ACLU Nebraska Legal Program - Due Process and Equal Protection
Click here to read more about ACLU Nebraska's
other legal program areas.
The Valentine's Day party for Plattsmouth elementary school
turned out to have a price tag: parents' privacy. In
February, 2008, parents in Plattsmouth were planning to attend their
children's Valentine's Day party after the school sent out an
invitation for everyone to come join the fun. But then just a
few days before the party, parents received a second invitation: to
sign a waiver consenting to a background check and a credit history
check before they would be allowed to step foot in the school.
There was no written policy explaining who would be banned from the
party, and no explanation for the need to look into parents'
backgrounds. Worried about the possibility of identity theft
and outraged by the requirement, some parents complained to the
ACLU. We wrote a letter to the Superintendent, who removed the
requirement for the party and promised to form a committee to review
a future policy that would balance children's safety with parents'
privacy.
Oxford Public Library has several computers with internet
connections, but one difference from other libraries: the library
would not allow adults to use a computer without a filter.
Every library is allowed to put filters on their computers; the US
Supreme Court said this is necessary to protect children from
accessing inappropriate sites. But the Court also said adults
have the right to request an unfiltered computer for their use.
In fall 2007, one library patron in Oxford asked and was refused.
The librarians said he wanted to look up dating websites and they
didn't believe that was right. After ACLU contacted the
library and the Nebraska Library Intellectual Freedom Committee, the
policy was changed and the library now features unfiltered computers
for grown-ups to use.
In 1994, a woman took her infant daughter to the hospital with a minor splash burn on her leg from hot
water. The hospital reported the burn as suspicious, and the woman was questioned by police and a social
worker. No legal action was taken against her. In 2001, the woman learned she was listed on the Child
Abuse Registry for “Inconclusive” child abuse when she was turned down for a nursing job. The regulations
allowed her to appeal this designation within the Department of Health and Human Services, but the DHHS
denied the woman’s request for removal from the Registry. We filed an appeal in the District Court for
Lancaster County. The Judge ruled for us, stating: “The failings of the pitiful record in this case go
on and on. At best this record is non-existent. At worst, the series of events to which the plaintiff
has been subjected exemplifies government at its worst. The executive branch may not have its way at all
costs and without regards to the rights of the individual citizen to reason and fairness.” The woman’s
name has been ordered off the registry. Top
Does the right to vote extend to everyone? In 2002, Justin Jensen and his mother Earleen Jensen went
to vote in the presidential campaign in Antelope County. Both of the Jensens own their own homes in the
village of Royal, though Justin's severe diabetic condition meant he had to spend almost every night
sleeping at his father's farm. Earleen stayed there too in the evenings, to watch over him and assist
his father if Justin slipped into an insulin coma, as he has done several times in the past. But neither
mother nor son permanently moved back to the family farm--both of them kept up their own houses, made
improvements on their property, and spent the time they could in their own homes. Nonetheless, Justin and
Earleen were both charged with the crime of illegal voting by the Antelope County Attorney, who claimed
they did not actually reside in their homes in Antelope County and therefore were not allowed to vote in
the election. The Jensens, lifelong residents who haven't missed voting since they first registered, now
are afraid to vote until the matter is resolved by the courts. In
2005, the Nebraska Supreme Court agreed with ACLU Nebraska and ruled
the Jensens--regardless of disability or financial condition--had a right to vote. Top
Can welfare rights be cut off just because you have more children? Nebraska Appleseed filed a class
action suit on behalf of disabled women who were on welfare. These women were not able to work due to
their disabilities, yet the state argued that they weren't entitled to receive any more money for children
born after the mothers went on welfare. Appleseed's suit alleged the "welfare cap" violated equal
protection and due process because children within the same family were being treated differently and
because women who cannot work due to their disability were not capable of remedying the problem by obtaining
employment. ACLU Nebraska and the ACLU Women's Rights Project filed an amicus brief, urging the court to
find in favor of the disabled women. In 2004, the Nebraska Supreme Court agreed, and ordered the state to
stop applying the cap.Top
