Alliance of White Anti-Racists Everywhere – Los Angeles
Detention
Following State of the Union, President Obama Needs to Follow Through on Immigration Reforms
01 week ago
The President’s State of the Union address this week re-iterated some of his key themes on immigration—support for comprehensive reform, dismay that DREAM Act students and foreign students educated in this country have no way to legalize their status, and a belief that he’s done enough to the secure the border. More importantly, he framed these themes in context to America’s economic recovery, innovation and growth. However, while any mention of immigration in the State of the Union is welcome, it’s what the President didn’t say that may have more of an impact on how his administration is remembered this year on immigration—and how his vision is measured by voters in the coming election.
In the State of the Union address, President Obama repeatedly signaled to Congress that he would sign sensible bills to reform our immigration system, big or small. But he quickly noted that partisan politics would make it all but impossible to pass comprehensive reform:
The opponents of action are out of excuses. We should be working on comprehensive immigration reform right now. But if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan, let’s at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, and defend this country. Send me a law that gives them the chance to earn their citizenship. I will sign it right away.
There are plenty of bills that fit this description, from the DREAM Act to proposals offering green cards to foreign graduates in science and engineering to support for immigrant entrepreneurs, but they are just as likely to flounder in the sea of partisan politics as something grander and more comprehensive.
And while the president suggested that the ball was in Congress’s court, he didn’t mention that his Administration has moved forward on reforms that don’t require Congressional action. The Administration has become more aggressive in the last in year in fixing parts of our backward immigration system, such as overhauling immigration detention, a review of the Secure Communities program, a re-invigoration of the use of prosecutorial discretion, and attempts to promote streamlined adjudications and family unity. The latter, announced just weeks ago, has generated real excitement among immigrant communities.
Similarly, changes to the way government officials decide what cases should be prosecuted in immigration court—and what cases should be dropped—have given hope to millions of immigrants that they may be able to stay with their families, at least for a while longer. But there remains considerable uncertainty about how DHS will routinely exercise discretion, especially amidst reports that DREAM Act students and others who clearly fit the government’s low priority status are still being deported.
In the areas of detention reform and Secure Communities, however, the early enthusiasm about change has been replaced by wariness on the part of advocates who want to believe promised reforms will be made. They have been repeatedly disappointed by delays in the detention realm and a continued commitment to keep Secure Communities alive, a program that many believe undermines community safety and policing. A special task force voted out a series of necessary reforms and gave their report to Secretary Napolitano last September, but DHS has yet to announce how it will implement these recommendations.
Although these ongoing administrative reforms don’t fit tidily into the overarching vision of immigration policy the President laid out in the State of the Union, following through on them would have a lasting effect on both immigration enforcement and the consideration of benefits for those stuck in our broken immigration system. And the President shouldn’t abandon his larger vision. He has made significant strides in helping to reshape how people who don’t much care about immigration think about it and that will be critical when the time comes for comprehensive reform. But for those most directly affected by our immigration crisis, it is the most immediate details that matter most.
Photo by WhiteHouse.gov.
Immigrant Family Detention Could Return to Texas
01 week ago
In 2009, the federal government stopped detaining families in Texas and cancelled plans to build new family detention facilities as advocates made clear that the practice was inhumane. Now, despite the administration’s stated commitment to reforming the detention system, plans are underway to build at least ten new detention facilities, including one to hold children with their parents.
The ACLU of Texas sued Immigration and Customs Enforcement in 2007 for detaining immigrant children at the T. Don Hutto Center in Texas. As a result, the facility for families was shut down and the only detention center in the country still housing families is in Pennsylvania is scheduled to close in March.
But last November, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement put out a request for proposal for 100 new family detention beds in Texas, according to KUT.
“There is no reason why families must be detained while their immigration cases proceed and the administration could easily release children and parents to community based alternatives to detention,” said Seth Freed Wessler, Colorlines.com’s investigation reporter.
“Detention centers are dismal places, no matter how humane the administration tried to make them. They are no place for children,” Wessler went on to say.
Immigrant rights advocate interviewed by KUT, say probation-like alternatives should be
used instead, including ankle bracelets, home visits and home-like
community shelters.
Guantanamo Chief Defense Lawyer Orders His Attorneys: Don’t Agree to Monitoring
03 weeks ago
Ten years on, Guantánamo authorities are back to their old tricks, throwing up roadblocks to fair trials. But now the top defense lawyer for the controversial Guantánamo military commission system has ordered the attorneys under his command not to comply with new rules issued by the Guantánamo prison chief that require Defense Department screening of all written materials lawyers want to send to their clients.
In an email sent Sunday and obtained by the ACLU, Marine Col. J.P. Colwell, the chief military defense counsel for the commissions, informed all military commission defense lawyers that they were ethically obligated to refuse to follow the rules, which were issued last month.
Guantánamo’s commander, Navy Rear Adm. David Woods, issued the rules on monitoring legal communications on December 27. Under these rules, any information provided by lawyers that military censors found objectionable — like communications about U.S. personnel who tortured the prisoners — could be kept from the prisoner and brought to the attention of the base commander. This would eliminate attorney-client confidentiality.
The new prison rules say that defense attorneys must agree in writing to the monitoring as a condition of communication with their clients. In his email, Colwell told military commission defense lawyers that they should not sign the monitoring agreement, and if they already had signed, then they should immediately withdraw from the agreement. Citing the ethics codes that govern every branch of the military, Colwell wrote that following the agreement and revealing such information would be “in violation” of rules for professional conduct.
Col. Colwell joins an honorable line of Guantánamo military lawyers who have opposed superiors’ attempts — ostensibly in the name of security — to undermine longstanding rules necessary for a fair trial. In seeking to force military defense counsel to cast aside their professional ethical obligations of client confidentiality, the new rules fly in the face of American justice and tradition.
If we want to do justice — and be seen as doing it — these cases need to be in federal court where the rules are established, fair, and effective.
Learn more about detention: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
ACLU Studio: An Innocent Man in Guantanamo
03 weeks ago
Today marks 10 years since the first prisoners were sent to Guantánamo, making it the longest-standing war prison in U.S. history. Almost 800 men have passed through Guantánamo’s cells. To learn more about the ACLU’s call to close Guantánamo, visit www.aclu.org/closegitmo.
In 2001, Lakhdar Boumediene was falsely accused of being an al Qaeda operative while working for a humanitarian aid organization in Bosnia. Even though Bosnia’s highest court found no evidence against him, the U.S. government kidnapped Mr. Boumediene and sent him to Guantánamo, where he remained for 7 ½ years without charge or trial.
In a 2008 landmark Supreme Court decision that bears Mr. Boumediene’s name, the Court ruled that the constitutional right of habeas corpus applied to the men imprisoned at Guantánamo.
The Court ordered the government to give Mr. Boumediene and his fellow prisoners a meaningful opportunity in a civilian court to challenge their confinement. Five months later, a United States District Court in Washington heard the supposed evidence against Mr. Boumediene, found it utterly lacking and ordered him set free. In May 2009, Mr. Boumediene was released from Guantánamo and today, he lives in France with his wife and three children.
In the latest episode of ACLU Studio, ACLU National Security Project Senior Staff Attorney Zachary Katznelson talks with Mr. Boumediene about his experiences at Guantanamo and his reflections on the 10-year mark since the first prisoners were taken there.
Subscribe to our podcast feed in iTunes, or subscribe via RSS.
Learn more about detention: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Check Out Our "Close Gitmo" Activist Toolkit!
03 weeks ago
Tomorrow marks 10 years since the first prisoners were sent to the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, making it the longest-standing war prison in U.S. history.
To learn how you can amplify the call to close Guantánamo, once and for all, check out our new activist toolkit.
And in case you missed them, be sure to check out the “Gitmo by the Numbers” Infographic that we blogged about yesterday, and our blog post about Lakhdar Boumediene, an innocent man who was imprisoned at Guantánamo for seven and a half years without charge or trial. Tomorrow, we’ll feature a podcast conversation with Mr. Boumediene.
And be sure to let President Obama know that you’re counting on him to make good on his original promise to close Guantánamo and to shut down the un-American and illegal policies that it embodies.
Learn more about detention: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
INFOGRAPHIC: Guantanamo by the Numbers
04 weeks ago
This Wednesday, January 11 marks 10 years since the first prisoners were sent to Guantánamo. Over the last decade, the prison camp has become a symbol of injustice, abuse and disregard for the rule of law.
Since it opened, almost 800 men have passed through Guantánamo’s cells. Today, 171 men remain imprisoned there; 89 of those men have been unanimously cleared by intelligence and military officials, but remain at the prison camp.
A new ACLU infographic details this information, as well as other alarming facts and figures about Guantánamo. Click here to view the infographic.
In case you missed it, this weekend we wrote about Lakhdar Boumediene, an innocent man who was imprisoned at Guantánamo for seven and a half years without charge or trial. Later this week, we’ll feature a podcast conversation with Mr. Boumediene.
On this shameful anniversary, the ACLU renews our call for the prison camp to be shuttered. Join us: ask President Obama to close Guantánamo, once and for all.
Learn more about Guantánamo: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Injustice at Guantanamo: Past and Present
01 month ago
Image, left: Lakhdar and Yusuf (born 8/2010) – September 2011
This Wednesday marks 10 years since the prison at Guantánamo Bay opened. Today in The New York Times, Lakhdar Boumediene reflects on that anniversary and tells the harrowing tale of the seven and a half years he spent imprisoned in Guantánamo Bay. Mr. Boumediene always maintained his innocence, fought his case all the way to the Supreme Court in a case that bears his name, and ultimately won his freedom before a federal court in Washington. Today, he lives in France with his wife and three children.
Mr. Boumediene’s personal experience goes to the heart of what is wrong with Guantánamo. Originally from Algeria, he became a Bosnian citizen and worked there for the Red Crescent — the Muslim equivalent of the Red Cross. In October 2001, he was taken away from his wife and two daughters, arrested and falsely accused of being an al Qaeda operative. After three months of investigation, Bosnia’s highest court found there was no evidence against him, but instead of tasting freedom, he was kidnapped by the United States government, trussed up and flown to Guantanamo. There, he was brutally treated, beaten, subjected to extreme temperatures, forced to stay in painful positions for hours at a time, sleep deprived and beaten. His wife and young children were never allowed to visit and their letters were either rejected entirely or heavily censored. Mr. Boumediene went on hunger strike to peacefully protest his incarceration without charge. He was force-fed for two years.
 |
|
Boumediene in Paris weeks after his release from Guantánamo — Spring 2009
|
Still, somehow, Mr. Boumediene maintained the strength to fight for his freedom. In his historic 2008 case, Boumediene v. Bush, the Supreme Court ruled that prisoners like him must have a meaningful opportunity to challenge their confinement. Months later, a federal judge ruled that the U.S. had no credible evidence against Mr. Boumediene and ordered him set free. It turns out the government’s entire case relied on a single unnamed informant, whom U.S. Embassy officials in Bosnia had found untrustworthy at the time Mr. Boumediene was originally seized. Yet he remained imprisoned for seven and a half years. He was finally reunited with his family in France in May 2009.
“Some politicians say that people in Guantánamo are terrorists, but I have never been a terrorist. Had I been brought before a court when I was seized, my children’s lives would not have been torn apart, and my family would not have been thrown into poverty. It was only after the Supreme Court ordered the government to defend its actions before a federal judge that I was finally able to clear my name and be with them again….I’m told that my Supreme Court case is now read in law schools. Perhaps one day that will give me satisfaction, but so long as Guantánamo stays open and innocent men remain there, my thoughts will be with those left behind in that place of suffering and injustice.”
While Mr. Boumediene is finally free, over 170 men remain in Guantánamo, stuck in a limbo created by the politics of fear that surround anything to do with terrorism. The majority of Guantanamo prisoners have been unanimously cleared for release by the United States intelligence and military communities, but remain incarcerated, to the cost of over $70 million a year. The reason is politics and failure by all three branches of government to act to bring an end to Guantánamo. It is a lot easier to bang the drum of fear than to sound the call of justice.
 |
|
Taken the day before release, the only known photo of a prisoner and lawyer at Guantánamo – May 2009
|
I had the honor of interviewing Mr. Boumediene last week, and our conversation will be available online later this week as a podcast on the ACLU’s website. It is a unique opportunity to hear the words of a man who has actually experienced Guantánamo Bay from the inside, with all its failings and profound ugliness. We ask that you stand today with Mr. Boumediene and call upon the U.S. government to finally end the blight on our reputation — and our security — that is Guantánamo Bay. Join us in asking President Obama to keep his promise to close the prison camp by charging and trying the prisoners who are there, or sending them home.
Learn more about Guantánamo: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
Senators Demand the Military Lock Up American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They Define as Being Right Outside Your Window
02 months ago
While nearly all Americans head to family and friends to celebrate Thanksgiving, the Senate is gearing up for a vote on Monday or Tuesday that goes to the very heart of who we are as Americans. The Senate will be voting on a bill that will direct American military resources not at an enemy shooting at our military in a war zone, but at American citizens and other civilians far from any battlefield — even people in the United States itself.
Senators need to hear from you, on whether you think your front yard is part of a “battlefield” and if any president can send the military anywhere in the world to imprison civilians without charge or trial.
The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. Even Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) raised his concerns about the NDAA detention provisions during last night’s Republican debate. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself.
The worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial provision is in S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which will be on the Senate floor on Monday. The bill was drafted in secret by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) and passed in a closed-door committee meeting, without even a single hearing.
I know it sounds incredible. New powers to use the military worldwide, even within the United States? Hasn’t anyone told the Senate that Osama bin Laden is dead, that the president is pulling all of the combat troops out of Iraq and trying to figure out how to get combat troops out of Afghanistan too? And American citizens and people picked up on American or Canadian or British streets being sent to military prisons indefinitely without even being charged with a crime. Really? Does anyone think this is a good idea? And why now?
The answer on why now is nothing more than election season politics. The White House, the Secretary of Defense, and the Attorney General have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act are harmful and counterproductive. The White House has even threatened a veto. But Senate politics has propelled this bad legislation to the Senate floor.
But there is a way to stop this dangerous legislation. Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) is offering the Udall Amendment that will delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power. The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.
In support of this harmful bill, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) explained that the bill will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield” and people can be imprisoned without charge or trial “American citizen or not.” Another supporter, Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) also declared that the bill is needed because “America is part of the battlefield.”
The solution is the Udall Amendment; a way for the Senate to say no to indefinite detention without charge or trial anywhere in the world where any president decides to use the military. Instead of simply going along with a bill that was drafted in secret and is being jammed through the Senate, the Udall Amendment deletes the provisions and sets up an orderly review of detention power. It tries to take the politics out and put American values back in.
In response to proponents of the indefinite detention legislation who contend that the bill “applies to American citizens and designates the world as the battlefield,” and that the “heart of the issue is whether or not the United States is part of the battlefield,” Sen. Udall disagrees, and says that we can win this fight without worldwide war and worldwide indefinite detention.
The senators pushing the indefinite detention proposal have made their goals very clear that they want an okay for a worldwide military battlefield, that even extends to your hometown. That is an extreme position that will forever change our country.
Now is the time to stop this bad idea. Please urge your senators to vote YES on the Udall Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act.
Learn more about detention: Sign up for breaking news alerts, follow us on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.
ACLU Brings Cases of Immigration Detention Abuse to Light
03 months ago
Reports of abuse from immigration detention facilities are nothing new. In fact, due to private contractors’ lax attitude and lack of federal oversight, many experts are finding that cases of abuse are vastly underreported. Last week, the ACLU reported on 185 allegations of sexual abuse of undocumented female detainees held in federal detention facilities. While undocumented immigrants have consistently been denied the same protections afforded to U.S. citizens, the recent allegations of sexual abuse—which are starkly out of place in a civil society—need to be addressed, regardless of an individual’s immigration status.
Of the 185 reported allegations of sexual abuse uncovered through the Freedom of Information Act, 56 occurred in Texas, 17 in California, and 16 in Arizona. The ACLU filed a class-action lawsuit against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and detention guards on behalf of three immigrant women who were allegedly abused in Texas. The lawsuit will also argue against a Department of Justice’s decision that immigration detention facilities are not covered under the 2003 Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA).
Congress enacted PREA to set definitive standards to prevent, detect, and respond to sexual abuse to everyone in custody, which the immigrant population, despite citizenship status, clearly needs. ACLU attorneys aim to include immigration detention facilities in the acts standards.
While the ACLU is only litigating three cases, they argue that sexual abuse of immigrant detainees happens much more often than reported. According to an ACLU statement:
While the information gleaned from the documents likely does not represent the full scope of the problem given that sexual abuse is notoriously underreported, the documents nonetheless make clear that the sexual abuse of immigration detainees is not an isolated problem limited to a few rogue facilities or to a handful of bad-apple government contractors who staff some of the nation’s immigration jails.
Experts agree that “immigrants in detention are uniquely vulnerable to abuse—and those holding them in custody know it.” Texas ACLU staff attorney Mark Whitburn explained that immigrants new to the United States, many of whom do not speak English and do not know their rights, are too scared by the new circumstances to report violations. For these reasons, many attorneys believe that the 185 cases are “just the tip of the iceberg” in human rights violations against detainees.
So how does the United States plan to address such a widespread problem? Senator Durbin (D-IL) asked DHS Secretary Napolitano about reports of insufficient medical care and sexual abuse of immigrant detainees during a Senate hearing last week. Napolitano assured him that DHS is actively looking into facility standards and often re-contracts with detention businesses to ensure detainee safety. ICE announced has a zero tolerance policy for any inappropriate behavior and the ICE office of public affairs said that it will investigate all reported cases of misconduct.
While the ACLU and countless immigrant rights groups will continue to monitor DHS’s response to allegations of sexual abuse in immigration detention, DHS desperately needs to prove capable of the oversight and accountability necessary to prevent abuse. No matter where one’s opinion falls on the issue of immigration, we can all agree that every human being deserves basic protections from abuse.
Photo by neil conway.
Reid Detains Defense Bill over Problematic Detention Language
03 months ago
Earlier this month, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) made it clear that significant changes to the detention provisions in the Defense Authorization bill are in order. In a letter to Senators Carl Levin (D-MI) and John McCain (R-AZ), Reid told the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee to fix the detention provisions in "S.1253" – the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA), a must-pass piece of legislation. Reid’s letter states that he does not intend to bring the bill to the Senate floor until sections 1031, 1032, and 1033 are changed.
How bad must the detention provisions be that the Senate Majority Leader required them to be changed before he would allow the bill to move? Well, for starters, section 1031 goes beyond permissible detention under the laws of war, and is inconsistent with the rule of law and positions that the Obama administration has taken.
Earlier this week, we released a memo that explains the problems with Section 1031′s proposed detention language. Among the most troubling issues, Section 1031
- Would subject United States citizens and other persons present in the United States to Indefinite detention without charge or trial.
- Could cause naturalized United States citizens and immigrants to be sent to a foreign country, even in the absence of any wrongdoing.
- Does not require even an allegation that a detained person caused harm or threat of harm to the United States or U.S. citizens.
- Curtails protections provided by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 against using the military for domestic law enforcement.
- Provides no guidance for the Defense Department on how to pay for new prison facilities and the increase in uniformed personnel that would be required for it to carry out the vast new detention, arrest, and investigatory powers Section 1031 authorizes.
- Grants permanent, worldwide authority for the United States military to imprison indefinitely persons seized in any country in the world, which would cause significant harm to U.S. foreign policy and to the willingness of other countries to adhere to law-of-war detention norms.
Thanks to all who have taken action and have contacted their senators, urging them to ensure the problematic detention provisions are stripped from the NDAA before it gets to the senate floor. If you have not joined in this effort please click the link, take action, and let your voice be heard.