mass rights blog

Press Release: ACLU of Massachusetts backs suit challenging Bush Administration travel restrictions on family visits to Cuba

2008-05-16T17:12:00.002-04:00

Three state ACLU affiliates, Center for Constitutional Rights join first challenge to increased restrictions on family visits announced in 2004

BOSTON, MIAMI and MONTPELIER, Vt. -- Decrying the Bush Administration’s attack on families, American Civil Liberties Union affiliates in Massachusetts, Florida, and Vermont, along with the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), today filed a joint friend-of-the-court brief in Vilaseca v. Paulson, a federal lawsuit in Vermont against the Treasury Department, challenging severe restrictions imposed by the U.S. government on travel to visit close family members in Cuba.

The lawsuit is the first challenge to the U.S. government's increased restrictions on visits to family members which were announced in 2004. They are being challenged now by four individuals who have current urgent needs to visit with elderly or ill relatives. The regulations prohibit Americans from visiting close family members in Cuba more than once every three years, even in emergency humanitarian situations. Previously, Cuban-Americans could visit family every year or even more frequently in emergencies. For the first time, the regulations also prevent Americans from visiting aunts, uncles or cousins at all. Anyone who violates the rules could face fines of up to $1 million and up to ten years in jail.

"Shame on the Bush Administration," said Sarah Wunsch, Staff Attorney for the ACLU of Massachusetts. "It apparently has no compassion for the need of families to gather together in times of death, illness, weddings, and births. Our government is playing politics with one of the most personal needs of human beings, to maintain their family relationships," said Wunsch.

According to John Reinstein, Legal Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, "these regulations gut the previous humanitarian rules allowing for close family visits and visits to Cuba in case of family emergencies." With major assistance from the national law firm of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, the ACLU argues that the due process right to preserve family relationships is deeply rooted in the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Further, the brief points to international human rights law that confirms that the preservation of family relationships is "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty."

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of four individuals, Armando Vilaseca, Yurisleidis Leyva Mora, Jared Kingsbury Carter, and Maricel Lucero Keniston, all of whom reside in Vermont. The parties are asking the court to enter an injunction requiring the Government to cease enforcement of the "Family Visit Regulations" and allow Vilaseca and other Cuban-Americans to resume annual and humanitarian travel to Cuba for family reasons.

The lawyers on the brief are James L. Messenger, Malick W. Ghachem, Okey Onyejekwe, Wasif Qureshi and Arthur D’Andrea, all of Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, which represented the groups pro bono, and Mitchell L. Pearl, of Langrock Sperry & Wool, LLP in Burlington, Vt.; Randall Marshall, ACLU of Florida Legal Director; John Reinstein and Sarah Wunsch, ACLU of Massachusetts; and Darius Charney, Center for Constitutional Rights in New York City.

Download the original lawsuit at: http://www.aclufl.org/pdfs/vilaseca.pdf

Press Release: ACLU Report Exposes Unjust Detention Of Youth

2008-05-12T10:17:00.002-04:00

Pre-Trial Juvenile Lockup In Massachusetts Disproportionately Impacts Youth Of Color

BOSTON - A widespread practice in Massachusetts of locking up youth accused of minor offenses and who pose little or no danger to their communities is unfair, threatens public safety and wastes public money, according to a report released today by the American Civil Liberties Union's Racial Justice Program and the ACLU of Massachusetts.

The report, entitled "Locking Up Our Children: The Secure Detention Of Massachusetts Youth After Arraignment And Before Adjudication," documents the use of detention by state judges as a rehabilitative tool to frighten youth never convicted of wrongdoing. The report also addresses the woeful lack of placement availability in the state's child welfare and mental health systems that leave detention as the only viable option for youth who cannot safely be returned to their homes.

"Massachusetts is simply locking up too many kids charged with delinquent behavior before a formal determination of their guilt or innocence," said Robin Dahlberg, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Racial Justice Project and the principal author of the report. "Thousands of youth who are neither flight risks nor dangers to their communities are detained while they await trial. This only exacerbates any existing behavioral problems or educational difficulties and is a significant and wasted expense to taxpayers."

According to the report, Massachusetts detains a higher percentage of youth pre-trial than 33 other states. The Commonwealth detains 5,000 to 6,000 youth in secure facilities each year, many of whom do not appear to be high-risk. Last year, 78 percent of them were charged with misdemeanors or low-level felonies, and more than 80 percent of them were eventually released back into their communities after spending an average of 25 days in lockup awaiting arraignment.

Additionally, youth of color make up 60 percent of those in detention, even though they comprise only 20 percent of Massachusetts' juvenile population.

The report also concludes that the overuse of pre-trial lockup wastes taxpayer dollars. In 2006, it cost roughly $16,000 to detain a youth for 16 days in a secure lockup. By comparison, it costs taxpayers less than $1,500 to provide six to eight weeks of supervision to ensure that youth permitted to remain at home return to court.

"Far from assisting youth in dealing with the issues that may have gotten them into trouble, secure detention is one of the most accurate predictors of future criminal behavior and other problems," said Amy Reichbach, racial justice advocate with the ACLU of Massachusetts. "This approach is failing both youth and our communities."

Key communities in Massachusetts are particularly affected by the over-reliance on detention of youth. For example, youth in Worcester County are detained at a higher rate than youth in other counties: 83 percent of detained kids are charged with misdemeanors or low-level felonies. In Springfield, 40 percent of all youth arrests are for misbehaving or acting out at school. And in Holyoke, 25 percent of all kids are arrested for school-based offenses.

"Massachusetts should create effective alternatives to pre-trial lockup and reserve secure detention for the relatively small number of children who truly need it," said Carol Rose, Executive Director of the ACLU of Massachusetts. "We should invest our scarce tax dollars more wisely to keep our kids in school rather than in lockup and, in so doing, make our communities safer in the long run."

A full copy of the report can be found online at

http://www.aclu.org/crimjustice/juv/35216res20080514.html or
http://www.aclum.org/lockingupkids

Additional information about the ACLU Racial Justice Project can be found online at:
http://www.aclu.org/racialjustice/index.html

Additional information about the ACLU of Massachusetts can be found online:
http://www.aclum.org

Video: Interview with "The Visitor" filmmaker

2008-05-06T16:41:00.003-04:00

Maybe you've already seen the film The Visitor, which is playing in theaters now. The story turns on the callousness of U.S. immigration policy after 9/11, and the ACLU has done a video interview with the film's creator, Tom McCarthy, here.

Video: Telling off the Supreme Court

2008-05-06T13:48:00.002-04:00

Everyone in our office has been talking about this video clip from Boston Legal.

News: Bartenders serve up drinks, customs checks

2008-04-24T14:23:00.003-04:00

Boston Globe reporter Maria Sacchetti quotes our Equal Justice Works Fellow, Anjali Waikar, in this story about bartenders at the Orpheum Theatre and Bank of America Pavillion who have reportedly been told to check the validity of passport stamps when serving customers who aren't U.S. citizens.

Waikar says this is "ridiculous."

News: In more public places, cameras are on watch

2008-04-24T14:20:00.003-04:00

Globe correspondent Connie Paige quotes our Staff Attorney, Sarah Wunsch, in this story on the growing use of surveillance cameras.

"We used to think of the United States as a place where the government was not spying on citizens," she says, as part of our overall concerns.

News: Bill bars gangs from 'safety zones'

2008-04-23T17:39:00.005-04:00

Maria Cramer and Shelley Murphy from the Boston Globe quote our Legal Director, John Reinstein, in this story about a bill that would make it a crime for gang members to stand together or talk to each other on public property.

There are all sorts of problems with the bill, such as the constitutional right to meet, and the fact that people who are simply mistaken for "gang members" could suffer under the law.

News: RSU fights for poster rights, ACLU speaks

2008-04-18T11:31:00.001-04:00

Derrick Perkins reports for the Daily Collegian in this article about a free speech rally at UMass Amherst. The story quotes Bill Newman, director of our Western Massachusetts Legal Office, who spoke at the rally.

News: ACLU queries Harvard's police

2008-04-15T10:37:00.003-04:00

Reporter David Abel of the Boston Globe has written this story on our work to find out why the Harvard University Police Department has apparently been using an undercover photographer to take pictures of political protestors. The story quotes John Reinstein, our Legal Director, and refers to the fact that the ACLU of Massachusetts is representing two protestors who were arrested in March after trying to take pictures of Harvard's undercover photographer himself.

We'd like to know what they're doing and why, and whether Harvard is part of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force, which some other schools around the country have joined.

Reporter Jamison A Hill of the Harvard Crimson broke the story yesterday, and followed up today with an HUPD rebuttal that raises new questions.

Here's one "Visitor" no one should miss!

2008-04-10T16:13:00.004-04:00

How often do you get a chance to be simultaneously entertained, informed and inspired to take action at the movies – and emerge with your paycheck intact?

This can be your experience on Wednesday, April 16 when "The Visitor" is screened for free at Boston's Regal Fenway (7 PM; 201 Brookline Ave., near Fenway T stop). To make sure you are assured of a seat, email jmathews@alliedadvpub.com, call (617) 425-8930, or just plan to be there early.

How can I vouch in such positive terms for a film that has yet to be released? Last night I introduced it on behalf of the ACLU of Massachusetts at another special screening at Coolidge Corner, and afterwards moderated a discussion with the audience and the film's convincing lead actor, Richard Jenkins, of "Six Feet Under" fame. The ACLU is involved because Participant Media, one of the film's producers, has launched a consciousness-raising campaign around the film, taking on one of our most poorly understood issues, the rights of immigrants.

I don't want to give the story away. Suffice it to say that if you don't know much about the detention and deportation polices of the Bureau of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), director Tom McCarthy ("The Station Agent") provides the basics in "The Visitor." The film bridges the gap between "them" and "us" with such sweet grace that it can be a great conversation-starter, judging from last night's lively Coolidge Corner discussion.

So plan to visit "The Visitor" when it is shown in Boston on April 16 – and then work with us to restore fairness and humanity to our immigration system.

Nancy Murray
Director of Education
ACLU of Massachusetts

News: Barnstable police take shocking step

2008-04-09T13:44:00.004-04:00

Reporter Hilary Russ of the Cape Cod Times wrote this article on Barnstable police use and testing of Tasers -- on themselves.

In a way, that's admirable, but the fact remains that there are serious concerns about the safety of Tasers. As the article says, there have been no deaths from Tasers in Massachusetts, but there have been deaths elsewhere, and concerns that the "non-lethality" of Tasers encourages their use.

Washington Post sheds more light on Fusion Centers in Massachusetts, nationwide

2008-04-03T10:47:00.003-04:00

Both here in Massachusetts and across the country, the ACLU has been working to tell more people about the Fusion Centers: massive government clearinghouses of data on all of us. The Washington Post has done a story which sheds more light on exactly what kinds of data the Fusion Centers are pulling together.

One quoted source in the story says, "There is never ever enough information when it comes to terrorism." But there can be. As ACLU Policy Counsel and former FBI Special Agent Mike German has said, when you're looking for a needle in a haystack, it doesn't help to make the haystack bigger. The 9/11 attacks didn't happen because we didn't have the information we needed -- it's that the information we had wasn't followed through on.

Exposure: The woman behind the camera at Abu Ghraib

2008-04-01T16:13:00.006-04:00

One of the speakers at our annual Bill of Rights Dinner this year will be Errol Morris, director of the Berlin Film Festival prize-winning film, S.O.P.: Standard Operating Procedure. In this film, Morris examines the incidents of abuse and torture of prisoners at the hands of U.S. forces at the Abu Ghraib prison.

In last week's New Yorker, Morris has co-written a long, fascinating article about Specialist Sabrina Harman, the soldier who took many of the infamous photos of abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison. It's about what conditions were like and why she did what she did.

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

2008-03-28T13:17:00.010-04:00

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

2008-03-27T17:51:00.000-04:00

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

2008-03-18T19:04:00.002-04:00

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

2008-03-14T12:13:00.006-04:00

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

2008-03-12T16:06:00.006-04:00

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

2008-03-09T16:45:00.004-04:00

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

2008-03-07T16:03:00.003-05:00

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?

2008-03-06T11:57:00.002-05:00

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

2008-03-05T10:34:00.007-05:00

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"

2008-03-04T16:56:00.004-05:00

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

2008-03-03T14:08:00.007-05:00

“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.

News: Police Safe Homes plan leads to heated debates

2008-02-28T16:35:00.001-05:00

Kyle de Beausset and Howard Manly quote Sarah Wunsch, Staff Attorney for the ACLU of Massachusetts, in this story about the Boston Police Departments controversial "Safe Homes" warrantless search program.