San Diego Union-Tribune (Sunday)
ACLU’S TOP ATTORNEY IN SAN DIEGO DEPARTS AFTER 16 YEARS
David Loy will take post with statewide free-speech group
When David Loy was named the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties in April 2006, he joined an organization that had six staff members and was involved in a long list of legal cases and political causes.
Some 16 years later Loy is leaving his post to take a job as the legal director for the First Amendment Coalition, a statewide group that advocates for speech, access and expression rights of news media and citizens. His final day at the ACLU, which has now more than three dozen staff members including several lawyers, was Tuesday.
A graduate of Northwestern University School of Law, Loy had worked at a nonprofit law firm in Spokane that focused on police accountability, public access to government records and environmental issues. He had previously worked as a public defender in Spokane as well.
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Q:
In the past 15 years San Diego has changed, demographically and politically. Have you seen a shift in people’s acceptance of the kinds of civil rights issues you advocate for? A:
I can’t speak to popular perceptions. I don’t have an opinion poll on the ACLU right now. I will say certainly in my 16 years I’ve seen a lot of positive change locally. The ACLU affiliate locally has been able to work constructively with elected leaders in ways it could not in the past because the politics of an Diego has changed and the elected leaders have changed.
I’ll give you one example. My predecessor Jordan Budd helped lead a challenge to San Diego County’s Project 100%, a program by which San Diego County forced every person applying for Cal Works benefits to submit to unannounced home inspections by law enforcement officers.
Jordan with co -counsel challenged that as a violation of Fourth Amendment. Unfortunately we did not prevail in federal courts. A few years ago, we launched a new challenge to Project 100% under state law, claiming it was a violation of state law that prohibits unjustified disparate impact in state-funded programs. And again we unfortunately lost that challenge in state court.
But based on the record and research and the investigation and data we gathered and built on and others had gathered, we made a strong case why the program was not only unjust, unfair, racially biased and an aspect of systemic racism but also was not cost effective and useful in achieving its purported goal of preventing welfare fraud. As a result of advocacy by my colleagues in our advocacy department, and the relationships they had built with the new majority on the county Board of Supervisors, the county Board of Supervisors unanimously voted to repeal Project 100%. Which is an action
I think would have been unthinkable 10 or 15 years ago. Even five years ago. Q:
You are a civil rights lawyer in a city just a handful of miles from the border. A lot of the ACLU’S work in the courtroom and outside involves border issues. In all the years you worked there the border has changed quite a bit. What is the state of the border in SD? A:
I think it depends on who you ask. For many people — particularly people who have deep roots on both sides of the border, particularly communities of color Latino community — it is a vibrant binational community and should be thought of as one region. I think that diversity and that community ought to be seen as a strength and appreciated as such.
There is unfortunately another view of the border, which I believe is rooted in racism, xenophobia and fear, which sees the border as a wall that must be maintained at all costs. I think not only is that unethical, immoral and racist, I think it is just plain impossible.
So I think how you see the border depends on who you ask. Many people who live here see it as a thriving binational community that should be treated with dignity and respect. And I hope over time that view will prevail. Q:
What is the biggest challenge or threat to civil liberties you see now to your successor? What is the biggest fire they will have to put out? ? A:
Nationally, the increasing tolerance for authoritarianism and the increasing disrespect for legitimate and peaceful democratic transfer of power is terrifying. This country has always had authoritarian movements, this country has always had wanna-be authoritarians. What is terrifying is how that has become mainstreamed and accepted within significant segments of the U.S. Locally and fortunately I think California has been relatively progressive on those issues. California is far from perfect and has many significant issues my ALCU colleagues will continue to fight, but those are better fights to have than the fights for basic respect for basic voting rights. Q:
Why leave now? A:
I’ve been there for 16 years. FAC presented an opportunity for me to go both broader and deeper. This affiliate is responsible for work in San Diego and Imperial counties. So broader on a statewide level, and deeper into my first love in the law, which is defending free speech and people’s right to know. That’s been one of my deepest passions in the law, freedom of expression and access and transparency.
greg.moran@sduniontribune.com