Civil liberties: use 'em or lose 'em

>Archive - PWW Print Edition Archive - 2001 Editions - Nov 3, 2001


 

The passage of the USA Patriot Act (HR-3162) confronts civil liberties activists with the daunting job of responding to the granting of new powers for law enforcement that infringes on civil liberties.

A coalition of 150 civil rights and liberties groups warned that the Bush Administration was attempting to push through an anti-terrorism law without public review.

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wisc.) told The Washington Post that many members of Congress voted for the legislation because they felt they had no choice, that even the bill's title - USA Patriot Act - was part of the "relentess" pressure for passage.

"They want to intimidate people," Feingold said. "A number of my colleagues said they thought I was right on the merits but felt they had to vote for it anyway."

The law went into effect Oct. 28. "The administration's proposed bill contained vast new powers for law enforcement," Feingold said from the floor of the Senate before casting the sole dissenting vote, "some seemingly drafted in haste and others that came from the FBI's wish list that Congress has rejected in the past."

The ACLU warned of a "sea change in the way search warrants are executed" that violates the fourth amendment by allowing covert entry of law enforcement and seizing of property and communications.

The bill also includes far reaching wiretapping and eavesdropping provisions which caused law makers who voted for the bill to insert a four year limit to that provision. The Bush administration wanted permanent authority.

The bill also included other provisions for fighting terrorism, including bioterrorism and money laundering. The main concern by civil liberties advocates are the many broadly defined provisions that could be used against people caught in an anti-terrorist dragnet.

"These new and unchecked powers could be used against American citizens who are not under criminal investigation," said Gregory T. Nojeim, associate director of the ACLU's Washington office, "immigrants who are here within our borders legally and also against those whose First Amendment activities are deemed to be threats to national security by the Attorney General."

Public opinion polls, even immediately after Sept. 11, have indicated strong concerns for protecting civil liberties.

The most recent poll by Business Week showed that about 41 percentcent reject expanded public surveillance, Internet monitoring and expanded government monitoring of cell phones to intercept communications.

There are provisions in the law that targets immigrants. Although the original "indefinite detention" of immigrants without charges was removed, the law allows for a seven-day detention with extensions up to six months.

Attorney General John Ashcroft defiantly promised to use even minor crimes or immigration violations to jail or deport immigrants in a speech to the U.S. Mayor's Conference.

Although 1,000 people have been detained since Sept. 11, The Washington Post reports that FBI officials say that fewer than 10 of the detainees are suspected of having substantive ties to the highjacking plots."

The ACLU joined 20 other groups, including the American Friends Service Committee, Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, Center for Constitutional Rights and the Electronic Frontier Foundation in filing a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to get information on the detainees.

The FOIA request stated that "the unprecedented secrecy surrounding the detention of several hundred individuals, which has now lasted for several weeks, in itself raises questions about the detentions and creates the utmost urgency to inform the public. The curtain of official silence prevents any democratic oversight of the government's response to the attacks."

While the Bush and Ashcroft anti-terrorist law is supposed to protect all who live in the U.S. from terrorism, the ultraright has an agenda that doesn't include considering hate crimes as terrorism.

The attacks on the civil rights of Arabs, Muslims and Asians have focused new attention on the need for federal action against hate crimes.

The right-wing Republicans are attempting to cut the Department of Education's hate crimes education and prevention programs from the final version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) reauthorization bill.

This double standard of what is terrorist and what is not extends as well to the threats that abortion clinics have faced since Sept. 11.

In a letter to Ashcroft from California Sen. Barbara Boxer wrote that "with regard to recent acts of domestic terrorism at more than 130 women's health clinics nationwide ... women's health clinics and providers have received anthrax threats for many years.

"Now, individuals or groups are capitalizing on the climate of fear produced by anthrax attacks in the U.S. and sending out a new round of anthrax threats to abortion clinics."

Boxer concluded by asking for an update on this investigation. Other sources have said the abortion clinic letters are "low priority."

On the floor of the Senate, Feingold outlined the long history of abuse by the intelligence agencies.

"There have been periods in our nation's history when civil liberties have taken a back seat to what appeared at the time to be the legitimate exigencies of war," he said.

"Our national consciousness still bears the stain and the scars of those events: the Alien and Sedition Acts; the suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War; the internment of Japanese-Americans, German-Americans, and Italian-Americans during World War II; the blacklisting of supposed communist sympathizers during the McCarthy era; and the surveillance and harassment of antiwar protesters, including Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., during the Vietnam War," Feingold said.

"We must not allow these pieces of our past to become prologue."

The last word on this critical issue goes to the Communist Party, one organization that has suffered first-hand during anti-democratic crackdowns on civil liberties.

Joelle Fishman, chair of the Political Action Commission of the Communist Party, said, "The only way to defend democracy and democratic rights is to use them. The pro-democracy movement renewed in the 2000 elections needs to come out in ever greater numbers to show the way in this new and difficult moment of history."

An independent oversight committee to monitor the implementation of the USA Patriot Act and an emergency conference of all civil liberty groups will go a long way to exercising those democratic rights.


The author can be reached at jleblanc@cpusa.org. A full analysis of the U.S. Patroit Act can be seen at www.aclu.org.