New Britain, CT – 200-plus anti-war activists, lawyers, religious leaders, labor unionists, journalists and family members of the wrongfully prosecuted and imprisoned met at a civil liberties conference at Central Connecticut State University, Dec. 8. The conference theme was “An injury to one is an injury to all!” Civil rights legal scholar Sahar F. Aziz introduced the keynote speaker, journalist Glenn Greenwald. Tracy Molm of the Committee to Stop FBI Repression also spoke.

Aziz zeroed in on the aggressive FBI sting operations targeting mainly Arab-American and Muslim men, especially operations that use informants or agents to create phony ‘terrorism plots’ and then arrest, prosecute and imprison the men. There is no actual crime committed in these cases; the FBI creates a scenario and pressures the men into it over time. They imprison them for long prison terms upwards of 15 years with “intent to commit a criminal act.” Oftentimes, the men are lonely, isolated or vulnerable. Aziz also spoke on the inability of lawyers to challenge secret evidence and torture in the U.S. court system due to ‘national security’ claims.

Glen Greenwald argues the erosion of civil liberties by the Bush administration is not just continuing, but accelerating under President Obama. Political repression is broadening and deepening, and is being cemented in legal decisions. The Guardian journalist is troubled that the broad array of voices opposing repression under Bush is now quiet with Obama in office. Greenwald expressed grave concern for the use of charges like “material support for terrorism” to prosecute American Muslims who are “targeted and prosecuted not based on acts they have undertaken, but on beliefs they have expressed.” He opposed U.S. government use of indefinite detention in Guantanamo and targeted executions without any charges or judicial process.

Tracy Molm of the Committee to Stop FBI Repression spoke on the “Creating New Ties of Solidarity” panel. Molm livened up the room, speaking about the fightback organized in response to the raids on the 23 anti-war, Palestine and Colombia solidarity activists in the Midwest. She explained that the Assistant U.S. Attorney Barry Jonas, who prosecuted the Holy Land Five and put them in prison, is refusing to return the belongings of one of the 23, Hatem Abudayyeh of Chicago, and is pursuing an ongoing investigation in the case. She asked people to remain vigilant and continue building solidarity. The room applauded the victory in the Carlos Montes case, which was won after an intense national campaign.

Molm ended her talk on a positive note, “I took a trip to Palestine in 2004. I wanted to give people back home a first-hand account of Israeli occupation and U.S. funding for it. I am proud of the work that myself and the other 22 activists do in solidarity with the peoples of Palestine and Colombia. We continue to organize and speak out against U.S. imperialism. We call on everyone of conscience to join us and join the fight to drop the federal investigation of the Anti-War 23.”

Tom Burke, another of the Anti-War 23, spoke at a workshop with United National Antiwar Coalition leaders. The UNAC speakers all agree that to justify wars abroad, the U.S. government needs to create fear at home. The U.S. government is expanding and deepening state repression against Arab-Americans, Muslims, immigrants, African-American, Chicano and Latino youth and anti-war and Occupy Wall Street activists. Burke finished his talk saying, “With the economy so unstable, the rulers on Wall Street are growing more afraid of the people, so they are using political repression more and more. In response, we are building a stronger movement with leaders who trust each other more and more, while working to end U.S. wars.”

#NewBritainCT #civilLiberties #HolyLandFive #AntiWar23 #FBIRepression

The new law includes restrictions on freedom of assembly and expression that criminalize many forms of protest. The law criminalizes, with a mandatory 3 year jail sentence, any protest that might “perturb, interrupt or impede” politicians, or “any disorder” around them. The law also prohibits protests in schools, universities and health institutions that “obstruct the providing of services or access.” This is clearly targeted at criminalizing anything like the 2010 student strike at the University of Puerto Rico or actions to defend public services that are threatened by budget cuts and austerity. Violations of this law mean 6 months in jail and/or a $5000 fine.

Puerto Rican Governor Fortuño is with the New Progressive Party (PNP) of Puerto Rico. Since Puerto Rico is a colony (“commonwealth”) of the U.S., politicians there can also be affiliated with U.S. parties; Fortuño is also a member of the U.S.’s Republican Party and a member of the Republican National Committee, the leadership body of the Republican Party. He will be a featured speaker at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida in late August along with other controversial right wing politicians such as Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. There will be large protests outside the Republican National Convention, centered by a mass march on August 27.

#PuertoRico #InJusticeSystem #RacismInTheCriminalJusticeSystem #civilLiberties #Repression #ACLU #antiimperialism #colonialism #LuisFortuño

On June 30 the Puerto Rican legislature approved a new Penal Code that includes sharp restrictions on a broad range of civil liberties and rights. Supporters of civil liberties refer to it as essentially a ‘wish list’ of many regressive laws the right wing has dreamed of passing. It now awaits either the approval or veto of Puerto Rican Governor Luis Fortuño, who is from the New Progressive Party (PNP) of Puerto Rico, and is also a member of the U.S.’s Republican Party.

The new changes to the penal code include restrictions on freedom of assembly and expression that would criminalize many forms of protest. The law would criminalize, with a mandatory three-year jail sentence, any protest that might “perturb, interrupt or impede” politicians, or “any disorder” around them. The law would also prohibit protests that “obstruct the providing of services or access” at schools, universities and health institutions. This is clearly targeted at criminalizing anything like the recent university student strikes or actions to defend public services that are threatened by budget cuts and austerity. Violations of this law would mean six months in jail and/or a $5000 fine.

The bill includes severe restrictions and criminalization of abortion (currently legal under Puerto Rican and U.S. law). The new penal code would also create lengthy mandatory minimum sentences for a range of crimes. There is a separate (but politically related) constitutional referendum that will be voted on, which would remove the right to bail for people accused of some crimes.

Many of these measures have been proposed before and failed, and the constitutionality of some of them is questionable. There is a concern expressed by opponents of the bill that this is just the first step and the government would then attempt to restrict other rights such as the right to strike. Strikes in Puerto Rico in recent years have been militant and effective at fighting austerity. More austerity is expected in the coming period.

Puerto Rico’s status as a colony (‘commonwealth’) of the U.S. means that Puerto Rico is subject to the U.S.’s federal laws and courts in addition to Puerto Rico’s own laws. Some of the provisions in this new bill could be found unconstitutional under U.S. and Puerto Rican law, but the legislature seems intent on pushing the limits to try to criminalize a broad range of actions. These changes to the Puerto Rican penal code come in a context of sharpening repression in the United States as well, and many of the parts of this law appear to be models for deepening repressive laws in the U.S.

#PuertoRico #RacismInTheCriminalJusticeSystem #civilLiberties #Repression #antiimperialism #colonialism #abortion #PoliticalRepression

This law makes trespassing, actions in or near restricted areas that would “disrupt the orderly conduct of Government” and blocking entrances to the restricted areas federal crimes. The restricted areas include locations under Secret Service protection including “(1) the White House or its grounds of the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds, (2) a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting, or (3) a building or grounds so restricted due to a special event of national significance.”

Under the anti-Occupy bill one must act “knowingly,” not “willfully and knowingly” which was the previous language. This new wording means one would need to know that they were entering a restricted area but not necessarily know their actions would constitute a crime.

The American Civil Liberties Union explained the potential impact of this new law, “H.R. 347 did make one noteworthy change, which may make it easier for the Secret Service to overuse or misuse the statute to arrest lawful protesters.”

Meredith Aby, an activist with the Minnesota Anti-War Committee and who helped organize the 2008 March on the RNC, responded to the passage of the law. “The classification of National Special Security Events and the criminalization of protests at these events is unfortunately nothing new. The federal government has used this designation since the Clinton administration as a way to make national political conventions, like the DNC and the RNC, and events like the G-8 and WTO insulated from justified public protest and outrage.”

Aby continued, “Regardless of how the federal government uses their rule book to favor the 1%, people in this country are fed up and want real change. Tens of thousands of people came out to say no to the war on Iraq in Saint Paul in 2008, despite the multitude of barriers to protest that the federal, state and local governments put up. Similarly tens of thousands will come out this May to protest the NATO summit in Chicago despite this law and Mayor Emmanuel’s attempts to criminalize protests. The 99% want money for human needs not war and will take to the streets in Chicago to have their voices heard.”

#MinneapolisMN #PeoplesStruggles #civilLiberties #CivilRights #OccupyWallStreet #rightToProtest #FederalRestrictedBuildingAndGroundsImprovementActOf2011 #HR347

Chicago, IL – Over 100 people rallied and marched here March 10 at Daley Plaza. They came to defend civil liberties, demand an end to suppression of dissent and to call for a stop of government attacks on immigrant, Arab, Muslim, Black and Latino communities.

The coalition includes the defense committees of the anti-war and international solidarity activists under attack by the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office, prominent Arab and Muslim organizations, immigrant rights groups and groups preparing to march against the NATO summit when it takes place in Chicago this May.

Protesters first gathered at Daley Plaza, where the historic protest against NATO and the G8 will occur in May. The Coalition Against NATO/G8 War & Poverty agenda has waged an eight-month campaign to win the right to march.

Hatem Abudayyeh, one of those whose homes was raided by the FBI in 2010, emceed and called on the movements to unite against all these attacks. Ahmad Rahab, of the Council of American Islamic Relations, urged the groups to oppose Islamophobia, but also to continue to oppose threats of war, such as the U.S. and Israeli moves against Iran.

Alaa Mukahhal of the Immigrant Youth Justice League described the “can’ts” she faced growing up as undocumented in the U.S.: “Can’t get a driver’s license, can’t get aid for college and can’t get a job.”

The protest led into a feeder march for the Coming out of the Shadows rally, where 500 immigrant youth protested in opposition to deportations and to demand full equality, including citizenship.

#ChicagoIL #InJusticeSystem #civilLiberties #September24FBIRaids #CommitteeToStopFBIRepression

The Interfaith Committee intends to continue to gather the support of faith leaders to defend the right to protest war and austerity.

The text of the statement follows:

A PETITION TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES

WHEREAS the founders of our American democracy, when debating the freedoms that should apply to “we the people,” rejected the proposal that these freedoms be “tolerated,” and affirmed that these freedoms are “rights – even unalienable rights – that the government must always honor; and

WHEREAS the Bill of Rights – not the Bill of “Toleration” – of the United States Constitution places the freedom of religion first, but associates it with the essential freedoms of speech, of the press, of peaceable assembly, and of petition the government for redress of grievances; and

WHEREAS religious leaders and their communities have a long and continuing tradition of defending these essential and interconnected rights whenever the government has sought to compromise or deny them as a means of exercising control, exploiting fear, and imposing unreasonable physical and expressive restrictions on persons and groups; and

WHEREAS the political and community leaders of the City of Chicago have determined that benefits will be realized by inviting the G8 and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to hold their scheduled summits in May of 2012 in the City, and that these invitations have been accepted; and

WHEREAS the political leaders of the City of Chicago have now used the occasion of the forthcoming summit meetings of the G8 and NATO to rewrite and make significantly more restrictive and oppressive those ordinances applying especially to the freedom of speech and the freedom of peaceable assembly, and to threaten and intimidate with massive police action, arrest, and exorbitant fines those who are planning to assemble and speak in protest against the policies and actions of the G8 and NATO as well as other matters of national and international concern; and

WHEREAS these political leaders of the City of Chicago have taken steps to unreasonably limit the hours and places for free speech and peaceable assembly during the G8 and NATO summits, including spaces that are officially acknowledged to be “public” in character, and even to discourage non-protesting persons, groups, and institutions from their presence in these public areas; and

WHEREAS, we as leaders of faith communities of the greater Chicago region and other parts of the country have a religious and public responsibility for demanding that political and community leaders meet their assigned duties ethically, legally, and in keeping with the Constitution of the United States of America;

WE, therefore, the undersigned religious leaders petition the Mayor of the City of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel, and members of the City Council, to cease and desist from the enactment of any and all laws and ordinances, policies and practices that, in word or in spirit, violate, compromise, and undermine the clear and consistent meaning of the United States Constitution and it Bill of Rights.

Signatures (Institution/Religious affiliation is for identification purposes only)

• The Rev. Thomas Aldworth, Pastor, Morgan Park Baptist Church, Chicago
• The Rev. Luis Alvarenga, Iglesia Unido de Cristo, Berwyn
• The Rev. Jacki Belile (ABC – USA); Founder and Director, Living well Ministries
• Fr. Bob Bossie, SCJ
• John Cassel, First Church of the Brethren
• Joyce Cassel, First Church of the Brethren
• The Rev. Ann Coburn, Episcopal Church
• Dr. Pauline Coffman, Middle East Task Force of Chicago Presbytery
• The Rev. Daniel Dale, Senior Minister, Wellington Avenue United Church of Christ, Chicago
• The Rev. William Exner, Vice-Chair, National Executive Council, Episcopal Peace Fellowship
• The Rev. Sarah Fisher, Rector, St. Peter’s Episcopal Church, Chicago
• The Rev. Dr. Cotton Fite, Priest Associate, St. Luke’s Episcopal Church, Evanston
• The Rev. Lee A. Gaede, Deacon, St. Giles Episcopal Church, Northbrook
• Dr. Linda Gaither, Chair, National Executive Council, Episcopal Peace Fellowship
• The Rev. Larry Greenfield, Executive Minister, American Baptist Churches of Metro Chicago
• Dr. Marshall Elijah Hatch, Senior Pastor, New Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church; The Leader’s Network, Chairman
• Rafeeq Jaber CFP, Treasurer, Civil Rights Education Center
• The Rev. Damon R. Jones, Senior Pastor, First Baptist Church of Berwyn, American Baptist Churches of Metro Chicago
• The Rev. Jackie Lynn, Executive Director, Episcopal Peace Fellowship
• The Rev. Loren McGrail, Wellington Avenue United Church of Christ, Chicago
• Imam Abdul Malik Mujahid, Chair, Board of Parliament of World Religions
• The Rev. Emeka P. Nwachuku, Vicar, St. Andrew’s Pentecost Episcopal Church, Evanston
• Fr. Robert H. Oldershaw, Pastor emeritus, St. Nicholas Parish, Evanston
• Ahmed Qadeer, Co-Vice Chairman, DuPage United Secretary, Naperville Interfaith Leaders Association (NILA), Ex-President, Islamic Center of Naperville)
• The Rev. Bonnie Perry, Rector, Rector/Senior Pastor, All Saints’ Episcopal Church, Chicago
• The Rev. Primitivo C. Racimo, Vicar, St. Margaret of Scotland Episcopal Church, Chicago
• The Rev. Elizabeth Ritzman, American Baptist Churches, USA
• The Rev. Dr. Douglas R. Sharp, Interim Minister, Lake Street Church of Evanston, American Baptist Churches, USA
• Swami Shraddhananda, Yoga Chicago (magazine)
• Mr. Newland Smith, Librarian Emeritus, Seabury-Western Theological Seminary
• The Rev. Dr. Jerome A. Stone, Evanston
• The Rev. Linda Tossey, Pastor, Community Baptist Church, Warrenville
• The Very Rev. Kara Wagner Sherer, Rector, St. John’s Episcopal Church, Chicago
• The Rev. Robert T. Yeager, Oak Park

#ChicagoIL #civilLiberties #FirstAmendment #MayorRahmEmmanuel #CANG8 #NATOG8Summit2012 #BillOfRights

At 12:30 today, Rahm Emanuel officiated over the death of the Bill of Rights in the City Council chambers.

Ordinances designed to severely restrict First Amendment rights of speech and assembly were presented on December 14th. The stated target was to prepare to repress protesters during the summits of NATO and the G8.

At first, aldermen and the media all agreed that no one would oppose Emanuel on this.

In response to mayor's attack on civil liberties, the Coalition Against NATO/G8 War & Poverty Agenda (CANG8) joined together with Occupy Chicago and several unions to unite our efforts to defend of civil liberties in Chicago. By last week, aldermen had felt so much pressure from constituents that they had to speak out.

Emanuel then moved to withdraw first one, and then another, of the most criticized pieces. Protests continued to grow; Emanuel retreated further; the protests mounted, and he retreated even further.

Finally, a version was reached that the council opposition could vote for, hoping that the movement would not condemn them. The final version is still a significant attack on democratic rights; its passage is a defeat for our movement.

The mayor has not achieved his true objective, though. Emanuel looks at the new Chicago he has inherited, with protesters in so many places, and he wants to put the genie back in the bottle. It’s not possible.

We have the right to protest against war, austerity, and inequality. Mayor Emanuel, you’ll see us in the streets of Chicago: our streets.

#ChicagoIL #civilLiberties #FirstAmendment #OccupyChicago #MayorRahmEmmanuel #CoalitionAgainstNATOG8WarPovertyAgenda #CANG8 #NATOG8Summit2012 #BillOfRights

Chicago, IL – Over 50 people gathered in City Hall, Jan. 17, to speak out against plans by Mayor Rahm Emanuel to restrict the right to protest. They held a press conference, and then proceeded to pack into two consecutive hearings held by City Council committees.

CANG8 (Coalition Against NATO/G8 War and Poverty Agenda) called the press conference. It bought togather union officials, community activists, faith leaders, anti-war activists and members of Occupy Chicago. CANG8 and Occupy Chicago called for people to stop what Occupy folks termed the “Sit Down and Shut Up” ordinance.

The headline-grabbing restrictions in the ordinance included greatly increased fines for those arrested in protests. (Charges of “Resisting or Interfering with a Police Officer” are among the most common in arrests during protests. In Chicago, “going limp” is considered resisting arrest.) Fines were to be increased from $25 to $200 at a minimum and doubling of the maximum fine to $1,000. Also, the fines for violations during a permitted march would be increased by a multiple of 20, from $50 to $1000.

The ordinances also said that organizers would be required to provide the city with “a description of any recording equipment, sound amplification equipment, banners, signs, or other attention-getting devices to be used in connection with the parade” at least a week in advance of the any march. Plus activists would have to guarantee one parade marshal for every 100 participants, and officials wanted to decrease the amount of time from two hours fifteen minutes to two hours that a march could be in the street.

Why these restrictions now?

Mayor Emanuel is trying to deter protest against NATO and the G8. He is also trying to clamp down on the Occupy Chicago movement that emerged this fall. Since the announcement of the NATO/G8 summits, there has been an intimidating, well publicized build up for heavy handed policing; a campaign to demonize those who might protest, both in the press with the story line that “protests lead to violence,” but also through presentations of “security assessments,” warning of the same thing in private meetings with schools, churches and cultural agencies in the downtown area; an effort at the same time to obstruct permits for rallies/marches; and finally ordinance changes that both further the intimidation of potential protestors and place greater restrictions on those planning permitted assemblies.

Response to Public Opinion

Emanuel’s move to restrict the right to protest caused a fire storm of civil liberties complaints. When his ordinances were first introduced one month ago, city council leaders were said to be in the “yes” camp, supporting the mayor. But CANG8 stood against it, and prominent civil liberties voices were raised. Occupy Chicago, the Teachers Union and SEIU joined in; and then an outpouring of grass roots folks gave the city council the courage to take a stand against these restrictions of constitutional rights.

In the middle of this debate, the City of Chicago granted permits to CANG8 for a family friendly rally and march on May 19. Mayor Emanuel responded to public opinion, which clearly supported the right to protest against NATO’s wars and the poverty that the G8 is pushing onto working people through its cutbacks.

In response to the pressure, the most egregious of the restrictions were reduced: increased fines for arrests in protests were dropped; the fines for march permit violations were reduced from$1000 each to $200 each; the requirement for one marshall for every 100 marchers was dropped; the requirement for amplification was reduced to informing them of any equipment too large to be carried by an individual; and the time limit for marches was left at two hours and fifteen minutes. The revised ordinance language has dropped the requirement that those applying for parade permits during the summits provide detailed information about the signs they planned to carry.

Any restriction on the right to protest is wrong

Organizers with CANG8, Occupy Chicago and organized labor are still urging members of the council to look at the intent, and think about the context: Mayor Emanuel invited the bankers and the generals here before Tahrir Square; before the protests in Madison, Wisconsin; and before Occupy Wall Street. He wants to deter protest in Chicago. The Emanuel administration has engaged in a campaign of vilification: “protests lead to violence” is how it is expressed. The superintendent of police and the mayor have threatened mass arrests from the moment CANG8 stepped forward to talk about a family friendly protest.

The mayor looks at the new Chicago he has inherited, with protestors in so many places, and he wants to put the genie back in the bottle. It’s not possible.

Any restriction on democratic rights is wrong. The city should not restrict its majority—workers, students, low income folks—as they find their voices. The city has voted in the past against war. Most people in Chicago are against the agenda of the NATO and G8 summits. Protestors have a right to deliver the message: “Jobs, Housing, Healthcare, Education, the Environment, our Pensions: Not War.” At the NATO / G8 summit.

On Wednesday, activists will pack the city council chambers during the vote on the ordinance changes.

The ordinances still quadruple the minimum fine from $50 to $200 for any violations of the parade permit; they give Chicago Police Superintendent McCarthy the power to hire private security companies to video protests, forging agreements with “public or private entities concerning placement, installation, maintenance or use of video, audio telecommunications, or other similar equipment. McCarthy is still allowed to deputize out-of-state law enforcement personnel during the summits. Protestors are still required to provide the city a description of large signs.

#ChicagoIL #civilLiberties #OccupyChicago #MayorRahmEmmanuel #CANG8 #NATOG8Summit2012 #rightToProtest

Washington, DC – President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA), which includes provisions that allow for indefinite military detention without trial, on Dec.31. The timing of signing assured limited coverage by the corporate media.

Civil liberties organizations, including the Committee to Stop FBI Repression, had urged Obama to veto the NDAA.

A statement from the Committee to Stop FBI Repression noted, “We need to do everything in our power to push back against repression. Under the guise of preventing ‘terrorism’ our democratic rights are being taken away. We have seen this in the case of the 24 anti-war and international solidarity activists who were raided by the FBI and/or called to the grand jury investigating ‘material support for Foreign Terrorist Organizations.’ We have seen this in the prosecution of veteran Chicano activist Carlos Montes in Los Angeles.”

The NDAA, like laws that pertain to the ‘material support for terrorism’ are anti-democratic.

A statement from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) points out, “Under the Bush administration, similar claims of worldwide detention authority were used to hold even a U.S. citizen detained on U.S. soil in military custody, and many in Congress now assert that the NDAA should be used in the same way again. The ACLU believes that any military detention of American citizens or others within the United States is unconstitutional and illegal, including under the NDAA.”

#WashingtonDC #RacismInTheCriminalJusticeSystem #civilLiberties #CommitteeToStopFBIRepression #PresidentObama #NDAA #NationalDefenseAuthorizationAct #indefiniteDetention

The complaint argues that the new “Procedures for Public Use of the Hennepin County Government Center” issued by Hennepin County and certain unwritten procedures enforced by the county violate the demonstrators’ First Amendment rights because:

• The rules were expressly created in response to OccupyMPLS, which is a content-based limitation on speech.
• The rules put forth impermissible time, place and manner restrictions.
• The rules are unconstitutionally overbroad.
• The rules are a result of arbitrary and unconstitutional decision-making.
• The unwritten procedures were designed to suppress Plaintiff’s speech and are inconsistent with how the county has treated other groups.

The complaint, which provides details of the county’s restrictions, asks the court to declare that the “Procedures for Public Use of the Hennepin County Government Center” and certain unwritten procedures relating to chalk, electricity and use of structures are unconstitutional under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

“The rules put forth by Hennepin County are particularly troubling because they were created as a direct response to OccupyMPLS,” stated Justin Perl, partner at Maslon Edelman Borman & Brand. “They were not based on any previous ordinances. The Constitution does not allow the government to just make up new rules as you go along in order to target a particular group.”

“In the United States, we have celebrated protesters occupying spaces around the globe during the Arab Spring, yet we are quick to criticize the Occupy Movement for utilizing some of the same methods of expression.” stated Charles Samuelson, executive Director of the ACLU-MN.

Plaintiffs include: Occupy Minneapolis and individuals Benjamin Egerman, Benjamin Painter, Samuel Richards, and Melissa Rowan. Plaintiffs are elected delegates of OccupyMPLS to represent their interest as an unincorporated political association.

Cooperating attorneys include: Tim Griffin and Brian Thomson of Leonard, Street and Deinard and Alain Baudry, Justin Perl and Leora Maccabee Itman of Maslon Edelman Borman & Brand LLP.

#StPaulMN #InJusticeSystem #civilLiberties #ACLU #OccupyWallStreet #OccupyMN #OccupyMinneapolis #AmericanCivilLiberitesUnion

Defend Our Civil Liberties

Despite positioning himself as a supporter of civil liberties during the 2008 campaign, President Obama has chosen to largely embrace rather than reject the sweeping changes made during the Bush regime, including the so-called Patriot Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) amendments, as well as executive orders and legal opinions. These greatly expanded the ability of government agencies to spy on and disrupt law-abiding residents and organizations in the U.S.

UE has warned for years that when the government is given powers of domestic surveillance and “counterintelligence,” it can and will use them against ordinary, innocent Americans, particularly those who speak out against government policies, and especially those who represent a credible power base, such as the labor movement. We saw this during the McCarthy period in the 1940s and 1950s, when the combined forces of the federal government, big business, and their business-union co-conspirators nearly destroyed the UE and progressive trade unionism.

Now the U.S. labor movement has again been targeted by government witch hunts. The Justice Department is interpreting laws prohibiting “material support” for terrorist organizations to include those who speak out on certain foreign policy issues and organize fact-finding missions, and even those who attempt to teach non-violent approaches to those who have engaged in violence in the past. This then led to an undemocratic grand jury investigation and eventually FBI raids in late 2010 on the homes of labor and peace activists who had organized non-violent protests at the 2008 Republican National Convention in Minneapolis. Since some of those labor activists also supported the fight by UE Local 1174 members to stop Wells Fargo Bank from causing the closing of their plant in the Quad Cities, the FBI warned police in the Quad Cities of “dangerous” militants coming to their area, a ridiculous accusation since it involved a handful of union activists coming to show traditional labor solidarity. But it forced the local police department to greatly overreact, spending precious local tax dollars on large numbers of extra police while having a chilling effect on the ability of local citizens to exercise their right to protest against corporate bad behavior.

Today, more Americans than ever are under government and corporate surveillance, and information about us is being shared widely among all levels of law enforcement, the military and with private entities. Law enforcement agencies are allowed to spy on and infiltrate organizations without any indication that a crime has been committed or is being planned; surveillance cameras are increasingly being used in the workplace, on city streets, and in other public spaces; and our telephone and email communications are being swept up en masse. Bureaucratic initiatives such as fusion centers (state, local, and regional law enforcement coordinating centers) and joint terrorism task forces are speeding the sharing of often false or illegally-obtained information.

This will not protect us from future events like 9/11. The problem was not a lack of information but the failure to analyze and act upon existing information. The government obsession with gathering information on non-terrorist political opponents means there are fewer resources to combat real crime, including terrorism.

Bosses try to instill fear in workers during union organizing campaigns – that is the kind of fear that the government has tried to spread across society as a whole. People may avoid anti-globalization rallies if they know they are under government surveillance. A union member will think twice about voicing their outrage on a picket line if they know they could face trumped-up terrorism charges. Fewer people attend organizing meetings if they suspect that someone in the room could be a police agent.

It is clear that the fight to protect and regain civil liberties must continue regardless of which party controls the White House.

A growing number of Americans also question the use of the death penalty. Why should working people who regularly express deep distrust of our government officialdom trust these same forces with the power to inflict the ultimate penalty of death? The question is especially crucial when a rising tide of evidence demonstrates our judicial system is stacked against those without money. When evidence such as DNA testing reveals death row prisoners are innocent, it confirms our justice system is fundamentally flawed. The question of capital punishment is historically of great concern to union members. On numerous occasions our government has framed and executed labor leaders. Among the more famous are the Haymarket martyrs, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) leader Joe Hill, immigrant labor activists Sacco and Vanzetti, and the coal miners known as the Molly Maguires. Spared the death penalty only after massive campaigns to save them were Tom Mooney, who spoke to an early UE convention, and the legendary Big Bill Haywood.

Attacks on civil liberties are not minor infringements on the rights of a few extremists. Today they affect a vast cross-section of Americans. The chilling effect of denials of our democratic freedoms curtails political debate within the U.S., limits the ability of all citizens to make democratic choices for the future of our country, and thereby undermines our livelihoods and living standards.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THIS 72nd UE CONVENTION:

Opposes any change in the federal criminal code that would undermine our basic rights to organize, strike, protest, demonstrate and otherwise defend the interests of working people, specifically including changes designed to make picket-line activity subject to federal prosecution;

Urges all locals to actively defend the right to protest against government and corporate policies which hurt working people by working with and supporting organizations such as the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, the Defending Dissent Foundation, the National Lawyers Guild, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the Committee to Stop FBI Repression;

Calls on public-sector locals to investigate and aggressively challenge any restrictions on their members’ civil liberties written into state law or municipal ordinances;

Demands that Congress outlaw political spying and disruption by the FBI and other federal agencies, repeal the FISA amendment act, repeal or let sunset regressive parts of the Patriot Act, and pass legislation to roll back the worst excesses of the Bush regime by barring the use of secret evidence and restricting the use of the state secrets privilege and National Security Letters;

Supports local initiatives to promote civil liberties by encouraging local governments to pass a Local Civil Rights Restoration Act 9 as part of the People’s Campaign for the Constitution and laws based on the First Amendments Rights and Police Standards Act of 2004 enacted by the Washington, DC city council, which recognizes demonstrations as critical to free speech and vital to democracy, and thus emphasizes negotiation and communication and prohibits preemptive arrests;

Calls for legislation to prohibit random or blanket drug testing in the workplace as well as legislation to ban telephone and Internet monitoring of employees and to further restrict the use of lie detectors in employment;

Opposes President Obama’s preventive detention proposal and Justice Department policies that allow for closed hearings, secret evidence, refusal to name those detained, elimination of attorney-client privilege, and long detentions without bond without any specific articulated reason;

Supports legislation to abolish preventive detention and re-establish the right to bail and the concept of “innocent until proven guilty;”

Demands that Congress reform the process for placing groups on terrorist lists to ensure that they have sufficient notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond to the charges against them, with necessary checks and balances on executive discretion, while also reforming the prohibition on material support to protect free speech, association, peace building and the provision of humanitarian aid to civilians;

Supports legislation to strengthen the Freedom of Information Act, supports strong whistle blower protection legislation, and opposes efforts to intimidate or bar the press and other news media from reporting on government activities;

Supports repeal of McCarthy-era “speech crimes” laws, including the Smith Act and the Subversive Activities Control Act and opposes exclusion of foreigners based on political beliefs or memberships;

Supports the abolition of the death penalty.

#UnitedStates #Labor #civilLiberties #UnitedElectricalWorkers #September24FBIRaids #CommitteeToStopFBIRepression #PoliticalRepression

For the American people, these are dangerous times. Administration officials are debating a wish list of countries to invade. They want to send the sons and daughters of working people to do the fighting and dying. Dreaming of Black Hawks over Somalia and marching on Baghdad, the rich and powerful will plunge us into disaster after disaster. We will get neither peace nor safety, prosperity nor plenty.

The issue is not simply that Bush is reckless. He is, but there is a more basic problem – the class of people that Bush fronts for. Look deeper at the “us or them” rhetoric and there is a certain truth to it: for or against big oil; for or against the airline owners; for or against a well-fed, well-dressed elite who would not know a hard days work if it punched them in the nose.

This is reflected in every debate in Washington. Budget surplus. What time is it? Tax cuts for the rich time. Economic crisis and looming budget deficit – time for more corporate tax breaks. They say if you are “with us,” then you support drilling for oil in wildlife refuges, invasions of other countries, and trade agreements that drive down wages.

The war is the leading edge of a racist, reactionary, and right wing agenda. Nowhere is this clearer than the debate about racial profiling. Before Sept. 1l, racial profiling was a widespread practice, but one that many of its practitioners tried to hide. Today, racial profiling is even more widespread, yet we find its defenders are jabbering away on every TV network.

The attack on civil liberties is another dimension of this reactionary agenda. The hundreds of unknown immigrant prisoners, held in places known only to their jailers, is a testament to the kind of country that Bush and Ashcoft yearn for.

The rich, along with their government and media, say “united we stand.” At the same time, they are trying to pull the rug out from under us. We do not have the same interests. We, working and oppressed people, need to speak up for ourselves and act in our own interests.

#UnitedStates #AntiwarMovement #PoorPeoplesMovements #InJusticeSystem #Labor #Editorial #OppressedNationalities #Afghanistan #Editorials #civilLiberties #Bush

Fadi Saba, a member of the Coalition for Civil Liberties, said that the attacks on Arabs and Muslims today echo the Palmer Raids of the 1920's, where the U.S. government rounded up and deported thousands of immigrants suspected of being communists. Mark Schlosberg, of the American Civil Liberties Union, warned the audience about the USA Patriot Act, which expands police powers, labels civil disobedience as terrorism, and targets immigrants. Maha El Genaidi, of the Islamic Network Group, raised the question, “Is Islam taking the place of communism in a new cold war?” She also called on individuals to educate themselves and for the community to speak out as a group.

After the panel presentation, members of the audience shared web sites on civil liberties, the concentration camps for Japanese Americans during World War II, and anti-war information. There was a discussion about the Arab Americans who had been fired by Cadence Designs and Macy's. Towards the end of the discussion, Masao Suzuki, a member of the Nihonmachi Outreach Committee, said there was a need to “build a base in the Japanese American community, build ties with Arab, Muslim, and South Asian Americans, and criticize U.S. foreign policy.”

#SanJoseCA #AntiwarMovement #ImmigrantRights #News #Afghanistan #AsianNationalities #911 #NihonmachiOutreachCommittee #civilLiberties #PatriotAct