susceptible populations in Wisconsin communities? Recent media stories (such as Green Bay's NBC 26 story) and a press release from State Representative Brett Davis (R-Oregon) are suggesting just that.
Statements encouraging state health officials to put the health of not just prisoners, but by extension the prison staff, correctional officers and their families in jeopardy by denying H1N1 vaccine to prisoners including pregnant female inmates garnered a response from the executive director of the ACLU of Wisconsin today. Chris Ahmuty said that denying or delaying appropriate preventive actions to control the spread of the flu, including vaccination in the close confines of the prison system, is neither rational nor effective.
“Taycheedah’s (Taycheedah Correctional Institution near Fond du Lac, WI) prisoners and guards are in just the kind of setting that needs aggressive preventive measures to avoid widespread infection," said Ahmuty. "To suggest that prisoners should not receive vaccine because they are less important than the ‘law abiding citizens of our state,’ will only further the spread of H1N1 to everyone.”
The Centers for Disease Control’s Interim Guidance for Correctional and Detention Facilities on Novel Influenza A (H1N1) Virus (May 24 2009) recognized that:
The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin in a May 1, 2009 media release urged public health officials “to implement a public health policy which is rational, effective and has the least intrusion possible on civil liberties.”
Ahmuty reminded the public, “Prisoners are serving their debt to society, but being subjected to disease and death is not part of a just sentence in any civilized society."
Read more about the ACLU of Wisconsin's work to address poor health conditions in Wisconsin prisons.
Statements encouraging state health officials to put the health of not just prisoners, but by extension the prison staff, correctional officers and their families in jeopardy by denying H1N1 vaccine to prisoners including pregnant female inmates garnered a response from the executive director of the ACLU of Wisconsin today. Chris Ahmuty said that denying or delaying appropriate preventive actions to control the spread of the flu, including vaccination in the close confines of the prison system, is neither rational nor effective.
“Taycheedah’s (Taycheedah Correctional Institution near Fond du Lac, WI) prisoners and guards are in just the kind of setting that needs aggressive preventive measures to avoid widespread infection," said Ahmuty. "To suggest that prisoners should not receive vaccine because they are less important than the ‘law abiding citizens of our state,’ will only further the spread of H1N1 to everyone.”
The Centers for Disease Control’s Interim Guidance for Correctional and Detention Facilities on Novel Influenza A (H1N1) Virus (May 24 2009) recognized that:
"Correctional institutions pose special risks and considerations due to the nature of their unique environment. Inmates are in mandatory custody and options are limited for isolation and removal of ill persons from the environment. The workforce must be maintained and options are limited for work alternatives (e.g., work from home, reduced or alternate schedules, etc.). In addition, many inmates and workforce may have medical conditions that increase their risk of influenza-related complications.”"In overcrowded jails and prisons, such as Taycheedah, the risk of H1N1 contagion spreading among prisoners and correctional officers and then to the officers’ families and communities must be addressed vigorously," said Ahmuty.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin in a May 1, 2009 media release urged public health officials “to implement a public health policy which is rational, effective and has the least intrusion possible on civil liberties.”
Ahmuty reminded the public, “Prisoners are serving their debt to society, but being subjected to disease and death is not part of a just sentence in any civilized society."
Read more about the ACLU of Wisconsin's work to address poor health conditions in Wisconsin prisons.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Call TODAY for voting rights in Wisconsin!
All legislators in the state Assembly (Republicans AND Democrats) need to hear from their constituents by Thursday, October 29th at noon on the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration Act. Voters who demand that they vote YES for AB 353 could help the bill get a floor vote this session and restore voting rights to over 42,000 Wisconsin citizens.
It’s this simple: It comes down to you making one phone call or sending one email.
CALL YOUR ASSEMBLY REPRESENTATIVE NOW and tell them:
“I am your constituent and I support AB353 the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration Act. I want you to vote YES and restore the vote in Wisconsin!”
Find your Assembly representative at the Who Are My Legislators? website
Some important things to know about the legislation:
- Wisconsin law bars individuals with felony convictions from voting while incarcerated and while on probation, parole or extended supervision. The Wisconsin State Legislature is currently considering legislation, known as the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration Act, that would restore the right to vote to individuals upon release from incarceration. This law would enfranchise the over 42,000 Wisconsin citizens who live in the community, work and pay taxes but are unable to participate in the political process.
- Disfranchisement is unfair and un-American. Over 42,000 Wisconsin citizens living, working, raising families and paying taxes in Wisconsin are barred from voting due to a past felony conviction.
- Disfranchisement perpetuates Jim Crow in Wisconsin. Racial disparities in Wisconsin’s criminal justice system mean that 1 in 9 African Americans in Wisconsin cannot vote compared to 1 in 50 of all Wisconsin citizens.
- Voting may make us safer. Studies show that ex-offenders who do not vote re-offend at a rate of 27%, ex-offenders who vote re-offend at a rate of 12%.
- Wisconsin voters support enfranchisement. A May 2009 poll showed that 57% of Wisconsinites support automatic, post-sentence enfranchisement.
- We need to simplify the voting process and save taxpayer dollars. Enfranchising people upon release from incarceration streamlines the restoration process, conserves government resources and saves taxpayer dollars.
- Wisconsin has more restrictive felony disfranchisement laws than 20 other states, including neighboring Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
CALL YOUR ASSEMBLY REPRESENTATIVE NOW!
Wanna do more?
Call your State Senator as well and forward this to 5 friends!
It’s this simple: It comes down to you making one phone call or sending one email.
CALL YOUR ASSEMBLY REPRESENTATIVE NOW and tell them:
“I am your constituent and I support AB353 the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration Act. I want you to vote YES and restore the vote in Wisconsin!”
Find your Assembly representative at the Who Are My Legislators? website
Some important things to know about the legislation:
- Wisconsin law bars individuals with felony convictions from voting while incarcerated and while on probation, parole or extended supervision. The Wisconsin State Legislature is currently considering legislation, known as the Wisconsin Democracy Restoration Act, that would restore the right to vote to individuals upon release from incarceration. This law would enfranchise the over 42,000 Wisconsin citizens who live in the community, work and pay taxes but are unable to participate in the political process.
- Disfranchisement is unfair and un-American. Over 42,000 Wisconsin citizens living, working, raising families and paying taxes in Wisconsin are barred from voting due to a past felony conviction.
- Disfranchisement perpetuates Jim Crow in Wisconsin. Racial disparities in Wisconsin’s criminal justice system mean that 1 in 9 African Americans in Wisconsin cannot vote compared to 1 in 50 of all Wisconsin citizens.
- Voting may make us safer. Studies show that ex-offenders who do not vote re-offend at a rate of 27%, ex-offenders who vote re-offend at a rate of 12%.
- Wisconsin voters support enfranchisement. A May 2009 poll showed that 57% of Wisconsinites support automatic, post-sentence enfranchisement.
- We need to simplify the voting process and save taxpayer dollars. Enfranchising people upon release from incarceration streamlines the restoration process, conserves government resources and saves taxpayer dollars.
- Wisconsin has more restrictive felony disfranchisement laws than 20 other states, including neighboring Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
CALL YOUR ASSEMBLY REPRESENTATIVE NOW!
Wanna do more?
Call your State Senator as well and forward this to 5 friends!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
