Search - 1 Result - Enemy Aliens Page 1 of 47

Source: Legal > Secondary Legal > Law Reviews & Journals > Individual Law Reviews & Journals > S - U > Stanford Law
Review ®
Terms: enemy aliens and date(geq (01/01/2002) and leq (12/31/2002)) (Edit Search)

54 Stan. L. Rev. 953, *

Copyright (c) 2002 The Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University
Stanford Law Review

May, 2002

54 Stan. L. Rev. 953

LENGTH: 27074 words

ARTICLE: Enemy Aliens

David Cole*

* Professor, Georgetown University Law Center. I benefited from comments of many colleagues in
connection with presentations of this paper at workshops and forums at Amherst College,
Georgetown University Law Center, Howard Law School, University of Pittsburgh Law School,
Stanford Law School, the Supreme Court Historical Society, Wayne State University, Wellesley
College, and the University of Washington. Matthew Kilby and Jihee Suh provided invaluable
research assistance.

SUMMARY:
... While there has been much talk about the need to sacrifice liberty for a greater sense of security,
practice we have selectively sacrificed noncitizens' liberties while retaining basic protections for
Eitizens. ... But while an allegation of an immigration violation, if proven, may justify deportation (if
the alien does not qualify for some form of relief permitting him to remain, such as political asylum),
the allegation of a violation does not in itself justify detention. ... Thus, while a decision to deny
entry to an alien might not trigger due process, a decision to detain an entering alien would trigger
due process limitations, because to do so is to deprive the person of physical liberty, and "freedom
from imprisonment ... lies at the heart of the liberty that [the Due Process] Clause protects. ... In
this regard, one of the leading spokespersons for the Arab community, James Zogby, director the
Arab-American Institute, recently found himself in rare agreement with the former counterterrorism
chief of the FBI, both of whom predicted that the Justice Department's plan to interview 5,000 Arab
immigrant men would likely backfire because of the division it would create between law
enforcement and the Arab community. ... The Enemy Alien Act is a precursor to the internment of
110,000 persons of Japanese ancestry during World War II. ...

Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there
falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of
the land.

Exodus 1:10

To those who pit Americans against immigrants and citizens against non-citizens, to those who scare
peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid
terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to
merica's enemies, and pause to America's friends.

Attorney General John Ashcroft Dec. 6, 2001 1

http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=ea991691879437b3520e811f7fd7059d&csvc=bl&cfo... 7/16/2003
 Page 11 of 17

8) ACLU holds convention as post-Sept. 11 interest in group surges

By Dick Polman
Philadelphia Inquirer

WASHINGTON _ Even in the best of times, it's never easy to be a card-carrying member of the American Civil
Liberties Union. The group is often reviled for defending the constitutional rights of pornographers, Klansmen,
native-born Nazis, common criminals _ all kinds of undesirables.

So you can guess what it's like for the ACLU these days, defending immigrants in the post-Sept. 11 era, and
contending that Attorney General John Ashcroft has invaded Americans' privacy rather than making citizens safer.
Sure enough, critics contend that the ACLU is undercutting the war against terrorism.

But as ACLU members from across the nation met here Wednesday for the first grass-roots convention in the
group's 83-year history, its leaders stressed the upside. As ACLU president Nadine Strossen remarked, "The half-
empty glass is also half full."

Translation: In what the ACLU views as a dark hour for civil liberties, when Americans may be tempted to trade
some of their rights for personal safety, it nevertheless is experiencing a historic surge in membership _ topping
400,000, a record high. The ranks have swelled by more than 25 percent since the autumn of 2001, when
Ashcroft made his first pitch for the new surveillance tools that are now codified in the USA Patriot Act.

Backed by a $50 million budget, the ACLU is juggling 33 lawsuits on the terrorism front. It also starts production
Monday on a national TV ad that will target Ashcroft's current push for expanded powers beyond the Patriot Act.
He wants more authority to jail suspects without bond before trial, and he wants a looser definition of "material
support" for terrorism _ a move, the ACLU claims, that would allow federal agents to go after political protesters.

"Basically," said Stephen Schulhofer, an ACLU member and a former board officer in Illinois, "the ACLU has
never been stronger _ yet it has never been weaker, and on the defensive, than it is now. It has a very tough job
in the current environment because its issues touch a raw emotional nerve. What should be embarrassing about
trying to defend the Bill of Rights? But for a lot of Americans, it probably looks like it's 'in league with Osama bin
Laden.1"

Its critics would not totally dispute that. Paul Kamenar, chief counsel with the conservative Washington Legal
Foundation, which has jousted in court with the ACLU, said Wednesday: "We're in dangerous times that call for
increased law-enforcement powers. We can't be such sticklers with the Constitution that we allow our enemies to
do us in. The ACLU is being dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. They're going after this
administration for political reasons."

Actually, the ACLU is going after both parties. Anthony Romero, the executive director, triggered a roar of
approval Wednesday when, in a speech, he skewered "the timidity, the reticence, the complicity of the
Democrats" who helped pass the Patriot Act with scant scrutiny _ thereby demonstrating that Democrats would
"rather stick their heads in the sand than stick their necks out for the Bill of Rights."

The ACLU is not without allies, however. The group that was used as a political football by presidential candidate
George H.W. Bush in 1988 (he said the ACLU's "card-carrying members" were "out in left field"), is now attracting
some high-profile conservatives, such as Phyllis Schlafly, former Rep. Bob Barr, and key Capitol Hill Republicans,
who fear that expanded federal surveillance is intruding on citizen privacy.

That still won't help the ACLU win a popularity contest, not when it continues to assail the FBI for targeting Middle
Eastern immigrants, arresting hundreds in secret, hiding their identities, and detaining them for months without
charges. In polls, most Americans don't seem concerned about these moves.

But for the ACLU _ founded in 1920 when a Democratic administration swept up nearly 6,000 immigrants during
the Red Scare, and the sole group to defend the interned Japanese Americans during World War II _ the
targeting of immigrants since Sept. 11 is merely the leading indicator of a new national-security regime. Thanks to
the Patriot Act, for example, it's a lot easier for the feds to scrutinize a citizen's Internet habits and library books.

ACLU president Strossen, in an interview on the eve of the gathering, acknowledged the ACLU's image problem:
"When the government invokes security and safety, that appeals to the gut. There's an instinctive wish, an
understandable human desire, to trust the government, to believe that if it's doing something, then it must be for a

6/12/2003
 Page 18 of 20

"I'm afraid it's going to leave a big hole," Mr. Rogers said.

Representative Frank R. Wolf, the Virginia Republican who led the hearing, said he shared that concern. Mr. Wolf
said he believed that there were important areas like public corruption that the F.B.I, was not aggressively
investigating. Congress may need to authorize money for more agents to fill the gap, he said.

Mr. Mueller acknowledged that "we are stretched" because of the bureau's expanded counterterrorism duties.
"We have to pick and choose," he said. But he said the bureau remained committed to investigating major public
corruption and white-collar crime.

Another area of concern cited by several lawmakers centered on the new Terrorism Threat Integration Center,
which the Bush administration created earlier this year.

Mr. Wolf said that while he supported the idea of an independent center to filter terrorist intelligence across the
government, he was bothered because the center was run by the Central Intelligence Agency.

"You are not an equal partner there," he told Mr. Mueller, but "more an arm of the C.I.A."

Several lawmakers said they feared that the C.I.A., because of a history of turf wars, would be unwilling to share
crucial intelligence with other agencies.

But Mr. Mueller said he believed that the setup was working well. He said that the new center's mission was
limited to analyzing intelligence, rather than operational activities, and that it represented an important effort "to
drop down the walls" between agencies.

11) False Terrorism Tips to F.B.I. Uproot the Lives of Suspects

By MICHAEL MOSS
New York Times

One evening in late April, the F.B.I, chief in Indiana, Thomas V. Fuentes, went to a crowded basement in an
Evansville mosque to ask for help in the fight against terrorism. Some 100 Muslims listened politely.

Then the wife of a local restaurateur spoke up to tell him what had happened the last time agents came calling,
shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. On a tip, her husband, Tarek Albasti, and eight other men were
rounded up, shackled, paraded in front of a newspaper photographer and jailed for a week. The tip turned out to
be false.

But four of the men were then listed in a national crime registry as having been accused of terrorism, even though
they were never charged, as the F.B.I, later conceded. The branding prevented them from flying, renting
apartments and landing jobs.

"People were crying as she describes this," Mr. Fuentes recalled. "And at the end, she says, 'My husband was
released, and in 19 months nobody has ever said, I'm sorry about what happened.1"

Mr. Fuentes did more than apologize. Last week, at his behest, a federal judge ordered that the men's names be
erased from all federal crime records.

The unusual public move to clear the Evansville men of suspicion comes after several terrorism cases collapsed
because they were based on tips that proved wrong.

Federal agents, facing intense pressure to avoid another terrorist attack, have acted on information from tipsters
with questionable backgrounds and motives, touching off needless scares and upending the lives of innocent
suspects.

After a wave of criticism, Bush administration officials have been revising their policies for handling terrorist
suspects. On Tuesday, President Bush issued guidelines restricting racial profiling in investigations to "narrow"
circumstances linked to stopping potential attacks.

6/19/2003
5) Secrecy Is Backed on 9/11 Detainees

By NEIL A. LEWIS
New York Times

WASHINGTON, June 17 — A sharply divided appeals court ruled today that the Justice
Department was within its rights when it refused to release the names of more than 700 people
arrested for immigration violations in connection with the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The 2-to-1 ruling by a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit upheld the government's contention that disclosing the names of people arrested on
immigration charges after the September 2001 attacks could help Al Qaeda figure out how law-
enforcement officials were conducting the nation's antiterrorist campaign.

The opinion extends a string of significant legal victories, against some setbacks of lesser
importance, for the White House from federal judges as they begin to rule on challenges to the
administration's actions in response to the terrorist attacks.

An appeals court in Philadelphia has already upheld the right of the administration to hold
hearings in secret on possible immigration violations in connection with the attacks. Another
panel of the District of Columbia Circuit has ruled that the detainees at the naval base at
Guantanamo Bay in Cuba are outside the reach of American constitutional law. And in January,
the appeals court based in Richmond, Va., gave the administration a major victory in ruling that a
wartime president like Mr. Bush could indefinitely detain a United States citizen captured as an
enemy combatant on the battlefield and deny that person access to a lawyer.

Today's case pitted two fundamental values against each other — the right of the public to know
details of how its government operates versus the government's need to keep some information
secret to protect national security.

The majority opinion, written by Judge David B. Sentelle, said that courts had always shown
deference to executive branch officials in the field of national security.

"The need for deference in this case is just as strong as in earlier cases," Judge Sentelle wrote in
the opinion that was joined by Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson. "America faces an enemy just as
real as its former cold war foes."

Judge Sentelle said that when government officials tell the court that disclosing the names of the
detainees will produce harm, "it is abundantly clear that the government's top counterterrorism
officials are well suited to make this predictive judgment. Conversely, the judiciary is in an
extremely poor position to second-guess" government views in the field of national security.

Judge David S. Tatel offered a blistering dissent, saying that the majority of the court was just
agreeing with what he said is the Bush administration's demand to "simply trust its judgment."

Judge Tatel wrote that "by accepting the government's vague, poorly explained allegations, and
by filling in the gaps in the government's case with its own assumptions about facts absent from
the record, this court has converted deference into acquiescence."

The opinion also demonstrated again the ideological divide on the nation's appeals courts and
especially the District of Columbia Circuit, which is widely viewed as second in importance only to
the Supreme Court. Judges Sentelle and Henderson are Republican appointees while Judge
Tatel is a Democratic appointee.
 Page 13 of 24

that much in terms of substantive security," he said.

He noted that reinforced cockpit doors and more explosive-detecting machines have helped. But Slepian said
Congress and the rest of the federal government are focusing too much on preventing another 9/11 instead of
concentrating on other tactics that terrorists have used, such as planting bombs on aircraft.

"When a terrorist sees that the front of the airport has some semblance of security, he's just going to go through
the back of airport," Slepian said.

8) Ashcroft Calls on News Media to Help Explain Antiterrorism Laws

By ADAM CLYMER
New York Times

QUEENSTOWN, Md., June 19 — Attorney General John Ashcroft called on the press and television today to
dispel fears about the sweeping antiterrorism law known as the U.S.A. Patriot Act, which was enacted after the
attacks at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Addressing two dozen editors, publishers, television executives and others, Mr. Ashcroft said, "We need the help
of the news industry, the fourth estate, to inform citizens about the constitutional tools and methods being used in
the war against terror. We need the media's help, for instance, in portraying accurately the U.S.A. Patriot Act."

He told a conference on "Journalism and Homeland Security," convened by the Aspen Institute, a nonpartisan
policy research group, that complaints and misunderstandings about the act were so widespread that "I heard a
fellow said his car wouldn't start the other day, and he blamed the Patriot Act."

In fact, he said, "Over the past 20 months the Patriot Act has become a critical reason for our success in the war
against terrorists, stopping further attacks in the United States."

In particular, Mr. Ashcroft sought to quiet concern about the government's access to library records and its use of
so-called roving wiretaps on terrorism suspects.

He said that critics of the law had "charged that under the Patriot Act the F.B.I, has arbitrarily visited local libraries
to check out reading records of ordinary citizens."

"The fact is simply not that," he said. "The Patriot Act simply does not allow federal law enforcement free or
unfettered access to local libraries, bookstores or other businesses."

Mr. Ashcroft said that warrants issued under the Patriot Act had to be approved by a judge. In contrast, when
records, including library data, were sought by ordinary grand jury subpoena, no judge was involved.

The number of such warrants issued has been classified, despite objections by some in the Justice Department
who argue that the low number of warrants actually served would help the department show it was not rummaging
in library records. Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who heads the
Judiciary Committee, said in an interview on Wednesday that he had seen the classified figures and that only "a
few" such warrants had been issued to libraries.

Mr. Ashcroft also asked the news media to explain more clearly the use of the roving wiretap, which allows the
authorities to listen in on conversations no matter what telephone an individual may be using.

Mr. Ashcroft told the conference that such wiretaps had been used against drug crimes, health care fraud and
racketeering for many years.

"Now I think it's important for the public to understand that this isn't something new, this isn't something different,

6/23/2003
 Page 21 of 24

14) Government's own report now bolsters abuse claims by Arab detainees

By TOM HAYS
Associated Press

Yasser Ebrahim says his introduction to the federal prison system came from guards slamming his head into a
wall while calling him a "terrorist."

Shakir Baloch says guards at the same lockup warned him: "You will be here the rest of your life."

Those allegations and others - including random beatings - made by Muslim men held on immigration charges
after the Sept. 11 attacks had been routinely dismissed by federal officials.

Earlier this month, however, the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General issued a report saying it
found "significant problems" with the treatment of nearly 800 detainees nationwide, including abusive conditions
at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn where Ebrahim and Baloch were held.

The report cast a critical light on the little-known federal lockup on the waterfront, and breathed life into a pending
civil rights lawsuit filed by Ebrahim, Baloch and five others against Attorney General John Ashcroft, prison
personnel, FBI supervisors and other officials. The plaintiffs are seeking class action status.

"What we said about all the suffering was true," Ebrahim, 31, said in a phone interview from his native Egypt. "The
government was doing its best to deny it."

Both Ebrahim and Baloch were held for eight months without being charged with a crime, then were deported.

"I'm owed an apology," said Baloch, 41, a Pakistani-born doctor with Canadian citizenship.

Their lawyers have amended the lawsuit, filed last year, to incorporate the inspector general's findings. The suit,
which seeks unspecified damages, claims federal officials violated their rights by imprisoning them on the basis of
their race and religion.

More than 80 men designated "of high interest" in the FBI investigation of the Sept. 11 attacks were jailed at the
facility in Brooklyn between Sept. 14, 2001, and Aug. 27, 2002. The nine-story facility usually houses men and
women charged with federal crimes, not immigration violations.

Inmates like Ebrahim and Baloch were classified "suspected terrorists" and put in high-security cell blocks
normally reserved for dangerous inmates.

The men say they were denied access to phones and lawyers for weeks at a time, locked in tiny cells where lights
burned all night, kept awake by guards pounding on their doors, put in handcuffs and shackles whenever outside
their cells, and beaten at random.

"I was being hated by everyone around me wanting revenge for Sept. 11," Ebrahim said. He acknowledged
staying past his visa's expiration but said he did nothing else illegal.

The abuse allegedly subsided once guards were ordered to videotape detainees outside their cells - a policy that
prison officials said was designed simply to deter accusations of mistreatment. The officials cited an al-Qaida
training manual that instructed terrorists to accuse their captors of abuse.

Ebrahim says one guard whispered: "The camera is your best friend. If not for the camera, I would have smashed
your face."

In interviews with the Inspector General's investigators, most guards denied any wrongdoing. But one said he
witnessed guards slam inmates against walls, and "stated this was a common practice before the MDC began
videotaping the detainees," the report said.

The guard said a supervisor told him "it was all part of being in jail and not to worry about it."

6/23/2003
 JULY/AUGUST 2003

THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BAR

r-st-v-
"JT^T- V
V-t, -
«t« ---

/John ureenya

********** CR-LOT O358*!I*C-047

SUSftN 6INSBUR6 045604
.£9 S LEE ST 0017 0077
Uft 22314-3815
 J* essage Page 1 of 3

Susan Ginsburg

From: Betty Swope [meswope@9-11commission.gov]

Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 7:26 AM
To: team5@9-11commission.gov
Subject: Emailing: 21JUST.htm

fyi

July 21, 2003

Report on USA Patriot Act Alleges Civil Rights Violations

By PHILIP SHENON

W ASHINGTON, July 20 — A report by internal investigators at the Justice Department has

identified dozens of recent cases in which department employees have been accused of serious
civil rights and civil liberties violations involving enforcement of the sweeping federal antiterrorism law
Tknown as the USA Patriot Act.

The inspector general's report, which was presented to Congress last week and is awaiting public
release, is likely to raise new concern among lawmakers about whether the Justice Department can
police itself when its employees are accused of violating the rights of Muslim and Arab immigrants and
others swept up in terrorism investigations under the 2001 law.

The report said that in the six-month period that ended on June 15, the inspector general's office had
received 34 complaints of civil rights and civil liberties violations by department employees that it
considered credible, including accusations that Muslim and Arab immigrants in federal detention
centers had been beaten.

The accused workers are employed in several of the agencies that make up the Justice Department, with
most of them assigned to the Bureau of Prisons, which oversees federal penitentiaries and detention
centers.

The report said that credible accusations were also made against employees of the F.B.I., the Drug
Enforcement Administration and the Immigration and Naturalization Service; most of the immigration
agency was consolidated earlier this year into the Department of Homeland Security.

A spokeswoman for the Justice Department, Barbara Comstock, said tonight that the department "takes
its obligations very seriously to protect civil rights and civil liberties, and the small number of credible
.^*TS^ allegations will be thoroughly investigated."

Ms. Comstock noted that the department was continuing to review accusations made last month in a

7/21/2003
 Independence Day 2003
Main Street America Fights the Federal
Government^ Insatiable Appetite for New Powers
in the Post 9/11 Era

A Special Report

by
The American Civil Liberties Union

Thursday, July 3, 2003

ACLU
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

www.aclu.org
25289 Part 4 6/20/03 10:15 AM Page 211

U. THE BILL OF RIGHTS AS HUMAN RIGHTS

And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex him. But
the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among
you, and thou shall love him as thyself.
LEVITICUS 19:33-34 KING JAMES

Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an out-
sider anywhere in this country.
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.,
J.ETJER-RROM THE BlRMWJGHAMjAII.

One of the most common responses to criticism of the way foreign

nationals have been treated in the war on terrorism is to assert, as Vice
President Cheney did about the military tribunal order, that foreign
nationals do not deserve the same rights as American citizens. That
response strikes a chord with the widely shared assumption that citi-
zenship makes a difference, and that the difference warrants the dis-
tinct treatment that foreign nationals receive. But are foreign
nationals entitled only to reduced rights and freedoms? The difficulty
of the question is reflected in the deeply ambivalent approach of the
Supreme Court, an ambivalence matched only by the alternately
xenophobic and xenophilic attitude of the American public toward
immigrants. On the one hand, the Court has insisted for more than a
century that foreign nationals living among us are "persons" within
the meaning of the Constitution, and are protected by all those rights
that the Constitution does not expressly reserve to citizens. Because
the Constitution expressly limits to citizens only the rights to vote and
to run for federal elective office, equality between non-nationals and
citizens appears to be the constitutional rule.
On the other hand, the Court has stated that with respect to immi-
125289 Notes S/20/03 1:58 PM Page i8S

NOTESl- 285
A
c
14. Die Bill of Rights as Human Rights
1. Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67,80 (1976).
2. The Japanese Immigrant Case (Yamatayn v. Fisher), 189 US. 861 (1903); The ,
> Chinese Exclusion Case (Chae Chan Ping v. United States), 130 US, 581 (1889). /
3. Galvan v. Press, 347 U.S. 522 (1954).
4. Ponerfeld v. Webb, 263 U.S. 225 (1923) (upholding Washington's alien land
law); Terrace v. T&owpson, 263 US, 197 (3923) (upholding California's alien land
law). In 1948, the Court invalidated California's law as applied to a U.S. citizen
child of a Japanese national. Oyama v. California, 332 U.S. 633 (1948). And in
Takahashi v. Fish d- Game Comm'n, 334 US. 410 (1948), the Court invalidated a
California law barring issuance of commercial fishing licenses to Japanese resi-
dent aliens, but expressly distinguished the alien land laws. 334 US. at 422. Thus,
"the U.S. Supreme Court technically never found the [alien land) laws unconsti-
tutional" Brant T. Lee, "A Racial Trust: The Japanese YWCA and the Alien Land
Law," 7Atian Pacific American Law fournal 1,28 (2001).
5. Shaughnessy v. United State; ex re). Mezei, 345 U.S. 206 (1953).
6. Foley v. Connelie, 435 U.S. 291 (1978) (permitting states to require citizenship
in hiring start troopers); Ambach v. Nonvick, 44] U.S. 68 (1979) (permitting
states tn require citizenship in hiring public school teachers); Cabeil v. Chavu-
Saluh, 454 U.S. 432 (1982) (permitting states to require citizenship in hiring of
deputy probation officers).
7. A November 2001 poll conducted by National Public Radio, Harvard Univer-
sity's John P. Kennedy School of Government, and the Kaiser Family Foundation
found that 56 percent of those surveyed said that noncitizens visiting or living
legally in the United States should have different rights than US. citizens. The
question specifically accepted the right to vote or hold public office. Deborah L
Acomb, "Poll Tjrack for December 15. 2001" National Journal, December 15,
2001.
8. U.S. Constitution, AIL I, §§2,3; Art. II. §1. Amend. 15. The Constitution's lim-
itation to citizens of the right agai nst discriminatory dcaial of the vow does not
mean that noncitizem cannot vote. If a state or locality chooses to enfranchise its
nontitizen residents, it may do so. Indeed, until the early twentieth century,
noncitizcns routinely enjoyed the right to vote as a matter of state and local law.
By contrast, the Constitution expressly restricts to citizens the right to hold fed-
eral elective office.
9. KwongHai Otewv. CoMing, 344 US. 590,596n.5 (1953) (construing immigra-
tion regulation permitting exclusion of alien* based on secret evidence not to
apply to a returning permanent resident alien because of the substantial consti-
tutional concerns that such an application would present).
to stop sending some information.

LASTING LESSONS

the disagreements over whether SEVIS is necessary or appropriate,

one doubts the system is here to stay. "It's a fait accompli ," says
Qvfieto, the University of Wisconsin teaching assistant. His sentiment is
echoed by a number of school administrators and their associations, who
agree that, in the midst of the war on terrorism, few people in government
would take the political risk of opposing SEVIS.

But the lasting lesson for government may have less to do with politics
than with process. The Homeland Security Department has committed to
creating a number of ambitious programs that, like SEVIS, are heavily
dependent on technology and the involvement of nongovernmental players . The
department's difficulties in managing SEVIS thus far, have raised questions
about its ability to handle future programs, many of which will be vastly
broader in scope.

School officials want the government to do a better job communicating with

them. The foreign student advisers associations have done the lion's share
of public relations work about SEVIS. Schools have little to no interaction
with Homeland Security officials. And some schools haven't been aware of
major SEVIS developments. Gotten says representatives of at least 50 small
colleges that attended a March meeting in North Carolina didn't even know
about the August deadline for complying with SEVIS.

The technical failings of SEVIS and the difficulty the government has had
in implementing it undermine its security potential, Gotten says. "If the
American people feel safer because of SEVIS, then they are severely
misled," she says.

Yet the greatest irony of SEVIS may be that the program has forced the very
"""^hoo! officials most leery of efforts to monitor students to take on that
le on the government's behalf. Schools can be punished for not reporting
even seemingly innocuous details, such as a student's mid-semester course
adjustment. Advisers who've long seen themselves as advocates now feel like
informants.

"We're supposed to be the ones helping the students, and yet at the same
time now we're having to be the policing force," says Toni Liston, the
international student adviser at Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville .

Despite the vocal protests at schools such as the University of Wisconsin,

SEVIS has had a chilling effect on student dissent. During recent
demonstrations against the U.S. -led war in Iraq, Gotten says, foreign
students asked her if they could be deported for attending the rallies. "I
told them, you absolutely have the right to participate in any free speech
activity on our campus or anywhere else," she says. Then she leveled with
them. "If things look like they're getting out of hand, be someplace else."

Being watched closely is nothing new for foreign students, who've always
had to report their whereabouts to authorities. But, after SEVIS, says
Quieto, things are different. "It just wasn't so scary before."

********
********

11
IG probes Patriot Act charges
Six complaints allege Muslims' civil rights violated
^~N Susan Schmidt
i Washington Post, July 22, 2003; Pg. A15

The Justice Department's inspector general is investigating six complaints

from Muslims who have alleged that federal employees pursuing enforcement
38
CHICAGO TRIBUNE: Suit contests anti-terror Patriot Act

ACLU alleges FBI violating privacy of Arab-Americans

Thursday, July 31, 2003

By Dan Mihalopoulos, Tribune staff reporter. Tribune news services contributed to this report

WASHINGTON - In the first direct legal challenge to the government's enforcement of the USA
Patriot Act, the post-Sept. 11 law enhancing the government's surveillance power, civil rights
advocates sued the Justice Department and the FBI on Wednesday for allegedly violating the privacy
rights of Arab-Americans and Muslims.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed suit in federal court in Detroit on behalf of six Arab-
American and Muslim groups, challenging the constitutionality of a Patriot Act provision expanding
the government's power to conduct secret searches of personal belongings and records, such as
Internet logs from public library computers.

The ACLU argues that the practice violates the Constitution's prohibition against unreasonable
search and seizure, as well as the free speech and due process rights of those targeted under the
Patriot Act.

"Ordinary Americans should not have to worry that the FBI is rifling through their medical records,
seizing their personal papers or forcing charities and advocacy.groups to divulge membership lists,"
said ACLU lawyer Ann Beeson.

The case is a legal expression of arguments that conservatives and liberals have made against the
anti-terrorism law since it was passed six weeks after the 2001 attacks.

The Bush administration steadfastly defends the Patriot Act as an indispensable weapon in the fight
against terrorism.

The law helps the government prevent "savage attacks such as those which occurred on Sept. 11,
2001," and the expanded powers have not been exercised in violation of constitutional rights, Justice
Department spokeswoman Barbara Comstock said in a statement.

A Justice Department official said the ACLU lawsuit marks the first time the government has been
sued for its enforcement of the Patriot Act.

The House struck the first major blow against the Patriot Act last week, voting to curtail the "sneak
and peak" surveillance powers it grants under a key provision that lets officials search private
property without notifying suspects until later.

The ACLU and other rights groups have complained that the Patriot Act is being used
indiscriminately against innocent people with no ties to terrorism.

Some libraries erasing data: Libraries across the country, including in Arlington Heights, 111., now

23
23) Enemy Combatant Vanishes Into a 'Legal Black Hole'
•\y Paula Span

Second of two articles

NEW YORK - It was the luck of the draw.

Some other spring morning, Donna Newman would have encountered a different client in a prison
jumpsuit, someone accused of fraud or drug trafficking. Instead, arriving at the federal courthouse
in downtown Manhattan in May 2002, she met Jose Padilla.

Newman serves on a panel of private practice attorneys who occasionally take on indigent clients
facing federal charges. She accepts new cases two days a year. "I believe in defending
indigents," she said. "You gotta give back." At the time, though, she had no inkling how much she
was about to give.

Padilla, arrested by the FBI at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport on May 8, had been flown
east to appear before a grand jury as a material witness. The subject he supposedly had
knowledge of ~ an al Qaeda plan to detonate a "dirty bomb" in the United States - sounded
scarier than most. Another alarming sign was that every time Newman set her pen down on the
courtroom table during that first appearance, federal marshals handed it back to her, evidently so
that Padilla couldn't seize it as a weapon.

Still, for Newman, the procedures seemed largely routine - until June 9, when President Bush
declared her client an enemy combatant and Padilla was hauled off to a brig in South Carolina. At
that point, the Padilla case detonated, largely consuming Newman's practice, her leisure, her life
for the coming year and plunging her into an extraordinary constitutional debate.

The pivotal question: Can an American citizen, arrested on U.S. soil, be held incommunicado in a
military prison indefinitely -- without being charged with a crime, without access to a lawyer?

The issue has ignited a fierce debate over civil liberties. It has been argued on the Senate floor
and on op-ed pages, and Amnesty International has condemned Padilla's treatment as "an
unprecedented suspension of fundamental rights of U.S. citizens in U.S. custody."

Newman and her co-counsel, however, are grappling with a more pragmatic question: How do
you represent a client you can't talk to?

The Client
The man was on the short side, clean-shaven; he looked younger than his 31 years, Newman
recalled. And he was wearing what is known around the courthouse as "a three-piece suit" - wrist
irons, leg irons and a connecting metal belt.

Newman, like many defense attorneys, had represented clients in other terrorism witness cases
since Sept. 11, 2001. "There were a whole slew of them," she said. "Initially, you don't recognize
that this one is huge."

Without much trepidation, therefore, she went about meeting with her client for more than 20
hours, she estimates. At the Metropolitan Correctional Center, she had to speak to him through a
screen, another signal that the government considered him particularly dangerous. But otherwise,
"he didn't impress me as any different from my other clients in personality or demeanor."

Padilla, who, like Newman, was born in Brooklyn, was "quiet, concerned about his predicament."
Newman struggled to explain that he had been arrested but, as a potential witness, not charged

PRESS CLIPS FOR JULY 30, 2003 32

car and passenger screening on ferries. Ferry operators will develop their own anti-terrorist
measures to meet government standards.

Before proposing the improvements, the Coast Guard studied maritime security risks in a novel
way that evaluated not just the consequences of an attack but the likelihood it would be
attempted and the probability of success.

Under that analysis, the risk of terrorists detonating weapons of mass destruction in a shipping
container - a scenario of great concern in Washington because of its potential lethality - got a
moderate rating because the containers are tracked.

Cruise ships also were considered less risky than large ferries because they have extensive
passenger and baggage screening. And smaller ferries, such as those operating on Long Island,
were not as risky as large ferries simply because they have fewer people, said Myers, the Coast
Guard engineer. The Cross Sound Ferry, running between Orient Point and New London, Conn.,
has seven ferryboats, the largest with a capacity of 1 ,000 passengers and 120 cars. The
Bridgeport-Port Jefferson Ferry runs three boats this time of year carrying up to 1 ,000 passengers
and 90-1 20 cars.

But the Staten Island Ferry is unique. "These things are very large and you've got a lot of people
in a confined area," Myers said. "They're on a scheduled route, you know where they're going to
be and that they're going to be there. It increases the risk greatly."
-\
J
1 5) Today We Face Another 'Watergate1 C/
By Samuel Dash

Samuel Dash is professor of law and director of the Institute of Criminal Law and Procedure at
Georgetown University Law Center. He served as chief counsel to the Senate Watergate
Committee.

Thirty years ago the Senate of the United States prevented President Richard Nixon from
destroying constitutional democracy in our country. Watergate was a wrenching turning point in
our history and its lessons must be learned and re-learned.

Now our lives as a free people are also being threatened by an administration bent on grabbing
unprecedented power, a timid Congress and an uninformed electorate. That is why the Watergate
experience remains so relevant to our republic today.

Watergate was much more than a bungled burglary of the Democratic National Committee
headquarters in the Watergate office building by agents of President Nixon to obtain information
that would help Nixon get re-elected in the presidential election of 1972.

It was the culmination of a series of criminal acts authorized by Nixon and carried out by his in-
house secret espionage team to maintain his power, smother dissent and punish his enemies.
Former Attorney General John Mitchell, who headed Nixon's re-election campaign and authorized
the Watergate burglary and wiretaps, called these criminal acts by the president and his aides
"the White House horrors," which had to be covered up if the president was to be re-elected.

The most serious horror was that Nixon and his aides believed that Nixon as president had the
absolute power and right to order these crimes to be committed. Nixon told an interviewer, "When
the president does it, it can't be wrong."

Mitchell testified before the Senate Watergate Committee that he would have "done anything" to
get Richard Nixon re-elected. "Anything?" asked a senator. "Would that include murder?" Mitchell

PRESS CLIPS FOR AUGUST 9-11,2003 20

WASHINGTON POST: Enemy Combatant Vanishes Into a 'Legal Black Hole1

Wednesday, July 30, 2003

By Paula Span

Second of two articles

NEW YORK - It was the luck of the draw.

Some other spring morning, Donna Newman would have encountered a different client in a prison
jumpsuit, someone accused of fraud or drug trafficking. Instead, arriving at the federal courthouse in
downtown Manhattan in May 2002, she met Jose Padilla.

Newman serves on a panel of private practice attorneys who occasionally take on indigent clients
facing federal charges. She accepts new cases two days a year. "I believe in defending indigents," she
said. "You gotta give back." At the time, though, she had no inkling how much she was about to
give.

Padilla, arrested by the FBI at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport on May 8, had been flown
east to appear before a grand jury as a material witness. The subject he supposedly had knowledge of
— an al Qaeda pkn to detonate a "dirty bomb" in the United States — sounded scarier than most.
Another alarming sign was that every time Newman set her pen down on the courtroom table
during that first appearance, federal marshals handed it back to her, evidently so that Padilla couldn't
seize it as a weapon.

Still, for Newman, the procedures seemed largely routine — until June 9, when President Bush
declared her client an enemy combatant and Padilla was hauled off to a brig in South Carolina. At
that point, the Padilla case detonated, largely consuming Newman's practice, her leisure, her life for
the coming year and plunging her into an extraordinary constitutional debate.

The pivotal question: Can an American citizen, arrested on U.S. soil, be held incommunicado in a
military prison indefinitely — without being charged with a crime, without access to a lawyer?

The issue has ignited a fierce debate over civil liberties. It has been argued on the Senate floor and
on op-ed pages, and Amnesty International has condemned Padilla's treatment as "an unprecedented
suspension of fundamental rights of U.S. citizens in U.S. custody."

Newman and her co-counsel, however, are grappling with a more pragmatic question: How do you
represent a client you can't talk to?

The Client

The man was on the short side, clean-shaven; he looked younger than his 31 years, Newman
recalled. And he was wearing what is known around the courthouse as "a three-piece suit" — wrist
irons, leg irons and a connecting metal belt.

20
ASSOCIATED PRESS: ACLU, Arab Groups Challenge Patriot Act

Thursday, July 31,2003

By ANDREW KRAMER, Associated Press Writer

PORTLAND, Ore. - The American Civil Liberties Union and several Islamic groups filed a lawsuit
Wednesday against the federal government over a section of the USA Patriot Act that lets FBI
agents monitor the books people read.

The ACLU called the lawsuit the first direct challenge to the provision of the act that allows the FBI
to secretly order librarians and others to disclose reading lists or other information as part of
terrorism investigations.

Librarians could not tell the patrons that the library had turned over records to the government and
would be legally bound to secrecy forever under the part of the law targeted in the suit.

The provision gives the federal government wide latitude to seize records, books and papers in
investigations of terrorism, but the ACLU said it could also apply to innocent religious leaders,
charity directors or doctors.

"It's unnecessary, dangerous and un-American," said David Fidanque, director of the Oregon
Chapter of the ACLU.

The Justice Department defends the act as a crucial weapon in the war on terrorism. Spokeswoman
Barbara Comstock said the section targeted by the lawsuit goes to great lengths to protect First
Amendment rights and requires court approval to obtain records.

"The Patriot Act was a long overdue measure to close gaping holes in the government's ability,
responsibly and lawfully, to collect vital intelligence information on criminal terrorists to protect our
citizens from savage attacks," Comstock said.

The lawsuit targets section 215 in the anti-terror legislation, passed by Congress soon after the Sept.
11 attacks at the urging of the U.S. Justice Department.

It waives the usual requirement of probable cause if the investigation involves terrorism, and allows
federal officials sweeping authority to search the records of people not suspected of any crime. The
FBI must prove to a court that the records have bearing on an investigation.

The lawsuit was filed in Detroit, but includes a Portland mosque that has been at the center of a
terrorist investigation.

Mosque President Alaa Abunijem said investigators have already used traditional subpoenas to
gather mosque records on the suspects and their families.

Secret, so-called 215 orders "almost certainly" were part of the FBI's probe into the mosque's
activities, said Ann Beelan, the ACLU's lead attorney in the case.

10
ASSOCIATED PRESS: Officials defend Patriot Act at public forum

Wednesday, July 30, 2003

DETROIT — Federal officials defended the USA Patriot Act on Wednesday, the same day the
American Civil Liberties Union announced a lawsuit challenging a provision of the act giving the
FBI wider latitude to seize records, books and papers in investigations of terrorism.

"I cannot think of a law that has generated more discussion and more debate than the Patriot Act,"
U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Collins said in opening remarks.

"So I want you to understand the balance that is being done with regard to protecting civil liberties
and protecting national security," he told the audience at the Wayne State University Law School
auditorium.

Collins and representatives from the FBI and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
spoke to about 100 members of the public.

Officials emphasized that many provisions of the Patriot Act have long been available to them in the
investigation of criminal cases, and said the act expanded those provisions to terrorism
investigations. They said the principles of due process and judicial oversight have not been diluted in
that process.

The ACLU called the lawsuit filed in Detroit the first direct challenge to a provision of the act
allowing FBI agents secretly to order librarians, religious leaders, charity directors or doctors and
others to disclose information from an individual's record.

The suit, which names Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller as
defendants, targets section 215 in the anti-terror legislation, passed by Congress soon after the Sept.
11, 2001 attacks at the urging of the U.S. Justice Department.

Officials at Wednesday's forum said section 215 allows the government to obtain "business records,"
which they said could include library records, though the act makes no mention of libraries. It does
not allow the government to create a "watch list" based on the books people check out from public
libraries, they said.

They also noted that section 215 may not be used against U.S. citizens or permanent residents when
they are taking part in activities protected by the Fkst Amendment.

Barbara McQuade, an assistant U.S. attorney in the counter-terrorism unit of Collins' office, said
controversy over issues such as closed immigration hearings, war tribunals and immigrant detentions
has been incorrectly attributed to the Patriot Act.

"The Patriot (Act) has kind of become this lightning rod, a shorthand way of (criticizing) all that is
wrong in the government post 9-11," McQuade said.

12
LOS ANGELES TIMES: Planned Sequel to Patriot Act Losing Audience , o^1 u
v"x

As congressional critics of 'sneak-and-peek' searches gain ground, the Justice Department may
shelve requests for expanded powers.

Tuesday, July 29, 2003

By Richard B. Schmitt

WASHINGTON — Six weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, Rep. C.L. "Butch" Otter of Idaho was a
lone wolf — arguing that Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft didn't need more power to fight home-grown
terrorists.

Otter was the only member of Congress to argue against the USA Patriot Act when the terrorism-
fighting kw was debated on the House floor. But these days, the Republican has plenty of company.
And the Justice Department, which in recent months has drafted a measure that would expand its
powers, may be on the retreat.

Last week, the House overwhelmingly passed a measure that would repeal a portion of the Patriot
Act, which had been passed while the rubble at the Pentagon and World Trade Center still
smoldered. The so-called Otter amendment would take away federal investigators' power to conduct
"sneak-and-peek" searches — unannounced searches of homes and businesses.

The measure would be a small adjustment to the Patriot Act, but it indicates a growing belief among
kwmakers that some investigators have abused their new powers and need to be held more strictly
accountable. Those concerns may diminish any prospects for a sequel to the Patriot Act.

Whatever the final fate of the Otter amendment, the Justice Department has voiced strong
objections to the measure, declaring it the "Terrorist Tip-Off Amendment" in a letter to House
Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-H1.) last week. No comparable measure has been introduced in the
Senate, although proponents hope to find a sponsor soon.

In a speech earlier this month, however, Otter was generally optimistic, telling business and
community leaders in Boise, "Things are looking up."

When Congress approved the Patriot Act about 21 months ago, the measure amounted to the
legislative equivalent of a blank check. It was formally known as the "Uniting and Strengthening
America Act by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA
PATRIOT) Act of 2001."

The sequel — dubbed Patriot Act II by critics but never officially proposed by the department —
would have made it easier to hold suspects and deny them bail and included provisions that would
set up a DNA database for people associated with terrorist groups and lift court orders barring
police from spying on dissidents, among other features.

But the recent release of a joint congressional report investigating the Sept. 11 attacks — and the
nearly 900-page document's portrayal of the intelligence community as stunningly inept in tracking

22
A.B.A. Urges Wider Rights in Cases Tried by Tribunals Page 1 of 3

-N'rtu jjork Suites

August 13, 2003

A.B.A. Urges Wider Rights in Cases Tried

by Tribunals
By JONATHAN D. SLATER

AN FRANCISCO, Aug. 12 - The American Bar Association

called on Congress and the White House today to ensure that
all defendants before military tribunals have adequate access to
civilian lawyers.

The resolution, approved by the group's policy-setting House of

Delegates, criticized restrictions on lawyers representing accused
enemy combatants before the tribunals. The association cited
government monitoring of conversations between lawyers and their
clients, not providing defense lawyers with evidence that might
help their cases as is required in ordinary criminal cases, and
preventing civilian lawyers from consulting with others to build
their cases.

The military tribunals were the Bush administration's proposal to

handle prosecutions of accused terrorists. Defendants before the
tribunals would be provided with a military lawyer, but civilian
defense lawyers have voiced strong misgivings about the
difficulties they would face in representing such clients.

The resolution was approved with no debate by delegates at the

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/13/national/13TR... 8/13/2003

The Pursuit of Immigrants in America After Sept. 11
By ADAM LIPTAK
T
ERRORISM, for America, may be a
new threat, but according to a Jus-
tice Department report last week,
Attorney General John Ashcroft has
employed some old, discredited, means to
fight it.
The report, on the detention of 762 people
on Immigration charges in the wake of the
Sept 11, 2001, attacks, was issued by Glenn
A. Fine, the department's inspector general
It found that immigration laws were mis-
used to establish a system to hold people,
sometimes in exceptionally harsh settings,
rather than charge them. The detentions
were often supported by flimsy evidence
and inconsistent criteria. Those detained
were mostly Arab and Muslim men.
Mr. Ashcroft has consistently defended
what he has called "aggressive arrest and
detention tactics in the war on terror" as
needed to protect Americans. And the gov-
ernment didn't approach the scale of the
abases in the last century, when large num-
bers of people were detained solely because
of their politics or ancestry.
In the Palmer raids of 1920, for instance,
thousands of people, mostly immigrants,
were rounded up in cities across America on
suspicion of holding radical views. Many,
were beaten, held in intolerable conditions
and forced to sign confessions. During
World War II, about 110,000 people of Japa-
nese ancestry, many of them American
citizens, were held in internment camps.
"We're probably much more sensitive to
civil liberties than the country has ever
been," said Cass R. Sunstein, a law prof^s-
sor at the University of Chicago.
But if the number of people detained after
the Sept. 11 attacks was relatively small, the
Justice Department's tactics were surpris-
ingly similar to earlier discredited prac-
tices.
David Cole, a law professor at George-
town and the author of a forthcoming book,
"Enemy Aliens," said that the Justice De-
partment rounded up people on mere suspi-
cion. "Many of the people were locked up
without any actual evidence of involvement
in terrorism," he said.
The problem, said Eric L. Muller, a law
professor at the University of North Caroli-
na and the author of "Free to Die forJTheir
Country: The Story of the Japanese Ameri-
can Draft Resisters of World War II" (Uni-
versity of Chicago, 2001), is that thoughtful
and measured analysis of the available
data, particularly in the aftermath of a
national emergency, is too much to ask of
the government. £ gence apparatus necessarily mean having
There is a place, he said, for taking ac-
Palmer Raids Redux
count of information about race or ethnicity,
along with all of the other data available in
modern law enforcement, in making judg-
ments about an individual. But using race or
ethnicity as the whole of the analysis is
unacceptable, he said.
Professor Muller has concluded, however,
that the people charged with implementing
Ashcroft defended
aggressive tactics
against terror.
these more subtle judgments may not be up
to the job. '
"It's not the case that after 9/11 national
origin had nothing to do with a personalized
suspicion,"_he said. "But we're not good yet
in confining our uses of race and ethnicity to
very moderated, limited intrusions. We just
don't do it very well. We can't trust our-
selves to do a little bit of racial profiling."
Nor does having a large modern intelli-
good intelligence or analysis to guide law
enforcement.
"One of the things this report reveals,"
Professor Cole said, "is that Ashcroft was
shooting in the dark and virtually every one
of his shots missed."
None of the detainees discussed in the
report were charged with engaging in or
aiding terrorism, though nearly all were
guilty of overstaying visas, entering the
country illegally or other immigration viola-
tions. Most have been deported, some after
long periods of unwarranted detention.
Public outcry over such restrictions on
liberty has been substantial. But much of it
has been focused on the few American citi-
zens who have been detained, including
Yasser Esara Hamdi and Jose Padilla, the
two Americans labeled "enemy combat-
ants" and held incommunicado for involve-
ment with terrorist groups. Far less atten-
tion has been given the roughly 600 prison-
ers captured during the war in Afghanistan
and held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Eric M. Freedman, a law professor at
Hof stra University, hopes the inspector gen-
eral's report will start to change that He
said that the problems revealed in the immi-
gration detentions cast "renewed doubt on
the soundness of the reasons for holding the
Guantanamo people, who were picked up
just as randomly but lack any sort of pro-
cess whatsoever to check on the mistakes."
A mixed verdict on Tuesday in Deti
where two Arab immigrants were convic
of supporting a terrorist plot against
potts, military bases and landmarks, w
two others were cleared, also raised qt
tions about the role the mfn's backgrou
and political views played in the jui
decision. The prosecution relied in pan
what looked like a tourist's videotape t
included prominent sites like Disneylan
"At the very least," said Peter Margul
a law professor at Roger Williams Unive
ty, "in this climate, evidence like the vi
that might be harmless in other contf
may, as a practical matter, shift the bur
of proof from the government to the deft
ant It is also possible that a jury i
consider the video in conjunction with
ethnicity or nationality of the defends
and draw inferences that are both compl
ly impermissible and virtually impossibl
combat"
It is surely unfair to judge the gov
ment's conduct only in hindsight A nati<
security threat naturally elicits a rapid
possibly risky response from the execu
branch.
At the same time, Professor Suns
said, the historical record is pretty clt
"In retrospect generally it seems we
gage in civil liberties violations that tl
was insufficient reason to engage in."
 Un-American Activities
Enemy Aliens: Double Standards
and Constitutional Freedoms
in the War on Terrorism
by David Cole.
New Press, 315 pp., $24.95
The Times of London last May pub-
lished a letter to the editor from Tony
Willoughby of Willoughby & Partners,
a firm of solicitors. "The head of IT
[information technology] at our law
firm," he wrote,
is a Muslim. He is a gentleman in
every sense of the word. His fa-
naticism, if he has any, is re-
stricted to cricket. Last Sunday he
went on a business trip to Califor-
nia. On arrival at Los Angeles he
was detained and interrogated on
suspicion of being a terrorist—
For the first 12 hours he was re-
fused access to a telephone. After
16 hours, not having been given
any food, he asked if he could
have some. He was given ham
sandwiches and, when he ex-
plained that he could not eat pork,
was told: "You eat what you are
given." He did not eat. He was
eventually escorted back to the
airport in handcuffs and deported.
Mr. Willoughby wrote to American of-
ficials seeking an explanation. He got
back what he calls "a fobbing-off let-
ter"—and his firm's laptop computer,
which had been confiscated at the air-
port. Its data had been wiped out.
That is a mild example, very mild,
of what has happened to the US gov-
ernment's treatment of aliens since
September 11, 2001. Mr. Willoughby's
colleague was evidently picked out,
treated with contempt, and denied
entry to this country because of his
religion and, possibly, his ethnic an-
tecedents; his family came to Britain,
decades ago, from Pakistan. But in a
sense he was lucky. He was not de-
tained for months in secret, prevented
from calling a lawyer, humiliated and
beaten by prison guards. All those
things have happened to aliens swept
off American streets at the order of
Attorney General John Ashcroft.
1 he harsh treatment of aliens since
September 11 has had little political
attention. Relatively few Americans
know or care much about it. In this
powerful book, Enemy Aliens, David
Cole shows why we should care, as a
matter not only of humanity but of
self-interest. He lays out the Bush ad-
ministration's policies in the way they
can best be understood, in their impact
on individual aliens. His tone is mea-
sured, his legal hand sure. He lets the
facts speak, and the result is gripping.
Cole gives the most convincing view
that I have read of the legal and bureau-
cratic threats that now face immigrants
and visitors to America. But then he
goes on to make an even more impor-
tant point. The repressive measures
that President Bush and Attorney Gen-
eral Ashcroft first took against aliens
are now being applied to citizens.
For the last two years more than 650
men and boys have been held in an
American prison camp in Guanta-
namo Bay, Cuba. They were seized in
16
Anthony Lewis
Afghanistan and are described by the
US as "illegal combatants" attached to
the Taliban or al-Qaeda. The Third
Geneva Convention, to which the
United States is a signatory, provides
that their status must be determined
by a "competent tribunal." But the
Bush administration has declined to
apply the convention or provide any
independent process to check whether
the prisoners were in fact fighting in
Afghanistan or, as has been claimed
for a number of them, were ordinary
people just caught up in the fighting.
Vice President Cheney said the pris-
oners were "devoted to killing millions
of Americans." But officials now con-
cede that no leading figures in the Tal-
iban or al-Qaeda are in Guantanamo.
The prisoners have included boys as
young as thirteen.
The Guantanamo detainees have
not been allowed to consult lawyers.
Efforts to bring habeas corpus actions
on their behalf have been turned down
by US courts on the ground that
Guantanamo is not US territory.
When an action was brought in British
courts on behalf of a British citizen in
Guantanamo, the Master of the Rolls,
Lord Phillips, said, "We find surpris-
ing the proposition that the writ of the
United States courts does not run in
respect of individuals held by the US
government on territory that the
United States holds...under a long-
term treaty." He called it "objection-
able" that a prisoner had no chance to
challenge the legitimacy of his deten-
tion "before a court or tribunal."
Donald Rumsfeld, the secretary of
defense, said recently that the Guanta-
Padilla, her client. A federal trial
judge decided that she should be able
to do so for the limited purpose of get-
ting any facts casting doubt on his des-
ignation as an enemy combatant. But
the Justice Department objected even
to that, saying that any contact with a
lawyer might hurt the effort to extract
information from Padilla by destroy-
ing the desired "atmosphere of depen-
dency and trust between the subject
and interrogator." The case is now
before the US Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit, in New York. A
lawyer involved, not Donna Newman,
told me it was "still hard to accept that
we are having to argue that an Ameri-
can citizen, picked up at O'Hare Air-
port, has a right to see his lawyer."
The Padilla case illustrates, Cole
says, that "what we do "o foreign na-
tionals today often paves the way for
what will be done to American citizens
tomorrow." In Padilla's case and
Hamdi's, the transition came unusu-
ally fast. But it is virtually inevitable at
some point, Cole argues: "The rights
of all of us are in the balance when the
government selectively sacrifices for-
eign nationals' liberties."
What citizens have to lose was made
dramatically clear when, last Febru-
ary, a private organization, the Center
for Public Integrity, published a leaked
draft of Justice Department legislation
called the Domestic Security Enhance-
ment Act. The legislation would pro-
vide that any American who supports
the activities (even peaceful ones) of
an organization the government des-
namo prisoners would be held until ignates as terrorist presumptively loses
the war on terrorism is over—which his or her citizenship. The citizen would
may be years or decades from now. become an alien. The attorney general
Some may be tried before military tri- could order all such unfortunate souls
bunals, he said, but "our interest is in —and all lawful resident aliens—de-
not trying them and letting them out. ported if their presence in the country
Our interest is in—during this global was inconsistent with our "national
war on terror—keeping them off the defense, foreign policy or economic
streets, and so that's what's taking interests." It would be the most sweep-
place." ing grant of unreviewable power to de-
port people since the ill-starred Alien
1 he treatment of the Guantanamo Act of 1798, passed in a time of hyste-
prisoners may be regarded as an ex- ria over French Jacobin terrorism,
treme in US policy toward noncitizens: which authorized the President to de-
they are held in indefinite detention, port "all such aliens as he shall judge
kept incommunicado and without ac- dangerous." That statute expired after
cess to counsel, with no hearing to two years.
determine whether they were in fact The Domestic Security Enhancement
enemy combatants. But exactly the Act, so-called, has never emerged as
same is being done now to two Ameri- an official Bush administration pro-
can citizens, Yasser Hamdi and Jose posal. But the fact that it reached the
Padilla. stage of a full draft says much about
Padilla was born in Brooklyn, was the state of mind of the Bush adminis-
brought up in Chicago, became a gang tration's lawyers—and about the folly
member, and was convicted several of believing that we citizens can re-
times. In prison he converted to Islam. main safe while rights are systemati-
After travel abroad he was arrested at cally assaulted. 1 thought I followed
O'Hare Airport, Chicago, on May 8, these things fairly closely, but I did not
2002. He was flown to New York by really appreciate the scope of what the
Justice Department agents, who served Bush administration has done to non-
him with a warrant as a material wit- citizens until I read this book.
ness before a grand jury investigating
the terrorist attack on the World Ooon after September 11, Attorney
Trade Center. A federal judge set a General Ashcroft began a program of
hearing on the warrant and appointed mass detention of assertedly suspect
a lawyer for him. Donna Newman. But aliens in the country, targeting mainly
two days before the hearing, Padilla Muslims and Arabs. At first the Jus-
was flown to a Navy brig in South Car- tice Department issued a weekly run-
olina and held as an "enemy combat- ning total of the number detained. But
ant." There hefemains. when it reached 1,182, on November 5,
For the last sixteen months Ms. 2001, the department went silent, re-
Newman has been trying to speak with fusing to disclose any numbers.
The New York Review
THE WASHINGTON POST
FBI Apology Fails
To Dissipate Cloud
8 Terrorism Suspects Confined on Bogus Tip
By ROBERT E. PIERRE
Washington Post Staff Writer
EVANSVILLE, Ind.—The food's the
same at the Crazy Tomato. So are the pric-
es and service. But what was a popular
place for pasta 18 months ago now attracts
a fraction of its regular clientele.
Business plummeted after the restau-
rant's owner, Tarek Albasti, was arrested
by the FBI with seven other Egyptian men
as alleged terrorists plotting attacks
against the United States. Pictured in pris-
on stripes, the men were splashed across
the front pages, ridiculed and shunned
even after their release by people who as-
sumed their guilt. Whispers about flying
lessons and money trails from Evansville
to Egypt spread rapidly.
But the FBI said it had all been a mis-
take. And at a meeting last month with
more than 100 people in the Muslim com-
munity here, the FBI offered a rare apolo-
gy because suspicion about the arrests—
which resulted from a bogus tip—hung
over the men's heads for so long and dis-
rupted their lives.
"The situation that happened to you was
horrible," Thomas V. Fuentes, the FBI's
agent in charge in Indiana, said during a
meeting at the Islamic Center of Ev-
ansville. "On behalf of the FBI, I will apolo-
gize " mosque and socializing among them-
The gesture clears their names in a
town they have struggled to make their
permanent home. But it doesn't mend a
once-thriving business or restore the com-
munity's trust. The men acknowledge the
FBI was understandably wary and cau-
tious after Sept. 11, 2001- But their un-
derstanding has its limits.
As part of a national roundup in the
weeks after the terrorist attacks, the "Ev-
ansville 8" were among 50 people held as
material witnesses in maximum security
jails without being charged with a crime.
Thousands of more men from Middle East-
ern countries were questioned, some ar-
rested and detained, allegedly for links to
terrorism, only to be let go or deported on
immigration violations. Civil liberties
groups protested that the arrests amount-
ed to racial stereotyping.
^It didn't make any difference if I was a
citizen or not as long as you fit the profile
of an Arab or Muslim who has taken flying
lessons," said Albasti, 31, surveying his
near-empty restaurant Albasti was arrest-
ed along with his uncle and six friends and
NATIONAL NEWS DC MD VA M2 SATURDAY, MAY 24., 20o3" A3
co-workers on Oct. 11,2001.
"It was quite a stunning development,"
Evansville Mayor Russ Lloyd Jr. said. It
was a complete shock. People were saying,
TVly gosh, this is Evansville.'"
The city of 120,000 is predominantly
white, and the Muslim community of 300
members at the city's only mosque is tiny.
"These weren't some folks that juat hap-
pened to live in the same city with us," said
the Rev. Daniel Schroeder, pastor of SL
Matthew's United Church of Christ, a local
pastor for 15 years. "We knew these peo-
ple."
All the men who had been detained
knew each other in Cairo and had come to
the United States seeking jobs that would
allow them to send money home to their
families. Albasti was the first to arrive in
Evansville in 1994, a year after marrying
native Carolyn Baugh, whom he met in
Egypt while she was studying there. At
first he was a busboy, then manager at the
Crazy Tomato before he and his wife pur-
chased the restaurant in 1997. An uncle
came over to help them run it Then one
friend after another, most former rowing
PHOTOS BY TERMNCE JWTONIOIAMES-CMCA60 TR
partners on his country's national team.
Albasti hired three of the men. Tarek Albasti, one of the Egyptians held by the U.S. government, is embraced by his mother-in-law, Mary Frances Baugh. Albasti, who
Their lives were simple: working as owns the Crazy Tomato restaurant in Evansville, has seen business declined. The men have been trailed by suspicion since the arrests.
cooks and waiters, playing soccer in the
morning, praying on Fridays at the and beatings he saw in the HBO series So when the meeting at the mosque was
"Oz" would be visited on them during their announced, they attended, hoping to get
selves. For the men, Evansville, a sleepy stay at the federal detention center in Chi- answers. Albasti's in-laws (one a lawyer
city on the Kentucky border, had been a cago. His uncle, Abdel Khalfl, who keeps and the other a writer) had argued all
culture shock after life in a bustling me- the restaurant's books, feared they would along that the material witness statute de-
tropolis of more than 10 million. be executed. None could understand ex- signed to compel testimony from fright-
"We knew America by the towers [in actly why they were being held, having on- ened or uncooperative witnesses had been
New York] and all that," said Mohamed ly been told they were material witnesses. misused to hold people indefinitely. The
Youssef, a waiter at the Crazy Tomato who "Witnesses for who? Witnesses for meeting was a way to get answers.
arrived four years ago. This was a quiet what?" Albasti said he thought to himself. "I expected nothing but heightened
city." They learned later that a lover's quarrel blood pressure," said Carolyn Baugh, Al-
Potitics was never a hot topic. But the Khaled Nassr, one of the "Evansville 8" had done them in. The wife of fellow de- basti's wife.
9/11 attacks changed everything. Four arrested in Indiana on the basis of a fake tainee Fathy Saleh Abdelkalek, apparently But they got an apology.
days after the attacks, Albasti was visited tip in Indiana after Sept. 11,2001, attacks. in anger, told the FBI that her husband was They were wrongly accused," FBI
by the FBI, who wanted to know about fly- suicidal and had planned to die in a crash. Agent Fuentes said in a later interview.
ing lessons he had taken. They had been a in, though, they assumed things would Authorities took it seriously. They have almost lost their business.
gift from his father-in-law, a local attorney. pass away in a few hours. It turned out not to be true, and when This is something that has affected them in
But the agents wanted to know more, "I thought they would ask us some gen- the man was released, he returned to every possible way. Anybody being ac-
about what he knew about terrorism and eral questions and it would be over with," Egypt along with one of the other men. cused falsely of something that serious is
Osama bin Ladea He answered They said Khaled Nassr, 27, who has been in the The six who remained tried to put the in- like a teacher being accused of molesting a
went away. United States for three years. cident behind them. But it kept dogging child. It's hard to come back from that You
Less than a month later, the FBI was Hours turned into overnight and then a them. Returning from a recent trip to can see... months later, the tears are still
back. This time, Albasti and his uncle were week in custody. They were paraded be- Egypt, one man was held in the airport for ready to flow."
arrested as they cooked pasta at the restau- fore cameras, flown to Chicago escorted five hours because his name came up in the Even so, Fuentes said the FBI had no
rant The other men were picked up at by armed U.S. marshals. Tears flowed. computer as being under federal investiga- choice. "Action had to be taken," he said. "I
work or at home. One had been waiting for Their wives and girlfriends—unable to tion. One was turned down for an apart- did not apologize that the FBI was forced
the lawmen, having heard about the oth- talk to them—also were left in the dark. Al- ment for the same reason. All have had a to take them into custody. That was some-
ers' arrests. Aware of Albasti's earlier run- basti imagined that the horrors of rapes cloud over their heads. thing that had to be done."
 MONDAY * -i i
LEXINGTON HERALD-LEADER
WWW.KENTUCKY.GOM KENTUCKY VOICES APRIL 28, 2003 All

Don't treat immi^knts as enemies

By Kevin O'Neil The administration announced the registra-
The United States has a long and complex re- tion program with minimal notice, inaccurate
lationship with immigration. During times of translations of registration procedures and under-
peace and prosperity, we tout immigration as one staffed offices that gave inconsistent information
of the cornerstones of our economy and national about the documents needed when registering
- identity. Conversely, in times of strife and con- and,the right to legal representation. The pro-
flict, immigrants become the target of some of gram evoked fresh memories of the post-9/11 de-
our most shameful and discriminatory acts. tentions, in which 1,200 or more people were de-
We have learned,; however. There is wide- tained and held for immigration violations with-
spread acknowledgement .that the internment of out being charged with a terrorism-related crime.
Japanese-Americans during World War II was a Fear increased when registrants living in this
cruel overreaction to an imaginary threat. To see country legally were detained because of errors
the dedication most immigrants have to their by immigration officials. As a result, America
new country, we need look no further than the has, for the nist time in its history, become a
first U.S. soldier killed in combat during the cur- place1 from which people flee. Hundreds of peo-
rent war in Iraq. Lance Cpl. Jos£ Gutierrez was ple from Muslim countries, some of whom have
born in Guatemala, granted asylum in the United legal permission to live here, fled to Canada.
States and died defending his adopted country. .They think that a country which once wel-
At the time of his death, he was one of 31,000 comed them now targets them because of their
non-U.S. citizens serving in our military. A religion or nationality. Some are terrified of
In fact, immigrants are making exceptional trusting a poorly managed program that has de-
contributions to U.S. war efforts and national se- tained and deported many. Others, too scared to
, curity. The FBI and Bureau of Immigration and register,but determined not to leave their new
Customs Enforcement recently began conducting home, now live in fear of deportation.
voluntary interviews of about 11,000 Iraqi immi- It is unlikely that the registration will help
grants in the United States. Just as they did in capture terrorists. As a short-term security strat-
the 1991 Gulf War, thousands of Iraqi immi- ; egy, it is equivalent to,asking terrorists to turn
grants have provided information that may pro- themselves in. The administration's poorly
tect Americans at home and in Iraq. planned efforts have only intimidated immi-
At its best, the program is an example of grants, discouraging them from turning to law
strong cooperation between immigrants arid the enforcement authorities. This, in turn, makes it
government: FBI and immigration officials have harder to improve national security. Had the ad-
met with immigrant groups to explain the need ministration worked in advance with immigrant
for interviews, invited interviewees to have communities, applied the Special Registration
lawyers or advocates present and pledged to in- program to all visitors from all countries, and
vestigate hate crimes,, committed against the Iraqi made the registration and detention procedures
community. tJnforttifiately, other efforts by the orderly and transparent, it could have added to
Bush administration have treated immigrants and intelligence information, verified the legatstatus
visitors as enemie^irather than allies. As a result, of ipost temporary visitors and made immigrants
the government has alienated large groups while think their civil liberties'were being protected.
doing little/to improve national security. sfThe Bush administration needs to regard im-
The administration's "Special Registration*** migrants as allies. Security programs based on
program is one such; example. The program' re- outreach and integration instead of suspicion are
quires male foreign visitors, from predominantly not only more consistent with our national val-
Arab and Muslim countries to register with the ues, they are more likely to make us safer.
government. Those who do not register are sub-
ject to deportation, even if they are in the United Kevin O'Neil, a native of Lexington and a graduate of
States legally. The vast majority is eligible to be- Dunbar High School, is a research associate at Migra-
come permanent residents and citizens. tion Policy Institute in Washington, D.C.
 CDT Cyber Security: Response to September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks Page 1 of4

CENTER FOR DEMOCRACY & TECHNOLOGY

lOiir Mission / (k.'t Involved / Stall' / Publications / Links / Search CDF / Jobs / Action! August 31,
2003

Security & Privacy

ACTON Response to September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attacks

irfiernet policy 'debate!'
%••','•$••»&»&•<'••$ "4' • '
^m-$vK$e**$^ \
mj^£N'Lnteui .-•
Join With CDT in
Making an Impact on
Internet Policy!
CDT joins the nation in grief and anger over the devastating loss of
life resulting from the terrorist hijackings and attacks against the
•»*• " 't • •
World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Responding to these attacks
„.,-"
,-r"
•% ••
' '.'!'••••• and the threat of future ones is testing our collective resolve to
maintain the freedom, openness and diversity that defines and
enriches our society. CDT believes that surrendering freedom will not
purchase security, that democratic values are strengths not
weaknesses, and that open communications networks are a positive
force in the fight against violence and intolerance, more
PATRIOT 11
• ACLU. "How Patriot Act 2 Would Further Erode the Basic
Checks on Government Flower That Keep America Safe and
Free." [pdf] March 20, 2003

• Letter to Speaker of the House from civil rights/civil liberties

Wiretap coalition, March 2003
k
Overview
• Letter from civil rights/civil liberties coalition [pdf], March 17,
Overview 2003
Government
Surveillance of
Telephones and the • Analysis of PATRIOTJI by ACLU, Feb. 14,2003
Internet
OMB
Search & to know [pdf], Feb. 13, 2003
Seizure
The Dept. of Justice Analysis of PATRIOT II by Prof- David Cole [pdf], February
has written a manual 10,2003
on the rules for
seizing evidence Text of the PATRIOT II Act: [html] [pdf- 13MB]
stored in computers.
"Searching and
Seizing Computers USA PATRIOT Act
and Obtaining
Electronic Evidence ct [pdf] Oct. 26, 2001
in Criminal
investigations^ Redlines prepared by the Electronic Commerce & Privacy
Practice Group of the Washington, DC law firm of Piper
Carnivore Marbury Rudnick & Wolfe LLP, and others showing how
Carnivore is a existing law was modified by the USA PATRIOT Act
computer
program designed o Changes to the posse comitatus law and to IEEPA, made
^•vby the FBI to by Title I of the USA PATRIOT Act [pdf]
intercept Internet
communications. o Changes to the electronic surveillance laws (ECPA, FISA,

http://www.cdt.org/security/010911response.shtml 8/31/2003
7 SYMPOSIUM
Irving R. Segal Lecture in Trial Advocacy
ABRAMS SAYS WAR ON TERRORISM
SUPERCEDES CIVIL LIBERTIES
Celebrated Constitutional lawyer Floyd Abrams launched
a direct hit across the bow of civil liberties when he
defended the U.S. government in its efforts to detain
suspected terrorists.
Abrams said the current situation poses a delicate
assessment of national and personal security versus
principles of civil liberties. In this year's Irving R. Segal
Lecture in Trial Advocacy, Abrams said he believes the
imminent danger from al-Qaeda justifies holding "enemy
combatants" without a right to counsel, even though no
criminal charges have been filed against them. Abrams, a
partner at Cahill, Gordon & Reindell in New York, also
said he supports increased surveillance and monitoring of
suspected terrorists, including photographing and
fingerprinting students or businesspeople from Arab
countries. That monitoring may also mean the FBI has to
attend religious or political meetings, if remarks or activities
in a mosque, for instance, present a potential danger to
Americans, Abrams said.
Speaking on "The First Amendment and the War Against
^rrorism," Abrams noted precedents for suspension of
.ivil rights: The Sedition Act of 1789, which permitted
the arrest of citizens who defame the government; the Civil
War, when President Lincoln waived the writ of habeas
corpus; and World War II, when Japanese citizens living
in America were interned in detention camps. Although
Abrams recognized these acts as misguided, he nevertheless*,
defended current treatment of "enemy combatants" as
necessary, given the attacks on September 11.
"If I thought the al-Qaeda threat was a passive one or
equivalent to the Barbary pirates... I certainly would not
at all be ready to make some of the painful compromises
that I think must be made between the claims of security
and freedom," Abrams said. On the other hand, the man
who represented The New York Times in the famous
Pentagon Papers case argued that the United States should
maintain freedom of the press and access to information.
"The more power we give the government, the more
important it is for the press to be utterly free to criticize
the manner in which the government has behaved and ...
to be knowledgeable about what the government has done."
Consequently, Abrams said he believes the media must be
allowed to inform the public on who is being detained
and for how long, without restrictions or fear of reprisal,
as has been the case thus far.
Abrams current position on civil liberties, however,
represents a departure for him. In 1994, Abrams served
on a Civil Liberties Advisory Committee created after the
first attacks on the World Trade Center. Then, he insisted
that an automated profiling system not include race,
religion or the national origin of U.S. citizens. Post 9/11,
he calls for accommodations in the rule of law, based on
the level of threat to public safety. We must assess risk and
draw balances accordingly, Abrams said.
"As our security risks have risen there will be no easy answer
about how to reconcile the two claims (security and civil
liberties), and I think we had better keep our minds open
as we attend to the painful task of determining how to do
so," Abrams concluded.
 9-11 COMMISSION DAILY PRESS CLIPS
11.16 months behind bars - and counting - for 9-11 detainee

By TOM HAYS
Associated Press Writer

Sadek Awaed says he remembers weeping only twice in his life: once when his
father died, the other when terrorists destroyed the World Trade Center.

"Whatever hurts this country, hurts me," he says.

The 31-year-old cab driver from Egypt claims that he tried to help the FBI identify
terror threats before authorities jailed him in New Jersey for immigration
violations.

Sixteen months later, he is still behind bars. Awaed is among a small number of
Arab and Muslim men detained in the six months after the Sept. 11 attacks who
remain in custody.

The exact number of such cases from that tense period is difficult to determine.
Officials have refused to discuss the detainees, citing confidentiality rules and
national security.

An audit by the Justice Department's inspector general put the tally of Middle
Eastern men detained in the FBI dragnet at 762, with most of them now
deported. Immigration lawyers say many were victims of a new brand of police
profiling.

The inspector general's report also found "significant problems" with the
detentions, including allegations of physical abuse. Civil liberties groups have
noted that only one of those detained, Zacarias Moussaoui, has been charged
with any terrorism-related crime. He is charged as a conspirator in the Sept. 11
attacks.

Awaed's lawyer, Sin Yen Ling, said he may be in a category of his own: a "quasi-
informant" who was cast aside by the FBI, jailed without committing a serious
offense and ordered deported to Egypt. There, he faces repercussions for his
past affiliation with the outlawed fundamentalist group the Muslim Brotherhood,
she said.

"He's dealing with the same type of persecution here that he would there," Ling
said. "There's no reason he's been in jail for the past 16 months, except for his
national origin and religion."
PRESS CLIPS FOR SEPTEMBER 17, 2003
 AILA BACKGROUNDER
Social Security and Immigration
The Social Security Administration (SSA) has several programs and policies that directly impact
our immigrant population. Several of these programs underscore the fact that numerous American
businesses depend on foreign workers, many of whom are unable to obtain proper documentation,
and these workers are paying taxes and contributing to Social Security. Without comprehensive
immigration reform that would enable these workers to regularize their status and obtain proper
documentation, the SSA will never be able to achieve important policy objectives such as
reducing the earnings suspense fund or correcting its databases and records. Furthermore without
this reform, American businesses will be denied the legitimate workers they need, and the
undocumented communities that need to be brought out of the shadows in order to separate
contributing individuals from those that may be here to do us harm could be driven farther
underground.

No-Match Letters: The SSA annually reviews W-2 forms and credits social security earnings to
workers. If a name or a Social Security Number (SSN) on a W-2 form does not match SSA
records, the Social Security earnings go into a suspense file while the SSA works to resolve
discrepancies. In recent years, the SSA has been unable to match employee information with
SSA records for 6-7 million workers a year. SSA has deposited $280 billion dollars in the
earnings suspense file as a result of the cumulative effect of these no-matches. The no-match
letters are an annual attempt by the agency to reduce the earning suspense file and clean up its
database to prepare for the release of its new Internet based Social Security Number Verification
System (which is discussed later in this backgrounder).

Previously, the SSA would send no-match letters to employers when information submitted for at
least 10% of their employees did not match SSA records. Until 2000, that system resulted in
about 40,000 letters sent annually to employers. In 2001, that number jumped to 110,000 letters,
with 1 in 60 employers receiving no-match letters. In 2002, the SSA sent a letter to every
employer who had at least one employee whose information did not match the SSA's records.
This change in practice resulted in the SSA issuing roughly 900,000 letters, the equivalent of 1 in
8 employers receiving these letters. Approximately 7 million workers were included on these
letters.

The sheer volume of no-match letters sent out last year, combined with language in the no-match
letter indicating that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could fine an employer for each
incorrectly reported social security number, resulted in panic and uncertainty among both
employers and employees. Despite language indicating otherwise, the letters were confused with
notification of immigration violations. Even savvy employers were very confused as to how to
respond to the letters and at the same time obey the immigrant worker protection laws. Some
employers immediately fired individuals appearing on the list. Others gave employees a limited
timeframe to correct the inconsistent information. In some cases, employees resigned
immediately after being notified of their no-match status. Reports indicate that U.S. employers
lost thousands of workers due to the effects of the no-match letter.

For 2003, the SSA has made significant changes to the number of no-match letters it will issue.
Letters will only be sent to those employers with more than 10 employees with mismatched
information or for whom mismatched employees represented !/2 of 1% of the W-2 forms filed
with SSA. In total, the SSA is expecting to send out approximately 130,000 letters, roughly

AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION

918 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20004
Phone: (202)216-2400 Fax: (202)783-7853
13,000 Muslims face deportation;
Registration drive finds few threats
New York Times
June 7, 2003
By Rachel L. Swarns,

More than 13,000 of the Arab and Muslim men who came forward earlier this year to register with
immigration authorities-roughly 16 percent of the total-may now face deportation, government
officials say.

Only a handful of the men have been linked to terrorism. But of the 82,000 who registered, more than
13,000 have been found to be living in this country illegally, officials say.

Many had hoped to win leniency by registering and demonstrating their willingness to cooperate with
the government's campaign against terror. The men were not promised special treatment, however, and
officials believe most of them will be expelled in what is likely to be the largest wave of deportations in
the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The government has initiated deportation proceedings, and in immigrant communities across the nation,
an exodus has already begun. Still, the effect of the registrations is being felt more broadly, and with far
more nuance, than that stark statistic—13,000 men over the age of 16~can express.

Quietly, the fabric of their neighborhoods is thinning. Families are packing up, and some are splitting
up. Rather than come forward and risk deportation, some immigrants have burrowed deeper
underground. Others have simply left—for Canada or for home.

The deportations are a striking example of how the Bush administration is increasingly using the
nation's immigration system as a weapon in the battle against terrorism.

For decades, illegal immigrants have often flourished in plain view because officials lacked the staff,
resources and political will to deport them. But since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon, the government has been aggressively detaining and deporting illegal immigrants from
countries considered breeding grounds for terrorism.

"There has been a major shift in our priorities," said Jim Chaparro, acting director for interior
enforcement at the Homeland Security Department, the agency that has subsumed the old immigration
service.

"We need to focus our enforcement efforts on the biggest threats," he added. "People may not like that
strategy, but that is what we need to do. If a loophole can be exploited by an immigrant, it can also be
exploited by a terrorist."

Advocates for immigrants warn that that strategy—indeed, the administration's sweeping reorientation of
law enforcement toward terrorism prevention—can be abused by overzealous government officials. The
advocates also have accused officials of practicing selective enforcement by targeting illegal immigrants
from Arab and Muslim countries.
Message Page 1 of 2

Joanne Accolla
——*
.From: Betty Swope [meswope@9-11commission.gov]
Jent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 7:50 AM
To: Team5@9-11commission.gov
Subject: Emailing: 03AIR.htm

this (the part about using fis personnel for air marshals) certainly raises some issues especially about deployment of existing border
inspection resources, we'll have to wait and see if it's just for emergencies or what, the cross training of others is comparable to what
has been done on the landborders. enjoy.

September 3, 2003

Border Inspectors to Be Trained for Several Jobs

By MATTHEW L. WALD

ASHINGTON, Sept. 2 — The Department of Homeland Security plans to train thousands of inspectors
at airports, seaports and highway border crossings so that each can conduct immigration, customs and
^riculture checks, functions now performed by three different people, the department secretary said today.

The secretary, Tom Ridge, also said that 5,000 law enforcement officers who work at immigration and customs
would be trained to work as federal air marshals so they could be shifted to airliner duty when the department
believed that the hijacking threat was high.

The cross-training will help the department respond better to intelligence tips, Mr. Ridge said.

"You've got to be as adroit and flexible as the enemy," Mr. Ridge said in a speech at the American Enterprise
Institute, a conservative think tank here.

He said he was trying to wring full advantage out of moving the various agencies into a single department and
rationalizing their work.

Some inspectors at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, Los Angeles International, Kennedy
International in New York and Houston Intercontinental have already been trained in all three functions, said
Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the department. All inspectors will be retrained within a year.

The other cross-training, taking law enforcement officers from the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement and teaching them to operate in an airliner cabin, will more than double the number of people
available to work as air marshals, people familiar with the program said. (The exact number of air marshals is
secret.) It was not clear what effect this would have on the number of marshals on duty in airliner cabins at any
*en time.

"In the past, if we wanted to cover a certain array of flights, that potentially could mean a federal air marshal
would have to be moved from one flight he was covering to another, leaving the original flight uncovered," Mr.

9/3/2003
e Cat
there.
Jim Hoagland
An my
jkitty
Doing Democracy Right...
Arab rulers have created great cit-
ies and citadels throughout their
realm. But they have not produced a
successfully functioning modern
state. It is audacious of President
Bush and his national security ad-
viser, Condoleezza Rice, to think
>ften that Americans can achieve this out-
/eifc come in Iraq.
•ent • Audacious—but not impossible.
has To succeed, they must develop and
jite communicate a clear vision that fills
his. in details omitted in Rice's recent
statements on America's "genera-
tional commitment" to Iraq. Here
are some thoughts on what that vi-
is, sion should contain:
to It should be based on developing
a self-governing administration that
will initially be involved in and then
quickly become wholly responsible
for decisions that shape the medi-
um- and long-term future of Iraq. An
embryonic national political process
is in fact underway in Baghdad. It
urgently needs to be encouraged, ac-
celerated and elevated.
From privatizing industry to de-
termining the national standard for
a cellular phone system, Iraqis must
be visibly and effectively involved
now in decisions that they will have
to live with long after occupation
ends. That unfortunately is not the
case nearly four months after major
combat ended.
In particular, U.S. involvement in
economic decisions in a country
conquered by American arms must
do more than diminish over time: It
must be totally transparent and
above reproach. U.S. honor, as well
as the effectiveness of the political
and cultural transformation effort in
Iraq, depend on U.S. officials, poli-
ticians and business leaders not mis-
using positions or influence to cre-
ate uneven playing fields for
themselves, their friends or their cli-
ents, or for favored Iraqis.
There must be no giving in to the
temptation to play empire or to seek
unfair advantage in Iraq. Through-
out the 20th century, the United
States helped rid the world of co-
lonialism, even though it did not do
all it could all the time. It is neither
in America's interest nor in its na-
ture to try in the 21st century to es-
tablish a neocolonial economic de-
pendency in Iraq.
The administration has already
been taken to task for favoring Vice
President Cheney's old firm, Halli-
burton, and giant Bechtel Corp. in
initial reconstruction contracts.
U.S. and corporate officials deny
any favoritism.
And strong pressure for political
intervention is likely to be exerted
in Congress as constituents press
their elected representatives for
help in acquiring lucrative pieces of
the Iraqi pie. This lobbying, which
is much more difficult for critics and
the press to follow, is already un-
derway, as shown by a recent, mis-
guided and unsuccessful attempt to
restrict a new wireless phone net-
work in Iraq to U.S. standards.
Congressional delegations visit-
ing Baghdad this summer and au-
tumn will find a familiar face on
hand to greet them—Tom Korolo-
gos, who recently retired as one of
Washington's most effective corpo-
rate lobbyists. Korologos was dis-
patched to Iraq by the Pentagon to
help establish and run the belea-
guered occupation authority. He
will also acquire an unrivaled view
of future business opportunities
there.
Other countries should be free to
share in Iraq's economic opportuni-
ties and its burdens. An internation-
al conference in October to generate
aid pledges for Iraq will usefully illu-
minate which countries are pre-
pared for both.
But it is illusory to allocate con-
tracts to other countries to lure
them into joining a peacekeeping
force sponsored by the United Na-
tions or to expect that such a force
would be created or effective if
American and British troops left, as
Bush's critics advocate.
The United Nations enforced eco-
nomic sanctions against Saddam
Hussein's regime for a dozen years.
Neither Baathist dead-enders nor
the lunatic followers of Osama bin
Laden and his murdering kind will
respect U.N. "blue helmets." Nor is
the Iraqi population likely to be as
sympathetic to a U.N. command as
many of those urging that approach
on Bush assume.
Ensuring equal economic oppor-
tunity for Iraqis and foreigners alike
performs a more fundamental politi-
cal task: It will reduce or help elimi-
nate the resentments and anxieties
against exploitative foreign dom-
ination that fed Arab nationalism at
its creation at the beginning of the
last century.
Political commitment in the Mus-
lim Middle East historically runs
first to tribes or to cities, not to na-
tion-states whose boundaries were
drawn by colonial fiat. But a feeling
of being exploited or cheated would
amplify and embitter Iraqi national-
ism and make it an enduring coun-
terforce to U.S. objectives in the re-
gion, just as Arab nationalism was
born out of World War I and colonial
occupation.
Bush and Rice see great opportu-
nities. They deserve credit for their
idealism and ambition. But they
must also keep their eyes on the
great dangers in the Middle East
that rise not from American weak-
ness but from America's strength
and ability to force its will on others.
jimhoagland^washpost. com
George F. Will
. . . Or Maybe Not atAll
U.S. warships carrying 2,300
Marines are off Liberia's coast,
U.S. forces still are in harm's way
in Afghanistan, and the number of
U.S. military deaths in Iraq since
May 1, when President Bush de-
clared major combat operations
over, is drawing closer to the total
military deaths before May 1. But
some people think America is un-
derengaged abroad.
For example, the presidents of
Oxfam America and Refugees In-
ternational, writing in The Post in
support of intervention in Liberia,
urge the Bush administration to
confront "head-on" many crises:
"Central Asia, the Balkans and
Western Africa are areas of the
world that provide too many ex-
amples of what happens when U.S.
power is not used proactively."
Such incitements to foreign policy
hyperkinesis can draw upon the
messianic triumphalism voiced by
British Prime Minister Tony Blair
in last month's address to a raptur-
ous Congress:
"There is a myth that though we
love freedom, others don't; that our
attachment to freedom is a product
of our culture; that freedom, de-
mocracy, human rights, the rule of
law are American values, or West-
ern values; that Afghan women
were content under the lash of the
Taliban; that Saddam was some-
how beloved by his people; that Mi-
losevic was Serbia's savior. ...
"Ours are not Western values,
they are the universal values of the
human spirit. And anywhere, any-
time ordinary people are given the
chance to choose, the choice is the
same: freedom, not tyranny; de-
mocracy, not dictatorship; the rule
of law, not the rule of the secret
police."
Neoconservatives seem more
susceptible than plain conserva-
tives are to such dodgy rhetoric
and false assertions.
Disregard Blair's straw men: No
one says Afghan women were "con-
tent," Saddam was "beloved" and
Milosevic was a "savior." But Blair
suggests that unless you believe
such preposterous things, you sure-
ly believe that "freedom, democra-
cy> human rights, the rule of law"
are not exclusively Western values.
But what does that mean?
Certainly not only Westerners
value, or can come to value, those
things. But certainly not everyone
everywhere shares "our attach-
ment to freedom." Freedom is not
even understood the same way ev-
erywhere, let alone valued the
same way relative to other political
goods (equality, security, piety,
-etc.).
Does Blair believe that our at-
tachment to freedom is not the
product of complex and protracted
acculturation by institutions and
social mores that have evolved over
centuries that prepared the social
ground for. seeds of democracy?
When Blair says freedom as we un-
derstand it and democracy and the
rule of law as we administer, them
are "the universal values of the hu-
man spirit," he is not speaking as
America's Founders spoke of "self-
evident" truths. They meant truths
obvious to all minds unclouded by
superstition and other ignorance.
Blair seems to think: Boston,
Baghdad, Manchester, Monrovia—
what's the difference? Such think-
ing is dangerous. Blair's argument
is true only, if it is trivial: "Ordi-
nary" people choose freedom, de-
mocracy and the rule of law be-
cause those who do not so choose
prove thereby that they are not
ordinary.
But there are a lot of them in the
world. Some of them are waging
\d
guerrilla war against American
forces in Iraq.
Blair's thinking is Bush's, too.
"There is a value system that can-
not be compromised, and that is
the values we praise," the president
says. "And if the values are good
enough for our people, they ought
to be good enough for others." ,
But one must compromise in the
face of facts, those stubborn things.
It is a fact that not everyone is in-
clined to praise "the values we
praise." And not every society has
the prerequisites—of institutions
(political parties, media) and man-
ners (civility, acceptance of plural-
ism)—of a free society.
Bush and Blair and many people
called neoconservatives believe
that moral objectives in politics are
universally applicable imperatives.
If so, then either national cultures
do not significantly differ, or they
do not matter or they are infinitely
malleable under the touch of en
lightened reformers. But all three
propositions are false and antithet-
ical to all that conservatism teaches
about the importance of cultural in-
ertia and historical circumstances.
Blair followed the passage quot-
ed above with these words of Lin-
coln's: "Those that deny freedom
to others deserve it not for them-
selves." Lincoln's subject was
Americans' complicity in American
slavery. But Blair's muddled impli-
cation is that a nation that refuses
to use force on behalf of all unfree
people is denying them freedom.
The premise—that terrorism
thrives where democracy does not
—may seem to generate a duty to
universalize democracy. But it is
axiomatic that one cannot have a
duty to do Something that cannot
be done.
. georgewill@washpost.com
U.S. Backs Florida's New Counterterrorism Database
i . - . ' - • " ''
'"•"' - • ' '
•;.--'
• . ,
••
" '
.
' ' " ; "
"
'' ^
'
' '
- • . ' • - • ;• -t tr
* A •

'Matrix' Offers Law Agencies Faster Access to Americans'Personal Records <

By ROBEHT O'HAXBOV JH.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Police in Florida are creating a counter-
terrorism database designed to give law en-
forcement agencies around the country a pow-
erful new tool to analyze billions of records
about both criminals and ordinary Americans.
Organizers said the system, dubbed Matrix,
enables investigators to find patterns and links
among people and events faster than ever be-
fore, combining police records with commer-
cially available collections of personal in-
formation about most American adults. It The Florida system is another example of
would let authorities, for instance, instantly the ongoing post-Sept. 11 debate about die
find the name and: address of every brown- proper balance between national security and
haired owner of a red Ford pickup truck in a individual privacy. Yesterday the District and
20-mile radius of a suspicious event tiie Department of 'Homeland Security
The staterlevel program, aided by federal * announced plans to launch a pflot law enforce-
funding, is poised to expand across the nation ment data-sharing network that will include
at a time when Congress has been sharply crit- Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New
ical of similar data-driven systems on the fed- York. < :'.. . • - . . ' . . . - :<;/.,
eral level, such as a Pentagon plan for global Paul S. Cameron, president of Seisint Inc.,
surveillance and an air-passenger-screening the Boca Raton, Fla., company that developed
CNN.com - Post 9/11 detainees await freedom - Sep. 17, 2003 Page 1 of3

.com /LAW CENTER

The Web * CNN.com E D H H n C E D EH Go
Home Page
World Post 9/11 detainees await freedom martindale.com
U.S.
Weather Wednesday, September 17, 2003 Posted: 11:38 AM EOT (1538 GMT) LAST NAME:
Business
Sports FIRST NAME:
Politics NEW YORK (AP)--Sadek
State/Prov. ISBASCH j
Law
Awaed says he remembers
Technology weeping only twice in his life:
Science & Space
once when his father died, the
Health
other when terrorists destroyed
the World Trade Center.
Entertainment
Travel
"Whatever hurts this country, hurts me,"
Education
he says.
Special Reports

ANDERSON The 31-year-old cab driver from Egypt

claims that he tried to help the FBI Attorney Sin Yen Ling represents an
360 identify terror threats before authorities Egyptian-born man who was detained
WEEKNIGHTS
7 PM CT jailed him in New Jersey for after 2001 terror attacks.
immigration violations.
SERVICES
Video Story Tools
Sixteen months later, he is still behind
E-Mail Services SAVE THIS ffr^l EMAIL THIS
bars. Awaed is among a small number
CNN To Go of Arab and Muslim men detained in fifQi PRINT THIS P -ft* MOST POPULAR
SF' > the six months after the September 11
attacks who remain in custody. The '"""""""'"' ——~ •--— ——. .
Wei, x* CNN.com exact number of such cases from that tense period is difficult to determine. Officials
have refused to discuss the detainees, citing confidentiality rules and national
security.
EHHRnCED Ea

Gogfe An audit by the Justice Department's inspector general put the tally of Middle
Eastern men detained in the FBI dragnet at 762, with most of them now deported.
Immigration lawyers say many were victims of a new brand of police profiling.

The inspector general's report also found "significant problems" with the detentions,
including allegations of physical abuse. Civil liberties groups have noted that only
one of those detained, Zacarias Moussaoui, has been charged with any terrorism-
related crime. He is charged as a conspirator in the September 11 attacks.

Awaed's lawyer, Sin Yen Ling, said he

44 There's no reason
he's been in jail for the
past 16 months, except
for his national origin
and religion. 99
-- Sin Yen Ling, attorney for Arab-
born detainee
may be in a category of his own: a
"quasi-informant" who was cast aside
by the FBI, jailed without committing a
serious offense and ordered deported
to
Egypt. There, he faces repercussions
for his past affiliation with the outlawed
fundamentalist group the Muslim
Brotherhood, she said.

"He's dealing with the same type of persecution here that he would there," Ling
said. "There's no reason he's been in jail for the past 16 months, except for his
national origin and religion."

Federal officials declined to discuss Awaed's case.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/09/17/attacks.detained.ap/index.html 9/17/2003

TWO YEARS LATER: Tracking Immigrants
THE DETAINEES
for Terror Inquiries
jtill Fall Short, Report Says
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 — The Jus-
tice Department, criticized for its
treatment of hundreds of illegal im-
\migranls jailed after the terrorist
^attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has not done
enough to avoid a repeat by spelling
out clear criteria for determining
who is considered a terrorist suspect,
an internal report concluded today.
In Us report, the Justice Depart-
ment inspector general's office said
federal authorities had not developed
adequate plans for classifying illegal
immigrants arrested in (error inves-
tigations to ensure that those with no
ties to terrorism would be cleared
quickly and adequate F.B.I, re-
sources would be devoted to such
investigations.
The inspector general's report of-
fered a mixed verdict on the
progress the authorities had made in
avoiding the pitfalls surrounding the
arrests of more than 700 illegal im-
migrants after the 9/11 attacks.
Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Ver-
mont, the ranking Democrat on the
Judiciary Committee, said the in-
spector general had "properly given
both the Justice Department and the
Department of Homeland Security
an 'incomplete' " in meeting their
pledges to fix the systematic prob-
lems surrounding the Sept. 11 deten-
tions.
"Both agencies need to address
M—^constructive recommendations
Procedures for
determining suspects
are faulted.
without further delay," Mr. Leahy
said. "They need to develop policies
and practices that will prevent a
recurrence of the haphazard way in
which the 9/11 detainees were treat-
ed."
An earlier investigation by the in-
spector general into the handling of
9/11 detainees, concluded in June,
triggered outrage and calls for
changes from members of Congress
and civil rights groups.
That investigation found that hun-
dreds of illegal immigrants with no
clear ties to terrorism were allowed
to languish in custody after the 9/11
attacks because the Federal Bureau
of Investigation and other federal
officials did little to establish wheth-
er they had legitimate links to terror-
ism. Investigators found that some of
the illegal immigrants jailed in
Brooklyn faced a pattern of physical
and verbal abuse from their jailers
and were confined in unduly harsh
conditions.
Attorney General John Ashcroft
and other Justice Department offi-
cials have said they made "no apolo-
gies" for using every legaf means in
their arsenal to protect Americans
from another terrorist attack. None-
theless, officials have pledged to find
w-""^ working out kinks in the
1 ncluding the establishment
i jriteria for determining who
shoL.u be considered a possible sus-
pect in a terrorism investigation.
THE NEW YORK TIMES NATIONAL TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2003
The inspector general's assess-
ment released today found that offi-
cials at the Justice Department and
the Department of Homeland Securi-
ty had indeed taken steps to try to
correct the problems identified in the
June investigation.
"I'm pleased that both depart-
ments appear to be taking these
problems seriously," Glenn A. Fine,
the inspector general, said in an in-
terview. "I don't think this is just lip
service."
But the report found that those
changes had often been too slow and
loo ill defined to ensure that abuses
were not repeated.
For instance, Homeland Security
officials told the inspector general
that they had developed "a cleat-
chain of command" in the past sev-
eral months to allow field offices to
review cases in which inmates were
held more than 90 days past their
scheduled release date. The new sys-
tem is intended to avoid problems
that arose after the 9/11 attacks
when many illegal immigrants were
field long past their release dates
while immigration officials waited
for the F.B.I, to determine whether
they had terrorist ties, officials said.
But the inspector general said that
the new plan was too vague to ensure
the policy was consistently followed,
and requested that Homeland Securi-
ty officials provide a detailed plan by
October.
Similarly, the inspector general
said the Justice Department had not
specifically addressed problems that
slowed previous investigations of il-
legal immigrants, including F.B.I,
delays in sending requests to the
Central Intelligence Agency for in-
formation, computer problems and
other communication breakdowns.
Barbara Comstock, a spokeswom-
an for the Justice Department, said,
"We've been aggressively respond-
ing to the inspector general's recom-
mendations, and we're pleased that
the inspector general recognized
that we're taking this issue serious-
ly." As for charges that those steps
have been slow and ill defined, she
said, "It's an ongoing process, and
this is a priority for us."
But the Justice Department took
issue with some of the inspector gen-
eral's recommendations.
It rejected the idea, for instance,
that it needed to develop a process
for reassessing policy decisions
made in crisis situations, like the one
that gave the F.B.I, the power in 2001
to hold illegal immigrants in indefi-
nite custody until they had been
cleared of any possible terrorist ties.
Justice Department officials said
that "there are already ample pro-
cesses in place for the department to
reassess its practices and policies."
Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for
the Council on American-Islamic Re-
lations, said he was encouraged to
learn that officials appeared to be
taking serious steps to eliminate I
abuses.
"I would hope that we've learned
from the past and we realize that a
wholesale roundup of individuals
based largely on their race, religion
or national origin is counterproduc-
tive to national security and goes
against our basic values of due pro-
cess," Mr. Hooper said.
The Globe and Mail Page 1 of 1

gisbeandmail.com
Ottawa compensates man after terrorism accusation

Friday, Oct. 3, 2003

UPDATED AT 11:56 AM EOT
Ottawa - The federal
government has quietly
Advertisement
compensated an Ottawa
man it falsely accused of
financing terrorism, had
arrested and destroyed
financially.

Liban Hussein ran a

money-transfer business
in Dorchester, Mass., that
United States officials said
was linked to al-Qaeda.
U.S. officials asked he be
extradited.

Ottawa seized his assets,

jailed him and moved to
have him deported to the
U.S. to face charges. But
in June, 2002, the Justice
Department announced it
was stopping proceedings
against the Somali-born citizen. CP

© 2003 Bell Globemedia Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPPrint/LAC/20031003AJNATSN-... 10/4/2003
>News - Ottawa - canada.com network \f 4

lama [man
Seeking a [woman
N A T I O N A L CHANNELS

BUSINESS CENTRE CLASSIFIEDS AUTOS HOMES CAREERS SHOPPING PERSON

Select a city
i NEWS SPORTS FINANCE ENTERTAINMENT HEALTH TECHNOLOGY TRAVE

SEARCHWORD: Search the Webi

Buying a car or home? Check your credit report!

canada.com » Ottawa » Story Tuesday
CITY SITE GUIDE STORY
» Ottawa Home
» Ottawa Citizen Ottawa man freed after Syrian ordeal CAREERCLI
» Global Ontario Arrested by U.S., Arar was deported, held for General M
General mar
» Global National
» Global Sunday year without charge experience,
should be a
» Global News organization
Morning
Dave Rogers and Janice Tibbetts Lajjrentian
WHAT'S HAPPENING
The Ottawa Citizen
» Local News Manager,
» Business & Provision of
Technology reference se
Monday, October 06, 2003 and docume
» Sports News
media...
» Around Town Bank of Cai
Listings: Maher Arar, the Ottawa man
• Entertainment & who has spent more than a
year in a Syrian prison because Divisional
Events Good leaden
11 • Sports Events U.S. immigration officials proven track
• Live Music suspected he was an al-Qaeda able to work
• Movies terrorist, has been released and environment
• Restaurants & will return to Canada today a Hardgoods
Bars free man.
» Accommodations Office Adn
» Contests Manage the
» Sound Off! Foreign Affairs Minister Bill activities, ne
Graham, who made the educational
announcement last night, said institutions/I
POLL departments
Mr. Arar, a dual citizen of
Which campaign CREDIT: Bruno Schlumberger, The APOG
Canada and Syria, was released Ottawa Citizen
promise do you think to a consular official and was
the incoming Liberals en route to his home in Ottawa. Diabetes /
should fulfil first? You will be r
Monia Mazigh is thrilled that her promotion a
f"~\l back He was expected to arrive late husband has been freed, but she is the Team Di
corporate tax this afternoon on board an Air determined to learn why and how he Canadian D
cuts and the was arrested, sent to his former Association
private-school tax France flight.
homeland and held for more than a
credit. year. Powered b>
Mr. Graham said Mr. Arar would
Reduce class size
not be detained once he landed
career
in the junior
grades. on Canadian soil.
) Spend more
money on health Mr. Arar, 32, was returning, via
care. Zurich, from a family vacation
r'•, Dismiss the Tory- in Tunisia, when he was
appointed detained during a stopover in
supervisors New York on Sept. 26, 2002.
running school U.S. officials then deported him
boards in Ottawa, to Syria where he was detained
Toronto and without trial. U.S. immigration
Hamilton. authorities accused him of

http://www.canada.com/ottawa/story.asp?id=81791442-CC32-42F3-9C3A-lAA64A7C8972 10/7/2003
A14
THREATS AND RESPONSES: Detentions After Sept. 11
GOVERNMENT REPORT
U.S. Faults Roundup of Illegal Immigrants After 9/11
Continued From Page Al
reports on internal matters.
A total of 762 illegal immigrants
were jailed in the weeks and months
after the attacks on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon, as the au-
thorities traced tens of thousands of
leads and sought to prevent another
attack. Most of the 762 immigrants
have now been deported, and none
have been charged as terrorists.
The Justice Department has
sought to maintain the secrecy of the
arrests, fighting news organizations'
efforts to gain access to deportation
proceedings and for disclosure of
more information about the detain-
ees. Public information about the ar-
rests has been fragmented; the re-
port offers the most detailed portrait
to date of who was held, the delays
many faced in being charged or gain-
ing access to a lawyer, and the abuse
that some faced in jail.
The report showed, for instance,
that nearly three of every four jailed
immigrants were from New York
City or New Jersey, many were Pa-
kistanis, and most were arrested
within three months of Sept. 11.
The report also found that immi-
grants arrested in New York and
housed at the Metropolitan Detention
Center in Brooklyn faced "a pattern
of physical and verbal abuse" from
some guards as well as "unduly
harsh" detention policies.
A total of 84 inmates who were
held in Brooklyn in terrorism investi-
gations were subjected to highly re-
strictive, 23-hour "lockdown," the re-
port found. They were limited to one
phone call a week, and they were put
in handcuffs, leg irons and heavy
chains any time they moved outside
their cells, according to the report.
And because of a "communication
blackout" in the weeks after Sept. 11,
families of some inmates in the
Brooklyn facility were told their rel-
atives were not housed there.
The highly restrictive conditions
and long delays in processing cases
and giving suspects access to law-
yers appeared to differ markedly
from policies before Sept. 11, accord-
ing to government officials and advo-
cates for immigrants. Prior to Sept.
11, the Immigration and Naturaliza-
tion Service had 24 hours to decide
about charging an illegal immigrant,
but six days after the attacks, the
Justice Department gave itself an
indefinite time period because of the
"extraordinary circumstances."
Immigration officials sometimes
did not notify prisoners of the
charges against them for more than
Some immigrants were held at this federal detention center in Brooklyn.
the goal in the Sept. 11 investigation
was to notify prisoners within three
days. The average wait for those
arrested in New York City and
housed in Brooklyn was 15 days, the
report said.
Early arrests after Sept. 11 includ-
ed some "glaring errors" in how
illegal immigrants were charged,
leading immigration officials to
route all charges through Washing-
ton for months in the fall of 2001,
investigators found, which caused
delays. A "disconnect" in communi-
cation between officials in New York'
and New Jersey added to those de-
lays, the report said.
In addition, investigators found
that the Federal Bureau of Investi-
gation moved very slowly to deter-
mine whether a suspect rounded up
as part of the Sept. 11 investigation
was linked to terrorism. It took the
bureau an average of 80 days to clear
prisoners for removal or release be-
cause of understaffing and because
the process was "not given sufficient
priority," the report said.
Mr. Fine traced the problem to an
.THE NEW YORK TIMES, TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 2003
Aaron Lee Flneman for The New York Times
Sept. 11 giving the F.B.I, the final say
over when and whether illegal immi-
grants detained in connection with
the attacks could be released.
The policy shift — moving author-
ity away from immigration officials
— represented "uncharted territo-
ry," an unnamed department lawyer
told investigators, because it as-
sumed that a person in detention
could have a link to terrorism unless
and until the F.B.I, said otherwise.
Though this policy was apparently
never written down, it was cleared
"at the highest levels" of the Justice
Department, the report found.
The report found that some law-
yers at the naturalization service
"argued vehemently" against giving
the F.B.I, final authority to clear
people in New York City because the
process was moving so slowly. Some
Justice Department lawyers raised
concerns as well.
In New York City, anyone who was
picked up as a result of a lead in the
Sept. 11 investigation was held under
this policy, "regardless of the
strength of the evidence or the origin
nf tint* l&a/l tponnft GAfri
Had it not been for the attacks,
"most if not all" of the arrests would
probably have never been pursued,
the report said. Some illegal immi-
grants were picked up at random
traffic stops, others because of anon-
ymous tips that they were Muslims
with erratic schedules, officials said.
Department officials acknowl-
edged to the inspector general's of-
fice that they realized soon after the
roundups began "that many in the
group of Sept. 11 detainees were not
connected to the attacks or terror-
ism," the report said.
The report did not name any de-
tainees, but it did give numerous
examples of questionable treatment.
It did not single out for criticism
Attorney General John Ashcroft or
specific senior department advisers,
prosecutors or F.B.I, agents.
The report spotlighted cases of un-
fair treatment. A Muslim man, for
instance, was arrested when an ac-
quaintance wrote to officials that the
man had made "anti-American
statements." The statements "were
very general and did not involve
threats of violence or suggest any
direct connection to terrorism," the
report found, but the man had over-
stayed his visa and was held.
Though the bureau's New York
office and the Central Intelligence
Agency cleared the man of any ter-
rorist connections by mid-November
2001, F.B.I, headquarters did not
clear him for release from incarcer-
ation until more than three months
later because of an "administrative
oversight," the report said.
Law enforcement officials todaj
defended their handling of the ar-
rests, noting that the policy was ir
keeping with guidance from the de
partment's Office of Legal Counse
about detaining illegal immigrants.
Moreover, Deputy Attorney Gen
eral Larry Thompson, whose aide:
handled some of the key policy deci
sions, was quoted in the report a
saying that it was "unfair to criticizi
the conduct of members of my staff'
during such an extraordinary perioc
Critics of the Justice Departmem
however, said that the findings bo:
stered their concerns about the go\s an
The findings "confirm our lon£
held view that civil liberties and th
rights of immigrants were trample
in the aftermath of 9/11," said Anth<
ny D. Romero, executive director <
the American Civil Liberties Unior
William F. Schulz, executive direi
tor of Amnesty International VSi
said that the inspector general's o
fice "should be applauded for relea
ing a report that isn't just a whit
wash of the aovernment's actions.'
 THE DETROIT TRIAL

Man Acquitted in Terror Case Says Co-defendants Will Be Cleared

By DANNY HAKIM
DETROIT, June 5 — A man acquitted
on Tuesday in a terror case here said that he
was grateful to the American justice system
and that he was confident his co-defendants
would eventually be cleared as well.
~"~ The man, Farouk Ali-Haimoud, 22, had
'en accused of being part of a four-man
jrror cell in the Detroit suburb of Dearborn.
He was the only one of the men, all Arab
immigrants, to be acquitted on Tuesday.
Two defendants were found guilty on terror-
related charges, and a third was acquitted of
a terror-related charge but found guilty of a
conspiracy related to document fraud.
On Wednesday, after 14 months in jail,
mostly in isolation, Mr. Ali-Haimoud said in
an interview that he was shocked that any of
them had been found guilty.
"None of us had links with terrorists in
any way," he said. "I'm just a regular
Muslim. I'm not an extremist."
He said he believed that the other de-
fendants would be vindicated in appeals.
"The justice system is the best in the
world," he said. "That's why a lot of people
want to come to the United States."
Tall and lanky, Mr. Ali-Haimoud could
pass for a teenager. But he was described by
the government's main witness, Youssef
Hmimssa, as the most radical of the group.
The four were charged with providing
material support for terrorism. Prosecutors
described the cell as having myriad ambi-
tions, from checking airports here and in
Chicago for security breaches to acquiring
Stinger missiles to shoot down commercial
airplanes. But officials said cases involving
terror cells would never be easy to pros- Jeffeiy Sauger for The New York Tin
ecute, given the difficulty in linking suspects Farouk Ali-Haimoud, the only one of four defendants acquitted in a Detroit terrorism case, with his mother, Meriem Ladjadj.
to the evidence collected.
"If you look at the case, and look at the
ment. "They were wrong." change the truth."
overall structure of the cell and how they
operate, they're very fluid," said Richard
'None of us had links Mr. Ali-Haimoud was released a few During the trial Mrs. Ladjadj, the for-
months after his initial detention and got a mer head of the computer sciences depart-
Convertino, the lead federal prosecutor on
the case here. "The fluidity itself almost
with terrorism in any job selling ice cream at Detroit Metropolitan ment at the Lewis College of Business in
Airport. Then he was arrested again in April Detroit, became a fixture in the courtroom.
makes it impenetrable to prosecution. It's a
hard thing to take a static look at."
way.' 2002. Initially, he and the other defendants On many days during the nine-week trial, it
Defense lawyers said the government were put in the general prison population. was only her and a few journalists watching
.J—-*was being manipulated by an opportunistic But they began being harassed after appear- in a courtroom without air-conditioning and
Itness and was reading too much into the ing on television, and they were moved to listening to testimony that had some jurors
lysical evidence. expert at the trial differed about the con- small isolation cells where, Mr. Ali-Haimoud fighting to keep their eyes open.
Mr. Ali-Haimoud came to this country tents. said, he spent 23 hours a day reading and She sold some of her furniture to help
from Algeria in 1999 to join his mother, Mr. Ali-Haimoud said the tapes "were sleeping. pay legal fees and had to leave her job.
Meriem Ladjadj, a naturalized citizen. just regular lectures." Mr. Hmimssa described Mr. Ali-Hai- "I was overwhelmed and lost track,"
He was first detained after the apart- There was also a day planner with crude moud as a supporter of an extremist group, she said. "I missed three classes and one
ment he lived in with two other defendants sketches that the government said included Takfir wal Hijira. He testified that Mr. Ali- meeting and they asked me to take a leave. I
was raided shortly after Sept. 11, 2001. He diagrams of an American Air Force base in Haimoud had said that there was a war zone was dysfunctional."
said that he had known the other men a Turkey used to patrol the no-fly zone in Iraq "anywhere in the world where there is no When the verdict was read, both Mr. Ali-
couple months and that they had moved in and a military hospital in Jordan. Sharia," referring to Islamic holy law, and Haimoud and his mother began to cry. Mr.
together to save money. Federal agents had Mr. Ali-Haimoud echoed the arguments that Jews, Christians and even Muslims who Ali-Haimoud said he was crying for the other
been looking for a previous resident of the of the defense lawyer, who presented evi- did not espouse extremist views were infi- defendants. They never spoke to him about
apartment but found items that would be- dence that the planner had belonged to a dels. terror plots, he said.
come crucial pieces of evidence. man who was mentally ill and believed he "It's not true," Mr. Ali-Haimoud said of "I'm not happy, so much, because I feel
The government said more than 100 was a general. the description. "Anyone who's got a beard, so bad for them," he said. "I'm praying to
audiotapes belonging to Mr. Ali-Haimoud "I know they were looking for the anyone who prays five times a day, you can God to help them get an appeal or get
preached radical views, though a defense truth," Mr. Ali-Haimoud said of the govern- call him whatever you want. But you can't another trial."
 A14 THE NEW YORK TIMES, FRIDAY, JUNE 6, 2003

THREATS AND RESPONSES: Investigations and Warnings

STICE DEPARTMENT D

Ashcroft, Defending Detentions, Asks More Power to Pursue Suspects

Continued From Page Al

with a designated terrorist organiza-

tion can be charged under the ma-
terial support statutes," he said,
Mr. Ashcroft's lengthy and impas-
sioned defense of the Justice Depart-
ment's counterterrorism campaign
and his push for greater authority
met with strong endorsement from
many, but not all, of the Republicans
on the judiciary panel.
Representative F. James Sensen-
brenner Jr., the Republican chair-
man of the panel, said that while the
Justice Department had made im-
pressive strides in fighting terror-
ism, he remained concerned about
the potential threat to civil liberties
posed by the long reach of counter-
terrorism efforts.
"To my mind," Mr. Sensenbrenner
said, "the purpose of the Patriot Act
is to secure our liberties and not to
undermine them."
Just last month, the Senate re-
buffed efforts by senior Republicans
to make permanent some critical
provisions of the Patriot Act that are
to expire in 2005. The concerns raised
by Mr. Sensenbrenner, and echoed in
even stronger terms by virtually all
the Democrats on the panel, signaled
that Mr. Ashcroft may face a tough
sell in seeking to broaden the Justice
Department's authority to pursue
irists.
>me of us find that the collateral
.age may be greater than it
needs to be in the conduct of this
war," said Representative Howard
L. Herman, Democrat of California.
Democrats said they were particu-
larly concerned about the report re-
leased on Monday by Glenn A. Fine,
the Justice Department's inspector Doug Mills/Tile New York Times
general. The report found "signifi-
cant problems" in the way the au- Attorney General John Ashcroft testified yesterday before the House Judiciary Committee, asking that the Patriot Act be strengthened.
thorities arrested and treated hun-
dreds of illegal immigrants as part accusations further, but the attorney illegal immigrants more quickly. connections that are still considered
of the Sept. 11 investigation. The re- Responding to a general responded that "I have no "God forbid, if we ever have to do suspicious. One suspect was the
port found that the authorities had plan at this time to employ a special this again, we hope that we can clear roommate of one of the Sept. 11 hi-
made little effort to distinguish real report criticizing the counsel in this matter." people more quickly," he said. "We'd jackers, and another was found with
terrorist suspects from those who Mr. Ashcroft said the depart- like to clear people as quickly as "jihad material" and more than 30
became ensnared by chance in the Justice Department ment's civil rights division had in- possible. There's no interest whatso- pictures of the World Trade Center,
investigation. Many suspects were vestigated 18 complaints of abuse by ever that the United States of Amer- Mr. Ashcroft said.
jailed for months, often without be- on detentions. guards against immigrant prisoners ica has in holding innocent people, Mr. Ashcroft said past data
ing formally charged or given access and had found in 14 cases that there absolutely none. It's costly. It takes showed that people who were facing
to lawyers, and some inmates in was not enough evidence to bring up resources that makes it difficult deportation and were released from
Brooklyn were physically and ver- Virginia, suggested that the denial of for us to do what we need to do with custody on bond fled about 85 percent
bally abused before they were the detainees' civil rights and evi- criminal charges. Four investiga- other people who are threats." of the time, and he said he was not
cleared of any terrorist ties, the re- dence of physical assaults by Justice tions are pending. willing to take that risk with the
But Mr. Ashcroft stressed repeat-
port said. Department employees might have "We do not stand for abuse," he edly that he believed the policy of suspects apprehended after the Sept.
While the report drew no conclu- risen to the level of criminal conduct. said. detaining people for as long as it took 11 attacks.
sions about the legality of the Justice The congressman asked Mr. Ash- Mr. Ashcroft said he also wished to clear them of terrorist ties was the "We had had to balance the risk,"
Department's actions, Representa- croft whether he planned to appoint that the department could have re- right one, and he said that several Mr. Ashcroft said. And in doing so, he
tive Robert C. Scott, Democrat of an outside counsel to investigate the solved cases against many of the 762 illegal immigrants did have terrorist added, "we did not violate the law."
 Foreigners' Rights
In the Post-9/11 Era:
A Matter of Justice
By DAPHNE EVIATAR
More than 5,000 citizens of foreign coun-
tries have been detained by the government
since 9/11 in connection with anti-terrorism
measures. Only a handful have been
charged with a terror-related crime. Many
were held initially without charges, denied
access to lawyers, judged in secret and
locked up for months without any showing
that they had committed crimes or other-
wise posed any danger. More than 500 were
deported for immigration violations.
The Bush administration's anti-terrorism
campaign has set off a fierce legal and
philosophical debate over what rights for-
eigners have compared with Americans.
When is it permissible to treat noncitizens
differently? Are there some rights — wheth-
er to a speedy trial or a formal charge —
that transcend nationality, and should be
accorded to every human being?
Treating foreigners differently, of course,
is nothing new for the United States govern-
ment. Debates over everything from federal
benefits and public school education to iden-
tification cards have bubbled up at various
times. But since Sept. 11, 2001, the conse-
quences for some foreigners have become
much more severe.
Prof. John Yoo of the law school at the
University of California at Berkeley points
out that while the Bill of Rights applies to
"persons" rather than citizens, it's not un-
constitutional to treat aliens differently in
certain contexts. The Supreme Court has
said in many decisions: "In the exercise of
its broad power over naturalization and
immigration, Congress regularly makes
rules that would be unacceptable if applied
When anti-terrorism
steps include detention
and secret trials.
to citizens." The Fifth Amendment may
guarantee everyone a right to due process,
but it does not say what process is due.
So while a criminal defendant, for exam-
ple, has a right to a lawyer and a public trial
before a jury, immigration cases are de-
cided by administrative judges, may be held
behind closed doors and can occur without
legal counsel.
The gap is even wider for the more than
650 foreign citizens at the United States
military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Suspected of having ties to terrorists, most
were picked up during the Afghanistan war,
none has had a hearing, and most will never
get a day in a regular court. Although the
administration has said it will soon start
military tribunals, the American Bar Asso-
ciation, among others, has declared the pro-
posed procedures unfair, objecting to re-
strictions on defense lawyers' access to
evidence, government monitoring of attor-
ney-client communications, and limitations
on appeals.
In a letter published in The New York
Times last month, Paul W. Cobb Jr., deputy
general counsel at the Department of De-
fense, wrote that the Guantanamo prisoners
have been designated "enemy combatants
Continued on Page 17