ACLU Economic Coercion

[Dan Lester]

At 08:35 PM 1/25/98 -0800, Filtering Facts wrote:
>should read Ann Beeson's ultimatum to Kern County at
>http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/kerncodemand.html
>
>  "If necessary, we
>   are prepared to challenge the Kern County Internet policy
>   on First Amendment grounds in federal court. As you know,
>   if we prevail on our claims, Kern County would be liable
>   for attorneys' fees. In order to avoid the need to resolve
>   this issue through costly litigation, the County must
>   remove the filters from the libraries within ten days of
>   the date of this letter."

Well, call it coercion if you wish.  Sounds like normal business practices
to me.  All sorts of businesses, including insurance companies and
government agencies, frequently negotiate settlements because it is much
easier to do so, and frequently MUCH less expensive to do so, than to
litigate.  Sounds like an appeal to the common sense of the administrators
and/or the voters.

>Notice this weathly national orgainization chooses to make these sorts of

Why do you say ACLU is "wealthy"?  What indicates that?  Most ACLU folks I
know don't pay much in dues and don't have extra bucks to give.  (I'm NOT
a member, though I support MANY of their tenets and actions, but by no
means all of them)  

>threats to poorer rural counties like Kern.  They don't make them to bigger,

In California terms Kern County is hardly poor or rural.  I know, I used to
live there.  It has one of the larger regional centers in the state and a
very successful and productive agricultural business, plus many others.  If
you want to talk about POOR counties in CA, fine, but Kern isn't one of them.

>urban systems like Cincinnati or Boston, that can afford to absorb the cost
>of an expensive lawsuit.  

Why do you think that troubled large cities can any more easily afford
lawsuits?  Many large cities are in much worse financial condition than
many "rural" counties.  

>"Currently, there is no case in the courts involving the use of filtering
>software in libraries. However, the ACLU, ALA's partner in many intellectual
>freedom cases, is being vigilant in its scrutiny of libraries today
>regarding First Amendment issues. It's not pleasant to think about having a
>library
>sued by an organization whose principles we support and which has supported
>ours over many years. "

Sounds fine to me.  I just got my latest ALA membership card, showing paid
membership for 32 consecutive years.  I've also given to FTRF and other
organizations at times, though I'm not much of a "joiner" in general.  I
support the vigorous prosecution of intellectual freedom cases.

Of course if anyone wants to fight a case on filters, they could always
come to a number of places in Idaho, many of which are MUCH less wealthy
than Kern County California.

cheers

dan

--
Dan Lester, 3577 East Pecan, Boise, Idaho 83716-7115 USA 208-383-0165
dan at 84.com   http://www.84.com/  (check out our 1997 holiday letter) 
 http://library.idbsu.edu/   http://cyclops.idbsu.edu/ http://www.lili.org/  
Sent me a postcard of a library yet?  You'll get something nice in return.