First
Amendment Foundation Annual Letter 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
2006
Dear friends of dissent:
NCARL NEWS
Defending Dissent Foundation
This will be the last newsletter we put out as NCARL. Starting in January
we will be the Defending Dissent Foundation. New name, new address: 1718
M Street, NW, #178, Washington, DC 20036. We will have a larger board,
combining the talents both of the First Amendment Foundation and NCARL.
Your contributions will be tax deductible as they have been with the First
Amendment Foundation.
That’s what’s different. What remains the same is our commitment
to defend the right of dissent, particularly from government efforts to
disrupt, discredit and neutralize it. We will continue to put out this
concise monthly letter focused on the key policy, legislative, and activist
issues related to the right to demonstrate, to speak out, to seek political
change. We will promote our books: First Amendment Felon
and Terrorism & the Constitution through
book readings and additional promotion and educational tours thru the
country. We will take on specific projects, support or oppose particular
legislation. We will produce an educational campaign which affirms the
First Amendment rights of demonstrators and will promote the adoption
of local laws and policies consistent with that constitutional right.
The other key is you all. We are not predominantly a lobby group –
you are the lobbyists. You are the educators in your community. You bring
us in to talk about the key role of dissent in the U.S., the need to protect
dissenters from government efforts to silence us. Your donations make
and keep us. Make your checks to NCARL or the First Amendment Foundation
(this latter for tax deductible donations) through the end of the year
please. Thanks for donations both large and small.
And we will continue to work in Washington and around the country to share
information among groups and about other organizations. We are a small
group, but our efforts are magnified by our interconnections across bounds
of politics, religion, ethnicity and region. What we learn, we try to
share.
ELECTIONS:
Will the Government Be Held Accountable for its Acts?
The U.S. electorate has apparently elected a Democratic House and Senate,
sending a potentially powerful message to the Republican-run Executive
Branch. But will the new majority carry through people’s expectations?
First off, a little history: 1) Single party governance (see the last
6 years) typically gives the Executive Branch pretty free rein. 2) Splits
in political control sometimes yield more gridlock than action or accountability.
Gridlock can be valuable of course. But even an opposing party Congress
will not necessarily take affirmative actions either: a) to hold the Executive
to task for its overreaching, or b) to pass legislation upholding U.S.
constitutional rights.
This somewhat unexpected victory carries its own risk. There is a sense
that the Democrats have only a few agenda items – including to raise
the minimum wage, address some health insurance issues, and try to extricate
ourselves quickly and honorably from Iraq. The first is easy to enact,
the second might be expensive in the short run even if gratefully received,
and the last, not easy to accomplish from any perch, and certainly not
from Congress’ chair.
Any new party taking charge of Congress has a short window of opportunity
to pass its priority legislation. There is an expectation that the electorate
will support a few key bills that relate to the change of party, and the
opposition will not dare openly stop them. That disappears after a few
months. So if we want the Congress to address the constitutional crisis
we have unwillingly watched unfurl over the last 5 years, we have to make
it happen.
Legislative Priorities to Begin to Fix the Anti-Terrorism Mess
We have yet to see the Congress put out a list of key fixes to constitutional
abuses – to the USA Patriot Act, NSA Warrantless Wiretapping, Military
Commissions Act, etc. We could argue that a significant reason why the
Democrats were voted in is precisely to address these issues. You must
help push Congress to act. We now must begin the 10 year plan to bring
back the Constitution at least to where it was on September 11, 2001.
And then improve it from there.
We would offer the following suggestions – making no effort to be
comprehensive in the list. Feel free to add your recommendations to the
list.
There are several parts to the effort – as the departing Defense
Secretary Rumsfeld (hear the cheers) famously said – there are the
things we don’t know that we don’t know. To learn at least
some of them, Congress must investigate and hold hearings and subpoena
people. That’s where we begin on many fronts.
1. Military Commissions Act – Investigation
Congress’ beginning task is to investigate to the highest levels
who authorized torture of prisoners, and rendition of prisoners to countries
who torture. The effort now proceeding in Germany to investigate these
issues (in part with the help of the Center for Constitutional Rights-
www.ccr-ny.org) can be
imported to the U.S. Capitol. Those at the highest rank with culpability
should be prosecuted. Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT), who will head the Senate
Judiciary Committee, has requested a raft of documents from the Justice
Department on these issues.
One good resource to understand and clarify the insufficiency of the “Combatant
Status Review Trials” (Guantanamo version of trials) can be found
in the analysis by Mark Denbeaux and others of Seton Hall Law School.
The full report can be found at: http://law.shu.edu/news/final_no_hearing_hearings_report.pdf.
TO DO: Ask your Senators and Representatives in the Judiciary
Committee to investigate rendition, detention and torture engaged in and
authorized by the U.S.
and Undo Legislation
At the same time, Congress must amend the recently passed Detainee Treatment
Act and Military Commissions Act to be consistent with the Geneva Conventions,
the Magna Carta, and the U.S. Constitution. This effort should aim to
stop the U.S. from sending its prisoners to other countries to be tortured,
prohibit torture by the U.S of prisoners or detainees, and allow anyone
who is detained to file a writ of habeas corpus so as to find out on what
basis they are held prisoner. People arrested in the U.S. who are not
prisoners of war as narrowly defined, should be considered subject to
the U.S. criminal courts with all the incumbent rights.
These proposals are neither pie in the sky, nor just supported by a few
odd civil libertarians. They have broad support from the U.S. military,
conservatives, libertarians, the legal community, the international community,
and a whole bunch of civil libertarians. Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) is
working on a bill to more narrowly define the term “enemy combatants.
That’s a worthy effort. Incoming Senate Judiciary Chair Leahy will
introduce a bill to restore the right of habeas corpus – to challenge
detainees’ imprisonment – another key task.
TO DO: Support Dodd and Leahy efforts so they are as strong as
possible from the get-go – and have your Senators join as co-sponsors.
2. NSA Warrantless Wiretapping – Stop Legislation, then
Oversight, Investigation
FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, is a backstop of the
Bill of Rights – distinguishing how the government must do investigations
to develop criminal prosecutions in a constitutional way, from its intelligence
investigations that don’t typically result in prosecutions, but
sometimes do. FISA has been gutted. Now Congress must investigate how
it has been cut out of intelligence oversight, including how FISA was
circumvented.
A one party government allowed the Executive Branch to act virtually without
regard to existing law. It seemed the rule was to tell the President to
proceed and than the Congress would follow with the pooper scooper to
collect the mess and dispose of it – preferably in a secret site.
FISA was modified in the USA Patriot Act, and the House passed HR 5835
in October, which if passed, would nullify FISA’s warrant requirement
and permit broader and intrusive domestic warrantless wiretapping. Senator
Specter has introduced S. 3001, which is only a little better than the
awful House version. Congress now has the opportunity to stop the evisceration
by letting these bills die, and then introducing a bill in the new Congress
to strengthen FISA, and in particular provide enforcement teeth in the
requirements that the Executive Branch report its actions regarding FISA
to Congress.
TO DO: Ask your Senators to keep a FISA bill from passing in the
lame duck Congress, and then proceed to strengthen and enforce FISA requirements
in the coming Congress.
3. Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act – Education and then
Repeal
One of the first dispiriting actions of the lame duck Congress was passage
of the Senate version (S. 3880) of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act
in the House. It was stuck onto the suspension calendar (means it’s
considered non-controversial) and while Rep Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) spoke
against the bill, shockingly, Rep Bobby Scott (D-VA) argued for it. On
November 13, the bill was passed on a voice vote – which means you
can’t determine accurately who voted for or against the bill.
One core provision of the bill: For merely causing loss of some records
and no or negligible damage, a person convicted under the law could get
a year jail time.
In the debate on the bill, Rep. Scott tried to distinguish the damage
done by civil disobedience activists in the civil rights movement and
that done by animal rights activists, saying that the current Animal Enterprise
bill wouldn’t have targeted the civil disobedience activists because
they did not intend to cause a loss of profits. I would note the Montgomery
Alabama bus boycott to contest that statement.
Rep.Thomas Petri (R-WI) decried the “inadequacy” of current
law and so the need to expand penalties for activists to commit property
crimes in the name of animal or environmental protection. I need only
point out last month’s newsletter and potential federal charges
of 30 years for one count and life plus 1000 years for two counts of possession
of a destructive device to rebut that argument. Again I need to say that
neither I nor NCARL support the use of violence for political or other
purpose. What we do argue is that sentences should not be lengthened dramatically
solely because a person has a political agenda.
Fortunately (though futilely), Rep. Kucinich raised these kinds of First
Amendment arguments. While Rep Sensenbrenner noted that the law ‘exempts’
First Amendment activity, if there is any damage or increased cost of
doing business, then that is obviated. But if paying for a security guard
counts as increased cost – then is any animal rights demonstrator
whose presence scares a facility into hiring a guard subject to a year
jail time? This bill has not been carefully considered.
TO DO: Unfortunately, as the bill has passed both houses in the
same form, it will in all likelihood go to the President for signing,
and my guess is he will. But try to raise these issues with your Senators
and Rep. Perhaps they can derail this in the lame duck if there is sufficient
pressure from constituents.
4. First Amendment Protection Act –
Those of you who have been around the block with NCARL may remember the
old FBI First Amendment Protection Act. I raise it again to set our sights
on an important goal: telling the government that it is not constitutional
to investigate people solely based on their First Amendment activity.
No, such a bill has not been introduced, nor has it been discussed yet
for the next Congress. But it will be again, some day. We had a brief
moment where a couple key sentences in the 1994 crime bill admonished
the FBI to abide by that rule, before it was abolished through efforts
of the FBI in the Anti-Terrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act of
1996. We can do it again. We should aim high. We must.
CASES
“Green Scare” – In last month’s letter
we described government prosecution of activists in Oregon and elsewhere
for environmentally motivated crimes. Four of the defendants agreed Nov
9th to drop a request for NSA surveillance documents against them, and
pled guilty to their own roles, but not cooperate in testifying against
anyone else. Despite this plea agreement, the government could have asked
for “terrorism enhancement” at sentencing – adding up
to 20 years to the negotiated jail time. At sentencing, 3 received 8 year
sentences and one a 5 year sentence. For more information on this case,
contact the NW Constitutional Rights Center in Portland, OR – 503.295.6400
www.nwcrc.org, or www.greenscare.org.
Al-Marri – Al Saleh al-Marri – a citizen
of Qatar, is a 3rd “enemy combatant” who has been held in
South Carolina. He was arrested in the U.S. while a student, in 2001.
In his case challenging his detention, the U.S. has just sent an argument
to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th circuit in his case, that non-citizens
may be jailed indefinitely if they are suspected of terrorist activity,
and do not have the right to challenge their detention in front of a U.S.
court. It’s part of the fallout from the newly passed Military Commissions
Act.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Your support and guidance through this time of transition has been helpful
and wonderful. You have great ideas and energy to work with us as we chart
the next period. We anticipate that the clarification of our name, our
purposes and the coalescence of NCARL and the First Amendment Foundation
will make us even better at what we do and what we need to do. Get those
running shoes on; we have lots of work to do!
And do let us know if we can send your letter to your email address –
saves money and paper.
BACK TO TOP
November
2006
Dear NCARL friends:
DEFENDING DISSENT
Frank Wilkinson Legacy and Defending Dissent Tour
As I write this, I’ve mostly finished a marathon book promotion
fall tour. It’s been invigorating to meet and get to know and revisit
activists around the country. Some are long time NCARL family, and many
are new to us, if not to activism in defense of the right to dissent.
I want to share just a few high points and/or things I learned at these
events.
Take Back Our Rights Conference – Dedicated to Frank Wilkinson
- Hamden, Connecticut
At the civil liberties workshop, four Connecticut librarians told the
story of their lawsuit, along with their lawyer Renee Redman. Then I put
their experiences in an historical context (and talked about the abolition
of habeas corpus via the military detention act). The initially anonymous
“John Doe” librarians had been given National Security Letters
– an FBI secret demand without judicial approval for information
about library users. The 4 librarians were limited by law to tell no one
– no lawyer, no family, not the press – that they had received
the letters. But they decided that was ridiculous and went to their lawyer
and then CT ACLU lawyers anyway, to challenge the law.
Even eventually when the government “allowed” them to go to
court, they couldn’t attend the first hearing, instead watching
in a separate private room by remote camera. At a second hearing they
could attend but were forced still to be anonymous, sit apart, and make
no eye contact with lawyers. Only long after the government mistakenly
failed to black out their names from court documents, they won the right
to be public about their appeal. And that occurred after the vote on USA
Patriot Act renewal that reauthorized the National Security Letters, which
effectively barred them from testifying before Congress on the issue.
Contacts: Renee Redman, one of the lawyers, at rredman@acluct.org,
and Peter Chase, one of the ‘John Doe’ librarians, at pchase@libraryconnection.info.
El Cerrito Democratic Club Annual Dinner –
El Cerrito, CA
I was honored to be the keynote speaker at this event north of Berkeley,
CA. The club has a long and proud history of political activism, and people
easily and knowledgeably connected the political targeting of HUAC days
(which some of their friends and relatives suffered) with the range of
policies today.
National Lawyers Guild Annual Convention – Austin, TX
Two important topics to share: Great Book - One is a new book compiled
by Meiklejohn Civil Liberties Institute interns and edited by the great
Ann Fagan Ginger. It is Landmark Cases Left Out of Your Textbooks, a mere
84 pages, 43 main cases told in clear language and roughly in a timeline.
It summarizes most of the critical civil liberties and civil rights cases
in U.S. and some International law from the late 19th century on. Send
$10 to MCLI, P.O. Box 673, Berkeley, CA 94701-0673. And I’ll buy
some extra for distribution as well.
“Domestic Terrorism”: The second matter is the intensified
targeting of environmental and animal rights activists as “eco-terrorists.”
December 7, 2005, the FBI arrested 7 people in 4 states and called a grand
jury, subpoenaing several others to investigate activists in the Northwest
as part of “Operation Backfire”. The 7 were charged with arson
and carrying incendiary devices, based on the testimony of one informant.
Shortly thereafter, one of those arrested apparently committed suicide
in jail. On January 20th, a more massive 65 count indictment came down
with additional people charged.
One of the key laws being used is 18 USC 924(c), a destructive device
charge, which carries a mandatory 30 - year sentence for one charge, and
life plus 1000 years for a second charge. Facing this kind of prison time
and notoriety and with the Attorney General himself announcing for the
prosecution, another 4 activists pled guilty and testified against the
rest in exchange for sentences of 3-10 years instead of forever.
A related grand jury seems to be on a fishing expedition – gathering
evidence for crimes already charged rather than seeking whether there
is evidence to bring new charges – the purpose of such bodies. Three
people have refused to testify and are in jail on contempt.
The trials are some time off. On October 31, there is a hearing to determine
whether National Security Agency warrantless wiretaps or FISA (Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act) wiretaps were used to help bring the cases.
Stay tuned for how this may further connect these purely domestic cases
to the international “War on Terror.”
Now you may ask why I raise these cases as a civil liberties issue. The
accused are folks who are suspected only of conspiring to commit property
damage. No humans or other animals were harmed in the slightest. The sentences
are humongous and have the huge weight of being called terrorist crimes.
They are so intimidating that few dare challenge them by standing trial
for the crimes, much less challenging their disproportionality.
For more information on these folks, contact Lauren Regan of the Civil
Liberties Defense Committee at 514.687.9180, or go to www.cldc.org.
The U.S. is calling “eco-terrorists” who commit property damage
“the number one domestic terrorism threat,” FBI Deputy Assistant
Director for Counterterrorism John Lewis told a Senate committee May 18,
2005.
The Animal Enterprise Terrorism bill, H.R. 4239 and S. 3880, passed the
Senate on Sept. 29. The House may take up passage in November. The bill
would define any actions causing an “animal enterprise“ business
to suffer a loss of profit a terrorist act. These might include peaceful
protests, boycotts and leafleting. New National Lawyers Guild President
Marjorie Cohn also noted the bill “could lead to the prosecution
of undercover investigators, whistleblowers and other activists as “terrorists.”
TO DO: Contact your Representatives - (Capitol switchboard - 202.225.3121)
or get to them while they’re home, and tell them to oppose this
overbroad and dangerous bill!
Frank Wilkinson Chicago Memorial – Chicago, Illinois
The Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights, along with a stellar
array of individuals and groups, sponsored a memorial remembrance of Frank
Wilkinson on October 29 at DePaul University. Among the speakers were:
Frank’s widow Donna; Rachel DeGolia, long time CCDBR director; her
dad, Frank Rosen, board member of the First Amendment Foundation and retired
United Electrical Workers Vice President; Timuel Black civil rights activist,
educator and steering committee member of NCARL; and U.S. Rep. Danny Davis.
There was a photo montage of Frank and friends along with the Ry Cooder
song about Frank, “Don’t Call Me Red,” and a clip from
the BBC documentary that included Frank’s story. Thanks to all at
CCDBR who helped put the event together. We ended on the theme of eliminating
some of the worst laws and policies passed post 9/11, notably the Military
Commissions Act.
Coming Up: Oberlin College, Ohio
November 8 I will speak at Oberlin, Ohio at 7:30 pm at the College, Wilder
Hall Room 101. Earlier in the day I’ll speak at the Kendal at Oberlin
retirement community. Contact me for details.
* * * * * * *
Troops Petition Congress: Get Out of Iraq
Dissent is strengthening in the U.S., and the proof of it is a petition
which so far more than 100 active duty and reservist members have signed
and are sending to Congress in January. It calls for the “prompt
withdrawal of American military forces and bases from Iraq. J.E. McNeil,
a friend of mine, is lawyer/director of the Center on Conscience &
War, a conscientious objector support group, and works with the petitioners.
For those who would object to active duty military expressing an opinion,
McNeil notes that there is in addition to the First Amendment, the Military
Whistle-Blower Protection Act which allows communications with Congress.
LEGISLATION
Military Commissions Act of 2006
On October 24, Mr. Bush signed into law the Military Commissions Act,
following its contentious voyage through the House and Senate. The bill
as described in an excellent essay by Chip Pitts and Bryan Long, says:
1) “the CIA can continue to use secret torture techniques”,
2) “the president can continue to unilaterally reinterpret the Geneva
conventions” and 3) “the military can continue to operate
tribunals that the U.S. Supreme Court held unconstitutional in June.”
4) “And all this is underpinned by the elimination of the classic
writ of habeas corpus (to ‘have the body’ of the prisoner
brought before an independent tribunal to justify the detention) with
respect to whole classes of detainees.” That doesn’t even
include the law’s allowing use of secret evidence and coerced testimony.
The essay is called “War, law and American democracy” published
in Open Democracy: http://www.opendemocracy.net/home/index.jsp.
Now if you think that’s bad enough, Elizabeth Holtzman, U.S. Rep
and Judiciary Committee member during Nixon’s impeachment, adds
to the above by saying: “As bad as these features is the bill’s
grant of a pardon to President Bush and his top Cabinet officials for
any crimes they may have committee under the War Crimes Act of 1996. When
a president violates the country’s criminal laws and then gets a
[virtually] secret grant of immunity for those crimes, he makes a mockery
of the rule of law. Then all lawlessness is permissible. This provision
in the bill creates a culture of impunity for torture and abuse of detainees.”
She further notes this provision was stuck into the bill at the last minute
with no notice or debate. For her full statement, contact Stephen Kent:
845.758.0097 or skent@kentcom.
And to me the emblematic action was done by the Senate Chair of the Judiciary,
Arlen Specter, who said he opposed the version of the bill that stripped
the right to habeas corpus, introduced an amendment to reinstate it, which
lost by a relatively small margin, and then he voted for the final bill
in the Senate. Specter noted that the courts would fix habeas. Such a
sad state of affairs that the man best positioned and knowledgeable to
control the content of this kind of bill is exposed as powerless to impose
the rule of law in the face of ignorant politics. This’ll be a long
fight to undo.
INTERNATIONAL LAWS
Canadian Courts Gut Terrorism Law Definition
From the NYTimes, Oct. 25. Twice now as of Oct 24, Canadian judges have
ruled invalid parts of anti-terrorist laws. Now a judge has ruled the
terrorism law is unconstitutional at its core. Terrorist crime is defined
in Canada as having been committed “with religious, ideological
or political motives.” (NYT) U.S. definitions typically use language
that describes crime committed to intimidate a populace or government.
Specifically, Justice Douglas Rutherford of the Ontario Superior Court
ruled the definition of terrorism “an infringement of certain fundamental
freedoms… those of religion, thought, belief, opinion expression
and association.”
The case was brought by Mohammed Momin Khawaja, a Canadian charged as
part of an alleged bomb plot. While the law was invalidated, the charges
were not, so Khawaja and others remain in jail in an odd legal limbo for
the moment.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Friends –
Our renaming as Defending Dissent Foundation formally begins in January.
This renamed entity will meld NCARL into the First Amendment Foundation,
and at a new address of 1718 M Street, NW #718, Washington, DC 20036.
But until about January 1, you will need to make checks out either to
NCARL, or if you desire tax-deductibility, to the First Amendment Foundation.
We need to obtain recognition by California and the IRS before we can
officially receive and deposit funds under the new name. Ah bureaucracy…
What use is the NCARL letter? Another tidbit from a recent trip came from
an internationally known civil rights and civil liberties lawyer. He told
me he takes each newsletter and includes them with his speeches, to facilitate
his comments. That delighted me. A number of you have told me that you
use the letter for lobbying calls or to try and keep up to date on issues
that are complicated and hard to sort out. I appreciate hearing both how
you use the letter and what would make it more usable to you.
Let me remind you all of a couple of other issues: we sent this letter
for free to anyone who wants it – to jails as well. I just got a
subscription from death row at San Quentin. We send them by mail, or email,
the latter of course is much cheaper for us and saves paper for all. If
you know of people who could use the NCARL letter, send their names, addresses
and/or email addresses.
If you would like to support our work financially, you can make checks
either to NCARL or to the First Amendment Foundation. The latter is for
tax deductible educational purposes. We welcome both. As well, consider
if you can making a donation to the Defending Dissent Foundation in your
will. We have received several of these gifts over the years and they
are most welcome. You don’t need to be a millionaire to make a will
or a gift in your will.
And thanks for all you do to defend the First Amendment and the right
to dissent.
BACK TO TOP
October
2006
Dear NCARL friends:
NCARL NEWS
Defending Dissent Foundation
You may remember that we asked for your input a few months back as we
considered how organizationally to work more effectively and efficiently.
Many of you gave us advice and suggestions, and we appreciate them all.
We have chosen yet a slightly different path than outlined. As NCARL lobbying
is well less than half our expense, we’re able to coalesce with
the First Amendment Foundation and be significantly under IRS lobby limits.
And to commemorate the change and clarify our work, we decided to name
the entity Defending Dissent Foundation. One director, one board, one
set of books and reporting requirements for one group. Oh, and by the
way, while we’re at it, we decided to move our address so all of
this could be changed in the records at once. The new address is 1718
M Street, NW #178, Washington, DC 20036.
We will not, NOT, be losing the legacy of NCARL and the First Amendment
Foundation, nor even of the National Committee to Abolish HUAC. It is
in their shadow and legacy that we seek to be clear, to do our work in
a focused way and better.
Of course we will do address forwarding – likely a year –
for those envelopes you have lying around, or if you can’t find
the new address. And this formally will not take place until January 2007
for simplicity’s sake. But the new address is functional now, and
we’ll use both addresses for a couple months – to use up another
couple months’ envelopes.
Other good news: joining us is Rachel Bernhardt to replace Katie as the
Assistant to the Director. Rachel comes to us with lots of nonprofit and
administrative expertise, degrees in Anthropology and Museum Science,
and excitement for the cause.
Katie Roberts will continue to support our bookkeeping and web needs at
least for the time being, so we’re gaining Rachel and not quite
losing Katie. But we need to say that Katie has been a critical support
over the last 4 years, and we will miss her tenacity, smarts, laughter
and love of cilantro.
Frank Wilkinson Legacy Tour
Kit Gage will be speaking and participating at the following events in
October and November:
• Take Back Our Rights, Quinnipiac Univ. School
of Law, Hamden, CT
Sat., Oct 7, all day – lots of great speakers. (contact: Bruce Martin,
martin-bruce@sbcglobal.net)
• El Cerrito Democratic Club Annual Dinner, Sat.,
Oct 14, Arlington Community Church, Kensington, CA
(contact: Al Miller, at amil2323@comcast.net)
• National Lawyers Guild annual convention, Austin,
TX
• Frank Wilkinson Celebration, Chicago, Sun., Oct.
29, 2-4 pm, Schmidt Center Rm. 254, DePaul University, 2320 N. Seminary,
(go to Nancy Mickelsons, Nancy.Mickelsons@pobox.com)
• Oberlin College, Nov. 8, 7:30 pm
If you wish to attend any of these events, send an email to the contact,
with Kit Gage in the subject line.
DEFENDING DISSENT
Protestor Victory in Miami
Protesters at the Free Trade Area of the Americas in Miami Nov. 2003 were
beaten and arrested all over the city. They sued the city (Killmon v.
City of Miami). The 11th Circuit Court ruled that the police are liable
for any damages that might come with ongoing litigation. The “Miami
Model” where 40 local, state, and federal entities conspired to
politically profile and preemptively arrest people is important to discredit
and stop.
Jim Bensman – Dangerous Activist
This must have been an exciting Army Corps of Engineers hearing. In Alton,
Illinois, Jim Bensman, a long time environmentalist, was attending a hearing
about how to reconfigure the Mississippi River to support a healthier
river. The discussion included destroying some of the dams that control
the flow of the river. Bensman was quoted in a newspaper article that
blowing up a dam would be a good option. Next thing he knows, he’s
a suspect of the proposed terrorist act of blowing up a dam (reported
to the FBI by an Army Corps official). To the FBI’s credit, the
agent was a little surprised to learn that Bensman had made the “threat”
in the public meeting. Yet still the agent threatened Bensman with not
cooperating when he balked at letting the agent inspect his home.
It quickly got straightened out we think (especially with some national
and ridiculing press), but never underestimate the capacity of some agency
official or other to misunderstand or twist a statement into criminal/terrorist
purposes.
Jared Iqbal – Importing Terror Airwaves
TV is dangerous. Ask Jared Iqbal. He has been charged with material support
for terrorism, for arranging in Brooklyn, NY for the distribution and
airing of Al Manar, the television station of Hezbollah, a designated
foreign terrorist group.
According to ACLU attorney Donna Lieberman, there are specific exclusions
to the material support provision “for importing news communications,”
and so Mr. Iqbal should not have been targeted, regardless of Hezbollah’s
general advocacy of violence.
FBI Counter-terrorism Database: 659 Million Records
Don’t look now, but the FBI now has in its database what David Sobel,
now of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org),
says is the “largest collection of personal data ever amassed by
the federal government.” It includes 240 million airline passenger
records. No indication how long they’ll be kept, or how to correct
errors.
Rumsfeld Does It Again
We kind of like it that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld makes our points for
us. He just said in public that those who criticize the Iraq mess are
like those who “ridiculed or ignored” the rise of Nazism in
the 1930s. Right, we knew that all dissenters support fascism, oh, and
are quislings.
LEGISLATION (Ugh)
Shame On Congress
Before you get this letter, Congress will act, or not, on three categories
of potentially awful legislation: detention and torture, expanding warrantless
wiretapping, and immigration and deportation. It’s too late to lobby
now before the elections, if you have not already. So we will limit our
description of what the bills contain. Like a mirage, the bills are changing
by the minute. Next month we’ll detail what actually passed, and
therefore what we will have to amend or undo or challenge in court in
the future.
The theme of these bills could be seen as both House and Senate caving
to the Bush Administration. While a few Senators and Representatives –
even a few Republicans – have stood up, they have then seemed to
cave in to even worse versions of the provisions to which they objected.
Senators McCain, Warner and Lindsey Graham claimed victory while caving
on torture limits and detention, and Senators Craig, Sununu, and Murkowski
did the same on warrantless wiretaps. It’s truly disheartening.
These critical issues have fallen right on the rails of the oncoming electioneering
freight train.
Immigration
House GOP Blitz on Immigration Appears to Fall Short
During the last two weeks, the House Republican leadership tried to push
through major sections of HR 4437, the anti-immigrant bill they passed
last December which provoked the record breaking marches, in “blitzkrieg”
fashion. Several draconian bills passed the House, but ran into difficulty
once more in the Senate. Bills that would have sharply reduced the due
process rights of non-citizens, as well as bringing state and local police
into routine immigration enforcement work, were blocked when Senate Republicans
proved unwilling to tack them on as amendments to spending bills. Two
bills were still alive at writing, and may pass: HR 6061 would build 700
miles of fences on the U.S.-Mexico border, and HR 4844 would sharply raise
the bar for registering and voting. In the latter, by 2008 everyone would
have to present government photo ID to vote; by 2010 they would have to
prove citizenship to register to vote.
Warrantless Wiretapping
The current version of these changing bills has the following:
1) All phone calls can be tapped by the government without warrant, if
one of the parties is abroad.
2) Government lawyers can go to a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act) secret court, and ask for generic permission to wiretap a bunch of
unnamed people who, the lawyers claim, are connected to a terrorist group
or country. If the FISA court agrees to the generally described program,
then the unnamed individuals can be tapped without a specific warrant
for the indefinite future.
3) If the fruits of those warrants yield information of terrorist activity,
then the government can ask for a specific FISA warrant, and use that
information to bring charges if it so wishes.
Military Tribunals & Torture
In brief, the main issues are:
1) Vague and expanding limits on torture,
2) No right to a habeas hearing if you’re detained (requiring the
government to tell you specifically why you’re being held and giving
you a lawyer to help).
3) One provision would allow legal permanent residents in the U.S. to
be jailed indefinitely without charge if they are suspected of terrorist
crimes, and
4) If a suspect gets a military commission- style trial, the government
can withhold some of the evidence (typically sources and methods), such
that it will say “an unnamed person told us that you have done such
and so.” Rebut that! If neither the government nor the accused know
that the source was an ex-brother-in-law, it might bear on the veracity
of the evidence. Kept secret, that’ll never come to light.
Freedom of Information
Sept. 21, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted out S. 394, the OPEN Government
Act, a decent bill that would speed the government’s timely release
of information to its people. The bill awaits House Committee action and
then votes on the floor (or shenanigans to incorporate it onto another
bill). Crossing fingers this gets included in some bill or other.
CASES
Maher Arar
You’ve all probably heard of Maher Arar by now, the dual Canadian
and Syrian citizen whom the U.S. duped the Canadians into deporting to
Syria to be tortured. Turns out he was not a terrorist, and now Canada
is publicly excoriating the U.S. for its duplicity. To us, one of the
most duplicitous features was the U.S.’ allegation that it believed
Syria’s assertion that it would not torture Arar if he was turned
over to them. Syria is on the U.S. list of foreign terrorist countries,
and has a well-documented history of torturing people. Rendition –
surrogate secret torture – is in the background as the Congress
considers detention rules in Guantanamo and on home turf.
Arar is being represented in a lawsuit against the U.S. by the Center
for Constitutional Rights in New York, while he lives in Canada again,
trying with difficulty to get a job.
Luis Posada – A Genuine Terrorist
Luis Posada Carriles, a Cuban exile jailed since 2005, is accused of bombing
a civilian airliner, killing 73 people. He is suspected of other terrorist
acts, including the 1976 bombing murder in Washington, DC of Orlando Letelier
and Ronnie Karpen Moffitt. The U.S. has not allowed his extradition to
Venezuela for trial. This September 11, U.S. Magistrate Norbert Garney
ordered Posada released, as he is being held indefinitely without trial,
under a deportation order – but no country will take him. The U.S.
Justice Department opposes his release and has asked and been granted
more time to argue the case. We oppose indefinite detention, even in this
case, but support Posada’s extradition to Venezuela for trial. Why
would the U.S. government stonewall a trial for an accused terrorist,
unless it fears the resulting exposures?
Letelier-Moffitt Files Coming to Light
Speaking of the Letelier terrorist bombing, now Chile wants the U.S. to
give it the remaining files on the bombing. These may include files expected
to implicate General Augusto Pinochet, whom the U.S. had helped bring
to power Sept. 11, 1973. Others in the Chilean DINA (secret police) working
with Cuban exiles in the U.S. have been convicted of this or related murders.
Perhaps Posada should go to Chile for trial after Venezuela?
Mohammed Saleh – No More Terrorism Charges
Mohammed Saleh went to Israel, he says, to bring cash from fellow Muslims
for zakat (charity giving) to Palestinians. Saleh was arrested, charged
and convicted of giving money to terrorists. He served five years in jail
in Israel, and under torture, confessed to some crimes. On his release,
he was returned to the U.S., where he is a citizen, but tagged by the
U.S. as the only U.S. citizen for whom it is illegal to give or receive
any funds. After litigating that condition for a couple years, in 2004
Saleh was charged with several crimes including material support for terrorism,
trying to raise money for Hamas (to which he had confessed under torture),
decade old allegations, for which he already served time.
Now on the eve of an Oct. 12 trial, the U.S. has dropped the major material
support for terrorism charge after defense lawyer Michael Deutsch sought
background information on a prosecution witness. The govt may also drop
a racketeering count.
It’s a continuing saga. The U.S. calls people “heinous terrorists,”
then ends up dropping or losing all the terrorism-related charges. It’s
a bad strategy to use to build good relations with the Muslim community
in the U.S. And it’s a travesty of the criminal justice system.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
It’s a hard time legislatively in D.C. We may well have to do more
local and state legislating to compensate for federal (fill in the blank!).
Certainly more organizing will be needed. It’s a time of change
for NCARL and the First Amendment Foundation. We can change to do better,
but only with your help. Thank you as always.
BACK TO TOP
September
2006
Dear NCARL friends:
Staffing Search
After 4 years as an essential help for us, Katie Roberts is moving out
of town and on to other challenges at the end of September. She has been
an enormous support in so many ways, and we will miss her greatly. Katie
may continue to do some of her tasks remotely, but clearly not all of
them.
So of course we are seeking to hire a local staffer and I’d like
you to spread the word. The job is 1.5-2 days a week (10-15 hours), though
it is fairly flexible as to how it’s spread out. The bulk of the
job is administrative – some light data entry, keeping track of
donations, of where you all are located, making sure you get the newsletter.
Some of the tasks are the administrative processes which keep nonprofits
in compliance with federal, state and local governments. I think it helps
if the person is interested in our issues – especially as s/he helps
me keep track of breaking news. Pay starts at $11/hour, a little more
if you have some bookkeeping and web expertise, and we pay 2/5 health
insurance, some vacation and sick leave. We are in the suburban Maryland
DC area in a great work environment (but you can’t have dog allergies),
on several bus routes and 1.5 miles from two subway stops.
DEFENDING DISSENT
Kit’s Traveling Roadshow
After a summer hiatus, I am going on the road again – thoroughly
filling up October. If you’re in the vicinity of the following,
please join us, or contact us now to see if we can schedule other events
in your area (bookstores, readings and talks at your group meeting, school
or home):
• Oct 7 - Take Back Our Rights Conference, honoring Frank Wilkinson
– at Quinnipiac Univ. Law School, Hamden, CT.
• Oct 14 – El Cerrito Democratic Club Annual Dinner, El Cerrito
CA.
• Oct 29– Frank Wilkinson Life and Work Celebration, Chicago,
IL.
Monitoring of Activists
The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network obtained documents on June 15
from the Defense Dept. that indicate more comprehensive surveillance of
student groups than was earlier reported. The documents, obtained thru
a Freedom of Information request, show that the military is investigating
both protests of its ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy
of excluding ‘out’ gay people, but also anti-war protests.
Among the schools targeted are SUNY Albany, William Patterson University
(NJ), Southern Connecticut State Univ., and UC Berkeley. The Pentagon
apparently intercepted emails, attended meetings and rallies, and mentioned
no evidence of any violent activity – just dissent. For a copy of
the DOD letter and more, see www.sldn.org.
NYC Fighting & Settling 2004 RNC Arrests
The 2004 Republican National Convention (RNC) demonstrations in New York
were huge, with mass arrests. Litigation continues for the over 600 people
who filed individual claims against the city. Natl Lawyers Guild Attorney
Jonathan Moore is working on class action certification of over 1200 people
for constitutional rights violations stemming from police and City actions.
The NY ACLU has two federal civil rights suits in the works regarding
the RNC and other protests.
Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, in her firm’s law suit, has obtained NYC
documents which show that it was politics and not a concern for the renovated
Great Lawn of Central Park that motivated its ban on park protests. “It
is very important that we do not permit any big or political events for
the period between Aug. 23 and Sept 6, 2004” was the text of one
Parks Dept. email. Further, contradicting Mayor Bloomberg’s contention
that he did not have “personal knowledge” as to why the National
Council of Arab Americans was denied a permit, another email to the mayor
showed he was kept up to the minute on the precise language of the rejection
letter. So right, politics had no place in any of this. To see the documents
Mara obtained, go to: www.justiceonline.org.
Fighting over NYC Parade Permitting
The New York City Police Department has avoided taking a step in the wrong
direction by backing off from requiring permits for groups as small as
2 bikers or walkers who ignore traffic laws – probably leaving the
number at 10 bikes. The department is trying to clarify its vague current
rules. Under the current proposal, groups would not need permits to gather
on the sidewalk – a positive change.
Chris Dunn of the NYCLU criticized requiring permits for bikes or other
vehicles planning to obey traffic laws. To weigh in, contact the NYCLU
or NYC National Lawyers Guild, www.nlgnyc.org.
Free Speech Zone – Expanded Beyond Political Conventions
Ah Chicago. July 2, Chicago police arrested 6 nonviolent activists (including
one of our steering members – a NLG legal observer) leafleting military
recruitment at one of the many outdoor Chicago festivals. Michael McConnell
of the American Friends Service Committee said the police told them to
move to a ‘free-speech zone’ to continue their protest. They
were in a public park reading the Bill of Rights and passing out fliers.
We previously remember hearing of this only for the political conventions
in Chicago (where Frank Wilkinson spent hours caged up without a chair)
and other cities.
TO DO: Contact the Chicago Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights
to offer your help on this: ccdbr@pobox.com
or 312-939-0675.
Academics: Ideological Travel Bans Broadened, & Opposing
Ideas Risk Firing
• The American Association of University Professors and ACLU, who
are monitoring bans on academics, note a surge in what appear to be denials
and revocations of professors’ travel permits based on their politics.
Though the Homeland Security Department denies this is the reason, the
professors are facing increased questioning about their politics on their
visa applications. Waskar Ari, a Bolivian Aymara Indian, is one of 15
the ACLU is watching whose visa was recently revoked or denied. DC NLG
Attorney Michael Maggio has taken up his case as have the AAUP and ACLU.
• Kevin Barrett is joining Ward Churchill as a target for firing
from his academic job triggered by his views about 9/11. Barrett holds
that the attacks of 9/11 had U.S. involvement, and expressed that view
on a conservative radio station (not his class) and now risks losing his
instructorship at the U of Wisconsin, Madison.
Grand Juries
Freelance journalist and blogger Josh Wolf was jailed on contempt of court
charges for refusing to turn over his videotape of an anti-capitalist
protest last summer in San Francisco to a grand jury. Jane Kirtley, an
expert on reporters’ rights issues, said this was the first pursuit
of a blogger – as an independent journalist, the “most vulnerable
links in the chain.”
Also in the Bay area, Nadia Winstead and Ariana Huemer have been subpoenaed
a second time to testify before a grand jury. The first time, they took
the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination, were granted immunity
for their testimony and then refused to testify. This grand jury is investigating
Bay Area animal liberation and environmental activists. Another activist,
Jeff Hogg, was jailed for refusing to talk to a grand jury in Eugene,
Oregon.
While grand juries are a critical component of the criminal justice process,
they also have been used as “fishing expeditions” to probe
the work and plans of political activists separate from their criminal
activities. More on these activists at www.FBIwitchhunt.com.
Flag Desecration Amendment – Down in Flames
By the skin of our teeth, the constitutional amendment to ban flag burning
and other damage has failed the 2/3 majority it needed. The vote was 66-34
on June 27.
TO DO: Thank your Democratic Senators if they voted against the
bill as 2/3 did. Especially thank Republican Senators Bennett, Chafee
and McConnell, who also voted against. Dem. Senators Baucus, Bayh, Dayton,
Feinstein, Johnson, Landrieu, Lincoln, Menendez, Nelson (FL) Nelson (NE),
Reid, Rockefeller, Salazar and Stabenow voted FOR a flag desecration amendment.
CASES
Supremes Say No to Govt on Hamdan
The US Supreme Court handed the Bush administration a clear 5-3 repudiation
of its Guantanamo and military commission system in the Hamdan case. It
held that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions (requiring humane
treatment) AND the US Uniform Code of Military Justice both apply to detainees
held by the US military, and that Guantanamo prisoners can still have
habeas hearings.
Now how is the government trying to ignore it? By pushing a “new”
as yet draft bill that repackages military commissions but leaves them
essentially intact. Judge advocates general, and several military law
scholars testified before the Senate essentially against any new proposal
that would violate Common Article 3. The key problems with the new draft
are that detainees might be barred from their own trial and the proceedings
would permit hearsay evidence (which could be 3rd country torture interrogations)
to be introduced at the ‘trial.’
TO DO: Ask your Senators not to support any bill that would violate
the Geneva Conventions on treatment of detainees, or the Supreme Court
ruling.
NSA Warrantless Wiretapping
Senator Specter, Republican chair of the Judiciary Committee, is, all
by himself, jockeying back and forth on the National Security Agency’s
warrantless wiretapping program. He was concerned about it, but then introduced
a ‘compromise’ that Mr. Bush apparently endorsed, which limits
judicial review to one secret court – the FISA court.
Fortunately there are more than a dozen court challenges to the program,
and most recently, US District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of Michigan,
found the program unconstitutional and illegal. All these cases will likely
go to the Supremes unless Mr. Specter and others cave to the Administration
and gut FISA – the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
TO DO: Ask your Senators not to support any bill that would allow
secret courts to ratify warrantless wiretapping.
Expanded Terrorism Crimes: Terrorism Charges Against Accused
Street Gangs
It always happens: criminal authorities targeted against specific people
and crimes get used more broadly. Look at RICO – first used against
the Mob and drug-runners, it now gets used against abortion protesters
and anti-war protesters. Now terrorism charges are being brought against
an alleged street gang member. Edgar Morales is charged with murder and
terrorism for being a member of the St. James Boys of the west Bronx and
committing many criminal acts. In Virginia, John Allen Mohammed –
convicted of the murder rampage in the Washington area in 2002, faced
terrorism charges as well. What about criminal laws for murder? They’re
still in place, and function quite well to jail people for life –
or death.
LEGISLATION
Immigration Bill Civil Liberties Concerns
By Emile Schepers
The Republican House leadership has been carrying out scores of “field
hearings” around the country with the ostensible purpose of examining
all the defects of Senate bill S.2611. Witness lists are evidently designed
to finger immigrants for crime, terrorism, unemployment and overstressed
public services. At the hearing in El Paso, Texas, the city’s police
chief told Congressmembers that in spite of the heavy undocumented immigration,
the crime rate is quite low and dropping. Pro-immigrants’ rights
organizations have also organized a wide variety of protests and counter
hearings. The Rights Working Group, a consortium of immigrant’s
rights and civil liberties organizations with a focus on the civil liberties
implications of immigration law (we’re a member), organized three
of these (in Bellingham WA, Tucson AZ and Dearborn MI) in August, and
is planning other national activities.
The focus of the mass movement for immigrants has broadened to include
strategies to stop stepped up immigration raids and deportations. A large
anti-deportation demonstration was carried out in Chicago on July 19 (30,000
participants estimated by organizers). The Sin Fronteras Law Center, also
in Chicago, got an immigration judge to give 15 workers arrested in raids
in April a year’s postponement of deportation, on the unheard of
grounds that the president and Senate promised a legalization program
for which they might eventually qualify and therefore it makes no sense
to deport them while this is being debated in Congress. A wildly indignant
federal government has, naturally, appealed the decision.
A Chicago immigrants’ rights activist under deportation orders,
Elvira Arellano, has asked and received sanctuary in a NW side Methodist
church, and is receiving widespread support nationally. A suit is being
prepared in the name of her minor son, Saulito, who is a US citizen, alleging
that to deport the mother is a violation of the rights of the citizen
child. Should this suit prosper, it would have profound implications;
more than 6 million US citizen children belong to families in which one
or both parents are undocumented.
IN MEMORIUM - Dissenters Passing
Maryann Mahaffey
Before Maryann was a board member of our sister group, the First Amendment
Foundation, she was a city council member of Detroit from 1973, and as
the Detroit Free Press put it: “A champion of equal rights for women,
a guardian angel of organized labor. And a voice for the poor, elderly
and downtrodden…the soul and conscience of a city.” She died
July 27 at age 81. First she worked in Detroit as a social worker and
advocate for public housing and welfare rights groups. Maryann’s
daughter Susan Dooha, noted how she broke barriers when running first,
unsuccessfully, for Wayne County Commission in 1970, (while winning the
legal fight to use her maiden name). On the city council, Maryann supported
rape crisis units and regulated homeless shelters, but she would not only
support issues legislatively. She would protect picket lines in person,
and spend the night with homeless people to understand and highlight their
conditions.
Susan Dooha also recalled that Maryann’s commitment was in part
formed by her work during World War II at a Japanese internment camp.
Susan noted, “It was such a powerful lesson about injustice and
human rights that it was really a touchstone for the rest of her life…about
basic justice for human beings.”
We join all of Detroit in honoring and missing Maryann Mahaffey.
Dorothy Healey
Dorothy Healey died August 6 at 91. Dorothy gave a good name to notorious.
She might well have been the best known American Communist in the country
over the years. Certainly in Los Angeles. She was a buddy of Frank and
Donna Wilkinson, and well known and loved by a large segment of Los Angeles.
She supported and embodied the right to dissent – in general as
well as within the Party, much to the chagrin of its leadership.
Dorothy’s mother was an original founder of the American Community
Party, and she came to activism at 14 – speaking on a soapbox, going
on to lead Mexican agricultural workers strikes, and by the late 1940s,
becoming the Chair of the LA Communist Party (CP) – all as an open
member of the CP. She was jailed for striking, and for being a Communist.
After learning in 1956 of Stalin’s crimes, she worked for almost
20 years to reform the American CP – succeeding in LA while failing
nationally, and finally leaving the Party in the early 1970s, and joining
the Democratic Socialists of America.
Dorothy went on to radio – hosting a show in LA on KPFK for many
years and then moving to DC and hosting a show on WPFW. She brought dissenters
to the fore and gave them a welcome, though never thoughtless or uncritical,
forum.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We appreciate your continued and thoughtful comments (as well as your
financial support) as to how NCARL and the First Amendment Foundation
should be working more closely together, and of course quite varied. We
will take them into consideration as we retool over the next months.
Let us know if 1) you want the newsletter delivered electronically instead
of by mail, 2) if you have other people you’d like to receive the
letter, and/or 3) you have further ideas on our being focused and named
for Defending Dissent.
BACK TO TOP
July
& August 2006
Dear NCARL friends:
NOTE:
This will be a combined July and August issue of the NCARL letter. So
for those of you who send in monthly sustainer checks, we will be asking
for both amounts at your convenience. For the rest of you – join
them! This letter is free to all who request it, so we’re supported
by donations entirely. We don’t bill people except sustainers.
REORGANIZATION
NCARL began as the National Committee to Abolish HUAC (the House of Representatives
Committee on UnAmerican Activities). After a long and ultimately successful
campaign, we needed to rename ourselves in 1975. The choice at that point
was the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation (NCARL, pronounced
N Carl). That was a useful title when the organization worked somewhat
more broadly than today, on a range of criminal justice and dissent related
legislation. Examples: Opposing the death penalty, supporting limits on
FBI spying, opposing revision of the Criminal Code, supporting limited
Hate Crimes legislation, opposing McCarran-Walter travel visa restrictions,
supporting reparations for Japanese Americans from World War II concentration
camps, and opposing any efforts to revive those kinds of plans, etc.
In later years we developed and supported a bill – the FBI First
Amendment Protection Act, and later the Secret Evidence Repeal Act - so
not all we did was oppositional. Particularly after our successful suit
against the FBI for spying on us (yielding 132,000 pages of documents),
we have gravitated more toward defending dissent activities. We have opposed
targeting people based not only on beliefs and dissent activities, but
also on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexuality and religion.
We are now at a point of re-evaluating our structure, our work, and our
relationship with the First Amendment Foundation – our sister nonprofit
which has 501(c)(3) tax status. We have a committee formed of some NCARL
steering committee members and Foundation board. They are recommending
some changes to both groups. These will likely include name changes and
closer ties between the two groups. We wanted to reach out to you all
for your input as well. Our expectation is that we would continue to produce
the monthly letter, but it could benefit from your recommendations as
well. How do you use it? Who else should get it? We send it out by mail
and electronically, as people prefer. Of course it’s cheaper for
us to email it. So what do you think? Do you like the names Defending
Dissent, and Defending Dissent Foundation? Something else we should fix
or improve?
DEFENDING DISSENT – CASES Etc.
LA Eight Win One
Aiad Barakat is one of the “Los Angeles 8” or LA 8. This group
of Palestinian activists in California were subject to deportation proceedings
in 1987 because of their First Amendment activities. This has been one
of the most convoluted and lengthy series of legal proceedings, and it’s
still alive – now under the USA Patriot act authority. Barakat had
appealed rejection of his naturalization and had been granted a new hearing.
This time, Judge Wilson granted his request for naturalization. It probably
helped that Judge Wilson, 20 years before, had ruled that the McCarran-Walter
act was unconstitutional as it allowed decisions on matters including
visa denials based on peoples’ politics. Now the government is required
to grant his request (or, oy vey, appeal).
David Cole and Marc Van der Hout have defended the case forever. Stacy
Tolchin of Marc’s office, Alihan Arulanantham of the ACLU of S.
Calif, and many law students and legal workers also can take credit for
this victory.
Ramadan Visitor Visa to the U.S. May Finally Go Forward
Tariq Ramadan’s visa denial made national news. This respected academic
was denied a visa to teach at a college post 9/11. Now US District Judge
Paul Crotty has ruled that the Executive Branch may exclude a person from
getting a visa for “almost any reason” but “it cannot
do so” solely because the Executive disagrees with the content of
the alien’s speech.” The government has 90 days to give Ramadan
a visa and cannot use “national security” as a rationale to
exclude him without explanation.
Arab Americans Fear Police; Government Actions Problematic –
Justice Dept Says
It may surprise few of you that Arab Americans fear police responses to
them more than hate crimes by the public. But one surprise is that a 2
year in-depth study of Arab American attitudes and police policies was
done by the Justice Department, which is publicizing the troubling results.
Further, the study is critical of federal policies as badly guiding police
and being inconsistently applied. The study recommended more outreach
to the communities, and police protection of communities, more community
policing, and fewer arbitrary and scattershot policies.
Military Spying on Campus
Under the military’s Talon program and perhaps other efforts, it’s
now clear that there is more widespread spying of campus counter-recruiting
efforts than we previously knew. Servicemembers Legal Defense Network
filed a Freedom of Information Act request, and in response, got documents
from activists which the military had obtained surreptitiously. They describe
an April 21 SUNY Albany demonstration, an activist memo describing changing
military tactics and the need to modify their protests, and a notice of
an April 1 counter-recruitment demonstration at William Patterson College
in New Jersey. None of these memos mentions even any civil disobedience
– just demonstrations and modifications to planned dissent –
including a planned formal complaint. Completely First Amendment protected
activity. Other material obtained confirmed military undercover activity
also at So. Connecticut State Univ, and UC Berkeley. See http://pageonq.com
for more information.
MORE CASES
State Secrets Trump Justice
Khaled El Masri v. George Tenet et. al was thrown out of court on the
basis of protecting state secrets. On May 12 Federal District Judge T.S.
Ellis III in Virginia wrote a moving decision as to El Masri’s likely
torture and wrongful detention by the US. Yet Ellis writes that he was
forced to dismiss the case. Ellis wrote: El Masri’s “remedy
must be the Executive Branch or the Legislative Branch, not the Judicial
Branch.”
Detention by Ethnicity or Religion Now Legal?
As David Cole (co-counsel in the lawsuit discussed below) puts it –
he can no longer tell Japanese Americans and others that something like
the World War II internment can never again be legal. With the decision
in Turkmen v. Ashcroft, the government upheld the indefinite detention
of Arabs and Muslims in the New York area in the immediate aftermath of
9/11. Judge John Gleeson of the US District Court for the Eastern District
of New York ruled that people can be held without explanation on the basis
of their religion, race or national origin, though he allowed the case
to proceed only on the issues of abusive or unconstitutional conditions
of confinement. This only a district judge’s decision, but it’s
a serious slap at what we hoped was settled law. Expect an appeal from
the Center for Constitutional Rights – attorney Rachel Meeropol
and company.
Muslims and Arab Americans Challenge Watch Lists
People repeatedly stopped in their efforts to fly, and questioned and
humiliated without recourse, have brought suit May 19th against the U.S.
Represented by the ACLU, a class action has been brought in Chicago, complaining
about both misidentification and mistaken government assessments of people
who only want to travel in the U.S.
ACLU Challenging NSA Wiretap Program in Court
In Detroit, the ACLU, represented by Ann Beeson, has challenged the National
Security Agency (NSA)’s warrantless wiretapping program, on behalf
of scholars, journalists, lawyers and groups. The government in response
in court June 12 asked Federal District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor to dismiss
the case, saying “the evidence we need to demonstrate to you that
it [the program] is lawful cannot be disclosed without that process itself
causing grave harm to United States national security.” Of course
the government argues as well that the plaintiffs can’t show they’ve
been harmed – because they can’t confirm they’ve been
spied on.
Ann Beeson argued the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of
1978 covers the President and should have been used. And as to harm, she
noted that journalists’ sources have shut up, and lawyers representing
terrorism suspects no longer can communicate by phone to their clients.
We’re hoping the resolution will not toss the courts out of accountability
again.
HAMDAN Supreme Court Case to Come
Nails are being bitten all over the world. Mr. Bush announced in recent
days that he wants to close Guantanamo prison but must wait for the Hamdan
decision. This patently absurd statement, nonetheless underlines the importance
of the decision. Salim Ahmed Hamdan, allegedly Osama Bin Laden’s
driver, faces a modified military tribunal along with only 9 other men
out of about 450 at Guantanamo. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the
case, and is expected to deliver a ruling the end of June – just
after this goes to press.
Ratification of what we have called a third way – neither following
the US constitution nor international law thru the Geneva Conventions
– would routinize the US creating legal procedures out of thin air.
The current process was created without legislation, no consultation with
other countries, and with considerable uproar inside the military thru
the ranks. Some in the military fear the prospect of facing similar procedures
if they would be captured. Remember the U.S. at first refused to give
people at Guantanamo hearings to determine if they were really captured
on the battlefield, engaged in conflict with US or allied forces.
LEGISLATION
NSA Warrantless Wiretaps
House to Require Company Reporting
First, the whole House of Representatives on June 20 narrowly defeated
(207-219) a vote to defund a program related to the NSA’s warrantless
wiretapping of US people. The next day, the House Judiciary Committee
passed a Democratic resolution that would require the Justice Department
to give the House all documents related to requests to telecom companies
for wiretaps. A full vote by the House would be required to enforce this.
Stay tuned. A couple shots across the bow to the Administration.
Senate Backs Off Accountability
But then, after some high visibility posturing of his own, Senator Specter
has backed off his strong opposition to the warrantless wiretapping, and
supported an amended bill “National Security Surveillance Act”
substitute to S. 2453. Facetiously called the “Specter-Cheney”
bill by an ACLU staffer, the bill would refer requests for the wiretaps
to the FISA Court. The requests then would proceed in secret, never to
see the light of day or public accountability. A committee markup to finalize
content on Thursday June 22 was postponed, and is scheduled to take place
just after we go to press before the July 4 recess.
TO DO: Oppose any bill that would ratify the legality
of mass wiretaps that bypass the court system. Let your Senators know
you oppose the Specter bill. The Center for Democracy and Technology spearheaded
a letter to Congress opposing the bill – we signed on. The ACLU
and others are mounting a full court press against this Congressional
spinelessness.
Bank Transaction Spying (SWIFT) Without Congressional Oversight
The next surprise government program is that the Treasury Department obtains
information about financial transactions from a Belgian private group
– SWIFT – the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications.
This is reportedly a more targeted search (than the NSA warrantless wiretaps)
of people suspected of connection to Al Qaeda. While there are some real
time audits by SWIFT officials, the Congressional Intelligence Committees
have only recently been briefed on the program and the House Subcommittee
tasked with Treasury Department oversight has yet to be briefed. Is it
legal? It’s another “Trust Us” program set up outside
the advice and consent structure of our government.
Thus far, the only call for hearings is by Rep Peter King (R-NY) who wants
to string up the New York Times, which broke the story. And of course
Mr. Cheney, who’s blasting the disclosure. There may be piling on
to this call.
Flag Desecration Constitutional Amendment Failed by 1 in Senate
Those who have followed the long history of flag desecration laws and
court decisions may remember that in recent history, all efforts to pass
the amendment in the Senate (by a 2/3 vote) have failed. This time it
was close. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed the resolution 11-7,
and by the time you get this letter the vote in the full Senate happened.
And the House vote was as usual overwhelming, so if it passed in the Senate,
it would have been up to the states to ratify it. Why do we face this
and what are the concerns?
Most recently in the Supreme Court, in 1989 the court ruled in Texas v.
Johnson that flag desecration is constitutionally protected activity as
the flag is so clearly a symbol of the U.S. that dissent activity obviously
sometimes uses the flag as shorthand to express that dissent with government
actions or policies. Since that time the Congress has worked to create
a constitutional amendment to override the Supreme Court.
Why the concern? Two issues – 1) What is a US flag for these purposes
and 2) What is desecration? They are not easily answered, as what is objectionable
tends to depend on the wearer or doer. Famously, Abby Hoffman wore a shirt
that looked to be made from a US flag when he testified before the House
UnAmerican Activities Committee. Many people were horrified (as he had
of course hoped). Pat Boone, the much more conservative singer, often
wore a shirt that had stars and stripes emblazoned on them and no one
complained.
One story is recounted in which U.S. prisoners of war were shown a photo
of a US flag being burned by U.S. people – aiming to demoralize
them. The POWs responded that they were fighting in part to defend the
right of people to do this in the U.S., and that this distinguishes us
from so many others.
While there are lots of procedural issues yet to be addressed to ensure
that there is no selective enforcement should the amendment be passed
by the states, we have a more dissent related concern. Having attended
and participated in many, many demonstrations, we’ve been in some
at which a flag was burned. Typically it is not a demonstration-sanctioned
event, but rather one person produces a flag, lights it a second later,
75 cameras get whipped out of nowhere, and there is the picture on the
front page of the “Pick Your Journal” the next day. Already,
flag-burning gets used as shorthand to discredit demonstrations. But if
this should become a constitutional amendment, will all the participants
at a demonstration where a flag is burned get arrested and charged with
conspiracy to desecrate a flag? Just watch.
Update on Immigration Legislation
by Emile Schepers
Most observers now think that there is little chance of finishing an immigration
reform bill in this session of Congress.
The House of Representatives passed a bill, HR 4437 in December, and the
Senate followed suit in May with S 2611. The House bill stresses border
and internal enforcement, and does not offer any solution for the 12 million
undocumented immigrants. The Senate bill contains many elements that are
worrisome from a civil liberties perspective, but does offer a mechanism
whereby half or more of the undocumented could eventually gain legal resident
status, with access to citizenship. The Senate bill also sets up a new
guest worker program with an annual limit of 200,000, and a possibility
for guest workers to petition to become permanent residents.
Normally, the next step would be a House-Senate conference committee to
reconcile these two very different bills. However, the House Republican
leadership has blocked this. First, Speaker Hastert (R-Il) claimed that
S 2611 is unconstitutional, because it contains language specifying how
undocumented immigrants are to pay their back taxes, and according to
Hastert this is a “revenue enhancement” clause which can not
originate in the Senate. Hastert also claims that the Senate never forwarded
the paperwork to the House that is needed to set up the conference committee.
But the main obstacle is that the House Republican leadership has decided
to hold at least seven hearings on S 2611 before even naming their own
members to the Conference Committee. These hearings will involve a number
of House Committees, and not all details have been announced. But from
information provided at Speaker Hastert’s press conference on June
22, it would appear that they are going to mostly invite testimony from
anti-immigrant sectors. In an interview with Time magazine, House Republican
Leader John Boehner (R-OH) made it clear that the focus will be on attacking
things in the Senate bill that the House Republican leadership does not
like. Inaccurately, the House Republican leaders are calling S 2611 bill
the “Democrats' Reid-Kennedy” bill, even though it is formally
called the Specter bill and originated as the “Hagel-Martinez compromise”.
Specter, Hagel and Martinez are Republicans, Reid and Kennedy are Democrats,
so......
At this writing, Senator Specter has announced that he is also planning
to hold hearings to promote S 2611. Meanwhile, the Bush administration,
which theoretically supports the Senate bill, has greatly stepped up immigration
enforcement action.
Immigrants’ rights supporters fear that we will end up with a harshly
repressive bill which gives President Bush and big business a union-proof
guest worker program but does nothing for the undocumented. The many organizations
and coalitions that comprise the immigrants’ rights movement are
developing a series of massive activities to oppose this.
TO DO: Keep the pressure on your elected officials to
keep from compromising.
Parting Shot
This from the CIA Internet site, quoted in Michael Kinsley’s Wash.
Post op ed June 16: “’We’ve been a major player in developing
the law of national security vs. the First Amendment…’ ‘Or
the Fourth Amendment…’ When ‘Americans [abroad] come
across on our screen, they’ve got constitutional rights we’ve
got to think about…Or electronic surveillance…In areas like
that, we’re helping to create the law, and that’s a real rush.’”
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
NCARL and First Amendment Foundation Comment and Contribution
Sheet
Given that we are considering a reorganization and renaming of both groups
– along the lines of Defending Dissent and Defending Dissent Foundation,
we wanted to encourage you all to write us, and are giving you a whole
page to do so. We are sending this letter to the full list of NCARL and
First Amendment Foundation folks. Our thinking is to begin to send the
usually 4 page newsletter monthly to the full list unless you tell us
not.
If you wish, give us your name and address with your comments. If you
could, send us the name of others who should get the newsletter. If you
can, begin to support us – either through a single donation, or
to begin to be a sustainer of the group – quarterly, annually, or
even monthly. A dollar, ten thousand dollars. Consider getting the letter
electronically – saves money and paper. But as you wish. And thank
for all your help and support over the years.
BACK TO TOP
June 2006
Dear NCARL friends,
DEFENDING DISSENT
Kit’s Wilkinson Book Travels
The Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom chapter (WILPF)
in Santa Cruz hosted me and several local activists for an event in late
May. Two students from UC Santa Cruz told how they recently landed on
the FBI’s list of suspicious persons for helping organize anti-war
rallies. Another Santa Cruz activist told a similar story of surveillance
for his efforts to organize a political New Year’s Eve peaceful
event. The event drew veteran movement people – many of whom had
worked with Frank Wilkinson, but also younger people who drew the parallels
between government suspicion of dissent activities in the 40s, 50s and
60s and today. Discussion was lively.
The Santa Cruz experience encapsulates the joint purposes of our book
touring: 1) to spread the history of government targeting of dissent and
the effectiveness of coalition building to limit the spying, and 2) to
reach out to both older supporters and newer activists to strengthen local
coalitions and grow NCARL’s national network.
I’m now back from the last of a group of book events, and will probably
not be doing many summer events. Chicago, Cleveland and Oberlin, OH, Boston,
New Haven, San Francisco, Portland and Seattle are in various stages of
planning for the fall. If you have a date in mind, get it in to me soon
so we can set up a variety of events in the area. It’s not overwhelming
to organize – so contact us to see what we can set up.
School of Americas Watch is FBI Target
Ok, so you’re not shocked that the entirely peaceful movement to
close the (old name) School of the Americas in Georgia – now 16
years of non-violent civil disobedience – has been a subject of
FBI surveillance. The group draws activists annually to march and call
attention to the school’s training of human rights abusers among
other foreign military. Robin Lloyd – a long time NCARL supporter
– is one of those activists now spending months in jail for her
civil disobedience with the group.
As part of its ongoing Freedom of Information Act efforts, the ACLU is
receiving many examples like these of FBI targeting of peaceful dissent
organizations. See more on this at www.aclu.org/spyfiles.
Greensboro
Rev. Nelson Johnson, a victim of the Greensboro Massacre and board member
of the Greensboro Justice Fund, was recently told that a group of mostly
African American activists including him was under surveillance for years
by local police. The interim police chief told Johnson that members of
the department had tried to entrap the activists into doing illegal acts
and then hid the practice. For more information, contact the Greensboro
Justice Fund: P.O. Box 1594, Northampton, MA 01061.
[West Point] Graduates Against the War (WPGAW)
We know it must have rankled the U.S. military academy to have its name
included in West Point Graduates Against the War. But now the WPGAW has
received a letter from West Point, telling it to remove its “trademark”
name from the anti-war group name, citing the need to protect the “image
and standing” of West Point in the “national and world stage.”
Co-founder Jim Ryan wonders why the academy has approved having its name
on several local businesses, “How does a pizza parlor enhance West
Point’s image on the world stage?” Ryan notes the cadet’s
code not to tolerate those who lie, cheat or steal requires them to start
their group and hold the government accountable. Stay tuned.
Spying on the Press
Perhaps it’s not surprising, but according to ABC News reports from
Brian Ross and Richard Esposito, the FBI is not denying that it is seeking
phone records of reporters from ABC, the New York Times and Washington
Post. All those leaks of constitutional concerns by government employees
are taking their toll on the Bush administration. In weekend appearances,
Attorney General Gonzales has warned that the press may be prosecuted
(1917 Espionage Act) for national security related leaks it receives.
Funeral Demonstrations ?? You Decide
Ok, this is a test. How much of a First Amendment purist are you? Tests
my mettle. Thinking about the issues raised is useful to clarify your
values, just as the issue of permitting Klan rallies in mostly Jewish
Skokie Illinois was in the last century.
Rev. Fred Phelps has a “God hates Fags” campaign. As part
of the effort, he has been organizing protests at random soldiers’
funerals, holding up signs saying that in general US troops are dying
because of US society’s acceptance of homosexuality.
Cruel to the survivors? Clearly. In horrible taste? Undeniably. Worth
outlawing? That’s what nine states have already decided, 23 more
in process, and hold on for a federal law outlawing demonstrators 100-500
feet from entrances to federal cemeteries.
See Robyn Blumner’s April 23 St. Petersburg Times column for a clear
position against such laws. See every legislature in favor. I’m
coming around to Robyn’s side – and would advocate strong
public arguments against Phelps’ behavior, but not outlaw it.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Phone Companies Hand Govt Info on Millions of Calls
Senator Leahy: “Now, are you telling me that tens of millions of
Americans are involved with al-Qaeda?”
There’s lots of denying going on these days, so it’s not yet
clear what’s accurate. But it’s pretty likely that some US
phone companies at least gave the government all their data on all long
distance calls from the U.S., and perhaps just to other countries. These
are phone numbers called from and to (which can be connected to names
pretty easily), the date and time. It’s like the old “mail
covers” but on a mass scale. This data was presumably used to target
some of these callers for additional scrutiny. But imagine those numbers
of people and calls – even the biggest of computers will have trouble
with that number crunching – and what are the criteria? How about
when Iranian radio called me for an interview? That was certainly suspect.
How about when I call a national Muslim American group across the country?
Read Bruce Shapiro’s June 5 article in The Nation, about
the history of the scandal of phone companies giving their records to
local police and the FBI. In the 1970s, Rep. Bella Abzug subpoenaed government
and phone company officials. Then Chief of Staff Dick Cheney and Defense
Secretary Rumsfeld got Justice to assert executive privilege but phone
company officials came and talked and Abzug got her evidence of “Operation
Shamrock” anyway.
One thing that seems clear about today’s scandal, is that the U.S.
claims it just asked the companies for their records – no warrant,
no specific legal authorization – and some of the companies just
gave them. When we know the companies involved, they and relevant government
officials should be held accountable.
TO DO: Call Senator Specter (202-224-4254) and ask him to subpoena
everyone involved – government and phone company officials –
and find out who and what was authorized. Find what happened to all those
records, and how widely they’re shared. Ask what category of information
would trigger the jump from mass collection to individual eavesdropping.
Lots to do.
Numbers: 9254 National Security Letters (NSLs) on over 3500 US
people,
2072 FISA searches, and 750 Laws Ignored
As required by the USA Patriot Act, the Bush Administration has reported
to Congress on the number of NSL’s (9254) – letters sent to
banks, internet service providers and etc – requesting detailed
information on US citizens or legal residents in 2005.
As well, the government obtained 2072 warrants for searches from the FISA
court under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 2005, an 18%
increase over 2004. FISA is the act which was circumvented by Mr. Bush
in authorizing the National Security Agency (NSA) to do warrantless searches
against an as yet unreported number of U.S. people.
Finally, the Boston Globe reports (April 30) that Mr. Bush “has
claimed authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took
office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed
by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.”
NSA Warrantless Wiretapping
Brouhaha Continues
This intrusive secret searching was done with the knowledge of Congress.
What knowledge? Eight people. Sworn to secrecy -- not to tell even the
other 20 people on the intelligence committees, people with the highest
clearances. Rendering impossible any sort of advise and consent function.
Senator Specter (R-PA), chair of the Judiciary Committee, has said he
will introduce a bill to block funding for the NSA program. Rep. Jane
Harman (D-CA), one of the 8 briefed, now is concerned by the program,
and voted against the intelligence authorization bill. After others beyond
the Congressional “Gang of 8” were briefed, they pointed out
to Harman that FISA had been violated. The authorization bill passed with
no NSA-controlling amendments; the amendment failed that would have required
briefing full House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees.
Just before the confirmation hearings of former NSA director Hayden for
CIA director, the Senate Intelligence committee was “thoroughly”
briefed about the NSA warrantless spying program – now called “terrorist
surveillance program” by the White House.
Robert Levy, of the Libertarian leaning Cato Institute, testified before
the Senate Judiciary Committee Feb 28th. His conclusions can be read at
the Senate Judiciary website, but can be summed up as: 1) the President
has broad power under Article II even to authorize warrantless spying
(with probable cause), 2) if Congress has expressly prohibited it, then
he does not have the power to override, and 3) FISA does expressly prohibit
Executive warrantless spying, so Mr. Bush has violated FISA.
TO DO: Go to the Bill of Rights Defense Committee website: www.bordc.org,
and take the model resolutions on warrantless wiretapping to your city,
county, or state! Join the many national groups in contacting your representatives,
urging they get all possible information about the actions, and hold the
Executive Branch accountable for violations of law.
Gen. Hayden Hearings : From NSA to DNI Assistant to CIA Director
Air Force General Michael Hayden reacted calmly as he faced long questioning
in his CIA director confirmation hearings. He fielded queries especially
about the warrantless wiretapping program which he claims he didn’t
form, but strongly supports. He didn’t answer why in 2002 he testified
that the government required a warrant to listen to Americans’ phone
calls, just as he was doing at that moment without warrant. He stated
as justification that NSA and Justice Department lawyers oversaw the warrantless
surveillance. The Senate Intelligence Committee reacted gratefully to
Hayden’s repeated assertions that under his watch the NSA had, and
any future assignment would, not come under the thrall of political convenience,
but rather it would stick to relaying the facts as understood in a broad
context. He’s probably being confirmed as CIA Director as this is
written (12-3 in Intel Comt).
How can they? A pall looms over these two unresolved revelations tied
to Hayden.
LEGISLATION
FBI Director Roasted by Senate
When FBI Director Robert Mueller came before the Senate Judiciary Committee
on May 2, he faced intense criticism. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) listed
some of the 100 examples of improper spying on anti-war groups. On the
Republican side, Muller faced concerns from Senators Specter, Grassley
and Cornyn on issues ranging from trying to trick reporter Jack Anderson’s
widow into giving the FBI Anderson’s files, to continued problems
with information sharing between the FBI and other agencies.
MOSTLY BAD NEWS ON IMMIGRATION REFORM
by Emile Schepers
The Senate resumed voting on amendments to the Hagel-Martinez comprehensive
immigration reform bill, S. 2611. The Bush administration jacked up immigration
enforcement actions and is sending off 6,000 National Guard troops to
the border. While the Democrats defeated a number of negative amendments
to Hagel-Martinez (including one eliminating legalization for the undocumented,
and one that would have prevented guest workers from self-petitioning
to become permanent residents), others passed, including:
*The Inhofe (R-OK) amendment making English the US “national language”,
declaring that the feds have no obligation to provide services in other
than English unless required by law.
*The Cornyn (R-TX) amendment would impose an additional $750 fee for
undocumented immigrants to adjust status.
*Amendments to send National Guard troops to the border and create a
700 mile border fence, and increased funding for detention facilities.
The guest worker program was reduced from 325,000 to 200,000.
An amendment by Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) was defeated May 23, 61-37,
which would have allowed legalization on the same terms for all undocumented
immigrants, rather than the three tiered approach of the Hagel-Martinez
bill.
Immigrants’ rights organizations stress that other items in Hagel-Martinez
that must be removed include: denying legalization to large categories
of people because they used a fake Social Security number, denying political
asylum to many, and restricting the ability of undocumented immigrants
to appeal adverse decisions by Homeland Security. Immigrants’ rights
groups want an amendment that would prevent immigrants with US citizen
spouses and children from being deported.
Whatever bill is finished will face big problems in the conference committee:
Speaker Hastert has re-affirmed his policy of not allowing anything to
pass against the majority of House Republicans.
TO DO: Lobby Senators and House members to pass an immigration
reform that legalizes all undocumented, creates new safe and legal mechanisms
for immigration, does not militarize the border, avoids easily abused
guest worker approaches, protects civil and labor rights for all, and
maintains unity of immigrant families. Get ready for a summer of protests
and voter registration for fair immigration reform.
CASES
State Secrets Trump El Masri Case
Kuwaiti-born German, Khaled el-Masri’s lawsuit claimed he was an
innocent victim of U.S. “rendition” to other countries’
secret jails for detention, interrogation and mistreatment. Federal Judge
T.S. Ellis III quashed the case, agreeing with the U.S. position that
it involved “state secrets” and so could not be tried, regardless
of validity. Ben Wizner, Masri’s attorney, had argued the case was
publicized widely in the press and the government itself had acknowledged
some renditions. Appeal please?
Al Arian – Judge Throws the Book
The prosecution asked Judge James Moody to sentence Sami Al Arian to time
served plus 9 months for their plea agreement. The judge instead sentenced
him to the maximum 19 more months. More shocking, Moody accused Al Arian
of committing acts of which the jury had found him innocent. “Master
manipulator” was Moody’s term for Al Arian, and he added,
your “only connection to widows and orphans is that you create them”
in response to Al Arian’s guilty plea to nonviolent humanitarian
fundraising for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.
Mohammed Salah – Tortured Confession Valid?
Mohammed Salah, arrested, jailed and tortured in Israel in 1993, signed
a confession in Hebrew, which he neither reads nor speaks. After release
in 1997 he returned to his family in Chicago. He faced a unique financial
limit on his return – the only US citizen not allowed to accept
or receive US funds. Gradually his lawyers loosened some of those restrictions.
Then in 2001 a grand jury started again and in 2004 he was indicted, charged
with aid to a terrorist group based on that tortured confession. Stay
tuned for the results of a suppression hearing as to whether that confession
can be introduced as evidence.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Special thanks to the family and friends of Alpheus “Al”
Byers Parsons, who at his memorial, collected donations to his memory
and sent them to the First Amendment Foundation.
BACK TO TOP
May 2006
Dear NCARL friends,
DEFENDING DISSENT
Talon Targets Campus Counter-Recruitment
Documents obtained from the Pentagon’s Talon program confirm that
some of the targets of its assessment of international terrorism threats
were US students demonstrating on their campuses against military recruiters.
These were both anti-war folks and those who object to the military’s
policy of discrimination against homosexuals. Two files document surveillance
of UC Santa Cruz students and NYU law school students. Another case was
reporting on a Quaker meeting in Lake Worth, Florida considering plans
to protest military recruiting in high schools.
An internal review of database entries in the Talon system turned up 260
that were mistakes, including those above. Uproar about these revelations
has at least resulted in the military setting up a vetting and review
system to minimize the damage. Kate Martin of the Center for National
Security Studies advocates: “If the Pentagon has been collecting
information improperly on Americans, it should provide a full accounting
of what kind of information it collected, on whom and why...”
Police Infiltrators in Boulder
I attended a wonderful Bill of Rights Defense Committee board meeting
in early April. Betty Ball of Boulder was one of the delights. She recounted
the discovery that 2 undercover police officers had infiltrated the meetings
of planned demonstrations in Boulder. The two men were the odd ones, advocating
stupid and violent actions and in general making the group seem weird.
When some in the group were arrested doing sitdowns - peaceful civil disobedience
– the 2 undercovers were immediately released, and later pictures
of them in uniform confirmed their identities. It reeks of the old COINTELPRO
days. Disrupt, discredit and neutralize having been the mantra.
Kit Gage Book Tour Journals
There’s still time to get on the bandwagon. Bring Kit Gage to your
town to talk about the need to defend dissent and the life of Frank Wilkinson
as exemplar. Plans are under way for Oberlin, OH, New Haven, CT, Chicago
and elsewhere. End of April I go to Los Angeles and Orange County. Boston
perhaps?
Just back from a trip to New York state, where I met fabulous activists
on Long Island from the Five Towns Forum – which has been holding
forth monthly for 50 years now. At Garrison, NY and Manhattanville College,
I met both activist vets and enthusiastic and successful newer student
leaders.
One of the most delightful discoveries was the Connie Hogarth Center at
the College. There, Connie Hogarth, a longtime NCARL activist, works with
students many decades younger, sharing skills and learning from each other.
The mutual affection and respect was obvious and enormous. One of the
losses my generation suffered as a result of the Red Scare and Cold War
was that there were fewer veteran activists to work with those coming
up who were not neutralized by the House UnAmerican Activities Committee
and attendant repression. I think it’s one of the reasons baby boomers
have the erroneous sense that we invented dissent. Connie and her Center
show me what we missed.
And then I got to see Pete Seeger – expounding on the practicalities
of how we can get to a more peaceful world. So glad he’s still doing
it.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
[Notice of Error: Last month, despite knowing better even elsewhere in
the letter, we referred to Senator DeWine as Representative. He used to
be, but he’s a Senator now. Sorry for the error.]
Warrantless Spying Scandal
Gonzales Testifies, Sort of
Let’s start this out with the Attorney General. Mr. Gonzales testified
again at a House Judiciary Committee hearing that the President was authorized
because of the “War on Terror” to conduct warrantless wiretapping
on US citizens’ purely domestic phone conversations. And then he
said virtually nothing more in answer to Representatives’ questions.
It so infuriated Republican Judiciary chair Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) that
he fumed, “…if we’re properly to determine whether or
not the program was legal and funded – because that’s Congress’s
responsibility – we need to have answers, and we’re not getting
them.” He characterized Gonzales as “stonewalling” the
committee. Reminds me of the Nixon administration.
Legislation Starting to Flow
We’re starting to see various legislative responses to Mr. Bush’s
abrogation of power that have to do with future action. Last month we
described Senator DeWine’s bill, S. 2453, as essentially legalizing
the spying. Senator Schumer has introduced S. 2455 to put a few more limits
on the activity than DeWine. Schumer’s bill would require court
review of the wiretapping, though without requiring FISA approval in all
intelligence cases, and without full briefing of Congress for oversight.
It would expand the array of domestic communications which the President
could wiretap.
On the House side, there is the better H.R. 4976, the NSA Oversight Act,
introduced by Reps Schiff and Flake. It’s a relatively simple bill
that reiterates that the FISA Act of 1978 is still valid law even post
9/11. The FISA courts must be used for the US to wiretap people in the
U.S. for intelligence or terrorism reasons.
On the accountability side: while Democrats in the Senate haven’t
supported Senator Feingold’s (D-WI) censure proposal, polls across
the country and contributions to Feingold’s political action campaign
indicate strong support in the field. And back in DC, there is still momentum
for continued hearings and accountability for what the Bush administration
has done. This is not the time to give up on punishing illegal spying.
TO DO: Ask your Representative to sign on to H.R. 4976, the NSA
Oversight Act, as a co-sponsor. And push both House and Senate to continue
hearings and for prosecution as warranted, especially when legislators
are home for Memorial Day recess.
LEGISLATION
Immigration Momentum and Mess
by Emile Schepers
On March 27, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary passed a bill which
included a mechanism for legalization of the undocumented, a guest worker
program, the AgJOBS Act which would allow farmworkers to gain legal status,
and the DREAM Act which would allow u |
