November
2007
Dear troublemakers,
Defending Dissent Foundation
Our New Executive Director
The Board of Directors of Defending Dissent Foundation is pleased to announce
that Sue Udry has agreed to become our new Executive Director. We conducted
a nationwide search. We received dozens of resumes from qualified and
fascinating people. We conducted many interviews. In the end, within our
midst, we found Sue, eager to do the work.
A number of us already knew Sue as a member of our Board before she resigned
to seek the Executive Director position. Sue had served on the steering
committee of the National Committee Against Repressive Legislation (NCARL),
and over a decade ago, had directed our sister organization, the Chicago
Committee to Defend the Bill of Rights. After moving to Washington D.C.,
Sue became the Legislative Director of United for Peace and Justice, responsible
for guiding the grassroots lobbying efforts of the coalition’s 1300
member groups, as well as the legislative advocacy of the coalition as
a whole. UFPJ is a respected national advocacy group dedicated to affecting
the national dialogue on national security, war and peace and a large
coalition – critical experience in our estimation.
Sue’s expertise in coalition building, in web and other Internet
communication, in legislative action, and in defending dissent activities,
makes her a great fit for us. She already knows many of the national organizations
with whom we work. She has been part of the national scene for a period
of years, and understands the legislative process. Her enthusiasm and
energy are palpable.
What she doesn't know so well is many of you (outside of Chicago, of course).
She doesn't yet know your experience and your expertise and your history.
She will learn the depth of your commitment to the issues and the warmth
with which you support and defend this organization.
Finding Sue to step into Kit’s shoes will help ameliorate our sense
of loss at Kit’s departure. Because Kit had been with NCARL for
fifteen years, she made possible the impossible job of replacing Frank
Wilkinson’s forty-year tenure directing NCARL and then, in April
of 2001, his directorship the First Amendment Foundation. The ongoing
gargantuan civil liberties crises brought on in the wake of the 9/11/2001
terrorist attacks greeted her shortly thereafter.
In the midst of it all, Kit, with Frank, commissioned Jim Dempsey &
David Cole's book, Terrorism & the Constitution and then
she became midwife to Frank Wilkinson biography – First Amendment
Felon. Frank's story neatly ties together our unique history, as
the National Committee to Abolish the House Un-American Activities Committee
(HUAC) and a poignant story of an indomitable hero and it became what
Kit and Frank had envisioned – not a just a regular biography, but
the history of government attacks on dissent throughout the 20th century.
Frank regaled most of the country with his stories over the last decades
of the 20th century. Now his biography, paired with the Cole and Dempsey
text, can do that into the future, which helps us all reconcile to Frank’s
death in 2005. Thank you, Kit, for all of that.
And thank you, Sue for joining in this newly more activist role with us,
Executive Director of Defending Dissent Foundation. Please join us in
welcoming her.
Woody Kaplan, President
Defending Dissent Foundation,
On behalf of the Board of Directors
Hello Defending Dissent Foundation
Dear friends,
As readers of this newsletter know too well, the work of the Defending
Dissent Foundation is vital. The Executive branch works in secret (or
out in the open) to erode our rights, aided and abetted by the Judiciary…
and the Legislature wrings its hands rather ineffectually, or just plain
gives in. I don't step into this job lightly.
But I believe in the mission of DDF and am confident that we can meet
the challenge we're facing. I am optimistic because activists, youth and
students, immigrants and others are taking the threats against our liberties
seriously. In my two and half decades as an activist, I have never seen
such awareness and concern about civil liberties before. That is partly
due to the overreaching of the Bush Administration of course, but also
due to the work of NCARL, the First Amendment Foundation, and others who
have effectively educated people around the country about the importance
of our right to dissent.
I come to the Defending Dissent Foundation with twenty-five years of experience
as an organizer on different peace and justice issues. I understand that
at the base of it all is our right to dissent, so I am pleased to be back
in the NCARL family. I look forward to working with you to keep our rights
intact, and hope I can count on your active participation in DDF.
Sincerely, Sue Udry
Kit’s Parting Thoughts
As those of you who’ve been reading the Defending Dissent letter
over the last months know, we’ve been searching for a new director.
As you can see, we’ve found someone – a person in the family
already. Clearly, Sue has civil liberties in her soul. That’ll be
a huge help for her as she facilitates us in facing off against a certain
array of repressive government limitations on dissent. Why certain? Look
at the last century: Palmer Raids to investigations of anti-war activists.
So now that we’ve found Sue and she’s found in us her next
career, I can proceed to my next work. I fully intend to be a resource
for Defending Dissent Foundation over the next months and probably years.
You never really leave the family. I look forward to reading the newsletter
rather than writing it every month. I look forward to being told what
to do and how to do it by Sue – in defense of the right to dissent.
I look forward to the new blood, new ideas, and new directions that will
take Defending Dissent Foundation further into the electronic age than
I’ve been able to go. Better website, blogs? MyFace? Sky’s
the limit.
None of the last 20 years that mark my affiliation with NCARL, First Amendment
Foundation and now Defending Dissent Foundation would have been worth
it if I felt alone in the effort. On the contrary, there is the Board
of Directors – they’ve put in sometimes huge amounts of time,
thought, encouragement, and gentle guidance, which have been crucial through
my transition into being director.
Then there is my cork board. It’s loaded with notes from you all,
and beyond that a file folder with some of the most interesting, funny
and welcome of the historical notes (and just to balance it off, a few
of the best hate mail). You are activists and you care about our country
and making it stand up to its espoused principles. You’ve been a
great history lesson for me because among you in the mailing list is an
honor role of the who’s who of civil libertarians. Most of the people
you’ve ever heard of who stood up against the Red Scare and McCarthyism
(or J Edgar Hooverism as Frank Wilkinson used to say), are and were our
supporters. And that means that so many more of the people you never heard
of, who more quietly stood up to the tyranny against dissent, have been
part of the NCARL, now Defending Dissent Foundation family. I am honored
to have ‘led’ you. I am gratified and humbled by your support.
You make me proud to be an American – when that can be a challenge.
I know you’re not going anywhere, and I’m just stepping down
as director. I remain an embraced and comradely troublemaker among the
best of troublemakers. Kit
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Mukasey Twists in the Wind
Last month it looked like Judge Mukasey was a shoe-in for Attorney General.
But then, in his testimony the second day before the Senate Judiciary
Committee, he hit a wall. Two main issues started to choke the committee.
Mr. Mukasey refused to condemn the use of ‘water-boarding’
outright, saying that he didn’t know how it was being implemented,
even after Senators described the procedure in its gory detail. And at
the same hearing, the judge allowed as how he thought that the President
has the right in a time of emergency to ignore the rule of laws.
In response, Senate Democrats have sent a letter requesting clarification
in writing of his position on water-boarding. And Republican Senator Arlen
Specter has asked for clarification on those issues and also on the Executive
override of laws. From Specter’s letter: “If you believe the
President can act outside the law, how do you square that belief with
your statement at the hearing that ‘The President doesn't stand
above the law?’”
Senate Judiciary Chair Pat Leahy has slowed up the process, saying there
will be no movement on the nomination until written responses to the letters
are received. Both he and Senator Dick Durban (D-IL) have indicated their
votes for Judge Mukasey depend on his repudiating water-boarding.
TO DO: Call your Senators with your concerns about these
issues – asking them not to confirm an Attorney General who believes
the Executive Branch is above the law. Call the switchboard: 202-224-3121
and ask for your Senator’s office. Then leave a message with the
receptionist or the staffer who handles judiciary issues.
LEGISLATION
Warrantless Wiretap Bill Mess
After the August passage of the “Protect America Act”,
Democrats and some others vowed they’d fix the codification of Presidential
warrantless wiretapping. The House introduced a bill, H.R 3773, the Restore
Act, which imposes additional limits over the August law, and refuses
to allow retroactive immunity to the telecommunications industry for its
cooperation with the Executive in facilitating warrantless wiretaps. Then
came the Senate on a bipartisan basis to introduce a much worse bill that
also would give telecomm immunity. It’s an abomination.
Initially the broad civil liberties community split over the House bill
as not being good enough. Then came the Senate version, which we all oppose.
It not only would give telecom immunity, but it codifies much of the worst
of the August law for a longer period.
TO DO: Call your House member today! Tell them to stand
up in support of at least the Restore Act (H.R. 3773) requirements of
warrants and oversight by the FISA court, and to oppose telecom immunity.
Stand up against the Senate cave-in.
CASES
Holy Land Foundation Mistrial Win
The U.S. government effectively killed the Texas charity in December 2001
when it froze and then seized its assets (money, computers, records, desks,
etc.), without a hearing. Some folks affiliated with the former organization
appealed the decisions, but failed in court, arguably in significant part
because the case involved secret evidence the challengers were not permitted
to see, not to mention that there were no organizational funds available
to pay to sue. The Federal court in D.C. ruled against the challenge that
this procedure denied constitutional rights of due process.
Not satisfied, the U.S. then decided to bring 197 criminal charges against
Holy Land Foundation and its board. Here it finally hit a wall. A jury
found the individuals innocent of many of the serious charges, and deadlocked
on the rest – finding no one guilty of any of the charges. The judge
called a mistrial.
This has been the recent trend on the material support for terrorism charges
when they hit juries. Sami Al Arian in Florida was found innocent of the
toughest charges and the jury deadlocked 10-2 for acquittal on the rest.
In Chicago, similarly, two men were acquitted of the most serious charges.
Material support for terrorism is inherently a vacuum cleaner charge –
it’s a crime to give money or even volunteer your time to a group
labeled terrorist – or even to another group that then gives money
to the labeled group. This includes completely charitable activity –
money for food, medical care, for children, for example – as was
Holy Land Foundation’s purpose. Juries have refused in recent years
to buy it. <><>
October 2007
Dear Troublemakers,
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Attorney General Nominee, Michael Mukasey – As Good as Advertised?
Everyone was ready when Alberto Gonzales’ resignation was accepted by Mr.
Bush. But the trepidation level was also high. Various names circulated,
and then it became obvious that Judge Michael Mukasey would be nominated.
As a judge, Mukasey had been through the nomination procedure in the 1980s
at the te Judiciary, which makes him more likely confirmable. And Democratic
Senator Schumer announced himself delighted at the nomination. Others let
it be known that this was a man who can be confirmed. Lots of kudos appeared
in the major papers attesting to his intelligence, clarity and basic judicial
temperament, as well as to his expertise in dealing with terrorism issues
first-hand.
That’s probably all true, but let’s look at a couple of terrorism cases
over which he presided to pick apart some of the issues. In the wake of
the first 1993 World Trade Center bombing, Judge Mukasey presided over the
conspiracy trial of Sheik Omar Rahman in New York, and right after 9/11,
heard government requests to indefinitely detain (without trial) Arab/Muslim
men under the material support for terrorism rubric. As well he heard in
2003 the case of Jose Padilla.
The Sheik Rahman case centered around a purported plan to bomb tunnels to
Manhattan – obviously a potentially catastrophic terrorism crime. Both Margaret
Ratner Kunstler and Andrew Patel, who were lawyers for the defense, spoke
highly of Mukasey’s fairness. Patel later also represented Mr. Padilla before
Judge Mukasey. Ron Kuby, who also defended the blind Sheik, and was removed
from the case on a conflict of interest rationale by the Judge, was critical
in this case: Judge Mukasey “was violating the rights of Arabs before it
was popular.”
In the Padilla case, Judge Mukasey unfortunately upheld the government’s
right to call Padilla an ‘enemy combatant’ and hold him indefinitely, but
against the government, ruling that Padilla must be allowed to consult a
lawyer. And Mukasey was adamant in repeatedly demanding that that the government
follow his ruling and let Padilla see his lawyer. The Padilla case, Mukasey
told the Wall Street Journal, showed “the inadequacy of the current approach
to terrorism prosecutions” because Padilla’s confession, obtained without
his access to a lawyer, was unusable.
Judge Mukasey was one of several judges who, immediately in the wake of
9/11, signed off on the detention of hundreds of Arab and/or Muslim men
around the country under the rubric of ‘material support.’ Almost none of
these men was ever asked to testify before a grand jury or charged with
a crime – most just were released after months or more in jail. ‘Material
witnesses’ only used to be jailed if it was determined to be for their safety,
not to keep them from skipping town. The good news is that in the wake of
9/11 the government bothered to consult judges before jailing these men,
compared with thousands of others just rounded up. The bad news is the government
did a really vigorous sweep of anyone they could find who they thought might
have anything to say about anyone associated with terrorism and then stuck
them in jail. And Judge Mukasey put his stamp of approval on the material
support detentions.
With both the Padilla and Rahman cases under his belt, there is a sense
that Judge Mukasey would be sympathetic to creating a new kind of terrorism
court that would keep government secrets better, more easily use FISA and
other intelligence information, and reflect more contemporary criminal terrorism
behavior in charging and trying crimes. While understandable, that’s still
a mighty scary perspective for the likely new head of the Justice Department,
from which may come new legislative proposals, and certainly new policies.
Expanded Government Satellite Spying Contested
Leadership of House Homeland Security Committees have asked the government
to hold off on implementing an expanded domestic surveillance program recently
announced, noting the lack of privacy and other safeguards for the program.
Reps. Bennie Thompson, Jane Harman and others are holding hearings and speaking
out.
TO DO: Call your Representative and ask them to support the effort
to investigate this program further to ensure that it isn’t unconstitutionally
intrusive.
CASES
FISA Patriot Act Amendments Ruled Unconstitutional – Bring Back Probable
Cause!
U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken granted summary judgment (a strong
affirmation) September 26th that 50 U.S.C. §§ 1804 and 1823, as amended
by the Patriot Act, are unconstitutional, as they violate the Fourth Amendment
of the Bill of Rights. She ruled that the government has no right to place
wiretaps and do other intrusive surveillance without a court order. This
judgment was made in the case of Attorney Brandon Mayfield of Portland,
OR, who was famously linked to the Madrid Spain train bombings, and then
de-linked.
Mayfield sued the U.S., after being falsely accused of involvement in the
bombings, detained several weeks and publicly vilified by the government
before being released. Prior to the arrest, Mayfield had his home and office
bugged; both places also were repeatedly subjected to secret break-ins without
a regular warrant. He sued the government for many of these actions, and
settled all but a constitutional challenge to the parts of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act amended in October 2001.
The relevant FISA amendment in the Patriot Act changed key language dating
from 1978. The amendment said that the government could use a FISA wiretap
if “a significant” purpose of the tap was foreign intelligence, rather than
“the” purpose as previously. The judge argued that this change overstepped
Executive authority over the constitutional role of the Judiciary. She went
back to the core principles of law and policy, that the government must
have probable cause before it can search your property, and that the specific
rationale must to be independently certified by the Judicial Branch.
You can expect the Executive to appeal this pivotal decision. As well, the
decision may affect the legislative process, as right now Congress is in
the middle of fighting to fix, or alternately, make permanent the August
bill that virtually gave away the store to the Executive regarding spying
without FISA judge authorization.
“Free Pass to Hijacking of Constituional Values”
Another Patriot Act tool, the use of national security letters, was ruled
unconstitutional by Federal District Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan.
The Patriot Act allowed the FBI to demand that banks, companies and other
groups turn over use records without allowing them to tell anyone that the
request had been made. Famously, the Connecticut Librarians went public
with their NSL and brought suit. That case and a 2004 ruling by Judge Marrero
stopped the government under the first Patriot Act. This case, brought by
an internet provider, contested the 2006 amended law that provided marginally
more requirements to the government to tell why the NSLs should be kept
secret.
In this case, Judge Marrero said that under the amended law, recipients
remain “effectively barred from engaging in any discussion regarding their
experiences and opinions related to the government’s use of the letters.”
He further called the secrecy portions of this warrantless program, “the
legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass
to the hijacking of constitutional values.” Even the name of the internet
provider suing in this case remains a secret. Go Judge Marrero!
McCarran-Walter Redux – with Secret Evidence
The American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, ACLU and American Association
of University Professors and other groups have sued the U.S for denying
a visa to a Adam Habib, a South African and Muslim academic known in part
for his vocal criticism of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.
Any long-time reader of this letter will remember that the U.S. has, since
the 1952 passage of the McCarran-Walter Act, blocked entry of visitors on
political grounds. Early on, these were generally people perceived as leftists
or Communists. The law was long fought, by our organization and others,
and virtually eliminated in the late 1980s. Now it’s back arguably to facilitate
the ‘war against terrorism.'
One of the most egregious factors in visa denials is that the government
keeps its rationale secret so those refused entry can’t argue against what
they can not see.
LEGISLATION
Right To Appeal Detention Bill
So what is Congress going to undo? The Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of
2007 has been sponsored by Senators Pat Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA).
It would allow any detainee held by the U.S. access to challenge the detention
before a U.S. federal court. The bill has been attached to a defense bill,
which may move quickly.
TO DO: Support this bill: S. 185 and in the House, H.R.
1416, by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). Call the general switchboard, 202.224.3121
and ask for your Senators or Representative. Tell the receptionist for each
that you support the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act.
“Protect America Act” - FISA Fixes?
The ridiculous cave-in “Protect America Act” (PAA) Amendments passed in
August but with a 6 month sunset, are now being reconsidered in Congress.
Few specifics can be advocated via this monthly newsletter as the scene
changes very quickly day to day. Essentially we call on Congress to keep
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act intact, and not violate the Bill
of Rights. But we have written joint organization letters to House and Senate
to hold additional open hearings, which they are now doing. All expect them
to pass some bill before the end of the year.
TO DO: If the legislative fix to the PAA has not passed
when you receive this, please call your Senators and Representative to fix
the horrid ‘Protect America Act” and uphold our constitutional rights in
modifying FISA.
DISSENT
Verizon, You Idiot!
Verizon Wireless has just avoided a major kafuffle by backing off
on its initial decision to prohibit NARAL Pro Choice America, the reproductive
rights organization, from sending ad text messages via its network to people
who specifically permit them, because it deems these messages “controversial”.
Various groups, among them this one, were revving up protests on the issue.
Regular phone lines are subject to “net neutrality” and must not discriminate
on content. Internet service providers and wireless phone companies argue,
and many experts agree, that current law doesn’t require wireless companies
to carry all content, regardless of whether it’s ‘unsavory’ or ‘controversial.’
This time, the controversy was gone in one day, and perhaps that’s a measure
that the “free” market – the marketplace – will fix this kind of problem.
It probably helped that people could compare the company Verizon Wireless
to the Chinese government in blocking advocacy communications. But to be
consistent, it probably makes sense for Congress to match up First Amendment
protections for internet and wireless communications as well as phone. That
is, as long as they don’t mess it up. Next time the mistake may be less
quickly obvious to the provider.
And why should activists have to jump up and down any time there is an obvious
First Amendment violation by an internet or wireless provider? Without clarity
of law, that will be our only recourse rather than one of several.
America: From Communists to Environmentalists
Our friend Robert Meeropol and attorney Lauren Regan have begun
to hold fora to help educate people about the way that the U.S. has gone
after people for their politics. In September they spoke at cities in the
Northwest to benefit Meeropol’s Rosenberg Fund for Children. The program
has been stimulated by the rise in government prosecutions of environ-mentalists
and animal rights activists, who have been prosecuted and given extraordinary
prison sentences for property crimes in which neither people nor other animals
intentionally were harmed.
Robert is a son of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, and Lauren is Director of
the Civil Liberties Defense Center, which helps defend activists from corporate
and government attacks while exposing the erosion of civil liberties. They
have taped these presentations – contact info@cldc.org or call 541.687.9180
to see if you can book a presentation.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Thank you for your activism, your troublemaking, and your insistence that
the government be held accountable to the people. And thank you as well
for your comments and suggestions to us, for your contributions today, and
for remembering us in your wills. We’re in this for the long haul and do
better working together.
September 2007
Dear friends
LEGISLATION
FISA Fiasco
A week after we wrote the last newsletter, Congress allowed itself to
be hoodwinked into passing an almost complete gutting of FISA, the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act. The old line – if you don’t
pass this legislation, the next terrorist act will be your fault –
worked. The new law is called “Protect America Act of 2007.”
Initially the argument was that a new bill had to be passed to allow foreign
caller to foreign caller wiretapping without a warrant, even if the call
gets connected via a switchboard in the U.S. (which is increasingly common).
Legislators generally decided that was rational.
Then, however, the Executive started arguing that it should be able to
wiretap on its own authority (without FISA court oversight) anyone abroad
who was talking to someone in the U.S. And that is what passed. The FISA-gutting
law allows a wiretap without the secret FISA court warrant for any call
a person in the U.S. has with someone outside the country, (your Mom,
for example). While there is a 6 month sunset on the law, any Attorney
General and Director of National Intelligence - authorized tap can proceed
for a year. While the Administration argues that the FISA court still
has oversight, it only can approve procedures, not specific authorizations.
The Administration version of the bill passed with 16 Democratic Senators
and 41 House Democrats voting for it along with most Republicans –
not a party line vote.
After the law passed, many legislators, led by Speaker Pelosi and Majority
Leader Reid, promised to amend it to create a more thoughtful and limited
change to FISA. There will be a tendency to pass something barely improved
quite quickly. On the other hand, Senate Judiciary probably soon will
become mired in the Attorney General confirmation process, not to mention
considerations about the Iraq war.
TO DO: The new fix FISA bill has yet to be introduced,
so we would urge you to call your legislators and ask them to help create
a strong new bill that:
1) would confirm that the FISA law is the only mechanism for intelligence
collection related to any calls from or to the U.S. ,
2) require penalties for violation of this core principle,
3) leaves the physical process of tapping in the hands of the telecom
industry and not the government,
4) require FISA Court oversight of the entire process, and
5) tell the government to destroy any U.S. tap product unless it indicates
terrorism planning or activity.
Call 202.224.3121 - which is the main Congressional switchboard where
you can request to be connected to your legislators or their staffers
tasked with this issue. Have them move swiftly but carefully to fix the
FISA mess they left in August.
CASES
Padilla – Did the Constitution Work?
Jose Padilla was found guilty of 3 terrorism-related crimes by a jury
of his peers. So in fact the government was able to use the criminal justice
system to convict this former ‘enemy combatant’ of crimes
for which he’ll likely spend his life in jail, despite years of
Executive Branch protestations to the contrary. And what are Padilla’s
crimes? Not being a ‘dirty bomber’ and not killing people
– he was not charged with those acts – but that great amorphous
crime: conspiracy. Conspiracy to commit terrorist crimes. Convicted probably
for having a fingerprint on the front of a form used by an Al Qaeda training
camp in Afghanistan filled out with another’s name.
But first, as you all know, he spent 5 years in jail, mostly without charge,
without access to an attorney, or any visitors, in solitary confinement
for years – essentially, extreme sensory deprivation. The rationale
– so Padilla could be interrogated without legal intervention –
has been rejected by former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor
in the 2004 Hamdi v. Rumsfeld decision. By most reports, Padilla’s
a pretty damaged human being now. Matches the legal system perhaps.
NSA Cases
Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) suit – An argument
August 15 before a 3 judge panel of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals
seemed weighted in favor of the legal challenge. In the suit, Mark Klein,
an AT&T whistleblower, maintains that there was a room where AT&T
and the National Security Agency collected massive domestic and foreign
communications of U.S. people. EFF then brought suit to challenge its
legality and the fight was over whether EFF would be allowed to sue on
this issue of state secrets.
Among the judges, Harry Pregerson and Margaret McKeown virtually ridiculed
government lawyers. When told that they just should trust the government,
and that the courts were not the right forum for complaints, Judge Pregerson
asked what was the right forum, “Impeachment?” Judge McKeown
asked, “If there were in fact widespread surveillance of American
citizens, there would be no remedy, yes or no?” and received essentially
a negative response.
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. George W. Bush – In the
second case argued before the 9th Circuit panel, attorneys for the foundation
noted they had mistakenly received a document indicating the lawyers were
being surveiled. So they were arguing receipt of the secret document was
proof of standing to argue the case in court. Jon Eisenberg, one of the
attorneys noted in an 8/13 Adam Liptak op-ed in the NY Times his procedures:
“Yesterday, under the auspices and control of my litigation adversaries,
I wrote a brief, of which I was not allowed to keep a copy, responding
to arguments which I was not permitted to see, which will be met by a
reply which I will not be permitted to see.”
FISA Court Orders Govt Response on FISA Orders –
On August 17, the ACLU asked the FISA court to function more openly, by
making public its otherwise classified rulings on the reach of U.S. authority
to wiretap. In response, the FISA court in DC has required the government
to file a quick response.
ACLU Challenges Gag on National Security Letter Recipients
On August 15, the ACLU argued in federal court in New York, that people
who receive a national security letters and who may not say even that
they have received a letter are being unconstitutionally gagged. Since
2001, the FBI has massively increased use of the secret letters, which
demand bank or other records (including library use). The Inspector General
at the Justice Department has reported that 143,000 NSLs were issued from
2003 to 2005. That’s a lot of gagging.
Holy Land Foundation
We have previously reported on the material support for terrorism case
against the Holy Land Foundation now finally being argued. In a weird
and reminiscent twist, the government has listed many groups as un-indicted
co-conspirators in the case. Among them are over 300 individuals and organizations,
including the nationally known Council on American-Islamic Relations.
The National Association of Muslim Lawyers, along with the National Association
of Criminal Defense Lawyers, wrote an August 15 protest letter to the
Attorney General, requesting a meeting to outline their concerns, which
include that people have no notice of the listing or ability to challenge
it – the link to the letter: http://www.namlnet.org/pdf/AG_ltr_UIC_list_final(1).pdf
On August 16th, CAIR filed a brief asking the court in the Holy Land Foundation
case to remove the name of CAIR and the other 300 names as un-indicted
co-conspirators from the case: http://www.cair.com/pdf/sp/CAIR_amicus_brief.pdf
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
AG Gonzales Gone But Not Forgotten
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has finally resigned, effective mid-September.
Fortunately, DOJ Inspector General Glenn Fine has told Senate Judiciary
Chair Leahy (D-VT) that he is investigating whether Mr. Gonzales lied
in statements to Congress among other issues.
Feds to Share Satellite Data With Locals
This fall, Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence, has approved
sharing of spy satellite intelligence with border control and probably
later on, local law enforcement agencies. Steve Aftergood, of the Federation
of American Scientists, said this proposed change “potentially makes
a transformation of American political culture toward a surveillance state
in which the entire public domain is subject to official monitoring.”
Civil liberties advocates are calling for very proscribed and controlled
access and stringent court and other oversight rules to be in place before
any dissemination of this high resolution data. Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA)
calls for “crystal clear” rules to protect privacy of Americans.
Talon Database to be Shut Down
The Pentagon has announced that on September 17 it will close down the
“Talon” database widely criticized (including by us) for collecting
antiwar protesters names and those of other people who posed no threat
to the military. Of course the Pentagon denies the protests are why it’s
being shut but rather because the “analytical value had declined.”
Ha.
US AID May Screen Foreign Aid Groups’ Staffers
Called the “Partner Vetting System” the US announced in the
Federal Register – initially to be effective August 29 – that
it will collect personal data to then run a “national security screening”
of key employees and board members of NGOs applying for US AID funds.
The purpose is to screen out people “associated with terrorism”
or a “risk to national security.” Previously, groups have
self-certified – thus avoiding government data collections on another
big collection of people.
After a big hubbub, the Bush Administration announced on August 29 it
will instead begin with a pilot program of groups who get AID grants to
do work in the West bank and Gaza. Another example of hubbubs working.
DISSENT
ANSWER Fined for Postering
Around DC it’s not uncommon to see many signs – for dances,
real estate, etc., not to mention political signs. An upcoming Sept. 15th
demonstration has precipitated another round of ANSWER posters announcing
an anti-war demonstration in DC. But now DC is calling the posters improper
for having the wrong glue and being plastered in the wrong places, and
fining ANSWER thousands of dollars for postering improperly. Needless
to say, ANSWER is contesting the fines. Whether or not ANSWER has a history
of plastering the city with fliers, there are valid concerns about selective
enforcement of postering regulations.
“Impeach Bush” Called Unlawful Advertising
Speaking of posters, it would have been funny if not true, but as reported
in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on August 9, police charged Kevin Egler
with unlawful advertising in a public space for posting his sign in a
public park. The police officer told him that real estate signs typically
posted were protected, but not First Amendment based signage. Egler is
contesting the charge in Kent Municipal Court. Backwards and upside down
– commercial speech ok: political speech forbidden.
DC World Bank Demonstrators Get a Million
The DC government has settled with 120 demonstrators and pedestrians who
were arrested September 27, 2002 during the big demonstrations taking
place. The city has admitted the arrests were illegal and paid out a million
dollars to the arrestees and their lawyers.
Republic Convention 2004 Demonstration –
Continued Fallout
Now the NY police department has been required by Judge James Frances
IV to release 2000 more pages of its documents regarding the 1800 arrests.
With each move in this case, NYC has been getting in deeper doodoo. But
these typically long cases are tough to litigate.
Resources
Heidi Boghosian of the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) has produced a new
report: “Punishing Protest, Government Tactics That Suppress Free
Speech.” It is available for $3 – go to http://www.nlg.org
and buy via Paypal, or send a check to the NLG at 132 Nassau Street, Ste.
922 New York NY 10038.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We’re closing in on hiring a new director for Defending Dissent
Foundation. When that is complete, we will introduce you to the new person
and vice versa. I am very impressed with the quality of applicants for
the position – a number of them would serve us well, so the board
will be able to choose from a talented pool.
Of course we will continue to rely on your generosity in supporting our
work as we stretch to fit our new name with a new director and retain
you stalwart troublemakers. As Defending Dissent Foundation is a 501(c)(3)
non-profit, all of your donations to it are tax deductible.
Thanks for all your kind words to me, and ongoing activism and donations.
Let’s just keep up the hubbub.
August
2007
Searching for a Director
We’re closing in on finding the right new Director for the Defending
Dissent Foundation and have several excellent candidates. With luck, we’ll
be on target to start the transition to the new Director this fall. Thanks
all for your continued financial support, activism and applications. They
are the greatest gifts you can give to our continued important work.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
FBI ‘STAR’ Computer Profiling System
The System to Assess Risk (STAR) is the newest FBI program to find people
who are “emergent foreign threats” (as opposed to other criminal
activity). The purpose is to give people ‘risk scores’ (like
FICO numbers) to help analysts find potential terrorists. It’s a
data-mining system that adds together several other lists – the
terror watch list, a person’s country of origin, information from
such commercial data brokers as Choicepoint, plus various FBI classified
and unclassified information to get one cumulative risk score.
Legislators including Senator Leahy, and privacy experts including David
Sobel of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have expressed concerns.
These include a lack of accountability of these programs, and at their
core, the likelihood of using unverified information. Garbage in, garbage
out. And if inaccurate information about you is on this list, how will
you ever get it out? Those of you who’ve gotten your credit information
already will know the likelihood of inaccuracies. With the STAR report,
you can’t get it to check it.
Executive Order Limiting CIA Detainee Treatment – Not Enough
The Military Commissions Act required the White House to issue detailed
guidance to the CIA, in compliance with the Geneva Conventions Common
Article 3, in how to treat detainees in Iraq and secret prisons elsewhere.
While it seems most of the mainstream press has headlined the result,
‘CIA Can’t Waterboard’, the actuality is cloudier and
more worrisome. According to the White House, some severe interrogation
treatment is allowed – more harsh than is permitted at Guantanamo,
for example. Torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, sexual humiliation
and denigration of religion are reportedly prohibited, but the CIA is
allowed to come up with a secret list of methodologies for interrogation.
The military and domestic police, to the contrary, produce specific public
guidance as to their limits to no bad effect. Why can’t the CIA?
And the fact that torture has been proven in repeated studies and real
life experience not to yield reliably accurate information is nowhere
factored into the order. See David Cole’s Salon article of 7/23/2007,
“Bush’s torture ban is full of loopholes.”
CIA – Outsiders Running the Show?
People around the Washington area know that since the Reagan days, the
federal government has increasingly been outsourced, privatized, and run
by consultants. That has its own very significant problems in general
(accountability, killing unions, etc.). But when it comes to national
security in general and the CIA in particular, there are additional layers
of problems if it gets privatized.
A scary op-ed by R.J. Hillhouse in the July 8 NY Times lays it out dramatically:
Hillhouse reports over $42 b(B)illion a year of intelligence agency functions
done by private firms. These firms include Booz Allen, Lockheed Martin
and Raytheon. They recruit spies, and supervise CIA officers. National
security is increasingly done by contract. We’ll leave to others
the myriad national security problems this may engender.
For our purposes, the concerns include who’s making sure these folks
follow the rules, are held accountable for misbehavior, and keep files
on what they do for eventual full understanding of government actions.
It was hard enough back in the day – see William Blum’s books
– to keep tabs on which governments the U.S. tried to overthrow.
But now? How can people even pretend to control their government’s
actions when they’re privatized under a cloak of secrecy?
DOJ – Gonzales Pulling it Down?
Every day it’s something new. White House politicized more aspects
of the Department of Justice. The White House gained access to way too
much privileged information inside DOJ. Attorney General Gonzales gives
the finger to the Senate Judiciary Committee, again, lying in the face
of conflicting public statements, including from members of the Judiciary
Committee itself. On July 26th the FBI director under oath contradicted
Mr. Gonzales. Why does all this mess impact the right to dissent? It concerns
how warrantless wiretaps were approved and reapproved. It is at the core
of the vast expansion of DOJ national security programs authority. At
the White House and now at the Justice Department, Mr. Gonzales is the
face of overreaching and abuses.
The question now is will Glenn Fine, the Inspector General, an independent
counsel, or someone else start investigating and/or prosecuting Mr. Gonzales?
Executive Privilege Expanded to Breaking Point – Ever Heard
of John Dean?
One of the more remarkable assertions by the White House in recent days
is that it would tell the Department of Justice not to enforce –
to block enforcement - of contempt charges brought by Congress against
White House officials who refuse to testify before Congress. This, they
say, is enforcement of executive privilege.
Now the House Judiciary Committee has voted to cite Harriet Myers and
Joshua Bolten for contempt of Congress, for refusing to testify about
the political purging of 9 U.S. attorneys. Given that Congress has amassed
documentation of possible criminal acts, its need to collect more from
the White House is compelling, and likely would withstand appeal to the
courts.
John Dean, like Harriet Myers, was White House counsel. He testified in
the greatest detail about his conversations with everyone in the White
House. The Nixon administration, for all its failings, did not stop him.
What makes Harriet Myers different?
CASES
GITMO
US Supreme Court – Will Hear Access to Courts Case Next
Session
The U.S. Supreme Court announced at the end of this term (reversing an
April decision) that it will hear the legal challenge of Guantanamo detainees
that they have the right to appeal their cases to the U.S. court system.
As Geo. U. law prof. Neal Katyal put it – this will take on the
core issue of whether the U.S. Constitution applies to detainees under
U.S. control. This whole issue of Gitmo detention has been such a legal
tangle, it is time for some clarity of the big issue.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) put out a report: “Enemy
Combatant Detainees: Habeas Corpus Challenges in Federal Court”,
which you can get from the Federation of American Scientists: www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33180.pdf.
US Court of Appeals – Outlaws Use of Secret Evidence at
Gitmo
A 3 judge panel of the U.S. District Court of Appeals in D.C. unanimously
told the U.S. (Bismullah v. Gates) on July 19 that it must give almost
all evidence it has to detainees who are contesting their detention. This
reminds us of the legal and ‘hearts and minds’ fight we had
with the government in the 1990s over the use of secret evidence in deportation
proceedings. Then, as now, it was clear to most judges looking at the
issue, that a person and their lawyer could not possibly rebut and defend
against evidence they could not see.
Gitmo Review Panels Flawed
The above two articles already indicate this, but to nail the coffin,
Stephen Abraham has said in an affidavit and testimony that the Combatant
Status Review Panels (CSRPs) are a mess. Abraham was on a CSRP as lawyer
and lieutenant colonel in the Army Reserve, and so reviewed information
on the detainees at Gitmo. It already was clear that there was no due
process as the detainees couldn’t call witnesses, and couldn’t
see much of the evidence against them in these CSRPs. But Abraham also
explained that there was pressure from superiors to believe unsubstantiated
statements, the information was often vague and unspecific “garbage”.
As well, contrary to others claims that everyone was fine with the process,
Abraham had been complaining about problems with the process while he
was serving on the tribunal – including to the higher-ups who have
testified to the contrary.
OTHER CASES
Warrantless Wiretaps
There are lots of cases across the country challenging the warrantless
wiretapping program. The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati
tossed out a Detroit case on national security grounds. July 24th, 9th
Circuit U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker refused to dismiss a case
in which 5 states have sought more information on the program. The 9th
Circuit appeals court will hear that case Aug 15th. One of the problems
with these cases is that it’s hard for defendants to prove standing
to sue or damages if they can’t find out for sure if the government
has targeted them in particular.
Ward Churchill Fired by the U of Colorado
Perhaps it’s the other shoe dropping, but Ward Churchill has been
fired. He made inflammatory statements about 9/11, which precipitated
a years-long controversy. He was fired purportedly for academic misconduct
– allegedly, plagiarism and research misconduct. But he and David
Lane, his lawyer, are filing a civil rights suit claiming this is about
speech, not actions.
Phelps Family Saga: Throw In Flag Burning to Free Speech
The now infamous Phelps family in Kansas has more trouble. Shirley Phelps-Roper
was charged with negligent child abuse, flag mutilation, etc., when her
10 year old stood on a flag during a demonstration. The Phelps family
is known for demonstrating at cemeteries during military funerals, arguing
that the deaths are God’s way of punishing the U.S. for accepting
homosexuals. Ok. They’re wacko. But they are just demonstrating.
Public Space to Demonstrate Shrinking
In my own Silver Spring, Maryland, the county made an agreement as part
of its redevelopment that a city street in downtown was essentially the
leased private property of developers. The developers took that to mean
that they could prohibit rallies, petition signing, etc. A ruckus broke
out and the developers have backed off. The problem is that the law about
malls has made it pretty clear that they are private property, but as
our communities and downtowns revitalize and regenerate, we need to take
care not to make them just look like public spaces but really be private
malls in disguise.
Holy Land Foundation
At long last, the Holy Land Foundation trial has begun. This formerly
largest Muslim charity in the U.S. is accused of material support for
terrorism – accused of supporting Hamas. The offices, equipment
and all assets were seized and frozen in 2001. We and others have condemned
the use of secret evidence to destroy charities selectively chosen. Other
non-Muslim charities support some of the same clinics and orphanages.
Kay Guinane of OMB Watch notes that in Britain and elsewhere, governments
are able to allow charities to give to the sick and the poor, whereas
the U.S. approach says you should not “separate the real charitable
work from the alleged terrorist activity.” This is an issue not
only on religious grounds, and due process grounds, but also targets people
by ethnicity and politics as well.
Mohammed Salah
Mohammed Salah, in Chicago, has been the only U.S. citizen prohibited
from all normal life activities – making money or giving funds to
anyone in the U.S. for any reason. Over the years he has gotten some govt
permits to go around the prohibition. Then he faced an array of criminal
charges. A jury in February acquitted him of racketeering conspiracy to
support Hamas, but convicted him of lying regarding a related civil case.
Now he has been given the lightest prison sentence recommended by federal
guidelines – 21 months in jail and a fine.
LEGISLATION
Fixing Terrorism Courts?
Congress is considering proposals to fix the trial system now used at
Guantanamo. If they succeed, it might short-circuit the Supreme Court’s
consideration of the issue. There are already bills in the pipeline which
affirm the right to access to the courts. Some of the possible ‘fixes’
would create yet another court system outside the federal system, potentially
allowing the use of secret evidence, keeping the accused from seeing certain
evidence, and otherwise messing with constitutional requirements. Jack
Goldsmith and Neal Katyal are among those raising alternatives to the
current Gitmo or federal criminal court options. They suggest setting
up a preventive detention system overseen by judges, urges general use
of civilian courts, but allows for a national security court with special
defense lawyers, selected judges (like with the FISA court), and a special
appeals court, that would all decide if people can remain in detention
forever. These folks would not have all the rights criminal defendants
do – like to an attorney, and they could be interrogated for significant
periods.
TO DO: Tell your Senators and Representatives that you don’t
want a new court. The prisoner of war rules and the U.S. criminal courts
allow sufficient alternatives for any terrorist.
Assuring the Right to Habeas?
The writ of habeas corpus is the right to challenge your jailing. That’s
one of the main issues at stake in Guantanamo and elsewhere. There are
several bills in process to assure the right of habeas. Most recently,
Senators Arlen Specter and Pat Leahy are now expected to offer a Habeas
amendment (SA 2022) to the Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 1585) which
is expected to be considered after Congress reconvenes in September. The
amendment is like S. 185 that was reported favorably out of the Senate
Judiciary Committee.
TO DO: While your elected representatives are home for the break, urge
them to support the Specter/Leahy habeas amendment to H.R. 1585.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We have been around a long time – as have many of you. Remember
us in your wills and the Defending Dissent Foundation will be continuing
our work after we’re gone.
Kit Gage, Director
July 2007
Dear friends,
DEFENDING DISSENT FOUNDATION
Searching for a Director
We have begun to interview candidates for director of the Foundation.
Several of the applicants look very good. But if you know of a special
person who we should consider, please contact Kit Gage, for the Director
Search Committee, at kgage@verizon.net.
Send us a cover letter, resume, references and a short writing sample.
Kit will remain Director until the position is filled, but we hope to
have a new Director in place by the fall.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
White House of Cards
We are seeing a continuing array of court decisions overturning Executive
Branch policies, Congressional hearings and rumblings, and backing off
by the Bush administration from many early activities post 9/11. This
is not proceeding quickly enough and requires continued calls and letters
from you all to keep the momentum going. Tell the Administration: Go after
people who commit crimes, not people who disagree with your policies.
No more torture. Due process for all. Close Guantanamo. No more secret
prisons. Follow the Geneva Conventions. Greater access to non-top secret
documents to allow better oversight by us and Congress.
There is a detailed examination in the Washington Post June 24 and 25
about the role of VP Cheney in setting up Guantanamo and orchestrating
use of torture not only by the CIA but also the military. It is fascinating
and revolting. His mantra, according to the Post series: “thoroughgoing
secrecy, persistence of focus, tactical flexibility in service of fixed
aims and close knowledge of the power map of government.”
Some of the issues we raise in this newsletter don’t have particular
bill numbers attached to them. Or the bills are not far along and have
many committees to approve them. But all of these issues are susceptible
to public pressure (if not to Mr. Cheney). Remember to write letters to
the editor of your local paper, and consider organizing community information
meetings about some of these issues for your local groups. Consider bringing
in experts on the issues that concern you most – to help people
understand the larger and deeper picture. And as well, sometimes your
Congressional reps need to hear from you on these larger issues not connected
or yet connected to particular bills.
Public Call to End Secret Detentions
On point to these kinds of activities, 6 human rights groups released
the names of 39 people they have reason to think are secretly jailed somewhere
– and called on the U.S. to come forward with information about
the men. Amnesty International, the Center for Constitutional Rights,
Human Rights Watch, NY Univ.’s Center for Human Rights and Global
Justice and two British groups have joined this call.
Rep. Ed Markey has introduced H.R. 1352, the Torture Outsourcing Prevention
Act with 52 cosponsors. It would eliminate the U.S. transferring people
to countries where they would likely be tortured.
TO DO: Ask your Rep to cosponsor the H.R. 1352 if they have not.
Executive Order 12333
This rule, promulgated by the President, and published in the Federal
Register (but not subject to a vote by Congress), was originally issued
in 1981 and still serves as the major guidance for each and all intelligence
agency responsibilities and practices (other than a few laws and [we keeping
reminding the government] UN and other international agreements like the
Geneva Conventions) which limit their activities. Now we understand it
is being significantly rewritten.
Apparently months ago, the CIA drafted new interrogation guidelines –
reportedly prohibiting some of the most controversial techniques like
‘water-boarding’ used in recent years.
While this rewrite may be timely given the expansion of agencies and technologies
since 1981, and the massive violations of the old strictures, it must
not be used as an opportunity to throw out those timeless rules –
like no torture.
Guantanamo Closure Advocates
There’s a bandwagon developing. Former Secretary of State Colin
Powell has now stated publicly that he would shut down the Guantanamo
military prison and the military commission system because of the horrible
impact on the world’s perception of the U.S. Defense Secretary Robert
Gates said a few months ago that it should be closed. Of course Democratic
candidates for President are taking various stands in general objection;
John Edwards says now that he’d shut it down the first day he took
office. June 21 there were rumors flying that the Administration was planning
to shut it down. Seen any albatrosses, anyone?
There are two kinds of bills in play – S. 1249 and H.R. 2212 to
eventually close Guantanamo (more or less), and S. 1469 to cut off funds
(more or less) to detain people in Guantanamo. S. 1249, by Sen. Feinstein
has 4 cosponsors. Its partner in the House is H.R. 2212 by Reps. Harman
and Abercrombie with 8 sponsors. Sen. Harkin’s cut off the money
bill, S. 1469 has 4 cosponsors. All are useful to gain momentum on this
issue. None is perfect.
TO DO: Get your representatives signed on to these bills.
Due Process Restoration
Restoring the Constitution Act, S. 576 and H.R. 1415 would bring us a
clear step toward reestablishing due process rights for detainees. Initiated
in the Senate by Sen. Chris Dodd with 12 cosponsors and in the House by
Rep. Jerrold Nadler with 56 cosponsors.
TO DO: Again, get your representatives on board these measures.
It’ll ramp up pressure, especially as we get Republicans signed
up.
FBI Screwed Up Data Collection Again
Perhaps you loyal readers will not be shocked, but yet again the FBI,
in an internal audit, discovered over 1000 violations of its own rules
regarding national security letters (NSLs). Sometimes the problem was
that approval for particular NSLs did not go up the chain of command.
Other times third parties (mostly phone companies) gave the FBI more than
they asked for, and naturally the FBI kept the information – content
of emails etc.
Former Chief FISA Judge Blasts Use of Warrantless Wiretaps
Judge Royce Lamberth of the federal district court of DC, lambasted the
Executive Branch over use of wiretaps without even secret judicial authority,
as with the FISA court he headed. Lamberth said “judges understand
the war has to be fought, but it can’t be at all costs.” He
noted that procedures can be changed but not the core values, for example,
post 9/11 he approved taps even over the phone.
CASES
Protest Group has Standing to Contest Inaugural Rules
Dating back to the 2005 Inauguration, the government argued that the ANSWER
Coalition didn’t have the right to contest the government’s
parade permit process. The argument was that the inaugural was over so
it was moot. But now the U.S. District Court has recognized that there
will be another inaugural (!) and so it is appropriate and legal to allow
ANSWER to challenge the rules of the private Inaugural Committee which
make the parade a fundraising event and largely preclude demonstrators
from the route.
As well the court ruled that the group can challenge “security measures”
which stopped protesters from carrying the poles that hold up protest
signs. So stay tuned as they get to the heart of the matter. Carol Sobel
of the National Lawyers Guild led litigation in this constitutional challenge.
Port of Olympia Protesters Win
Opponents of the war in Iraq held a 10 day protest in May 2006 to challenge
shipment of armaments to Iraq out of the Port of Olympia, WA. On June
12, 2007, Thurston County District Court Judge Susan Dubuisson dismissed
trespassing charges against the demonstrators, after the prosecution was
caught committing misconduct in the case. The prosecution had withheld
a police summary of the event, and submitted new reports created a year
after the actual event, and belatedly submitted a huge witness list. The
judge, citing “gross negligence” by the government, decided
with “great regret” to kill the case.
The government had earlier sought to dismiss the case, but unfortunately
for it, the evidence was based on spying on the defense’s listserve.
Based on the listserve information, the judge had granted a mistrial.
When the spying issue was raised with the judge, the mistrial that was
earlier granted was undone. And instead, with the judge dismissing the
case, the process was essentially reversed.
U.S. Military Court Throws Out War Crimes Charges
This case revolves around the words “illegal enemy combatants.”
On June 4, military judges in two separate cases threw out war crimes
charges against two people held at Guantanamo, saying that the Military
Commission Act of 2006 covers “illegal enemy combatants” and
these two men were entitled only “enemy combatants” by a Combat
Status Review Tribunal that earlier reviewed their detention.
This was another sign of the decrepitude of the legal underpinnings for
those held at Guantanamo.
Due Process for Mr. Marri
Al Saleh al-Marri is a legal permanent resident of the U.S. And while
he might well be a dangerous person affiliated with al-Qaeda, he is entitled
to constitutional rights in the U.S. The most conservative Court of Appeals
in the U.S., the 4th Circuit, ruled unanimously that by declaring him
an enemy combatant, the U.S. had denied his right to have a hearing about
why he was detained (habeas corpus). It further ruled 2-1 that al-Marri
cannot be called an enemy combatant. The court is saying that al-Marri
should be charged with a crime and tried in a U.S. court.
FEDERAL/STATE COOPERATION
Immigration Records in Crime Database
It was ironic that in the town of Takoma Park, MD, a nuclear free zone
which passed a Bill of Rights resolution a couple years back, Hugo Vinicio
Hernandez was deported after a routine traffic stop. Hernandez is a Guatemalan
man, stopped by local police, and arrested because the record of his (civil,
not criminal) deportation order came up on the police computer. Civil
deportation orders now are in the FBI National Crime Information Center
database, which Takoma and almost all other local police around the country
now use.
We have written about this problem before. Various legal challenges are
going through the courts at various stages. The International Association
of Chiefs of Police and similar organization oppose non-criminal immigration
information in the database. But it’s there. Now.
According to a June 13 article in the Washington Post about the case,
there are more than 600,000 outstanding deportation orders. Are local
police now expected to enforce these orders? If so, will anyone who is
undocumented ever be able to call the police for a rape, theft, child
abuse, or otherwise request police assistance? Who will pay for this expanded
police work?
Of course this change comes as the Congress daily kills and revives the
major immigration law revision with vastly different possible amendments.
Modernized and Expanded Database
A June 7 NY Times article highlighted the huge, high-tech NYPD database.
Not only does this database include the NCIC crime database noted above,
but also all the stuff of file cabinets – who has visited people
in city jails and state prisons, 911 calls.
LEGISLATION
Former DAG Comey Answers Leahy
It was at recent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that
former Deputy Attorney General James Comey described the bedside swoopdown
on then Attorney General Ashcroft by then White House Counsel Alberto
Gonzales, seeking to reauthorize warrantless wiretapping. Now Mr. Comey
has sent written answers to committee Chair Pat Leahy about “a particular
classified program.”
In the written testimony, Mr. Comey makes clear several items –
that the Vice President both knew that the Justice Department had problems
with the warrantless wiretapping, and later opposed Mr. Philbin’s
promotion (Philbin had helped Comey stop Gonzales from harassing Mr. Ashcroft
to extend the wiretap program).
In response to Senator Schumer’s questions, Mr. Comey listed 9 high
level people who were prepared to resign over the crisis, in addition
to most of his staff, including Robert Mueller, then Director of the FBI.
Subpoenas Approved to Justice on Warrantless Wiretapping
The Senate Judiciary Committee on June 21 voted to approve authorizing
subpoenas to the Dept. of Justice to get more detail on the warrantless
wiretapping program. This is a shot across the bow – to loosen up
more information from DOJ as the Senate seeks with great difficulty to
do effective oversight. It was a bipartisan vote.
[Correction: In the June letter, I got my attorneys general mixed up.
A couple of you caught it and reminded me that I asked people to complain
about Mr. Ashcroft, when I meant Mr. Gonzales. Probably the rest of you
just knew what I meant and gave me a pass. Either way, thank you.]
RESOURCES
• Institute for the Study of Dissent and Social Control: www.dissensio.org
This is an academic group that publishes studies on government surveillance,
and particularly its effect on activist organizations.
• Save Our Civil Liberties: www.saveourcivilliberties.org
This is a group formed after police abuses at Miami demonstrations.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Friends – We don’t charge for the letter so you get no dunning
notes and yet are we are supported in great measure by your generosity.
Your bequests also are welcome as we forge into the future with our new
moniker and consistent work.
Kit Gage, Director
June 2007
Dear friends
DEFENDING DISSENT FOUNDATION
Searching for a Director
After our notice last month that Kit Gage will be going to “senior
status”, many of you have sent appreciative notes to us, commending
Kit’s work with NCARL and the First Amendment Foundation. It’s
a mutual admiration society. You all are a wonderful lot as well. Thank
you for the sentiments.
And now we’ve put the job description up on the First Amendment
Foundation website: www.defendingdissent.org/faf/
Feel free to distribute it widely to your networks. We do prefer that
the person live in (or move to) the DC area. Among the highest priorities
for the position is a strong background in civil liberties work, and then
of course ability to write and speak and manipulate the computer (and
others?) in defense of the right to dissent.
Send resumes to kgage@verizon.net
please.
LEGISLATION/HEARINGS
Gonzales/Comey
If you’ve been hiding from the media, perhaps you didn’t notice
that Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified before the Senate Judiciary
Committee in May. He shocked many people with his story about racing in
2004 to then Attorney General Ashcroft’s bedside at D.C’s
George Washington U. hospital to stop two White House staffers (future
Attorney General Gonzales and then Chief of Staff Andrew Card) from getting
a very sick Mr. Ashcroft to re-authorize an early version of the NSA warrantless
wiretapping program. Mr. Comey, who was at that moment acting Attorney
General, helped stop the maneuver, along with an aide, Patrick Philbin.
Oddly, Mr. Philbin had in November 2001 authored the memo giving the president
“inherent authority” to establish the due-processless military
commissions. So Philbin was hardly a constitutional stickler either.
After this remarkable exercise in chutzpah (of a Machiavellian sort by
Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card), Comey, Ashcroft and others reportedly had
planned to resign en masse shortly afterward, in a principled stance reminiscent
to many (including us) of the Watergate era “Saturday Night Massacre”
mass resignations at Justice. They were only convinced out of the stance
after the Madrid bombings happened and they decided they had to stay at
Justice to respond to that crisis.
Now this is a dramatic story. And it may ultimately succeed in getting
Mr. Gonzales to resign, be fired, be impeached, or whatever. But abhorrence
of the late night hospital visit covers up the more important issues:
1) The Attorney General and his top aides were opposed to the government’s
warrantless wiretapping program to the point of refusing to reauthorize
it. 2) The remaining secrecy of the details of these programs. 3) The
current legislative fight over the wiretapping.
For now, this all remains in the shadows as the program and its various
iteration details remain secret from the public. We know there’s
a program, we know that some of the telecom companies cooperated with
the government to do the wiretapping, and we know now that the shape of
the program has gone thru some changes. And we don’t like any of
what we’ve heard as it all seeks to subvert the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA).
There’s a pitched battle proceeding now on several fronts. The Administration
wants legislation passed to give FISA the coup d’gras. Many Democrats
and some Republicans want to strengthen, or at least reiterate, the role
of FISA – that wiretaps must be approved by FISA judges, even if
in intelligence/terrorism-related taps they are approved in secret. Further,
there are several lawsuits chugging away, challenging warrantless wiretapping
– especially against the telecom companies. Electronic Frontier
Foundation is suing AT&T, and others are suing Verizon in New Jersey,
objecting to private company cooperation in unlawful activities.
The personal tale is shocking, but the reality of a massive, unregulated,
secret (predominantly secret even from Congress) program is the real story.
For now the FISA “modernization” bill has not been attached
to any bill under active consideration. Further, the House Intelligence
Committee has just announced that it will investigate the nature of the
telecom cooperation with the National Security Agency. Chair Silvestre
Reyes (D-TX) said: “Before granting immunity for any activities,
it will be important to review what those activities were, what was the
legal basis for those activities, and what would be the impact of a grant
of immunity." That should put a hold on any immunity legislation
for the moment.
Fortunately, the Senate Judiciary Committee is not too distracted. Chair
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and ranking member Arlen Specter (R-PA) have sent
a letter to Mr. Gonzales demanding many types of information, including
the following disquieting note:
This Committee has made no fewer than eight formal requests over the past
18 months – to the White House, the Attorney General, or other Department
of Justice officials – seeking documents and information related
to this surveillance program. These requests have sought the Executive
Branch legal analysis of this program and documents reflecting its authorization
by the President. You have rebuffed all requests for documents and your
answers to our questions have been wholly inadequate and, at times, misleading.
TO DO: Encourage your legislators to keep the pressure on to
find out what the Administration has done regarding NSA warrantless wiretapping,
before considering any FISA bill. And urge them in general to uphold a
strong FISA standard.
Immigration Bill Considered
Most of you have heard that an omnibus immigration bill is under consideration
now in the House and Senate. To all accounts, it’s being written
as it’s being amended, as horses are being traded. At this moment,
a final vote is not expected until early June (if the negotiated general
agreement doesn’t collapse), but the changes are so rapid that they
don’t lend themselves to detailed description here.
On the pure detention and legal proceeding, due process issues that we
tend to focus on, there look to be a few small improvements from current
law. The emphasis of course from our standpoint is that people should
not be held in indefinite detention in the U.S. without trial for specific
charges. They should not be excluded from the U.S. for such non-violent
activities as demonstrating or marching about political issues. In immigration
proceedings they should have the right to see the evidence against them.
We have signed on to a letter organized by Rights Working Group. See more
at www.RightsWorkingGroup.org.
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) would deny citizenship to lawful permanent
residents based on secret evidence, in an amendment probably voted on
by the time you read this. If these issues are important to you, check
out the above, or any of the websites of ethnic rights groups’ or
the American Immigration Lawyers Assn.
CASES
Ft. Lauderdale Demonstrators Win
The National Lawyers Guild and others have won a significant settlement
agreement with the City of Ft. Lauderdale to allow relatively unfettered
speech and assembly in the city. The Florida Alliance for Retired Americans,
various Greens, anti-war and other groups had challenged several laws
that allowed city officials to limit demonstrations to religious sects
rather than political groups, to delay giving permits, to pick and choose
the groups to allow based on whether they approved the issue. Now the
U.S. District Court has approved the settlement agreement which 1) requires
decisions on permits in 2 business days, 2) can’t use subjective
factors to deny permits, 3) allows demonstrations without permits on any
sidewalk or city street if demonstrators obey traffic regulations and
don’t unreasonably obstruct passage to others.
Congratulations to Carol Sobel, Andrea Costello and other litigators,
and to the groups for pursuing the issues.
TO DO: Go to www.nlg.org
to obtain details on the settlement. Consider similar language for your
own city – or compare it to your current regulations.
Update: Military Funeral Protests
A few months ago we reported the difficulty we had supporting the Westboro
Baptist Church protesting at soldiers’ funerals that supposedly
U.S. soldiers are being killed because of U.S. tolerance of homosexuals.
Right. Stupid. But we defend the right to protest nonetheless. The Kansas
legislature promptly passed a law prohibiting protests within 150 yards
of entrances to cemeteries around the time of military funerals. Now the
Kansas Attorney General, Paul Morrison has filed a lawsuit to challenge
the law (the process he must follow by Kansas law). Good for him.
Jose Padilla
The criminal case against Jose Padilla, formerly one of two U.S. citizens
named “enemy combatants,” is well under way. The bar already
was set pretty low; the supposed ‘dirty bomber’ was not charged
with being that. Instead he faces lesser charges of conspiring to “murder,
kidnap and maim” people abroad.
Even these lower expectations haven’t been met in the prosecution’s
case. Evidence by its key witness, Yahya Goba, who is one of the Lackawanna
people who apparently received military/terrorism training in Afghanistan
in 2001, is underwhelming. Goba confirmed that he lied on the same form
that Padilla is alleged to have filled out – also with an alias.
That makes it tough to confirm that Padilla was the one who filled in
the form the government alleged is his. Judge Marcia Cooke appears not
to be impressed by the evidence as well. The trial proceeds in Miami.
Guantanamo Legal Representation
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard arguments on whether
Guantanamo detainees need not have lawyers, but only ‘personal representatives’
who are not required to keep client communications secret from the government.
Already the detainees can see only a summary of the evidence, can be judged
guilty based on hearsay evidence, and have the burden of proving they
are not enemy combatants (the reverse of innocent until proved guilty).
A week before, the court heard the issue of whether the defendants may
be given all the evidence the government collected – not just the
part the government found most convincing to make its case for detention.
Chief Judge Douglas Ginsburg opined during the argument, “How can
we [have] any meaningful review of the determination [of enemy combatant
status] if we don’t know what we don’t know, but you know?”
It reminds us exactly of the situation before 9/11 in which the government
was using secret evidence to deny bond in deportation hearings. In both
cases, there is no due process if you can’t see the evidence against
you.
Lt Cmdr Matthew Diaz
You can argue that this man is a hero instead of deserving to be court-martialed.
He gave a list of Guantanamo Bay detainees to a human rights lawyer at
the Center for Constitutional Rights when the detainees were not allowed
legal representation. The list allowed the representation process to begin.
Diaz was found guilty of giving out secret information and sentenced to
6 months in jail. He was found innocent of releasing the documents believing
they could harm the U.S., and his sentence was much less than the possible
14 years.
Luis Posada Carriles
For those few stalwarts who still believe that terrorism law is equitably
enforced in the U.S., one need only cite Luis Posada Carriles. He is a
Cuban-born Venezuelan strongly and widely suspected of bombing a Cuban
airliner in 1976, and other attacks. He escaped from jail while awaiting
trial in Venezuela. He’s been in the U.S. since 2005. Venezuela
sought his extradition for trial almost 2 years ago.
Now, after an immigration fraud proceeding in the U.S. (an unconvincing
surrogate for a criminal trial), Posada has been released on bail (despite
being an obvious flight risk and quite arguably a danger to others). But
politics being what they are, the Bush administration has refused to honor
Venezuela’s extradition petition.
TO DO: Write to your Representatives and to Mr. Bush (1600 Pennsylvania
Ave, NW, Wash. DC 20500, or call 202-456-1111) and ask for Mr. Posada
to be extradited for trial in Venezuela.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH/STATES
Alabama Homeland Security Dept Tags Dissent and Rights Groups as Terrorists
The Alabama Dept of Homeland Security had a website on which it listed
various groups as terrorists. This from a May 27th AP story by Bob Johnson.
The reported groups which might “spawn” terrorists included
gay rights, environmentalists, animal rights and anti-abortion groups.
They were listed as “single-issue” terrorists. As the website
has been taken down, we can’t confirm the details. When that part
of the site was discovered, fortunately a furor ensued.
RESOURCES
ACLU Report on DOJ Domestic Terrorism Guidelines
On the 5th anniversary of the 2002 revised Department of Justice guidelines,
the ACLU has released a report: “History Repeated: The Dangers of
Domestic Spying by Federal Law Enforcement.” As you would expect,
the report provides some history of the guidelines, criticizes continued
spying on protesters with no improvement in combating terrorism, and urges
a change of the Ashcroft guidelines back to the stronger standards of
the original Levi guidelines. We welcome the report. You can get a copy
from the ACLU: www.aclu.org/safefree/spying/29902pub20070529.html.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Keep those job applications coming – the director position is open
until filled. We have some good candidates already – thanks!
May 2007
Dear friends
DEFENDING DISSENT FOUNDATION
Kit Gage
Kit Gage has announced her intention to retire as our Executive Director.
TV interviewee, coalition builder, lobbyist, hate and love mail receiver,
eternal vigilance maintainer, conference organizer (in 2003 she coordinated
the Grassroots America Defends the Bill of Rights First National Conference),
skinflint budgeteer, people person, strange bedfellow (collaborating with
such as the CATO Institute, the American Conservative Union, and Gun Owners
of America, all in defense of dissent), immigrant and ethnic rights protector,
First Amendment absolutist, stealth publisher (ushering into print FBI
v. The First Amendment by Richard Criley, Terrorism and the Constitution,
Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security by James
X. Dempsey and David Cole, and First Amendment Felon by Robert Sherrill,
Kit has told us she will leave as soon as a replacement can be found.
If we took her literally, then we could rest easy because she is irreplaceable.
But some of us having worked with Kit for twenty years, we know when she’s
made up her mind, and so we accept her decision with regret but gratitude,
for the profound record she leaves – working first with and along
side of Frank Wilkinson, and then building on his legacy – will
long endure.
For twenty years, Kit has played a critical role in holding together and
advancing the agenda of our unique institution. Like Frank was, Kit is
a legal worker and not a lawyer. It became a byword of theirs for NCARL
that a person need not be a lawyer to read and understand law and policy,
and to stand up for what is right, backed up by their own and others’
cogent argument.
The names changed: National Committee to Abolish HUAC became the National
Committee Against Repressive Legislation(NCARL); the First Amendment Foundation
has become the Defending Dissent Foundation. And the witch hunt targets
changed: From reds and their defenders (when the equation was to be a
pinko or red was to be a spy) to demonstrators and Muslims, Arabs, South
Asians, and people who “look like terrorists.” But the task
remained the same.
Whether managing Wilkinson, writing NCARL’s monthly newsletter (this
month opposing covert operation, next month exposing the government’s
assault on CISPES, etc.), attending to the care and feeding of disgruntled
former CIA agents and other potential whistle blowers, promoting the FBI
First Amendment Protection Act, or assisting politically active immigrants
and civil libertarians to form the National Coalition to Protect Political
Freedom, Kit, officially a part-timer, seemed always to be working 24-7
in defense of dissent and First Amendment values.
One project: In 1996, when it developed that Arabs and Muslims were being
detained and denied bail with the use of secret evidence, Kit helped found
the coalition that included many national Arab American and Muslim groups
as well as a nice variety of civil rights and liberties suspects, engaged
in a massive PR campaign, and recruited the best lawyers in the country
to handle the cases of 20-odd men who were being illegally detained, and
although it took three or four years, eventually all were released and
the policy discredited even by the Administration.
Kit estimates that she has been to “approximately a billion”
demonstrations, managing not to get arrested while being a legal observer
and bailing out lots of others. She avoided getting arrested once when
being interviewed on the Geraldo show; she narrowly stopped herself from
strangling Geraldo for being more than the usual jerk.
Did Kit enjoy her job? One time when she shared the podium with an FBI
flack, a teacher asked the agent to list terrorist groups. He obliged
but in the midst of his list, threw in “the Sikhs” among them.
Says Kit, “I was able to pick up my jaw off the floor, ask the audience
if they had heard the agent list an entire religion as a terrorist group
(and they nodded), as an example of why there might be a problem. Okay,
that was fun.”
Kit’s strange bedfellows work is really a hallmark of hers. She
has brought young demonstrators together with old Leftists to share the
longevity of government spying on demonstrators. She has connected new
Americans to formerly new Americans and homegrown dissenters to forge
stronger alliances to oppose present-day government spying. By learning
about the Palmer raids, Japanese American internment, COINTELPRO, etc.,
Kit avers, you can gain strength to oppose current incarnations of First
Amendment abuses.
We thank Kit for her commitment, her patience, her energy, her dedication,
her idealism, her good humor, her fortitude, her First Amendment DNA,
her service.
The Board of Directors
Kit’s additions
It’s a measure how much you all are like a family that I hesitate
to let you know of my resignation/retirement as director of Defending
Dissent Foundation. Feels a little like I am letting my folks know that
I am moving away from home, as I know some of you will be surprised and
saddened. But it’s a good time for me to move on to a new project,
and appropriate timing for a new director for Defending Dissent Foundation.
I’ve been a staffer for NCARL, the First Amendment Foundation and
now Defending Dissent Foundation for 20 years. That doesn’t compare
with Frank Wilkinson’s 45 years, but it’s still a long time.
We succeeded in getting out the biography of Frank Wilkinson as a mechanism
to help people understand the movement to stop the House UnAmerican Activities
Committee, and I have largely finished promoting it with trips around
the country. With the help of the boards of NCARL and the First Amendment
Foundation, we have reframed the groups – with a name that’s
self-explanatory and has a distinguishing niche. We’ve melded NCARL
into the renamed Defending Dissent Foundation. So now we have created
one group out of two, which will be much simpler to run, do the books,
and as well, present to the public.
With these projects done I decided this is the time for me to move on
to different things – focused more on consulting on native and low
maintenance planting and related environmental concerns. But given that
Defending Dissent Foundation is clearly part of my extended family, I
want to continue to provide assistance as needed, and in particular to
function as a connector to the critical historical memory of this amazing
group. Editing Bob Sherrill’s book was a graduate level class adding
to my existing knowledge base about Frank, NCARL and its early history.
I feel strongly that a new director with different perspectives, expertise
and energy will carry Defending Dissent Foundation to a new level. DDF
deserves no less. And if I can continue to provide a perspective of duration
and some expertise, then that will be worth the effort. I’ll be
sticking around for a few months as director to help the board find a
replacement.
But we want your help. You know the best civil libertarians in the country.
Let us know about them and tell them to apply for the job. We’ll
be pleased to forward a job description. The Bill of Rights is not self-enforcing,
and that is particularly true of the right to dissent. Likewise Defending
Dissent Foundation is made live and functional with your continued help
– so help us find a director! We’ll post the job description
on our old website: www.defendingdissent.org/faf/,
and you can contact me directly at kgage@verizon.net
for more information or to apply.
Activist Work
Oops
Last month we gave the incorrect website for the new Right-run civil liberties
coalition American Freedom Agenda. It is of course www.americanfreedomagenda.org.
Sorry.
Legislation
New FISA Bill – The Wrong Direction
The crisis over warrantless wiretapping has focused on abuses of the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). While the Administration has somewhat
disassociated itself from these activities, now it has proposed a bill
to modify “modernize” FISA that would in essence codify warrantless
wiretapping.
The bill the “FISA Modernization Act” (no number yet assigned)
would do the following:
• Expand National Security Agency (NSA) warrantless surveillance
of Americans’ phone and email communications,
• Change the definition of “electronic surveillance”
to allow spying without a warrant on the content of all international
communications to and from U.S. people, whether they are a citizen or
not, as long as that person is not the target of their spying.
• In that changed definition, also allow the NSA to collect “to
and from” information on all phone calls and e-mail within the U.S.
including by U.S. citizens without a warrant, and store this information
indefinitely.
• Allow warrantless collection of the content of communications
if “directed at the acquisition of the contents of communications
of a foreign power.” This means your kid’s letter to an embassy
for country information, your call for visa or shots travel information,
and press calls. It requires no connection to foreign intelligence.
More information go to Lisa Graves’ www.cnss.org/FinalCNSS%20FISA%20Memo%204.19.07.pdf,
Jim Dempsey’s analysis for CDT at www.cdt.org/security/20070418fisaanalysis.pdf,
or the Bill or Rights Defense Committee’s information on an alternative
bill, S.1114 that’s better if not perfect: http://www.bordc.org/threats/legislation/index.php#wiretap.
TO DO: Call your Senators and Representative (switchboard 202-224-3121).
Tell them the bill is a step.
Cases
Josh Wolf Out of Jail – Gives Up Videotape but Doesn’t
Testify
Wolf was jailed for refusing to give his videotape of a demonstration
in San Francisco to a grand jury (see our earlier letter). After 224 days
in jail, he was released – called the longest incarceration of an
American journalist. He then gave both the federal judge and the public
(posting it on his website) a copy of the video and answered two questions
– denying seeing any attack on an officer or damage to a police
car. But his supporters called the release a victory in that he neither
testified nor identified people on the videotape.
Seattle WTO Demonstrators Win
In 1999, thousands of demonstrators marched to protest the World Trade
Organization meeting and policies. 175 of them were arrested in peaceful
protest. Now in a case called Hankin v. City of Seattle, the demonstrators
have won their damages case. Seattle will pay $1 million to the demonstrators
and probably more importantly, change their police training. Earlier a
jury had found the arrests to be unconstitutional. The law firm Public
Justice had argued that the illegal arrests had either followed police
policy or been approved by policymakers, rendering the City liable for
the arrests. Seattle will seal its arrest records in the case, and notify
other agencies that the individuals were never tried or convicted of offenses.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
History Can Help – Census Gave Japanese Names to the FBI
USA Today reported that the US Census Bureau gave information about Japanese
Americans and Japanese living in the DC area to US intelligence agencies.
The report relied on research from William Seltzer of Fordham University
and Margo Anderson of the Univ. of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. American Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), the Japanese American Citizens League
and the ACLU issued a press release in which Kareem Shora of ADC called
on Congress “to ensure that this violation of Japanese Americans’
privacy is not repeated with Arab Americans” given the level of
intelligence agencies’ attention to this populace post 9/11.
Japanese Americans file Amicus Brief in Detention case
Similarly, Japanese American children of people who were detained in World
War II are now filing a amicus brief to the NY Appeals court in the case
of more than a thousand people detained in the New York area right after
9/11, Turkmen v. Ashcroft.
Defense Dept May Close Talon Spy Program –What Will be its
Next Name?
As activists have discovered various secret databases that under the rubric
or antiterrorism, collect information on protesters, churches and etc.,
we have called for them to be stopped. Now the Pentagon's new intelligence
undersecretary James R. Clapper Jr. "does not believe they merit
continuing the [Talon] program as currently constituted, particularly
in light of its image in the Congress and the media," said Pentagon
spokesman Maj. Patrick Ryder.” The particular concern with this
program is the military spying on U.S. activists. But stay tuned. These
things get renamed and restructured and pop up again.
Guantanamo – Those Pesky Lawyers
It seems part of the give and take – the Center for Constitutional
Rights has been very effective in getting lawyers from around the country
to volunteer to help represent people detained in Guantanamo. So now the
Bush Administration wants limits on their visits to their clients. But
it’s creating a huge uproar in the legal community. The New York
City bar has sent a protest letter to the Justice Department. And this
won’t be the end of it.
Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) has just introduced a bill to close Guantanamo (no
number yet. Senator Feinstein said. "This [Guantanamo] has greatly
damaged the nation's credibility around the world. Rather than make the
United States safer, the image projected by this facility puts us at greater
risk. The time has come to close it down."
TO DO: Ask your Senator to co-sponsor Ms. Feinstein’s bill
to close Guantanamo.
April 2007
DEFENDING DISSENT FOUNDATION
Status report: the state of California has approved our changed name,
and now we await the feds ratifying this by notice – a standard
procedure. After that it’ll all be settled. Please continue to write
checks to NCARL or the First Amendment Foundation, but if you forget and
write them to Defending Dissent Foundation, we’ll hold your check
for a bit, assuming that it’ll just be a matter of a week or two
until we can deposit them in an account with our new name. Thanks for
your patience.
HISTORY OF DISSENT
Some Women’s History
Recognizing Women’s History month, I wanted not to let it pass without
a couple of anecdotes of early women’s rights organizing in the
19th century. That movement can help us understand the ebb and flow of
political change movements and their cross fertilizations and conflicts.
Let’s focus on Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony as exemplars
of the larger movement. These two women had very different abilities,
capacities and concerns. And they both evolved. Stanton was both an orator
and writer while Anthony was more of an organizer. Elizabeth wrote many
of Susan’s speeches, because Stanton was raising her kids in Seneca
Falls and couldn’t travel around the country as could Anthony. More
substantively, Stanton advocated a wide array of women’s rights,
having come to women’s rights through both the temperance and slavery
abolition movements. The exclusion of women in the abolition movement
helped push her into organized women’s rights activism. Anthony
became even more focused on women’s suffrage.
After the Civil War, some of those more concerned with women’s suffrage
came to split with the abolition movement and oppose adoption of the 14th
and 15th Amendments giving African American men the vote if all women
were not also given that right. That divide also helped split the women’s
movement itself. Stanton made some quite racist statements, probably stimulated
in part by her frustration at the failure to incorporate voting for all
women into these amendments. On the other hand, Sojourner Truth was allied
with their position and worked side by side. Stanton and Anthony’s
‘principled’ position finally formally split the women’s
rights movement into two groups: the National Women’s Suffrage Association
and the American Women’s Suffrage Assn.
After both amendments passed, with no provision for women’s suffrage,
the women’s rights movement was further divided when Stanton co-wrote
The Women’s Bible, which angered the more religiously conservative
women. Her support for the right of women to divorce, hold property, and
have access to paid work in addition to a straight suffrage platform,
further split her National Women’s Suffrage Association from the
one issue American Women’s Suffrage Assn.
Some years later, and presumably water over the dam, the groups rejoined,
oddly, with Stanton serving as first president despite mutual reservations.
Stanton, Anthony, and co-suffragist Matilda Joslyn Gage did much to document
their own movement in their own lifetimes, helping them keep some control
over the way their movement was portrayed.
All of these groups, in addition to their internal divides, suffered from
public opprobrium and ridicule. As well they were belittled by the government,
arrested occasionally for demonstrating, and roundly condemned.
It’s like a braided stream. The Civil Rights movement, the anti-Vietnam
War movement, the Left and the Right in general and more recently the
movement to end the war in Iraq have similar tendencies as the early women’s
rights movement. They suffer from internal recriminations, and doctrinal
disagreements that sometimes change and sometimes stay the same.
A final point. The role that Stanton, Anthony, Gage played, along with
perhaps a couple dozen other women and men in the suffrage, abolition,
and temperance movements, illustrate the fragility of these movements.
When governments target activists, they often not only damage the specific
actions or organizations they seek to stymie, but also other political
change movements as well.
Communist Party USA Files at Tamiment Library at NYU
A little more history will finally see the light. This time boxes and
boxes of it. The Communist Party USA has agreed to give the New York University’s
Tamiment Library its files.
At the press conference announcing the donation, Norman Markowitz noted
(and you can see his full remarks in www.politicalaffairs.net
for which he is contributing editor): “The history of CPUSA activists
and allies role in advancing the struggles of the Civil Rights movement
during the period of McCarthyism is still largely unwritten and this collection
will help both scholars and students understand it.” And he gave
a number of specific examples of peoples’ rights movements which
were advanced in significant part with the assistance of Party activists.
This will not surprise historians of the period. But scholars’ new
access to this more detailed documentation of the first half of the 20th
century will serve to confirm the brave and organized movement from its
founding in the early 1920s, especially in the South, to seek an end to
lynching, and to work for a range of civil rights when that was easily
a death sentence. It should also help confirm the divisive, top-down and
myopic aspects of the CPUSA as well – but these were already widely
reported and known.
DISSENT TODAY
The Right Gets Religion on Civil Liberties – American Freedom Agenda
We’ve worked with Bruce Fein and former Rep. Bob Barr before on
civil liberties issues. We’re a member of the Liberty Coalition
-- a sort of Right-run coalition -- on several of our issues. But now,
with great fanfare, another very conservative group has been formed called
the American Freedom Agenda. Its website: www.americanfreedomagenda.org.
It will focus on Executive Branch overreaching and many issues identical
to those of concern to progressives. But this coalition also includes
Richard Viguerie, someone who has been and remains on the other side of
progressive causes for 30 years at least.
Here’s a partial summary of its 10 point statement of principles:
Prohibit military commissions. Prohibit use of secret evidence or evidence
obtained by torture. Prohibit detention of American citizens as ‘unlawful
enemy combatants’ and restore the right of habeas corpus to all
so-called enemy combatants. Stop the National Security Agency (and presumably
other agencies) from violating federal law by collecting phone call information,
emails and breaking into peoples’ homes. Etc. It’s a clear
and strong opening volley that could greatly support the momentum to change
this imbalance of powers.
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Give the FBI an Inch – National Security Letter Abuses
The Office of the Inspector General (IG) at the FBI is a wonderful thing.
IG Glen Fine has again released critical information about FBI abuses
of a post 9/11 investigative tool, in time to do something about them
and before it is merely another historical note about government abuses.
See the Inspector General report at: http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/doj_fbiletters_032007.pdf
Prior to this report, IG Fine among other things, reported on roundup
and detention of Arabs and Muslims in the U.S. without cause, FBI incompetence
in failing to identify 2 of the 9/11 hijackers, and failure to detect
the Russian spy and FBI agent Robert Hansen.
Now in a March 9 report, Fine’s office has identified that the FBI
violated Attorney General guidelines, violated FBI policy and lied (“circumvented”
the law). Some headquarters FBI agents used the term ‘exigent circumstances’
– an emergency shortcut – to get permission to obtain many
national security letters. Sometimes, contrary to requirements, the records
had nothing to do with national security. The process allowed the FBI
to get phone, financial, travel and email records without a subpoena.
And Fine also found that the FBI often (739 times) didn’t follow-up
later with the required subpoena.
Almost as worrying was the finding that lawyers within the FBI were complaining
to the FBI headquarters unit which was violating the law t |