|
It's About Persistence
You Weren’t Meant to Hear This
Government Must Disclose Justification for 5-year Gag on Internet Provider
Students with Disabilities Face Corporal Punishment at Higher Rates
Public Housing Policy Tears Families Apart
The Enforced Disappearance of Mustafa Setmarian Nassar
When Kosher isn’t Kosher
THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THE ACLU!
Your involvement is the life-blood of our organization and makes possible all that we do to defend our most basic liberties.
The Enforced Disappearance of Mustafa Setmarian Nassar
In October 2005, Mustafa Setmarian Nassar, a Spanish citizen of Syrian origin and an influential Islamic theorist, was apprehended by agents of the Pakistani government and handed over to U.S. officials. Nassar’s wife and family have not heard from him since. They do not know where he is located; they do not know if he is alive or dead.
The ACLU, together with Alkarama for Human Rights and Reprieve sent a request to the U.N. Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, asking that the Working Group take up Mr. Nassar's case with the government of the United States and requested that the Working Group fully investigate the specific circumstances of Mr. Nassar's enforced disappearance at the hands of the U.S. government.
Similar requests were also sent to Martin Scheinin, U.N. Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, and Manfred Nowak, U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, on Mr. Nassar's behalf. These requests implicate the government of the United States as well as the governments of Pakistan, the United Kingdom, Syria and Spain who were all involved in some capacity in Mr. Nassar’s enforced disappearance as part of the "extraordinary rendition" program.
>> Learn more about Nassar’s case.
ACLU Lawsuit Charges Georgia Kosher Laws Are Unconstitutional
The State of Georgia’s Kosher Food Labeling Act mandates that any food labeled kosher in that state must be certified to be in accordance with "orthodox Hebrew religious rules and requirements."
Which isn’t a problem, unless you’re a Reform or Conservative or other, non-Orthodox Jew in Georgia.
The ACLU filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Kosher Food Labeling Act. By mandating that any food sold as kosher in the state of Georgia must meet the "Orthodox Hebrew religious rules and requirements," the challenged statute delegitimizes alternative interpretations of kosher adhered to in other Jewish communities.
The lawsuit was filed in Fulton County Superior Court on behalf of Shalom Lewis, rabbi of Congregation Etz Chaim in Cobb County who, as a conservative Jew, is unable to fulfill his rabbinical duties to supervise food establishments because his theological interpretation of the kosher laws differs from that of Orthodox Judaism.
"Having the state choose which rabbis are 'legitimate' and which are not puts many rabbis in a precarious position," said Debbie Seagraves, Executive Director of the ACLU of Georgia. "Congregations rely on their rabbis to provide the kind of religious guidance that this state law prohibits them from providing, unless they are Orthodox. The state of Georgia should not hold the power to define who is 'official' Jewish clergy. That is clearly a matter of faith, not the proper role of government."
According to the ACLU's lawsuit, the Kosher Food Labeling Act violates the religious liberty guarantees of both the U.S. and Georgia Constitutions by endorsing only "Orthodox Hebrew religious rules and requirements" and criminalizing the practices of the many people across the state who, while seeking kosher products, subscribe to interpretations of kosher that differ from those of Orthodox Jews.
>>Read the complaint.
Do you know somebody who would be interested in getting news about the ACLU and what we're doing to protect civil liberties? Help us spread the word about ACLU Online — forward this newsletter to a friend.
|
August 15, 2009
It's About Persistence
By Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director, ACLU
I hope you will take a few moments to read -- and watch! -- this edition of ACLU Online. It's all about what I love best about the ACLU and its supporters -- persistence. When we're fighting for what's right, we don't ever back down. Take the issues of torture and accountability. It's on the map right now for only one reason: you and the ACLU put it there and we refuse to let it go away.
TORTURED LOGIC -- the new video we released last week -- is the latest example of that persistence. It's our newest approach to keeping the pressure on for an independent investigation of the Bush torture program -- one that follows the evidence wherever it leads.
In this week's issue of ACLU Online, you can also read about how the ACLU is standing against injustice and fighting for the most vulnerable across the country. In Maryland, the ACLU is challenging a policy that bans friends and relatives from a housing project even if they are invited guests. And we just released a report about corporal punishment used against the most vulnerable in our schools -- the disabled. Injustices like these occur in every corner of the country and, with your help, the ACLU is there to stand up against them.
So, take a minute to read about how the ACLU is fighting against injustice -- and shore yourself up for more tough-minded ACLU action in the weeks ahead.
Keep standing strong.
You Weren’t Meant to Hear This
Oliver Stone, Rosie Perez, Philip Glass and a host of talented performers have come together to expose something our government tried to keep secret from the American people.
The Bush torture memos brought to light by the ACLU reveal a systematic program of torture so appalling that it would be a moral outrage to let those who authorized it escape a criminal investigation.
The chilling and clinical nature of these memos really sinks in when you hear them read aloud. These memos shamefully contorted the law to justify the crime of torture, and now it’s time for those responsible for this dark episode in our history to be held accountable to the American people.
The video’s release comes amid recent news reports suggesting that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is considering appointing a prosecutor to investigate torture. However, press reports indicate that Holder envisions an investigation narrow in scope that would focus only on low-level interrogators and contract employees.
There is ample evidence already in the public domain that the widespread and systemic torture of detainees was authorized at the highest levels of the Bush administration. We cannot move forward confidently knowing that the abuses of the past will not be repeated by future administrations as long as everyone knows that the powerful people who perpetrated and enabled these serious crimes got off scot free. The attorney general should appoint a special prosecutor who will follow the facts where they lead, whether it be to prisons overseas or to the halls of power at home.
>>Watch Tortured Logic now. Then send it to Attorney General Eric Holder and ask that he appoint an independent prosecutor.
Government Must Disclose Justification for 5-year Gag on Internet Provider
A federal court has ruled that the government must reveal portions of the evidence it has relied on to justify its continued gag order on an Internet service provider (ISP) that the FBI served with a national security letter (NSL) more than five years ago. The ruling, which requires the government to produce an unclassified summary of that evidence as well as a redacted version of a secret declaration it filed in June, came in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of the ISP.
Under a Patriot Act provision, the FBI uses NSLs to demand personal customer records from ISPs, financial institutions and credit companies without prior court approval. The FBI routinely imposes gag orders on NSL recipients which prohibit them from disclosing information about the FBI's demand for sensitive customer records.
"The government's reliance on completely secret evidence to justify this five-year-old, unconstitutional gag order undermined our John Doe client's right to a fair process," said Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. "The court was right to find that the government cannot continue to silence Doe based entirely on evidence we are not even allowed to see, let alone given a meaningful opportunity to refute."
Because the FBI imposed a gag order on the ISP, the lawsuit -- now called Doe v. Holder -- was initially filed under seal, and even today the ACLU is prohibited from disclosing its client's identity. The FBI continues to maintain the gag order even though the underlying investigation is more than five years old and even though the FBI abandoned its demand for records from the ISP over two years ago.
>>Learn more about the case.
Students With Disabilities Face Corporal Punishment at Higher Rates
In the 2006 -- 2007 school year, nearly a quarter of a million school children were subjected to corporal punishment in public schools. Impairing Education, a report released this week by the ACLU and Human Rights Watch, finds that students with disabilities -- who have a right to appropriate, inclusive educational programs that give them the opportunity to thrive -- are nonetheless subjected to this violent discipline at disproportionately high rates.
Corporal punishment -- from paddling, to throwing children into walls or floors -- is routine in public schools in many parts of the United States. Impairing Education documents many such cases. No student should be subjected to these abusive forms of discipline, but students with disabilities, who already face extra challenges, can be particularly vulnerable to physical or psychological harm from these punishments.
The use of corporal punishment on children with disabilities violates the right to freedom from cruel, degrading treatment and violence guaranteed to them under international human rights law. Children with disabilities have the right to an inclusive education, yet corporal punishment impinges on this right and creates barriers to their success.
No child should be hit, especially the most vulnerable.
>>Take Action: Stand with the ACLU against corporal punishment.
>>Learn about ways you can help end corporal punishment.
Public Housing Policy Tears Families Apart
What if the government told you your family couldn’t live together? That your father, or your son, or your boyfriend couldn’t even come over to your house to visit? That if he did visit you, he would be arrested, prosecuted for trespassing, possibly incarcerated, and you could be evicted?
That’s exactly what the city of Annapolis, MD, is telling its public housing residents.
The city’s public housing authority maintains a list of people -- currently over 500 -- who are banned from being on or near public housing property. The housing authority claims that all of these people are a danger to the community, but the fact is many of them have never been convicted or even charged with a crime, while others committed minor offenses years ago and have long since served their time. Still, they can’t get off the list.
The ACLU filed a lawsuit earlier this week to challenge the policy that unlawfully bans certain individuals from being on or near public housing in Annapolis, Maryland, even when they are invited guests of tenants. Under the policy, Annapolis public housing residents who allow banned friends and family members into their homes are subject to eviction.
The lawsuit, filed in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, charges that the banning policy violates the rights of public housing residents and their families and friends to free association, privacy and quiet enjoyment in their own homes.
"This policy doesn't promote public safety, it prevents parents from raising their children," said Ariela Migdal, a staff attorney with the ACLU Women's Rights Project. "Separating people from their families doesn't make public housing safer, it just aggravates social problems."
>>Learn more about the Annapolis public housing ban and the ACLU case challenging it.
Join us on...
|
Send Email