www.acluwv.

org
Index | 01
Table of Contents
Director’s Chair . . . . . 01-02
Letter from the President . . . . . 03
Freedom of the Press . . . . . 05
The Arrest of a Veteran Reporter . . . . . 05
Lawsuit Against a Comedian . . . . . 06
The Heyman Arrest . . . . . 07
In Your Community . . . . . 09-10
Barnette’s Diamond Anniversary. . . . . 09
Legal Observer Program . . . . . 10
Political Cartoons Exhibit . . . . . 10
Legislature . . . . . 12-14
Steven Mader . . . . . 15-16
WV Immigrants . . . . . 17-21
A Snapshot of Immigration in WV. . . . . 17
Muslim Ban . . . . . 18
Ice Raids . . . . . 19
Refugees and Temp Protected Status . . . . . 20
Dreamers . . . . . 21
Women’s Awareness . . . . . 22-26
WV Voter ID Law . . . . . 27-28
Black Identity Extremist . . . . . 29
House of Hagar . . . . . 30
Director’s
Chair
Joseph Cohen
Every single day, we seem to wake up to news of a
fresh assault on our most cherished ideals from the
highest office in the land. The furious attacks on
voting rights, freedom of the press, immigrants’ rights,
LGBTQ rights, abortion rights, and protestors’ rights
have come at such a pace that they sometimes blur
together. Blatant misogyny and open expressions of
white supremacy have become so commonplace in our
public discourse that it would be easy to become numb
to them. Yet, the resistance remains strong.
Across the state, people are organizing to create a
more just West Virginia. I’ve had the great fortune to
travel the state and work with these incredible activ-
ists. From Bluefield to Wheeling, from Parkersburg to
Shepherdstown, the energy is palpable. And I’ve taken
such great inspiration from the people, most of whom
have never previously been active, who are standing
together against the many forms of oppression. You
could feel something special is happening in West
Virginia. Then the most incredible thing happened.
Director’s Chair | 02
But we cannot stop now. The struggle for justice
In the shadow of Blair Mountain, some 37,000 teachers continues. We are redoubling our efforts and we need
and school service workers channeled our West your help. If you have not done so, I’m asking you to
Virginia forebears and engaged in one of the highest renew your membership to the ACLU-WV. We need
forms of non-violent dissent--they withheld their labor. the people and financial resources to remain vibrant in
The exercised their right to freely associate. They this fight. Feel free to send me an email at
descended on the Capitol in unprecedented numbers jcohen@acluwv.org, and we can talk about how else you
and they made their voices heard. They showed us all can get involved.
the immense power of collective action, and in the
process, they may have caused a fundamental political
realignment in Central Appalachia.
Finally, I want to thank ACLU-WV board President
Marybeth Beller for her powerful leadership and
direction over the years. Thankfully, Marybeth is
We are one year into Trump’s America, and we are staying on the board, but, after four years at the
still standing. Actually are doing better than that; we helm, she is stepping down as Presi-
are winning. It feels as though we are on the dent this April. Marybeth has seen
precipice of transforming our society for the better in our organization through a sometimes
profound ways. difficult transition. But her steadying
At the ACLU of West Virginia, we have been
influence, her deep understanding of
the issues, and her humble leadership
leaders in fighting back against the attack on style have placed us on a path to
our civil liberties coming from Washington and continued success. Our organization,
Charleston. This has been our most active our state and I are all indebted to
year ever. We’ve been in the Marybeth.
courts, at the legislature
and on the streets. And
we’ve seen a lot of
success this past year.
You can read about
some of those battles
Photo credit:
Billy Wolfe
in this newsletter.
We simply could not
have done it without
you. I can’t thank you
enough. You have
recognized the threat and
you have joined in record
numbers--or membership is
roughly four times bigger
than it was prior to the 2016
election. You have answered
our pleas for assistance by
calling, emailing and
writing letters to your
representatives to protect
and expand civil liberties.
And you have joined your
fellow West Virginians in
this growing movement.
Letter from the President | 03 Ads | 04

Letter from the President Check us out on

The ACLU of West
Virginia is a strong,
active, state-wide organi-
zation with dozens of
volunteers, made up of
community activists and
attorneys who work to
protect civil liberties for
all West Virginians. Our
board represents diverse
mountaineers from every
corner of our state and
we work hard to manage
our fiscal resources and
our fellow citizens to
represent the needs of
legislators, town councils, school systems and police
departments throughout the state.
years we have recruited strong staff members who are
Social Meida!
dedicated to their work and to moving civil liberties
forward. Their work can be seen in the cases we have
won, the people we have educated and trained, and the LIKE OUR PAGE
struggle we maintain with the West Virginia Legisla- facebook.com/acluwv
ture. Because we are strong and have an excellent staff
and board in place, I am confident that now is the time
for me to step aside as board president and to make
room for new board members to develop their skills in FOLLOW US
leadership of this fine organization. Institutions need @aclu_wv
new ideas and growth in order to flourish. I will
continue to serve on the board, but I also want to
allow room for new
leadership; and so, with the close of our fiscal year, I FOLLOW US
will resign as president and continue my work with our
new executive committee members.
@acluwv

ACLU members have granted me the honor of serving

on this board for a number of years now, and the
board members have given me the privilege of serving
as our president for the past four years. During these
Having this position is an honor I treasure. I hope you
will join me in welcoming our new leadership and in
continuing the fine work of the American Civil Liber-
www.acluwv.org
ties Union of West Virginia.

ACLU National Membership Conference

Board Members June 10 - 12, 2018
Sonya Armstrong
Putnam County
Douglas Evans
Wood County
Jamal Mustafa
Monongalia County Washington, DC
Marybeth Beller Rosemary Ketchum Jennifer Oliva
Kanawha County Ohio County Monongalia County The ACLU National Membership Conference brings together ACLU members
for learning, mobilization, and inspiration. The event is an opportunity for
Barbara Bayes Karen Kunz Anna Osborne members from around the country to exchange ideas, to celebrate the
Lincoln County Monongalia County Greenbrier County extraordinary history of the ACLU, and to look forward to the challenges
ahead.
Frank Calabrese Jack Magan Lida Shepherd
Ohio County Kanawha County Kanawha County Speakers include: Senator Elizabeth Warren, Congressman John Lewis,
President of Planned Parenthood Cecile Richards, Co-Founder of Black
Chuck Smith Lives Matter Patrice Cullors, and National ACLU Executive Director
Naomi Cohen Jeff Martin Anthony Romero.
Monroe County Putnam County Kanawha County
Get more information at https://conference.aclu.org
Melissa Ellsworth Dominique Villasenor
Monongalia County Nicholas County
Freedom of Press | 05
Freedom of the Press is Under
Attack. We’ve Been Fighting Back.
ACLU-WV has made a lot of waves nationally in recent months advocating on behalf of a free, robust press.
Two seemingly unrelated civil liberties matters—the arrest of a veteran reporter for asking a question at the WV
Capitol and a frivolous lawsuit filed by a coal baron against a television comedian—thrust the eyes of the nation
on West Virginia. These events are much more related than they may seem at first glance, and they are part of
a larger war being waged against a free press. ACLU-WV fought back against the war on journalists when it
came to our front door.
The Arrest of a Veteran
Reporter for Doing His Job
Last summer, during the national debate over the
Affordable Care Act and the Trump administration’s
attempts to repeal and/ or replace it, then-Health and
Human Services Secretary Tom Price and senior
Trump advisor Kellyanne Conway visited the WV
Capitol to discuss the addiction crisis in our region. As
they walked through the building, Dan Heyman, a
veteran reporter with Public News Service, pressed the
two on whether domestic violence would be considered
a preexisting condition under a legislative proposal
being pushed by the President and being considered by
Congress at the time.
Suddenly, Heyman was pulled aside by Capitol police,
handcuffed, and hauled off to jail. He was charged with
a misdemeanor for “willful disruption of governmental
processes” and only released when his employer posted
a $5,000 bond. The law under which Heyman was
charged can carry a fine of up to $100 and a jail
sentence of up to six months.
“At some point I think they decided I was just too
persistent in asking this question and trying to do my
job, and they arrested me,” Heyman said after he was
released. While Heyman may have believed he was
just doing his job, we believe he was fulfilling a vital
service to our democracy. He was attempting to
inform the citizenry about one of the most important
issues of our day.
The charge against Heyman was outrageous. The law
is unconstitutionally overbroad, and factually there was
simply no government function or process that Mr.
Heyman could have possibly interfered with as Price
and Conway walked through the hallways. The crimi-
nal complaint alleged that Heyman was “causing a
disturbance by yelling questions.” What it didn’t note
was that Heyman was actually targeted for reporting
on matters critical to the public interest—not in a
closed meeting or the inside of a working office, but in
the hallways of a government building.
After public outcry, including significant advocacy
work by ACLU-WV, prosecutors finally dropped the
outrageous charges against Heyman about four
months after he was arrested. The Kanawha County
prosecutor’s office released a statement indicating that
while Heyman’s conduct "may have been aggressive
journalism" it "was not unlawful and did not violate
the law with which he was charged, that is, willfully
disrupting a State governmental process or meeting."
Public News Service reporter Dan
Heyman following his arrest on
May 9, 2017
A Thin-Skinned
Coal Baron’s
Frivolous Lawsuit
Against a
Comedian
Bob Murray, the CEO of the
Ohio-based Murray Energy Corpo-
ration, has a history of violating
mine safety regulations and finan-
cially supporting politicians —
including President Donald Trump
— who advance agendas that enrich
coal executives while leaving
miners in harm’s way. Murray also
has a history of suing journalists,
media outlets, and activists who
call out his unethical practices.
Over the last 15 years, Murray has
sued everyone from local reporters
to environmental activists to The
Huffington Post. And after a recent
broadcast, he added talk-show host
John Oliver to that list.
Freedom of the Press Cont. | 06
Last summer, the HBO television of attention—it was covered by
show “Last Week Tonight with outlets as divergent as the Boston
John Oliver” did a story on the Globe, the Hollywood Reporter,
coal industry. During the episode, Vanity Fair and Playboy—because
John Oliver took aim at the we used humor to help prove our
practices of many in the coal point. Satire, hyperbole, offensive
industry, including Bob Murray. speech, and comedy are all protect-
ed by the First Amendment —
Oliver discussed the damage done that’s especially true with regards
to coal mining communities when to speech about public figures on
jobs are in decline. He also matters of public concern.
recalled a Utah mining disaster Comedians like John Oliver and
involving one of Murray’s mines, Stephen Colbert don’t just have
which killed nine miners and was large audiences — they have large
found by a congressional inquiry audiences that care about the
to have been preventable. Oliver, a important issues facing our coun-
comedian, also criticized Murray
with more creative language,
try. Courts should never be used
as a sword to prevent those audi-
calling him a “geriatric Dr. Evil,”
referencing complaints Murray has
ences from receiving information
because powerful people find it
received from his miners. He objectionable. As we note in our
specifically recounted an instance brief, “Anyone Can Legally Say
in which one of Murray’s employ- ‘Eat Shit, Bob!'” References to Dr.
ees wrote “Eat Shit Bob” on a
returned check for an unwanted $3
Evil, giant talking squirrels, and
returned checks are all protected
bonus and had a human-sized
squirrel named Mr. Nutterbutter
by the First Amendment—whether
coal tycoons like it or not (see
come on stage to present Murray a
check for “3 acorns and 18 cents.”
Figures 1 and 2).
After we filed our brief, the case
Murray responded by suing John was transferred from federal court
Oliver and HBO in a federal court to state court. The state court has
in West Virginia for defamation since dismissed the lawsuit. At
over what he insists are false the time of publication of this
claims about the coal industry and newsletter, Murray was considering
his company. His lawsuit also appealing the ruling.
references hurt feelings over the
personal insults, claiming that
John Oliver’s broadcast upset him
more than anything else ever had.
As one commentator asked, “[I]s
he really saying that a late night
British comedian on a premium
channel has caused him more
stress than the time that one of
his mines collapsed and killed a
group of his employees? If so . . .
that’s . . . weird.”
ACLU-WV filed an amicus curiae
(friend of the court) brief in
support of Oliver and HBO. Our
brief received an incredible amount
Freedom of Press Cont. | 07
The Heyman Arrest and Oliver Lawsuit Are Part of a
Larger Attack on Freedom of the Press
At a time of eroding trust in our
government institutions, an inde-
pendent free press is more critical
than ever to ensure that the people
running our country are held to
account. This makes Heyman’s
arrest and the frivolous lawsuit
against Oliver all the more
distressing.
We have a man in the White
House, who as a candidate and
now as President, has shown utter
disdain for journalism. He has
mocked reporters, encouraged
violence against the press, threat-
ened to open up libel laws and
revoked press credentials of outlets
seen as hostile. In a political
cartoon come-to-life, the White
House Press Secretary literally hid
in the bushes to avoid journalists
last summer.
Then-Secretary Price called the
arrest of Heyman “appropriate.”
The fact that then-Secretary Price
would praise such a gross violation
of one our most fundamental
rights is deeply disturbing. Given
the culture his boss has fostered,
it’s not the least bit surprising.
But not surprising does not mean
not alarming.
And Murray is not the only one
unleashing frivolous lawsuits to
silence speech. Last February,
ACLU clients Esther Calhoun, Ben
Eaton, Mary Schaeffer, and Ellis
Long reached a successful settle-
ment with the local landfill that
sued them for a whopping $30
million for speaking up about the
environmental harms that landfill
was causing their community.
Despite initially trying to sue
those community activists into
silence, the landfill ultimately
agreed to recognize our clients’
right to speak out.
Our President has repeatedly been
caught in outright lies. He is
embroiled in an investigation in a
foreign power meddling with our
election. He continues to push
dubious narratives about voter
fraud, crime, and immigration.
In this time, it is more important
than ever that we have a press
that has the fullest protection of
Host John Oliver
discussing Murray
Energy CEO Bob Murray
on HBO’s Last Week
Tonight With
John Oliver.
the law to doggedly
pursue our elected
Fig. 1 officials, ask the tough
questions, and hold them
accountable before the American
public.
It is horrifying to see that the
constant drumbeat of attacks on
journalism coming from the White
House has trickled down to our
state. It’s a basic constitutional
principle — that apparently bears
repeating, including to our presi-
dent — that you don’t get to sue
media organizations or lock up
journalists because you don’t like
their coverage.
In the 1971 Supreme Court ruling
on the famous Pentagon Papers
case, Justice Hugo Black wrote,
“The press was to serve the
governed, not the governors.”
Freedom of the Press Cont. | 08
Fig. 2
Indeed, when our public
representatives — whether the
Trump administration or the West
Virginia Capitol police — forget that
they work for us, we need journal-
ists to remind them. Without a free
press, public officials have a much
easier time evading accountability,
shielding misconduct, and pushing
through dangerous policies without
public scrutiny. Even Thomas
Jefferson, who had a quarrelsome
relationship with the press, knew
that “our liberty depends on the
freedom of the press.”
We need journalists to be able to
challenge and question those in
power loudly and persistently. For
the government to stand in the way
is a frontal assault on the First
Amendment and the functioning of
our democracy. Those who don’t
want transparency in the halls of
government have no business
putting themselves in the political
spotlight.
If our elected officials and other
powerful interests insist on continu-
ing to violate one of our country’s
core values, we will see them in
court. We stand with Dan Heyman
and John Oliver, and we will fight-
back against any attack on a free,
independent press. In the end, the
Constitution will prevail.
09 | In Your Community
In Your
Community
Barnette’s
Diamond
Anniversary
Seventy-five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed
down the decision in West Virginia State Board of
Education v. Barnette. Among the most important
First Amendment cases is history, Barnette arose right
here in West Virginia. So, on March 1, the WVU Law
School chapter of the ACLU-WV sponsored a
celebration of the seminal case, which included a panel
discussion of the case and its relevance in American
society today.
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that the laws of god are
superior to the laws of man, and therefore, they refuse
to salute a flag. In the 1940’s, the WV Board of
Education instituted a rule requiring children to salute
the flag or face expulsion. A number of Jehovah’s
Witness school children in the state—including sisters
Marie and Gathie Barnette—refused to salute the flag,
resulting in their expulsion. They fought their case all
the way to the Supreme Court, where in 1943, by a 6-3
vote, the court held, in the very narrowest sense, that
school children could no longer be forced to salute the
flag. But the decision stands for much more than that.
The breadth and beauty of Justice Robert Jackson’s
decision in Barnette makes it among the most
compelling explanations of the First Amendment ever
put down on paper. The sentiment of the decision has
seeped into the American consciousness and our
understanding of what “liberty” actually means.
Probably the most often cited passage of the decision
says: Freedom to differ is not limited to things that do
not matter much. That would be a mere shadow of
freedom. The test of its substance is the right to differ
as to things that touch the heart of the existing order.
If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constel-
lation, it is that no official, high or petty, can
prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics,
nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or
force citizens to confess by word or act their faith
therein.
It's absolutely beautiful. And profound.
The panelists, including WVU Law School Professors
Robert Bastress and Chuck DiSalvo, Dr. Chuck Smith,
ACLU-WV Legal Director Jamie Lynn Crofts, and
CARE Executive Director Gabrielle Chapman,
discussed the impact of Barnette on American life
today. From the Black Lives Matters movement to
Colin Kaepernick to Women’s marches to striking
school teachers, Barnette’s freedom to be different
plays a key part in the ongoing public debate of if,
when, and how an individual should protest. And it
all started from some kids in West Virginia who
refused to salute the flag.
In Your Community Cont. | 10
Legal Observer Program
Ever since the inauguration of President Trump, we have seen an incredible uptick in
protest activity in West Virginia. And we at the ACLU-WV think that is beautiful. Protect-
ing people who are organizing and exercising their right to dissent is among the bedrock
principles of the ACLU. So, to help ensure that protesters rights are protected, we have
established the ACLU-WV Legal Observer Program.
A legal observer is someone who attends a rally, protest, march or other first amend-
ment activity. However, legal observers are not participants in the action. Rather, as
their name implies, they merely observe. Legal observers watch protest activities to
document any interference with the exercise of protesters’ rights. Essentially, legal
observers act as the ACLU’s eyes and ears on during a protest. And then, if neces-
sary, they could be called as a witness if a legal action needs to be taken to protect
protestor’s rights.
Generally we only dispatch legal observers when we are requested by event organiz-
ers. Recently we have provided observers to protests in Charleston (for a Black Lives
Matter rally and a Free the Nipple march), Huntington (for a protest of President
Trump’s visit and the Rally for Our Lives), Parkersburg (for a Healthcare march),
Buckhannon (for the Hate Has No Home Here march and rally) and White Sulphur
Springs (for a protest of the GOP retreat).
If you are interested in becoming an ACLU-WV legal observer, please let us know at mail@acluwv.org,
and we can provide training. With the increased protest activity in all corners of our state, it is
important that we have volunteers who are trained and prepared to act as observers across the state.
Political Cartoon Exhibit Explores
Freedom of Speech
On December 16, in Shepherdstown, exhibit all over the state over the next two years. If you have a space
ACLU-WV hosted an that would be appropriate for this world-class cartoon exhibit, please let
amazing exhibit of political us know at mail@acluwv.org!
cartoons, all exploring the First
Amendment. The show featured Participating artists in the show include Kirk Anderson, Clay Bennet,
cartoons from some of the most Paul Berge, John Cole, Edward Colley, Peter Dunlap-Shohl, Steve
respected cartoonists in the coun- Greenburg, Ed Hall, Phil Hands, Gary Huck, Mike Keefe, Mike
try, including numerous Pulitzer Konopacki, Jimmy Margulies, P.S. Mueller, Jack Ohman, Joel Pett, Ted
Prize winners. Rall, Andy Singer, Scott Stantis, Signe Wilkinson and Matt Wuerker.
The show was curated by renowned
political and labor cartoonist Gary
Huck. As part of the opening Huck
had an insightful public question
and answer session with ACLU-WV
Executive Director Joseph Cohen.
The discussed cartooning, freedom
of speech and the current environ-
ment for political artists.
ACLU-WV is looking to show the

Legislature
The 2018 West Virginia legislative session will almost
certainly be remembered for years to come. For
nearly two weeks of the 8 week session, the marble
halls of the Capitol were filled with raucous, echoing
chants of teachers and school service personnel from
all 55 counties striking for better pay and benefits.
Unfortunately, the session will also be remembered
for the Legislature passing, and putting on the
November ballot, a proposed constitutional amend-
ment to strip away a fundamental, constitutionally
protected right. That act will make the 2018 midterm
elections in West Virginia one of the most contentious
and expensive in recent memory.
Despite the passage of the proposed amendment, the
2018 Legislative Session will also go down as a highly
successful session for the ACLU of WV. The organi-
zation monitored 330 pieces of legislation and lobbied
on 74 of them. Ultimately, we were able to stop or at
least improve all but two pieces of bad legislation for
a 92% success rate of defensive lobbying. We also
helped to advance another 11 pieces of positive legis-
lation to passage or at least to continued study for a
28% success rate.
A number of factors contributed to this success.
First and foremost, our members and followers regu-
larly and meaningfully responded to action alerts and
calls for public engagement. So thank you! Second,
the ACLU of WV team worked seamlessly to get out
critical information in a timely fashion and respond
appropriately to rapidly-changing situations. The
ACLU of WV was also able to identify the issues and
key moments to focus lobbying efforts, allowing the
organization to have an efficacy that outpaced its size.
Finally, the teacher strike itself has to be given some
credit. With nearly every committee hearing packed,
committee chairs were much more reluctant to run
some of the more objectionable legislation.
The biggest battle of the session was undoubtedly
Senate Joint Resolution 12 (SJR 12). This proposed
constitutional amendment explicitly states that there
is no right to an abortion under the West Virginia
Constitution. Even before the legislative session
began, there were rumors that a constitutional
amendment to restrict the use of Medicaid funds for
abortions would be proposed. From the outset it was
clear that a primary purpose of this amendment
would be to drive up conservative turnout in the 2018
Legislature | 12
midterms, where many observers are expecting a
Democratic wave. Early in the session, a number of
anti-abortion bills and proposed constitutional
amendments were introduced. Notable among these
was House Bill 4012, which narrowly aimed to restrict
Medicaid funding by changing the definition of
“medical procedure” to exclude abortion; House Joint
Resolution 111, which was a constitutional amendment
limited to prohibiting state funds from being used
for abortions; Senate Bill 450, a supposed compromise
bill that would have mandated more data collection on
how Medicaid is being used for abortions; and Senate
Joint Resolution 12, the most broad and radical of any
of the proposals. Of course, Senate Joint Resolution
12 wound up being the legislation that moved.
The Legislative fight was long and intense. As a
constitutional amendment, SJR 12 required 2/3 of the
members in the Senate and the House to vote for it to
pass. With a clear partisan motive, the fight was
drawn along party lines. As a Senate resolution, the
first challenge was in the Senate, where, assuming all
Republicans would vote for the measure, every
Democrat would have to either abstain or vote against
the resolution to defeat it. However, Minority Leader
Roman Prezioso supported the proposed amendment,
eventually
voting for it
along with
Senators
Woelfel, and
Unger and all
Republicans.
Had those
individuals
voted against
the resolu-
tion, it would
have been
defeated; and it seems likely that the lack of leadership
was a determinative factor in losing those votes.
The vote in the House was a different story. Minority
Leader, Tim Miley, who has historically voted for
anti-abortion measures, took an active role in
checking in with the members of his caucus and
working to recruit “no” votes. In addition, in House
Judiciary, and again on the House floor, an
amendment was offered to change the date of the
election should the amendment pass. Both times, the
amendment was rejected, making clear the partisan
intent. Despite the laudable effort of House minority
leadership, 10 Democrats ultimately voted for the
amendment. Having passed the legislature, the
13 | Legislature
proposed constitutional amendment will be on the
ballot in November, and the ACLU and our allies will
be on the forefront of that fight.
The ACLU of WV joined with West Virginia Free and
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic to lead a campaign
against the resolution. The Health Not Politics cam-
paign included a range of grassroots, advocacy, medi-
cal, and social organizations that unified to oppose
SJR 12. Our coalition was active throughout the
entire state collecting signatures, signing postcards,
and building a network of activists. People partook in
a variety of actions, culminating in a rally on the steps
of the Capital on March 3. While SJR 12 did pass,
this network of partners and advocates will be vital in
defeating it at the ballot in November.
While nothing came of it, it was clear that, even for
some in House leadership the attacks on abortion
rights went too far. West Virginia still has law crimi-
nalizing abortion in the code, even though it is current-
ly unenforceable. When the ACLU of WV brought this
to the attention of the Chair of House Health and
Human Resources, Delegate Ellington, he sponsored a
bill to strike the obsolete criminal code. He even put
the bill on the committee agenda. Unfortunately, the
Speaker ordered it off the agenda, but in the current
environment at the WV legislature, the ability to get
sponsorship and some movement of a pro-choice piece
of legislation was still a small victory in
itself.
The ACLU was also central to two
big criminal justice reform initia-
tives. Both bail and civil asset
forfeiture were identified as
issues with bipartisan support
for reform. The ACLU of WV
worked with the American
Friends Service Committee,
Public Defenders Services,
Mountain State Justice,
formerly incarcerated
individuals and other
key stakeholders in
crafting a bail
reform proposal
utilizing risk
assessments.
Ultimately, that
proposal was
rejected for a
more limited
reform approach
that focused on
personal recognizance for a limited range of misde-
meanor offences. The bill moved through the House
easily, and a committee substitute in Senate Judiciary
actually improved the proposed reform, allowing
personal recognizance for all non-violent misdemean-
ors. Unfortunately, the bail-bond lobby, which profits
off of our broken system of mass incarceration, got
wind of the potential reforms and showed up to oppose
the reforms. The committee, unable to come to a
consensus moved bail reform into a study resolution.
Civil asset forfeiture suffered a similar fate, with
strong support that was met with stronger backlash.
The ACLU of WV worked with Americans for Prosperi-
ty on a proposal that was taken up in House Judiciary.
The committee demonstrated support for the reforms,
however Delegate Rodney Miller, a former sheriff,
argued against the bill, and the decision was made to
hold it for the weekend. During that time, law enforce-
ment, which funds itself through the abusive civil asset
forfeiture system currently in place, came out strongly
against the bill and when it was taken back up the
following Monday, the decision was immediately to put
it into a study resolution.
No session is complete without a few unexpected bills.
House Bill 4618 was a routine technical fix bill, it was
designed to update West Virginia’s “riot act” to update
the name of the Capitol Police to the Division of
Protective services; the bill made no substantive chang-
es to the existing law. However, the existing law is
archaic and draconian. It includes provisions like
immunity for police who kill people, and, conversely, a
provision that finds all people who are part of a gather-
ing guilty of murder if anyone dies. The bill would
normally have sailed through the legislature, but it was
taken up right in the middle of the teacher strike, and
people mistakenly believed that those provisions were
put in place to authorize the Capitol Police to break up
the strikes. The legislation went viral and legislators
found themselves on the defensive. This provided a
unique opportunity for the ACLU of WV to intervene
and work the Senate Judiciary Committee to remove
some of the most objectionable provisions, while
making the technical corrections necessary.
The ACLU of WV also played a prominent role in
another ill-advised piece of legislation that received
consideration in the Senate. Senate Bill 460 would
have required every internet-capable device to come
pre-set to block all “obscene” content. The filter could
only be turned off with proof of age and the payment
of a fee by the purchaser; the fee would go to a special
revenue account to be used by the State. Amusingly,
this would have made West Virginia the monopolistic
purveyor of “obscene” content. The bill, it turns out,
is the brainchild of Chris Seiver, a Christian activist
with a checkered past, a history of misrepresenting his
qualifications, who was most known for suing to marry
his computer in protest of same-sex marriage. During
testimony in Senate Judiciary, his companion, a
former adult actress, turned anti-porn crusader, gave a
shouting, sprawling, and disjointed oratory so bizarre
that the Committee had police station themselves near
her in case she needed to be removed. ACLU of WV
Policy Director, Eli Baumwell, also testified eventually
leading to the defeat of the bill.
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, there were numer-
ous attempts to advance ill-advised, and bigoted legisla-
tion. Fortunately, the ACLU of WV was able to
successfully beat back all of these attempts. The
“Bigot Agenda” included a bill to mandate every school
offer an elective on the Bible (Senate Bill 252), a
campus free-speech bill that forced schools to pay for
discriminatory student organizations (Senate Bill 111),
a Confederate monument protection bill (Senate Bill
418), a bill to ensure clergy don’t have to perform
marriage ceremonies they object to (House Bill 4010),
an anti-Sharia bill (House Bill 4204), and a bill that
would have required the state to spy on refugees
(House Bill 4555). It should be appalling enough that
each of these bills found a sponsor willing to introduce
them, but in fact, every one of these bills was at least
introduced and debated in one committee. House Bill
4010 actually made it out of the House, and Senate
Bills 252 and 418 made it out of a committee, as did
Legislature Cont. | 14
House Bill 4555. We also saw dirty tricks played to
try to advance some of this legislation. After the
anti-refugee bill (House Bill 4555) passed out of the
Committee on Homeland Security and Veterans’
Affairs, it was supposed to go to the Finance Commit-
tee where the Chair Eric Nelson made it clear it
would not be on his committee’s agenda. At the same
time, the anti-Sharia bill (House Bill 4204) had been
effectively killed in a subcommittee. In order to
advance at least one, the House Judiciary committee
offered a substitute bill for the anti-Sharia bill, which
was, in effect the anti-refugee bill. Fortunately, the
move was successfully challenged on procedural
grounds. And ultimately, with help from activists and
an interfaith group of religious and community
leaders that we affectionately dubbed the “G-d Squad”
all of this legislation was prevented from going into
law.
While the ACLU of WV and our friends, followers,
and supporters should feel very good about the work
that we did, the effect of having the teachers at the
Capital was evident. Bad bills were not put on agen-
das, and if they were, they were pulled quickly, when
the public filled the committee rooms. This is a great
reminder that no matter how strong the advocacy
efforts, an informed and engaged public is the best
way to keep the worst instincts of the legislature in
check. The ACLU of WV has recently made the goal
of protecting and expanding democracy one of its core
campaigns. Of all the lessons learned during the 2018
legislative session, the biggest one may just be how
important it is to get people engaged in the political
arena.
15 | Stephen Mader Stephen Mader Cont. | 16

A Weirton Police Officer Was Fired

for Not Shooting a Young Black Man
He Correctly Determined Was No
Threat.
In the early hours of May 6, 2016, the lives of rookie
police officer Stephen Mader and R.J. Williams inter-
sected in Weirton, West Virginia. Both men were
young fathers. Mader was a white cop holding a gun.
Williams was a Black man holding a gun. This tragedy
ends exactly as you’d expect — with R.J. Williams
killed by a police bullet — but with a twist: Mader did
not kill him. In fact, he tried his best to save Williams’
life. And for doing his duty, Mader was fired.
In the case of the death at the hands of police of R.J.
Williams, it all started with a domestic disturbance
call by Williams’ girlfriend. Arriving first on the scene,
Mader came upon Williams, who had his hands behind
his back. The officer quickly asked Williams to show
him his hands. Williams complied, revealing a gun.
Immediately, Mader ordered Williams to drop his
weapon. But Williams refused, repeatedly pleading for
Mader to “just shoot me.” In that moment, Mader did
not see a man with a gun. He saw a human being in
crisis. Mader deduced that Williams was not what he
might appear — a danger to others and to a responding
officer alike. Mader saw that Williams was trying to
commit “suicide by cop.”
Rather than shoot, Mader returned to his military
training and attempted to de-escalate the situation.
He softened his voice, looked Williams in the eye, and
said, “I’m not going to shoot you, brother. I’m not
going to shoot you.” With those words, Officer Mader
connected to the humanity of Williams, a man in
deep distress.
While Mader continued his attempt to convince
Williams to drop his weapon, two other officers
arrived on the scene. In a matter of seconds, one of
the newly arrived officers fired four shots, killing
Williams. It was at that point the officers discovered
that Williams’ gun was unloaded. Stephen Mader was
correct. R.J. Williams was not a threat, but it didn’t
matter. He was dead.
Weeks later, the Weirton Police Department fired
Stephen Mader.
We have grown accustomed to hearing about outra-
geous acts of violence perpetrated by the police
against communities of color. Some become more
outraged. Some have become numb. Some call for
accountability or for the needed reforms to stop
unnecessary police violence and deadly use of force.
No matter the public’s reaction, in nearly every
instance, the offending cops are not prosecuted and
are back patrolling the streets in a few weeks.
But in Weirton, West Virginia, there was the bizarre
opposite. Officer Mader was fired for not shooting a
Black man with a gun. The message the police depart-
ment sent is tragically clear: Law enforcement in
Weirton should err on the side of killing people.
Under the Fourth Amendment, police officers may
only use deadly force if they have probable cause to
believe that the target is a violent imminent threat to
the officer or someone else. Officer Mader came to the
opposite conclusion — he reasonably, objectively, and
correctly determined that R.J. Williams was not a
threat to anyone except maybe to himself. And once
he made that determination, Mader was not permit-
ted to use deadly force under the U.S. Constitution.
Essentially, the Weirton Police Department fired
Stephen Mader for failing to violate R.J. Williams’
Fourth Amendment right to not get shot.
A police officer cannot lawfully be fired for failing to
violate someone’s constitutional rights. So last May,
along with the Law Offices of Timothy O’Brien,
ACLU-WV filed a lawsuit against the City of Weirton
on behalf of Mader. We argued, in part, that the
termination of Stephen Mader was in violation of
West Virginia public policy.
After deposing City officials, we were able to win a
positive settlement in favor of Mader. To settle all
outstanding claims, the City of Weirton paid Mader
$175,000. And while justice prevailed for Mader, R.J.
Williams is still dead — a constant reminder police
nationwide need the
proper de-escalation
training needed to avoid
unnecessary killings,
especially of Black men
and boys.
Mader’s firing exposed,
again, the toxic culture
that infects far too many
police departments in
America. We need to end
the insularity and hostility towards the community
exhibited by so many law enforcement agencies. We
need to give law enforcement officers tools to effective-
ly serve their communities. That means we need to
invest in de-escalation training, implicit bias training,
and crisis intervention training. The resolution of this
lawsuit sends a clear message to the City of Weirton
and to police departments across the country. Our
communities deserve thoughtful, compassionate,
transparent law enforcement. We will continue to
work to reform policing in the Mountain State.
17 | WV Immigrants
West Virginia
Immigrants in the
Trump Era
A hallmark of the Trump administration has been division. The Presi-
dent divides us by race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, and
gender identity. He continually uses some groups as scapegoats.
One group that has obviously been singled out for attack by the President
is immigrants. He launched his campaign by calling Mexican immigrants
“rapists.” At the end of his first week in office, he attempted to block
people from seven Muslim nations from entering the country—including
people who have lived here for decades. He has attempted to curtail legal
immigration. He has demonized and dehumanized undocumented immi-
grants. He has empowered ICE to tear families apart. He has pardoned a
racist, anti-immigrant bigoted sheriff. He has turned our back on refu-
gees fleeing war. And he has stripped Dreamers of their future and their
stability.
But how has that impacted life here in WV? What has been the experi-
ence of immigrant communities in the Mountain State?
A Snapshot of Immigration
in West Virginia
WV is a really unique place in some ways for immigrants. Most notably,
WV has one of the smallest immigrant populations in the country. Only
29,000 people in WV—1.6% of our state’s total population—is foreign born.
Interestingly, more than half of the immigrants in WV are US citizens.
A miniscule portion of our population is undocumented. There are less
than 5,000 undocumented people in WV. That is just 0.2% of the total
population. West Virginia’s undocumented population is the smallest
proportion of any state in the country. Nonetheless, there are about 1,300
children who are US citizens in WV, who are at constant risk of their
parents being deported.
The dearth of immigrant voices in WV leads to fear and the growth of
demonstrably false negative stereotypes. Some of the really hurtful,
negative stereotypes about immigrants that we have to counter in WV
include: That immigrants are lazy. That immigrants are uneducated. And
that immigrants don’t pay taxes. All of these claims are widely inaccu-
rate.
WV Immigrants Cont. | 18
Myth: Immigrants are lazy.
Truth: Immigrants are incredibly productive
members of society. In WV, there is a higher
workforce participation rate among Muslim Ban different, but still sought to fulfill his unconstitutional
foreign-born people (58%) than US-born and immoral campaign pledge to shut down Muslim
people (54%). Immigrants also have a lower
unemployment rate than native-born people. The Muslim Travel Ban is an odious form of religious travel to the US. That executive order was also
and national origin-based discrimination that we’ve blocked by the courts, although the Supreme Court,
Immigrants provide invaluable resources to
our state. More than 40% of the jobs held by been fighting at the ACLU for over a year now. We enforced portions of it for very limited purposes.
foreign born people in WV are in the educa- are now actually on the third incarnation of the Muslim Ban 2.0 expired while we were waiting for the
tional services, and health care and social Supreme Court to hear it. Then the President issued
assistance fields, compared to 27% of
Muslim ban.
Muslim Ban 3.0. Muslim Ban 3.0 is similar to 2.0,
US-born workers.
but has some key differences.
Immigrants in West Virginia are entrepreneurs.
ACLU-WV Legal Director Jamie Lynn Crofts and
Despite our small immigrant population, our Executive Director Joseph Cohen have travelled the
state is home to more than 2,500 immigrant state numerous times since the first iteration of the Muslim Ban 3.0 indefinitely bans people from Iran,
owned businesses that generated $47.6 in Muslim Ban was handed down in January 2017 to Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia, five
2014. And while immigrants make up only overwhelmingly Muslim countries that were also
meet with members of the state’s Muslim community.
1.6% of our state population, they make up Additionally, we have held online know your rights targeted by the earlier versions. The order
4.5% of the state’s business owners. That emphasizes that countries are being banned because
means immigrants in WV are 2.8 times more trainings and worked with vulnerable university
likely to start a business than US-born people. student populations all in an attempt to help targeted they have not cooperated in providing information
for visa vetting. Yet Somalia remains banned even
communities navigate the confusing and fast-changing
Myth: Immigrants are uneducated. landscape of the Muslim Travel Ban. though it does live up to the government’s new visa
cooperation standards.
Truth: Immigrants in West Virginia are highly
educated. Immigrants in WV are 2.5-times We’ve seen firsthand the fear and hardship this
more likely to have a college degree than state-sanctioned discrimination has caused our neigh- The order adds restrictions on Chad — another
non-immigrants. 48% of immigrants in our Muslim-majority nation — along with North Korea and
bors here in WV. Well-established pillars of our
state have a bachelor’s degree or higher, Venezuela. The inclusion of two countries that are not
compared to only 19% of native born people. community feel under attack and unwelcome. We
Therefore it’s not surprising that 28.4% of have worked hard to provide members of the targeted Muslim majority does not even qualify as a fig leaf.
North Korea accounted for just 61 affected visas last
foreign born workers in WV earn more than communities with the information they need to make
$75,000 per year, compared to 15.5% of the best decisions for themselves and their families. year — out of more than 75 million visitors to the
US-born workers in WV. United States.
WV—especially southern WV—has a very
serious doctor shortage. We have one of the
Last January, the President issued Muslim Ban 1.0,
which blocked travel to the US for people from seven And Venezuela as a country is not banned in any
highest concentrations of physicians from the
countries targeting by the Muslim travel bans
majority Muslim nations. The ACLU and others were
able to get that blocked in the courts. Then President
meaningful sense. Only certain Venezuelan
government officials and their families are affected,
in the country. Doctors in WV from the
countries targeted by the original Muslim ban Trump issued Muslim Ban 2.0, which was somewhat and those individuals are only barred from obtaining
have 210,000 appointments each year. Where
would our state be without immigrants?
Myth: Immigrants don’t pay taxes.
Truth: Immigrants do pay taxes. Our state,
which is seemingly always in a financial crisis,
needs tax revenue. Immigrant-led households
in WV pay $125 million in federal taxes and
$51.9 million in state and local taxes. And our
tiny undocumented community pays taxes
too—$5.1 million in state and local taxes
annually.
Immigrants make our state better. And it is
our responsibility to correct people when they
make false claims to the contrary. Immigrants
are in a tough environment in WV. The small
population often makes immigrants feel as
though they have a target on their backs; it
also leads to a lack of community supports.
Therefore, since the election ACLU-WV has
been focusing on providing support to
immigrant communities and lifting immigrant
voices too often silenced in our state.
19 | WV Immigrants Cont. WV Immigrants Cont. | 20
Refugees and Temporary Ice Raids
Protected Status As discussed above, the undocumented population in
There are 65 million people displaced in the world. WV is very small. So, with all of the other Trump
That is the highest number ever. Yet the Trump attacks on civil liberties, we did not think ACLU-WV
administration has only agreed to take on 45,000 would be dealing with ICE raids as a major part of
refugees for the year; that is the lowest number ever. our work in WV. We were wrong.
As of March 2, 2018, only 8,728 refugees have arrived
so far in Fiscal Year 2018, far behind schedule for There has been an incredible increase in ICE activity
even the Administration's own historically number of in WV since Trump became president. ICE raids
45,000 per year. seem to happen in waves. We hear about a number
of raids for a few weeks and then they seem to die
Prior to the massive reduction in refugees in the US, down. A month or two later, we’ll have a couple of
we were supposed to get refugees resettled in West weeks where we hear about a lot of raids again. That
Virginia. The WV Interfaith Refugee Ministries was seems to be the pattern.
approved as a resettlement agency by the State Depart-
ment in December of 2016, and refugees were The first wave of raids started in late February of
supposed to be resettled in Charleston. Then the 2017. We were contacted about two workplace raids
Trump administration pulled the rug out from under in Berkeley County. We heard about others around
tourist and temporary business visas. In contrast,
WVIRM, the City of Charleston, and, of course, refu- the state in the following days. We obtained statistics
nearly every single person from the Muslim-majority
gees around the world who are facing the direst of of the ICE activity and found out that there were 248 grant population, it simply doesn’t have the community
countries is barred from getting a green card, no
circumstances. people detained for suspected immigration violations supports for immigrants that other states have. WV
matter what family, business, or other U.S. connec-
tions he or she has. during that two-week period in PA, DE and WV, doesn’t have a single staffed organization dedicating
The Trump administration has also dramatically which is a very high number. solely to advocacy for immigrants’ rights. As a result,
reduced the scope of the Temporary Protected Status immigrants in WV can feel isolated and targeted.
The total numbers underscore the scope of suffering
(TPS) program. TPS gives people who come from Of the 248 people detained in those three states, 42 This is a community that often does not know who it
the new ban will impose, and the hugely disproportion-
countries where environmental disaster, armed conflict were from WV. There are more than 40 times more can trust. Having such a small undocumented
ate impact it will have on Muslims. According to an
or other extraordinary circumstances might place them undocumented immigrants in PA and DE than in WV. population leaves people in WV feeling more vulnera-
analysis of the number of U.S. visas granted by catego-
in danger, permission to legally live and work in the Yet, more than 1/6 of the people detained were from ble.
ry in 2016, the new ban would bar tens of thousands of
U.S. Approximately 435,000 immigrants from 10 WV. Why were such a high proportion of West
individuals from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Soma-
countries have been granted TPS. Virginians being detained? We have been working very hard to build an immi-
lia annually from obtaining green cards.
grants’ rights coalition in WV. It is a slow process to
In the last few months, the Trump administration has We discovered that the vast majority of detentions in build this infrastructure from the ground up. We have
Many of these are people coming to the U.S. to join
let TPS expire for Sudan, Haiti, Nicaragua and El WV have been what ICE calls “collateral targets.” held know your rights events for immigrants. We have
their husbands, wives, parents, and children who are
Salvador. Those countries account for 327,000 TPS When ICE raids a workplace, it has primary been building relationships with immigrant communi-
citizens or lawful permanent residents. These families
recipients—more than 75% of all people in the US with targets—usually individuals who have either been ties and with those entities that have are connected to
would be separated indefinitely. By contrast, the
TPS. The Trump administration will make determina- convicted of a crime or have an outstanding deporta- immigrant communities.
impact on people from countries newly included in the
tions on Honduras, Nepal, Somalia and Yemen later tion order. Once ICE enters a workplace, it can then
ban is small: 40 immigrants from Chad can expected
this year, which account for approximately 100,500 question other “collateral targets”—people who just Most importantly, we are working to help people from
to be blocked, nine from North Korea, and none at all
TPS recipients (nearly all of the rest). happen to be there—about their status. In WV, these the impacted communities speak out and lead the
from Venezuela.
collateral targets tend to reveal their documentation movement. We have worked with immigrants to tell
Most TPS recipients have lived in the US for decades. status, which can lead to detention and then deporta- their stories. We have helped elevate important
Courts in Hawai’i and Maryland quickly issued injunc-
Many of these people have US citizen children and tion. In other states, collateral targets are more voices. And we are helping to support leaders from
tions blocking most enforcement of Version 3.0. How-
spouses who are lawful permanent residents. In likely to know that they have a right to remain silent targeted communities in a place where their voices
ever, in December, the Supreme Court lifted the injunc-
certain cases, people will be torn from their families and they exercise that right. In WV, targeted commu- traditionally are not heard.
tions and Muslim Ban 3.0 was put into effect while the
and returned to countries that are simply not safe. nities don’t seem to know their rights as well as in
court cases work their way through the system.
For example, Haiti was granted TPS status following surrounding states. We need to change the conversation about immigration
the devastating 2010 earthquake. Recovery has been in WV. It will take time, but we will eventually
The Supreme Court is expected to take up the issue in
significantly slowed by a cholera outbreak and more We believe that, because WV has such a small immi- succeed.
the coming months. The stakes of any decision are
recently significant hurricane damage. Nonetheless,
exceptionally high. It could mean the difference
the US has ended TPS and 60,000 Haitians have to
between whether a grandmother in Syria ever gets to in WV would only improve our community. We desperately need people to come to WV. And as we know,
leave the US or risk deportation.
see her grandchild here in West Virginia or not. It refugees and TPS recipients, like other immigrants, add so much to our state.
will determine whether families are torn apart. We
Offering our community as a safe haven for people
will continue to fight this with everything we have. We have worked closely with WVIRM to lobby our federal representatives over refugee and TPS issues. Addi-
fleeing the horrors of war, persecution and natural
disaster would undoubtedly improve the lives of tionally we have successfully fought really heinous anti-refugee legislation that was introduced in the state legis-
refugees and TPS recipients. But those seeking shelter lature. We will continue to work to make WV a welcoming home for those in need.
21 | WV Immigrants Cont.
Dreamers
In September, the Trump Administration announced
that it was ending the Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA) program. DACA granted legal status
and work permits to nearly 800,000 Dreamers, undocu-
mented immigrant young people who came to the US
as children and met certain rigorous criteria.
Six years ago, the US government made a deal with
immigrant youth—if you pass a criminal background
check, you can live here, study here and work here.
The Trump administration went back on that promise.
The President threw the lives and futures of 800,000
young people and their families into disarray.
Currently, the federal courts have blocked the
termination of
DACA, but that
could end at any
point. We need
Congress to pass a
clean DREAM Act
now. There are not
many DACA recipi-
ents in state of WV.
But they are here.
They are our friends
and neighbors. And the President’s unilateral revoca-
tion of DACA has upended their lives. We’ve been
working closely with one DACA recipient—Jackie Loza-
no—to tell her story and advocate for a legislative
solution to the crisis manufactured by President
Trump.
Jackie grew up in North Carolina, but now lives in
Charleston. She was a good student in high school.
Her family was very poor, but she knew that she
wanted to go to college. She knew that the only way
she would be able to afford college would be if she got
scholarships and grants. Jackie’s guidance counselor
had her fill out a form to help get aid for college. The
form asked Jackie for her social security number,
which she didn’t know. She went home and asked her
mother. That’s when Jackie’s world turned upside
down.
Jackie’s mother informed her that she did not have a
social security number. That she had been born in
Mexico and was not a US citizen, and that she was, in
fact, undocumented. Jackie had no idea. Her mother
brought her to America when Jackie was two years
old. She had been a very ill baby and needed medical
treatment. Her mother was able to get her that
treatment in the US.
Jackie had no memory of Mexico. She had never been
to Mexico since coming to the US. And while she
speaks Spanish, she struggles to communicate with
relatives in Mexico on the phone as they speak too
quickly for her. Jackie is American in absolutely every
way except for a piece of paper.
When Jackie found out that she was undocumented,
she fell into a depression. Her grades fell. She gave
up. And then President Obama announced the DACA
program. Suddenly, Jackie had hope. She was 16
years old and applied for DACA status on her own.
She raised the money for the application by getting $5
or $10 from community sponsors and from her mom
selling tamales on the street corner. With DACA,
Jackie was able to legally work and was protected
from being deported.
Jackie now has a beautiful one-year old baby boy. He
is an American citizen.
Without congressional action, Jackie risks losing the
ability to earn a living to care for her child. She risks
being deported to a country that she has no memory
of. And she risks being torn apart from her son and
her partner.
We’ve worked to elevate Jackie’s voice into the
statewide discussion around immigration. We have
produced a video telling her story, helped her set up
interviews with the media, and gotten her speaking
engagements around the state. We’ve gone with
Jackie to meet with Senator Manchin (we’ve met with
the entire WV congressional delegation on the issue),
and we’ve collected hundreds of post-
cards from West Virginians demand-
ing that Congress pass a clean
DREAM Act.
We need to act now to protect
Jackie and the hundreds of
thousands of people in her situa-
tion.
Prepare to Fight Back
Our Imminent Struggle to Protect
Women’s Health and the WV
Constitution
Senate Joint Resolution 12 (SJR
12), passed out of the legislature
on March 5, and will be on the
ballot in the November election as
“Amendment No. 1, No Constitu-
tional right to abortion Amend-
ment”. If a majority of the elector-
ate votes for it, the West Virginia
Constitution will be amended to
read “Nothing in this Constitution
secures or protects a right to
abortion or requires the funding of
abortion.”
This is the single most extreme
attack on women’s right to basic
bodily autonomy in the history of
the state. If this amendment were
to pass, the West Virginia Consti-
tution would not protect the right
of a woman to have an abor-
tion—even if she was raped or her
life was in danger. This is an
attempt to completely redefine the
basic, fundamental rights that are
protected by our Constitution. It
is an attempt to amend our Consti-
tution to discriminate against
women.
The good news is that we all have
the opportunity to vote this radical
change to our Constitution down.
The authors of the proposed
amendment have not tried to hide
its radical nature. Only 17 words
long, the language of the amend-
ment is crystal clear. The Amend-
ment’s straightforward language
should help us in explaining its
incredible breadth and potentially
dangerous consequences to West
Virginia voters.
The WV Constitution is 146 years
old. If Amendment No. 1 were to
pass we would change our 146
year old Constitution from a
document that enumerates and
protects our rights, into a docu-
ment that tells us what rights we
don’t have. That is a radical
change to our governing docu-
ment. It would undercut the basic
traditions that form the basis of
American-style liberal democracy.
And we believe that if we can
educate West Virginia voters as to
the extreme nature of this
proposed amendment, they will
vote no to protect our state Consti-
tution.
If this amendment were to pass,
the consequences for women in our
state would be dire. The most
immediate consequence would be
that poor and working class
women would no longer be able to
receive Medicaid funding even for
medically necessary abortions. We
live in a very poor state with only
one abortion clinic, and this
restriction would result in even
less access to abortion care than
already exists here. Exercising
your constitutional rights should
not depend on your income. And
without access to safe abortions,
women will use unsafe methods to
terminate pregnancies.
Longer term, the consequences
could be even more stark. By the
plain language of this proposed
amendment there would be no
protections—under any circum-
stances—for a right to an abortion
under our state constitution. Of
Women’s Awareness | 22
course, under Roe v. Wade, our
federal Constitution does include
abortion rights. However, the
people who are pushing SJR 12 are
the exact same people who have
been maniacally attempting to get
Roe overturned for decades.
Amendment No. 1 is part of the
master strategy of these enemies of
choice. They want this constitu-
tional amendment in place in WV
in preparation for the day they’ve
been working towards for the past
45 years---the day Roe is
overturned.
If this constitutional amendment
passes and Roe is overturned,
performing an abortion would
immediately become a crime in
WV. An old law is still on the
books in WV that makes it a
felony, punishable by 3 –10 years,
to perform an abortion.
The stakes in this fight could not
be higher. This is a direct attack on
our Constitution. It is a direct
attack on poor and working class
women. And it is an attack on
women’s right to make personal
healthcare decisions with their
doctors.
But we are prepared to stand up
for women and protect our constitu-
tion. We are planning the biggest
grassroots political campaign WV
has ever seen. And with the help
of our members and supporters, we
will win this ballot fight in
November.
23 | Women’s Awareness Cont.
The Threat to Medicaid Funding for
Medically Necessary Abortions
To understand the threat to
Medicaid funding, you first have to
understand the history. In a
special legislative session in May of
1993, the West Virginia legislature
passed Senate Bill 2, which
included a provision codified in
Chapter 9, Article 2, Section 11 of
the WV code. The provision
prohibited the use of Medicaid
funds for abortions except where
the abortion was necessary to save
the life of the woman, if the fetus
was not expected to be delivered,
or if the pregnancy was the result
of incest or a rape that had been
reported to the police.
That law was challenged and in
September of 1993 the West
Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals
(WVSCA) issued a decision called
Women’s Health Center of West
Virginia v. Panepinto (or the Pane-
pinto decision for short). In that
decision the WVSCA started with
the long-recognized principle that
the West Virginia Constitution
provides greater protections than
the federal Constitution. The
WVSCA went on to say that
because the WV Constitution
provides for the “common benefit,
protection and security of the
people”, when they are acting to
provide medical care for the poor,
the state must do so in a neutral
way. Applying these principles to
the rights of privacy and equal
protection, the Court held that
state funds could not be withheld
from people seeking “medically
necessary abortions.” The law was
invalidated, however it remained in
code.
The result is that West Virginia is
one of 17 states that allows state
funds to be used for “medically
necessary” abortions. In practice,
abortion providers seeking Medicaid
reimbursement fill out a
standardized DHHR form
certifying that the abortion is
medically necessary which includes
checking off one of several broad
medical justifications.
Per DHHR’s own testimony these
certifications are very rarely
reviewed. That lack of review has
raised the ire of some who charge
DHHR with paying for “elective”
abortions (we’ll come back to that
term). Most of us have had the
maddening experience of an insur-
er refusing to authorize, or worse,
denying a claim for a medical
procedure because a bureaucrat
with a profit-motive has decided,
over the judgment of your own
physician, that the procedure was
not medically necessary.
Particularly in a topic as private
and personal as abortion, and
particularly when the bureaucrat
is a government official, we should
be proud of the fact that our state
is not engaging in that sort of
behavior. Their deference to the
judgment of treating physicians
and the will of patients should be
a example, not an aberration.
The idea that Medicaid should not
be used for abortion is derived
from the idea that some people
have a moral objection to abortion,
and that their tax dollars shouldn’t
be used for that procedure. That’s
fundamentally illogical; people hold
strong moral and personal
objections to all sorts of things
that public funds are used for: war,
drug enforcement, immigration
enforcement, environmental
regulation, and public defenders to
name just a few. Even specific to
medicine, people hold moral
objections to blood transfusions,
vaccines, and even basic
medications - still we would find it
absurd to refuse to fund these
things because some have an
objection to it. Indeed, the morali-
ty of abortion itself is not nearly
as clear cut as opponents would
make it out to be. First, let us
acknowledge that different
religious traditions, philosophies,
medical, and scientific fields hold
different opinions about the morali-
ty and justifications. It was
precisely this plurality of opinions
that led Justice Blackmun to write
in Roe v. Wade, “[w]hen those
trained in the respective disci-
plines of medicine, philosophy, and
theology are unable to arrive at
any consensus, the judiciary, at
this point in the development of
man's knowledge, is not in a
position to speculate as to the
answer.”
Nonetheless, legislation to over-
turn the Panepinto decision and
prohibit Medicaid funds has been
introduced regularly since the
decision. It has never been
passed, because it is broadly
recognized that with a WVSCA
decision directly on point, such law
would easily be held as unconstitu-
tional under the WV Constitution.
The obvious solution for the oppo-
nents of choice was to amend the
Constitution.
Women’s Awareness Cont. | 24
Amendment No. 1 Goes Well Beyond Prohibiting
the Use of Medicaid Funds for Abortion
Proponents argue that the only effect of Amendment No. 1 would be to overturn the Panepinto decision and
return the law to the 1993 law. This is patently untrue. As discussed above, the most immediate effect of
Amendment No. 1 would be to over turn Panepinto, however, longer term, it could open the door to any number
of restrictions, including criminalization of abortion.
Simply comparing the language of Amendment No. 1
with the language of HJR 111, another proposed
amendment that did not pass the WV legislature,
shows that the claims that Amendment No. 1 only
relates to Medicaid funding are false. HJR 111 reads
“[n]o public funds of this State may be used to pay for
abortions, except when the procedure is necessary to
save the life of the mother.” The language of HJR 111
very clearly only would have prohibited state funds to
be used for abortion. The legislature chose not to pass
HJR 111, and instead it passed SJR 12 (now Amend-
ment No. 1), which reads, in part, “[n]othing in this
Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion….”
When the language of Amendment No. 1 is compared
to HJR 111, it is clear that the claim that Amendment
No. 1 only deals with Medicaid funding is untrue.
Amendment No. 1 Is Incredibly • Where the mother was certain to die
absent an abortion?
Extreme
• Where she had a condition with 75%
chance of dying? Or 50%? Or 25%?
As SJR 12 (now Amendment No. 1) was working its way through the
legislature, Democratic legislators offered a number of amendments. In • What if it was 5%? 1 out of 20 times
the Senate, they attempted to amend SJR 12 to include exceptions for she would die. Would you be
rape, incest and health of the woman. Those proposed amendments were comfortable taking those odds?
voted down. As a result, if Amendment No. 1 were to pass, the West
Virginia Constitution would offer no protections for the right to an abor- • What if it was 1% - only 1 out of 100
times. Not a lot of people would
tion under any circumstances. The state Constitution would not protect engage in an activity where 1 out of 100
young girls who were raped by their father, resulting in a pregnancy. And times resulted in death. Fewer still if
the state Constitution would not protect a woman who would die if she the activity involved 9 months of
was forced to carry a pregnancy to term. discomfort; restrictions on what you
could eat, drink and do; immense pain;
and subsequently years of social and
Proponents of Amendment No. 1 argue that it’s okay that the amendment
financial responsibilities. Would you
does not provide exceptions for health, rape or incest because federal feel comfortable with the state telling
protections are sufficient. However, these are the exact same people who someone that they would have to
are working tirelessly to overturn Roe and all federal protections for accept that risk?
abortion. As the plain language of Amendment No. 1 shows, their
ultimate goal is to give politicians the power to ban abortion under any • In 2017, the US has a maternal
mortality rate of 26.4 maternal deaths
circumstance. for every 100,000 births. Do you feel
comfortable telling people they must
That most abortion laws contain exceptions for the life of the woman or accept those risks? What if you’re a
fetus and exceptions for rape and incest belies the understanding that, black woman, where, you would face a
maternal mortality rate of 43.5 deaths
even among opponents of abortion, some are considered more moral than
those deemed to be “elective.” But these are not bright line rules. per 100,000 versus 12.7 per 100,000
for white women?
Consider - even for opponents of abortion - would an abortion be justified:
25 | Women’s Awareness Cont.
And it isn’t just the life of the woman. What about
potential health complications? How high a risk and
how severe do the complications have to be for you to
feel that an abortion is justifiable?
What about rape? Notwithstanding abhorrent rhetoric
about pregnancies from rape being “gifts from god” or
the ridiculous belief that the “body can just shut that
down”, most people are sympathetic to the notion that
a woman should not be forced to carry the result of a
rape to term. But if we’ve learned nothing else from
the “Me Too” movement, hopefully we have learned
that not all rape involves being physically held down.
Would you feel comfortable with the state requiring a
woman to carry a pregnancy to term where:
• A 12-year old is impregnated by a 46-year old man who
has convinced her he’s her “boyfriend”? What if he’s 22?
Or 16? What if she’s 15?
• What about a situation where a woman is impregnated by
a man when she is too drunk to give consent. Does it
matter if they’re dating? Or married?
• What about a survivor of domestic violence who does not
resist only because she wishes to avoid violence?
If a woman says she was assaulted or forced and is
pregnant as a consequence, are you comfortable decid-
ing if the assault was sufficiently “rape-like” to justify
terminating the pregnancy? Are you comfortable with
the government making that determination?
The factors that lead a person to chose abortion are
complicated. Even the most “medically-necessary”
abortion is ultimately elective. And even the most
“elective” abortion is medically-necessary in some
sense. There is no moral consensus on abortion to
begin with, and when you begin to examine the indi-
vidual circumstances, it becomes clear that every
woman will have a different line on when an abortion
is and is not justified for themselves. And it is precise-
ly because of that, that it is not appropriate for the
state to intervene.
Amendment No. 1 Is a
Direct Assault on Women’s
Bodily Autonomy
Proponents of Amendment No. 1 will argue that it, by
itself, would not interfere with any woman’s right to
obtain an abortion. But that is untrue. First, as
discussed above, it would interfere with poor and
working class women’s ability to access abortion care.
Moreover, if the West Virginia Constitution is so
amended, there is little reason to think that the West
Virginia legislature wouldn’t pass additional legislation
pursuant to the amendment.
The introduction and advancement of legislation aimed
at chipping away at reproductive rights has become a
regular feature of the WV legislature under both
parties. With no constraints under the WV Constitu-
tion, abortion opponents would be emboldened to push
even more extreme legislation, up to and including,
criminalizing abortion again (although WV code still
has a statute criminalizing abortion on the books).
Under the language of Amendment No. 1, the legisla-
ture could conceivably ban contraception that stops the
implantation of fertilized eggs, fertility treatments that
result in fertilized eggs that are later destroyed (like in
vitro fertilization), or criminalize miscarriages if it’s
determined that behavior of the mother was a cause of
the miscarriage.
Currently, none of that is possible because federal law
would protect against all of that. But abortion oppo-
nents have been clear. They are hell-bent on overturn-
ing Roe v. Wade.
As part of their grand plan to overturn Roe, opponents
of choice have been working to pack the federal judicia-
ry. President Obama left office with over 100 judicial
vacancies, including one on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Those vacancies existed because Senate Republicans
used their majority to regularly refuse to hold confir-
Women’s Awareness Cont. | 26
mation hearings. The vacancies have rapidly been filled by President
Trump, often times with barely-qualified zealots. This is an attempt
to hijack the judicial system, putting Roe v. Wade in extreme peril.
If Roe falls, and Amendment No. 1 passes, West Virginian women
cannot expect any legal protections as the legislature has repeatedly
displayed open hostility towards abortion rights. Indeed, if Roe falls,
West Virginia already has a criminal statute on books that the
legislature has refused to repeal for 45 legislative sessions. If Roe
falls and Amendment No. 1 passes, that crime would presumably go
right back into effect.
Abortion is a good, and normal medical procedure. Many people
today have forgotten the legacy of criminalized abortions: the perse-
cution of women for exercising control of their bodies, abandoned
babies, and back-alley abortions where women died. But numerous
studies have looked at American life since Roe v. Wade and the
availability of safe, legal abortion has been linked to everything from
better maternal and neonatal health, to lower crime, to greater
workforce participation.
So, ultimately, it’s about time we stop catering to a vocal group of
extremists because they aren’t comfortable with what is a totally
Photo credit: Billy Wolfe
normal medical procedure. And make no mistake, abortion is
normal--nearly 1 in 3 women (and some trans men) will have an
abortion in their lifetime. That means it’s almost inevitable that
people you know and love have had abortions.
Join Us in Defeating this Outrageous
Attack on WV Women
We must stand up for women in West Virginia right now. We are in for the fight of our lives over
Amendment No. 1.
Along with coalition partners, ACLU-WV is planning an unprecedented grassroots campaign to defeat
Amendment No. 1. Outside groups will be flooding money into the state to undermine our Constitution and
WV women’s reproductive rights. So we will need to mobilize our members and supporters for this ballot
fight in a way never seen in our state’s history.
Working with our coalition partners, we will be engaging citizens across the state to ensure that people
understand the radical nature of the proposed amendment. We will use every tool at our disposal to expose
the dangers of Amendment No. 1. We will be canvassing all over the state and we will be speaking with
voters in all 55 counties. We will be reaching out to new voters and supporting groups engaging in voter
registration drives. Protecting our constitution and protecting women’s health will undoubtedly be the top
priority of the ACLU-WV between now and election day.
If we are successful in educating the public to understand the extreme implications of this radical
amendment, we will prevail at the ballot in November. But that is only possible if we have a grassroots
army of supporters to help spread our message and get out the vote. Therefore, we are calling on you to
follow us on social media, help financially support our work, and/ or sign up to volunteer with us by
emailing us at mail@acluwv.org.
We need you now more than ever. Together, we will win.
 Voter ID Law | 28

WV You will be asked for ID during the May primary

election and during the November general election.
Under the newly effective law, the following forms of
registered to vote unless they affirmatively opt out.
 
In 2017 there was an attempt to dramatically reduce

Voter
ID are valid: the list of acceptable ID’s, which ACLU-WV worked
hard to kill, however the automatic voter registration
program was delayed until 2019. We will be prepared
• West Virginia driver’s license or ID card
to fight any legislative attempts to make the voter ID
• Driver’s license issued by another state law more strict or any attempt to further delay or

ID
terminate the automatic voter registration program
• U.S. Passport during the 2019 legislative session.
• Photo employee identification card issued by the U.S.
Government or State of West Virginia The ACLU-WV takes a strong stand against voter ID

Law Is
• Student identification card issued by an institution of higher
education in West Virginia or high school in West Virginia
• Military identification card with photo issued by the United
laws in any form.  There has always been a tension in
America between the ideal that every person has an
equal say in choosing their representatives and the
reality which has often restricted access to the
political process for marginalized communities.  Voter

Now
States ID laws are the most recent iteration of the latter.  
• Concealed carry permit with a photograph Certain groups, often marginalized, are less likely to
have certain types of identification and are restricted
• Medicare or Social Security card Birth certificate from voting.  

in
• Voter registration card issued by a county clerk in the State of
West Virginia
• Hunting or fishing license issued by the State of West Virginia
Even when voter ID laws are more permissive, like
West Virginia’s, the mere presence of a voter ID law
on the books can suppress votes. Many voters do not
even try to go to the polls because they presume only

Effect
• ID card issued by the West Virginia Supplemental Nutrition a drivers’ license or other photo ID that they do not
Assistance Program have is required.

• ID card issued by the West Virginia Temporary Assistance for We need people in WV to understand the broad array
Needy Families program of identification acceptable under the WV law. Educa-
tion is vital to counteracting the suppression.  Recent-
• West Virginia Medicaid card ly, Secretary of State Mac Warner brought together a
In 2016, the WV • Bank or debit card group of stakeholders from across the state and across
the political spectrum, including ACLU-WV, to engage

Legislature passed
• Utility bill issued within six months of the date of the election them in voter education. We have taken on the chal-
• Bank statement issued within six months of the date of the lenge, working to educate voters of the new ID
requirements. We will continue these education efforts

a voter ID law that

election
through the general election this fall. While we still
• Health insurance card  oppose the voter ID law, we are working to alleviate

went into effect on

the harm done by its passage.
Alternatively, a voter who doesn’t have any of the  
above forms of ID can have any adult who has known
January 1, 2018. them for at least 6 months and has a valid photo ID
accompany them to the polls and sign an affidavit
attesting that the voter is who they claim to be.  
Finally, a poll worker who knows the voter can allow
them to vote without any form of ID.
 
The law also required the Secretary of State to imple-
ment a voter education component and develop a
program for issuing free ID’s.  Finally, the law creat-
ed an automatic voter registration program which
means people who go to the DMV to get a license, ID,
or to update their address will automatically be
29 | Black Identity Extremists House of Hagar | 30

Black Identity We reminded the FBI that the Constitution prohibits

the government from targeting people because of their

Extremists
Last August, an FBI intelligence assessment was
leaked taking aim at a new classifications dubbed
racial identity or because they take part in First
Amendment-protected activities, including protesting
racial inequity and injustices. We expressed our
concern that the FBI has created this new “Black
Identity Extremist” designation to enhance govern-
ment scrutiny of Black community organizers, includ-

“Black Identity Extremists.” The FBI assessment
labeled these groups as dangerous and a “very likely
threat” to law enforcement personnel. The document,
which was not intended to be released to the public,
raises significant concerns that the FBI could unfairly
House
ing people involved in the nonviolent Black Lives
Matter network.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has recorded at
least 37 deadly radical rightwing terrorist attacks

target Black community leaders who are constitutional-
ly exercising their 1st Amendment rights.
This wouldn’t be the first time the FBI or other federal
agencies have unjustly marked peaceful African Ameri-
of
after the Oklahoma City bombing which killed 168
people in 1995; since then, 77 law enforcement
officials and innocent civilians have been killed by
anti-government paranoiacs or white extremists,
including the nine people killed at Emanuel AME

can activists. For decades, the federal government
has spied on Black leaders across the
political spectrum, including A.
Philip Randolph, Thurgood Mar-
shall, Angela Davis, Marcus
Garvey, W.E.B. Du Bois, Martin
Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X,
and Jesse Jackson. During
the civil rights era, the FBI
infiltrated and spied on the
meetings of civil rights
groups, and disrupted the
personal lives of virtually
every major Black leader in
the United States. According
to a report from then-FBI
Assistant Director William
Sullivan to J. Edgar Hoover, in
surveilling Martin Luther King, Jr.,
the FBI sought “to take him off his
pedestal and to reduce him completely in
influence” with the result being that “the Negroes
will be left without a national leader of sufficiently
compelling personality to steer them in the proper
direction.”
In order to prevent the mistakes of the past we, along
with a coalition of concerned West Virginia organiza-
tions, decided to take action.
Together we sent a letter to the FBI rebuking its
approach and encouraging it to take extra precautions
to ensure that racism isn’t a factor in any attempts to
target so-called “Black Identity Extremists.” We are
committed to holding law enforcement agencies
accountable and will be watching closely for any
actions that invoke constitutional concerns.
Church in Charleston, SC and, more recent-
ly, Heather Heyer at a white suprema-
cist rally in Charlottesville.
So although the majority of
deadly extremist attacks in the
United States over the past
15 years have been perpetrat-
ed by white supremacists,
the FBI appears to be
allocating an inordinate
amount of resources to
surveil African Americans
based on a purported
ideology linked to their
“Black identity.” We’ve seen
this before. We must not
permit the racism so deeply
prevalent in our society, or the
tacit approval of white supremacy
from our country’s highest office, to
result in the federal government once
again targeting African American leaders and
activists through unlawful surveillance.
We must not repeat the shameful mistakes of our
past. We must recognize the racism that still infects
all of our institutions—including the FBI—and the
biases present within each of us that influence the
decisions we make. It would be illegal and immoral for
law enforcement to target people because of their
race. Based on the past actions of federal law enforce-
ment, we know that we all must be vigilant to fight
discriminatory impulses. For that reason, we encour-
aged the FBI to take extra precautions to ensure the
legitimacy and necessity of any attempts to target
groups classified as “Black Identity Extremists.”
As we informed the FBI, history will be watching.
Hagar
What happens when the right to practice your religion in your own home is threatened by the government?
The American Civil Liberties Union of West Virginia steps in. We represented Catholic Worker Kate Marshall
in successfully securing a permit to continue using her Wheeling home, known as the House of Hagar, to
provide hospitality to those in need in accordance with her religious beliefs.
BACKGROUND Article 3, Section 15 of the West Virginia
Following the Catholic Worker Movement tradition, Constitution; and both federal and state civil rights
Kate opens her home to individuals in need for law. We must be vigilant to ensure that the
weekly dinners and laundry service among other government cannot use generally applicable laws, like
efforts to support the community. In 2016, the zoning laws, to infringe upon people’s religious
Wheeling Planning Commission required Kate and practice.
the House of Hagar to obtain a permit due to
concerns raised about parking and other neighbor- As the United States Supreme Court made clear in
hood issues. The continuation of the permit had been West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette nearly
questioned by the Commission after neighbors came 75 years ago, “The very purpose of a Bill of Rights
forward complaining about the individuals utilizing was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes
the space. An initial report issued by the city last of political controversy, to place them beyond the
summer recommended withdrawing the permit. reach of majorities and officials and to establish them
as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's
OUTCOME right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a
After a thorough investigation spurred on by the free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and
ACLU-WV, the Commission voted unanimously to other fundamental rights may not be submitted to
allow Kate to continue living her faith. vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.”
WHY IT MATTERS Kate lives her faith in a truly inspirational way and
we are proud to help House of Hagar continue its
Freedom of religion is one of our foundational mission to make West Virginia an even better and
constitutional principles, and is protected by the more welcoming place than it is already.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution;