Posts on Civil Liberties

Dissenting from last week’s Supreme Court decision recognizing habeas corpus rights for prisoners at Guantanamo, Justice Scalia all but called the judiciary, not to mention his colleagues on the High Court, a Fifth Column in the War on Terror: “[This decision] will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed,” he wrote. Not surprisingly, the Right Wing followed his lead.

Fred Thompson, the recent presidential candidate, said death would be a “tragically obvious” result:

I also find it just a tad ironic that in a case involving habeas corpus, which literally means that one must produce a body (or person) before a court to explain the basis on which that person is being detained, the decision of this court may mean more fallen bodies in the defense of a Constitution some of these justices ignored.

Gary Bauer decried “The radical Left and its liberal allies in Big Media” for supporting “an action beneficial to America’s wartime enemies”: “Whose side are they on?” The Weekly Standard editors similarly wrote, “In their visceral, myopic hatred of President Bush, liberals will see the ruling as a blow to the president and not the broad, foolish, and dangerous judicial power grab it is.”

The National Review denounced “the imperial court,” while the American Spectator’s John Tabin singled out the author of the majority opinion as “Lord Kennedy.” To the Wall Street Journal, he is “President Kennedy”; the editors warned of “another attack on U.S. soil – perhaps one enabled by a terrorist released under the Kennedy rules.”

Larry Thornberry attacked “the al-Qaeda wing of the U.S. Supreme Court.” Joseph Farah described the decision as “wav[ing] the white flag of surrender before al-Qaida and its Islamo-fascist allies throughout the world.”

Writing in FrontPage Magazine, Henry Mark Holzer—who warns that the U.S. will regret the decision “if the Nation lives”—brings it around to the presidential election:

For this constitutional and national security debacle, ultimately we have to thank not only the 5-justice majority but also justice-nominating and justice-confirming Republicans in the White House and Senate.

The Boumediene decision is thus a grave cautionary lesson about what is at stake in this presidential election: nothing less than the future of the Supreme Court for another generation, and with it the security of the United States of America.

Thompson, a prominent supporter of John McCain, similarly alluded to the issue of judges in the election: “What remedy do people have now if they don’t like the court’s decision? None. If that thought is not enough to cause concerned citizens to turn out on Election Day to elect a new president, then I don’t know what will be.”

As for McCain himself, he called this habeas corpus ruling “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

The Supreme Court narrowly ruled today in favor of the right of habeas corpus and against a piece of the Bush Administration’s practice of curtailing civil liberties in the name of national security. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, both appointed by President Bush, joined Justices Scalia and Thomas in dissenting.

As is common, Scalia’s dissenting opinion provides a preview of the far Right’s reaction to the ruling. Scalia—one of the highest-ranking judges in the country—predicted that giving prisoners access to the judiciary is tantamount to murder:

The game of bait-and-switch that today’s opinion plays upon the Nation’s Commander in Chief will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.

Noted by Brian Tamanaha.

The imaginary Newt Gingrich presidential campaign is an idea that just won’t die. Now that John McCain has earned enough delegates to secure the GOP nomination for 2008, Robert Novak is taking Gingrich 2012 seriously:

Newt Gingrich's efforts to restore his standing among Republican conservatives for a possible future presidential bid have suffered a self-inflicted setback because of the former House speaker's support for liberal Rep. Wayne Gilchrest's unsuccessful attempt to save his seat in Congress representing Maryland's Eastern Shore. …

But even if the prospect of Gingrich running for president is illusory, his bid to be the GOP’s futuristic guru—with a steady stream of book deals and media appearances—seems to be progressing just fine. Gingrich’s “527” advocacy group recently announced it will be opening an office in Menlo Park, California to focus on “[o]nline political technology.”

If Gingrich is hoping to make inroads in Silicon Valley, he would be well advised to cool his over-the-top rhetoric on domestic spying and telecom immunity. Gingrich has focused on the issue in his online commentaries over the last few weeks, accusing Democrats of tendering a “declaration of unilateral disarmament in the War on Terror” and of perpetrating “the most amazing anti-national security action by Congress in decades.”

Sameh Khouzam, an Egyptian national who has been accused, and convicted in absentia, of murder in his native country has been fighting efforts by the U.S. government to deport him, claiming that he will be tortured if he returns because he is a Coptic Christian who refuses to convert to Islam.  

Rallying to Khouzam’s side is Pat Robertson’s American Center for Law and Justice, as well as its European affiliate, The European Centre for Law and Justice:

As a Coptic Christian, Khouzam effectively has no rights in his native Egypt and quite frankly because of his religious beliefs is certain to be denied the most basic of human rights and protections. The U.S. government repeatedly has stated its opposition to torture and should do what's right -- keep Khouzam out of the hands of a government that is likely to do just that."

…

In its amicus brief, the ACLJ and ECLJ contend that Egypt's assurances that it won't torture Khouzam are simply not credible.

…

The brief also contends that the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT) should apply in this case. CAT states that "no State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture."

The brief asserts that "where the receiving country has a poor human rights track record, like Egypt does, diplomatic assurances should carry almost no weight."

Obviously, there is nothing wrong with the ACLJ/ECLJ’s effort to prevent Khouzam from being tortured – in fact, it is quite laudable.  What makes the ACLJ/ECLJ involvement in this case interesting is the fact that both organizations have close ties to Former Attorney General John Ashcroft – the very same man responsible for the “extraordinary rendition” of Canadian citizen Maher Arar to Syria, where he was reportedly tortured:

L.V. “Butch” Foreman, a member of the Ector County school board in Odessa, Texas, has three words for parents who say the district’s Bible course crosses the line from teaching about the Bible to promoting sectarian beliefs: “kiss my butt.” Said Foreman:

“If they don’t have children in the class, they can kiss my butt,” Foreman said. “They’re just looking to impose their beliefs and their views on everybody, and we don’t put up with that crap out here.”

If the plaintiffs did have children enrolled in the classes, then Foreman said he would tell the students to drop the class and take another course since it’s an elective.

On Wednesday , the parents –  represented by attorneys with People For the American Way Foundation , the ACLU, the ACLU of Texas, and the law firm of Jenner & Block  – filed a lawsuit against the school  district, charging that this particular Bible course violates their religious liberty. Odessa schools are using a controversial course based on the program promoted by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (NCBSPS) – a private group backed by religious-right activists including Jesse Helms, Tony Perkins of Family Research Council, the Eagle Forum, and even Chuck Norris. The NCBCPS curriculum fails to present the Bible in an objective manner, a requirement for any public school course about the Bible. Instead, it presents the Bible as history, and also from a particular sectarian perspective. 

After the board  voted to adopt the NCBCPS curriculum – and create a course that the Texas ACLU’s Lisa Graybill called “basically a Sunday School class within the walls of a public school” – the district’s curriculum director exclaimed in an e-mail,

YES, WE ARE USING NCBCPS :) :) :)! HA! Take that you dang heathens!

According to American Spectator.

While Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has been under attack from politicians from both sides of the aisle over the firing of the U.S. attorneys, and while groups ranging from People For the American Way to the conservative American Freedom Agenda have called for his resignation over the abuse of civil liberties and other issues, the Republicans running for president have, for the most part, stayed mum. Now, two long-shot candidates are speaking out against Gonzales – albeit for different reasons.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee suggested Gonzales should resign so as to “not force the president” to make the decision, since the attorney general “is clearly creating a major distraction for the president and for the administration and for the Republican Party.”

And anti-immigrant firebrand Rep. Tom Tancredo said Gonzales should go because he “didn't fire enough” prosecutors – in particular, the U.S. attorney in Texas who “went after” border-patrol agents involved in the shooting of a fleeing Mexican.

Featuring John Yoo.

Need to spy first to get evidence for surveillance warrant, reasons former AG.

Priests for Life head calls Brownback “hero for the unborn.” Meanwhile: Brownback introduces bill to stymie First Amendment lawsuits.

Pushing, still, to expand sectarian preaching before non-church audiences – while warning of “banning the name of Jesus.” More on this issue.

Against constitutional challenge. More on NCBSPS.

Robertson-founded group urges Supreme Court to disallow citizen lawsuits. More from ACLJ.

Surprise move apparently contradicts bill he signed, reports New York Daily News.

Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Virginia) met with reporters today to respond to the press around his recent attack against Congressman-Elect Keith Ellison. Following a right-wing campaign against Ellison, a Muslim, for his choice to hold the Koran during a photo op after his official swearing in, Goode wrote a letter to constituents to assure them that “I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way” and linking Ellison’s photo op to immigration policy. "[I]f American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran.”

In today’s press conference, “he essentially did not back down one iota from his letter,” according to CNN reporter Brian Todd. Todd pressed Goode on whether he was against Ellison’s use of the Koran, and whether he favors the legal immigration of Muslims, but “he did not answer the question.”

Watch the segment from “The Situation Room”: Broadband or Dial-Up.