Counter-terrorism expert Mike German on Boston-area radio Saturday

As a 16-year federal law enforcement veteran, Mike German knows his stuff. As a former FBI Special Agent, he twice infiltrated neo-Nazi groups (using constitutionally sound methods) to prevent terrorist attacks. But he left the FBI to make Congress and the public aware of deficiencies in U.S. counterterrorism operations.

Today German serves as Policy Counsel for the ACLU and is the author of Thinking Like A Terrorist.

On Saturday, March 29, at 10am, he'll be on the Samantha Clemens Show, 91.5 WMFO Medford, to talk about Fusion Centers, the federally funded domestic intelligence centers that are collecting personal data about all of us, with little or no oversight.

I've heard Mike speak a couple of times, and he does a great job of puncturing the supposed need for the government to sweep away civil liberties in the name of the "War on Terror."

UPDATE:

Audio from the show is available here.

News: When school needs counter student rights

The Boston Globe's Kay Lazar wrote this excellent front-page story on what we often call the "school to prison pipeline." The piece quotes Amy Reichbach, our Racial Justice Legal Fellow.

Security breach at the Pentagon

George Jenkins blogs in detail about a huge security breach at the Pentagon last year.

It makes you wonder: if data at the Pentagon, of all places, can't be kept secure, then how can anyone reasonably expect that information held in databases for the Real ID national identity card, or at the Fusion Centers, will be any less vulnerable?

Five Years Too Many

Wednesday, March 19 marks five years since the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. To date, nearly 4,000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died, with no end in sight. Vigils will be held in Boston Common and across the Commonwealth - find one in your community and exercise your First Amendment right to peaceably assemble and petition the government!

Government Surveillance 101

The Wall Street Journal has provided this excellent overview of government surveillance efforts and the concerns they raise.

Meanwhile, DailyKos blogger mcjoan has just written about the ACLU's reponse to the WSJ article, including more on the scope of the program (at least as much as we know about it) and a Freedom of Information Act request to find out more about aspects of the WSJ story.

Photo Exhibit: A Memory of Humanity

Don't miss this rare photo exhibit that bears witness to victims and prisoners of war, “A Memory of Humanity: From Solferino to Guantanamo - 145 Years of Red Cross Photography,” on view through March 31 at the Adams Gallery at Suffolk University Law School. Some of the photos are disturbing reminders of how little we know about our recent past-–and how little we've learned from it.

As Mark Feeney wrote in The Boston Globe, “The names of the wars may change - Franco-Prussian, Serbo-Turkish, Boer, Russo-Japanese, the Spanish Civil War, both world wars, Korean, Vietnam, Arab-Israeli, Falklands, Iraq. The sites are sadly various, too: hospitals, POW camps, quarantine stations, war ruins, orphanages, concentration camps, repatriation centers, emergency warehouses, refugee camps, political prisons, hospital ships. It's the pain and suffering endured that are constant.”

Curiously, there is no explanation of why photos of Guantanamo were not included in the exhibit.

Press Release: International Human Rights Experts Denounce U.S. Record On Racial And Ethnic Discrimination

ACLU Applauds Recommendations And Demands Immediate Action

Report coincides with first anniversary of ICE raid in New Bedford

BOSTON -- A United Nations committee today issued a strongly worded critique of the United States' record on racial discrimination and urged the government to make sweeping reforms to policies affecting racial and ethnic minorities, women, and immigrants in this country. The American Civil Liberties Union called on the U.S. government to take vigorous steps to implement the committee's recommendations and fulfill its human rights treaty obligations.

"The message from the U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is clear when it comes to the U.S.' record on human rights and racial equality -- the government can't just talk the talk, it must also walk the walk," said Jamil Dakwar, Advocacy Director of the ACLU Human Rights Program. "To claim the high moral ground and assert leadership on the issue of human rights, the U.S government must address the systemic discrimination and injustice that exists in its own backyard."

The CERD committee, which oversees compliance with an international treaty to end racial discrimination that was ratified by the U.S. in 1994, reviewed testimony and research by the ACLU and other human rights groups before issuing its final report. Representatives of the ACLU were in Geneva last month to testify before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on the state of racial and ethnic discrimination in the U.S.

Among its recommendations, the committee called on the U.S. to:

* Pass the federal End Racial Profiling Act or similar legislation and combat widespread ethnic and racial profiling practices by law enforcement, especially against Arabs, Muslims and South Asians in the wake of the 9/11 attacks;
* Protect non-citizens from being subjected to torture and abuse by means of transfer or rendition to foreign countries for torture;
* Adopt and strengthen the use of affirmative action programs to eliminate discrimination, and allow school districts to voluntarily promote school integration;
* Eliminate systemic inadequacies in criminal defense programs that have a disproportionate effect on indigent minorities and ensure competent counsel in all cases;
* Restrict felony disfranchisement policies and eliminate barriers to post-sentence voting rights restoration;
* Address the problem of violence against indigenous, minority and immigrant women, including migrant workers, and especially domestic workers;
* Pass the Civil Rights Act of 2008 or similar legislation, and otherwise ensure the rights of minority and immigrant workers, including undocumented migrant workers, to effective protection and remedies when their employers have violated their human rights; and
* Address the problem of the school-to-prison pipeline -- the trend of funneling minority children into prison.

Although the United States asserted that a "broad brush characterization such as the 'school-to-prison' pipeline cannot be made" and that "no data documents such a phenomenon," because school discipline and environment are individual to each school, the CERD committee disagreed.

"Children, particularly poor children of color, are pushed out of schools and into the juvenile justice system in a number of ways," said Amy Reichbach, Racial Justice Advocate at the ACLU of Massachusetts. "These include arrests of children for incidents such as 'disturbance of schools or assemblies' that were, in the past, handled through more informal school channels. Furthermore, under Massachusetts law, the Commonwealth has no obligation to educate a child who has been expelled. Given the significant negative consequences for children of expulsion and court involvement, we should implement the recommendations of the United Nations and urge school districts to review 'zero tolerance' policies to limit suspensions and expulsions except in the most serious cases, provide training for the growing number of police officers deployed to patrol school hallways, and adopt measure to address the racial achievement gap in education."

Also in Geneva today, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants, Jorge Bustamante, presented a report on the injustices faced by migrants and immigrants in the U.S., denouncing immigrant detention policies and facilities that fail to meet international standards and have few protections for the rights of migrant workers.

"The U.S. should heed the recommendations of this international expert and do more to create fair, humane policies and conditions for immigrant communities in this country," said Chandra Bhatnagar, staff attorney with the ACLU Human Rights Program. "It's time for the government to match its soaring rhetoric on the importance of human rights globally with a renewed commitment to protecting the rights of vulnerable immigrants here at home."

The ACLU is calling on the government to adopt the recommendations made by Bustamante in his report, including:

* Eliminating mandatory detention of undocumented immigrants and determining whether non-citizens pose a risk to society on a case-by-case basis;
* Allowing immigrants in detention the chance to have their custody reviewed before an immigration judge;
* Creating binding human rights standards governing the treatment of immigration detainees in all facilities, including the removal of non-citizen children from jail-like detention centers;
* Establishing standards for the mental and medical health needs of migrant women who have been the victims of mental, physical, or sexual abuse;
* Ending harassment and racial profiling of migrant workers by local and federal law enforcement agents; and
* Ensuring health, safety and labor protections for migrant workers and providing health benefits for migrant workers injured on the job.

Last year, Bustamante conducted a three-week fact finding mission at the request of the U.S. government, visiting a detention center in Arizona and meeting with migrant communities and government officials in California, Arizona, Texas, Georgia, Florida, New York and Washington D.C. During that time Bustamante was denied entrance to New Jersey's Monmouth County Correctional Institution and Texas's Hutto immigration detention center, a converted prison that currently houses about 150 immigrants, including children and asylum seekers. In 2007, the ACLU filed successful federal lawsuits that resulted in the release of 26 children and greatly improved conditions at the Hutto facility. The U.S. has a history of blocking international experts from access to controversial detention facilities.

Yesterday, Senator John Kerry expressed deep disappointment with the fact that a year after the New Bedford raid, ICE continues to conduct enforcement actions in an inhumane manner, devastating families and communities.

"Last year, Massachusetts saw firsthand what some of the problems identified in this report mean to real people, when ICE conducted its chaotic raid on the Michael Bianco Inc. factory in New Bedford," said Laura Rótolo, Human Rights Fellow for the ACLU of Massachusetts. "We will continue to fight against unjust policies that put families and communities at risk by challenging illegal conduct and educating the public about ICE abuses."

The ACLU's report on the state of racial discrimination in the U.S. and other relevant documents can be found online here: www.aclu.org/intlhumanrights/racialjustice/cerd.html

The ACLU's statement on the U.N. Special Rapporteur's report on the human rights of migrants is available here: www.aclu.org/pdfs/humanrights/oralstatement_to_jorge_bustamante.pdf

One year after the New Bedford raid, has anything changed?

Today marks one year since the raid on the Michael Bianco factory in New Bedford, Massachusetts, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has said that it has learned its lesson. But raids continue at an alarming pace, both in workplaces and in homes.

In the past year, ICE carried out over one hundred workplace and home raids, and it plans to do more. In Fiscal Year 2007, ICE deported 276,912 persons - an all time record - and this year promises to be no different, with immigration detention now being the fastest growing form of incarceration in the country.

Immediately following the New Bedford raid, ACLUM, together with other advocates, filed a lawsuit challenging ICE’s practices. While a court ultimately found that jurisdictional issues prevented it from hearing the case, it said that it hoped “ICE .. will treat this … series of events as a learning experience in order to devise better, less ham-handed ways of carrying out its important responsibilities.”

Yesterday at a press conference, ICE chief Julie Myers continued to defend the New Bedford raid, stating that no children were left stranded. Of course, we know that this simply is not true. On the day of the raid, community groups counted 200 affected children and could name those who had been left without a caretaker. While ICE, at the insistence of Senator Kerry, has come up with humanitarian standards to be used when carrying out large raids, problems continue, and the “ham-handed” approach still seems to dominate.

Just last month, the ACLU of Southern California was forced to bring a lawsuit when 100 immigrants were arrested in a workplace raid and ICE denied their lawyers the ability to accompany them to interviews where officials questioned them about their status.

Without binding rules and extensive training on how to conduct enforcement actions, each raid is an opportunity for abuse.

In Massachusetts, fear and distrust of authorities continues in immigrant communities, leading to crimes going unreported and previously active members of communities going underground. The Boston Globe recently reported that a pair of robbers dressed as police officers were targeting homes of undocumented immigrants because they knew that they would not report the robberies.

ACLUM continues to fight against unjust policies that put families and communities at risk by challenging illegal conduct and educating the public about ICE abuses.

News: Safer Homes Program Questioned

Since Boston police first floated the idea last fall, we've gotten dozens of media inquiries about the proposed "Safe Homes" program. It would ask people in select neighborhoods to "voluntarily" open their doors to police searches for guns.

Boston Channel 5 reporter Rhondella Richardson explores the ongoing controversy in this report. She talks to people like a concerned parent, who says she would support the program because she wants her kids to be safe. Another wonders what would really happen if the police found a gun in their home: "Am I safe, or am I not safe? You gotta think."

Richardson also interviews Carol Rose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, and about the civil liberties implications of the controversial program. The ACLU has been raising concerns about "Safe Homes" from the start, and has distributed this fact sheet in English and Spanish. It's about the right to say no to a warrantless search, and the rights that you might give up if you said yes.

A key danger in "Safe Homes"

On Monday, Bianca Vazquez Toness of WBUR did
a really interesting story that underscores the difficulty the police can face earning the trust of local communities.

One of the reasons the police "are looking to build trust in high-crime neighborhoods," as Vazquez Toness says, is for the proposed "Safe Homes" initiative, in which Boston police plan on going door-to-door in high-crime neighborhoods, asking people to open their doors to "voluntary" searches for guns.

The ACLU of Massachusetts is concerned that people won't understand they have the right to say "no" to these searches, or that anything illegal the police find in the searches (guns, drugs, etc.) can lead to arrests and criminal charges against anyone in the home, including children. This isn't like programs which simply aim to take guns out of circulation, with no questions asked.

In other words, a key danger in "Safe Homes" is the erosion of trust. People could waive their rights to help tackle gun violence, but then feel betrayed if members of their families are hauled off to jail or are suspended or expelled from school, instead of simply having to turn over a gun -- or even if no guns were found at all.

An ACLU of Massachusetts briefing paper with more information on "Safe Homes" is available here.

Driving While Immigrant: Immigrants in Central MA Share their Experiences with Local Police

“Do you have T.B.?”

This is what Jorge’s son was asked when his car was pulled over by a local police officer in Milford, Massachusetts. Jorge said that his son didn’t know why he was pulled over; the officer decided not to tell him.

“Do the police have the right to question us like this?” asked Jorge, a small-framed man from Ecuador who spoke only in Spanish. Jorge was among the forty or so community members I met on Saturday afternoon who came to express their concerns that they are being targeted by the police. I could see several other men in the audience nodding as Jorge spoke, as if to say that they, too, had had similar encounters with law enforcement.

Another man, Luis, raised his hand and stood up to speak. Luis was stopped while driving his truck in Holliston, he explained in Spanish. But Luis wasn’t told why he was stopped. The officer instead ordered him out of the driver's seat and told him to walk to the back of his truck. The officer then pulled out a camera. He snapped a picture of Luis' face. Luis doesn’t know what ever happened to his picture.

These are a few examples of the stories community members shared with me and other organizers on a Saturday afternoon in a small town church basement in Central Massachusetts. A couple of community members organized the event to address concerns that the immigrant communities in their towns are being targeted by the police. They asked me to speak about their rights and about what they can do as a community to address these issues. Most of the audience members were men who had fled their indigenous communities in Ecuador to work as roofers and construction workers in Massachusetts in order to support their families.

Do the police have the right to question us like this?

This question rang in my head the entire afternoon, like it has for the past year and a half. As a matter of law, um, well it depends, I thought to myself. As a matter of human dignity, NO, I wanted to scream. I put on my lawyer hat and thought, how can we prove that people are being targeted?...What was the basis for the stop?... Did the officer have reasonable suspicion?.... Did these men even have the legal authority to drive in Massachusetts? And then a moment of honest frustration swept over me as I thought, aren’t some of these men lucky that they weren’t transferred to immigration custody like so many other people in other parts of the state?

But what these stories reveal is that this isn’t just about illegal drivers in Massachusetts. And this certainly isn't just about illegal immigration. Even immigrants who are here in full compliance with the law seem to be suffering under these efforts to target anyone who “looks foreign.”

Later in the afternoon, for example, another man pulled me aside to say that he heard of two people who hold green cards and Massachusetts driver’s licenses. When they were picked up by the police for allegedly committing minor traffic violations, the officers didn’t believe that their licenses were real. Both of them had their licenses confiscated and their cars were towed.

For the past year and half, I have been listening to peoples’ stories. From what I have seen and heard, the theme in Massachusetts is far too pervasive: if you’re a brown-skinned immigrant, you are presumed illegal until you prove otherwise.