From: "Sumita
Bhandari" <sbhandari@napalc.org
As many have already heard, Attorney General John Ashcroft is asking
Congress for "a tightening" of the nation's anti-terrorism laws. A bill that would allow the AG to deport
based on the suspicion that a person may be willing to help a terrorist - a
fishy proposition just on its face, not
to mention the fact that none of this certification would be reviewable under already existing secret evidence laws, may
move rather soon, and immigrants across the country will suffer - please call
your Congressional reps and Senators to register your opposition to this bill
which seriously violates the already-eroded rights of
immigrants.
The bill has not yet been introduced, and is currently circulating on
the Hill in draft form. Ashcroft has
asked Congress to approve the bill this week, but Congress may not get to it
before next week. Here's some of the info I have received on the bill:
Again, the bill permits the Attorney General to certify that there is
"reason to believe" that a non-citizen, including a legal permanent
resident, "may have been involved" in terrorist activity, broadly
defined, or "may be a risk to the national security." The certification is unreviewable
in any court. Any person so certified is
liable to mandatory (and possibly indefinite) detention, and to summary
deportation. Legal challenges can only
be brought by habeas in the District Court of the District of Columbia (to detention decisions) or by petition for review
in the D.C. Circuit (for challenges to deportation orders). The statute makes clear Congress's intent not
to permit any
review (even by habeas) of the accuracy of the AG's certification.
We understand that if organizations or individuals have objections to
the bill, staff needs to hear them now -- i.e., before introduction -- because,
during the current crisis, members will be reluctant, to put it mildly, to be publically identified as voting against the bill or even as
substantially amending it.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR
IMMIGRATION-RELATED PROVISIONS, MOBILIZATION AGAINST TERRORISM ACT (September 18, 2001)
Certification of aliens
The proposal creates a provision
for the INS Commissioner, after consulting with the FBI director, to
"recommend" to the AG that an alien be "certified" as an
alien the INS "has reason to believe may further or facilitate acts of
terrorism" as broadly defined, "or any other activity that endangers
the national security of the United States (NOT defined).
Lack of Judicial Review
The proposal says that this
"recommendation [to certify] is not reviewable
by any court."
Expansion of Administrative
Removal to LPRs "certified"
The proposal amends the administrative (expedited)
removal section of the current INA section 238(b). Currently this section permits
administrative, non-immigration judge removal for non-lawful permanent
residents who were convicted of committing an aggravated felony. (This is not the expedited removal at the border, but rather, is a little-known
provision whereby INS agents, without any court supervision, order the removal
and remove non-LPRS who were convicted of aggravated felonies).
Section 238(b) would be expanded to permit expedited, administrative
removal for any alien, including LPRs, who were
"certified" under the provision described above. This administrative removal order
itself would not be judicially reviewable except by a
filing in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Conclusive Presumption of Removability for Aliens Certified
This proposal says that an alien
"certified" is "conclusively presumed to be removable from the United States."
Mandatory Detention of Aliens
"Certified"
This proposal says that when the
AG concurs with the recommendation to "certify," he shall take the
alien into custody and shall maintain that custody irrespective of any relief
from removal" the alien may have or may be granted "until the
Attorney General deems" that the alien may no longer be "certified."
Habeas Corpus and Judicial Review
This proposal expressly limits
all judicial review, including habeas corpus under 28 USC 2241, of decisions to
detain or remove persons "certified." Without regard to the place of
detention, judicial review of the detention of "suspected terrorists"
is available only by habeas corpus in the United States District Court in the District of Columbia, and only after issuance of a final order of
removal.
Violation of Entry Requirements -
Criminal Penalties
This proposal permits conviction
and a prison sentence for commission of a crime of violence OR for recklessly
operating a conveyance while eluding inspection or failing to stop, or "an
intentional violation of arrival, reporting, entry, or clearance
requirements" of numerous sections of the INA, specifically, 231, 232, and
234 through 238. A conviction under
this section is punishable by a five-year prison term.
Super Retroactivity
The proposal would apply to all aliens, no matter if they entered the US before
enactment or whether their conduct occurred before passage, and would apply to
all past, pending or future deportation, exclusion, removal or other
immigration proceedings.
--
IN THE NAME OF NATIONAL SECURITY?
The tragic events of September 11 must never happen again noone would argue with that. But instead of working to
resolve the crises that have fostered terrorist activity, the US government has embarked upon a crusade. The people
of Afghanistan will pay the biggest price in this war on
terrorism, but all our lives will be affected. As we mourn the dead of
September 11, let us also think carefully about what is being called for in
their name.
NON-CITIZENS WILL BE TARGETED
The proposed Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) would allow the Attorney General
to certify any non-citizen that the INS has reason to believe may
further or facilitate acts of terrorism& or any other activity that
endangers the national security of the United States. The government is not
required to charge such people with any crime, or to substantiate its reason to
believe in any way. All non-citizens certified under the ATA, including
lawful permanent residents, are subject to indefinite detention
without a court order. According to the ATA, the recommendation to certify is
not reviewable by any court. Once someone has
been certified under the proposed measures, s/he can be imprisoned or summarily
deported with very limited options for legal defence.
This proposal applies to all non-citizens, regardless of when they entered the
country and when they are alleged to have committed such acts.
The INS is moving ahead with
plans to institute a tracking system to monitor over half-a-million
international students already one of the most closely monitored populations in
the USA.
ALL AMERICANS WILL BE SUBJECT
TO INCREASED SURVEILLANCE
The government is proposing a vast expansion of its powers to order
wiretaps without legal scrutiny. This extends to use of the FBI s
Carnivore Internet-surveillance technology and the National Security Agency s
Echelon system for surveillance of electronic communications. Wired reports (9/12) that since September 11 many internet
service providers were quietly going along with the FBI s request to monitor
the Net with Carnivore.
The ATA would
allow the use in US courts of information gathered by foreign governments by
methods that violate US constitutional protections against unreasonable
search and seizure.
THE PROPOSED MEASURES WILL
UNDERMINE DEMOCRATIC FREEDOMS AND POLITICAL STABILITY IN OTHER NATIONS
The CIA is seeking the lifting of current restrictions on working with
human rights violators. As Robert Scheer commented in the Los Angeles Times (9/17): The CIA, which
originally helped train Osama bin Laden& will now have its powers expanded to do more of the
same.
The US government is considering lifting its official ban on assassinations.
The ATA gives tacit permission to
other governments to gather intelligence information by methods that violate US
constitutional protections. It may in fact put pressure on these governments to
produce such information.
THE WAR ON TERRORISM IS ALSO A WAR ON CIVIL
LIBERTIES!
This factsheet
was produced by the Alliance for a Secular and
Democratic South
Asia. The Alliance was formed in 1993 to combat rising religious
intolerance in South Asia and to campaign for peace and justice in the region. We are committed
to working towards a just, non-violent resolution of the crisis we are
currently living through. If you are interested in joining us in this work,
please call 617-983-3934 or e-mail us at secular@mit.edu.
--
From popserve
Tue Sep 18 12:58:51 2001 id 1353A5F1DF; Tue, 18 Sep 2001 13:58:40 -0400
(EDT)
From: Kamala Visweswaran
<kvis@mail.utexas.edu
Subject: [FOIL] For Fact Sheet on MATA:
MOBILIZATION AGAINST TERRORISM ACT
You may think this is unrelated to any noncitizens
you assist. Think again. It could
apply to anyone our government decides fits its expansive definition of terrorism and terrorist. As we frequently said about the secret evidence provisions, this could have
included Nelson Mandela,
Gerry Adams and those fighting against repressive regimes in
Central
America. They just start with the most vulnerable
populations. It is, unfortunately, worse than secret evidence,
allowing the INS (with help from the FBI) to unilaterally deport or detain indefinitely people
it (or the FBI) has "reason to believe" fit
their expansive terrorism definition. No concrete evidence required, no hearing with an IJ, no BIA
review. Federal review only in the DC
district court. Should this pass, presumably they could round up the folks the BIA and
the federal courts have ruled were not, in fact,
terrorists, despite FBI secret evidence that averred so.
They also wish to add a new crime: If you "disregard" or
"disobey" a border patrol officer you could be imprisoned for six months; this it
not limited to noncitizens.
I will let you know the response strategy
soon. Unfortunately, as you
can imagine, this is being fast-tracked.
To: foil-l@foil.org
Subject: [FOIL] For your
attention
Gautam Premnath spotted this on the
EducationGuardian.co.uk site and thought you should see it.
To see this story with its related links on the
EducationGuardian.co.uk site, go to http://education.guardian.co.uk
US
government to scrutinise foreign students
In
a bid to tighten security after the US
terrorist attacks, educators allow the government to keep a closer watch on
foreign students.
EducationGuardian.co.uk
Staff and agencies, Friday September 21 2001,
The Guardian
A motion has been put before the US Senate demanding that no new visas
be issued to overseas students after it was reported that Hani
Hanjour, one of the hijackers from the American
Airlines flight which hit the Pentagon, entered the United States on a student visa.
And in a move to further tighten the system, American universities will
let the government monitor all international students, as the country asks how
the terrorists who attacked New York and Washington could have learned to fly at US colleges.
The Association of International Educators has announced it will now
accept a tracking system that will give police information about students'
names, universities, dates of attendance and academic
majors.
In effect, all 515,000 foreign students attending American universities
will be under scrutiny from 2003.
"The time for debate on this matter is over, and the time to devise
a considered response to terrorism has arrived," a spokesperson for the AIE
said.
Since the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre, intelligence
officials have admitted that the government has been concerned for years about
foreign nationals being given the training required to make chemical,
biological and nuclear weapons.
10 years ago, there were already 10,000 overseas students being trained
"in advanced technologies in chemical, biological and nuclear
fields."
Although they recognise that there is now a
real concern about overseas students' motives, some university administrators
are defending the need for openness.
The dean of international programmes at Michigan State University said, "Universities have a special obligation
to be open institutions of creation and knowledge sharing, but we also have an
obligation not to do things that put ourselves and others at risk."
Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited
--
Know Your Rights information.
-- Partnership for Civil Justice
From the Partnership for Civil Justice, in Washington, D.C.
September 13, 2001
We are
profoundly saddened and grieved by the magnitude of loss suffered by so many on September 11th. Our deeply felt
condolences and sympathies are
extended to those who are mourning family and friends and to all who have been affected by these devastating
acts.
At this time, when pain and outrage are such strong and natural
reactions to massive death and destruction, we remind the
government that its
actions must be guided by the principles in the Constitution,
the legal foundation for the United States. The Bill of Rights serves our highest aspirations, and has applied in times of
conflict, unrest, war as well
as periods of relative calm.
There are reports around
the country of Arab and Muslim people being targeted and assaulted, including a man with a knife accosting a
vigil sponsored by the American Kurdish Information
Network, in its 192nd
day at Sheridan Circle, and slashing through their signs while
shouting obscenities and racial slurs. Regional police
channels in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday reflected that persons believed to be of
Arab descent were being
stopped by police. We urge all persons of
conscience to oppose all forms of racism and ethnic harassment, as is occurring in the aftermath of Tuesday’s events.
We
call on the government to stand behind and not sacrifice the
principles of the Constitution out of reaction or
opportunism. The government must
afford persons equal protection under law, must not engage in racial or ethnic profiling, and must not
sacrifice fundamental
democratic freedoms ostensibly in response to Tuesday’s acts. The
Partnership for Civil Justice has raised concerns
about, and has vigilantly opposed,
the apparent trend of both the District and federal governments to restrict fundamental civil
liberties, and to move towards increased surveillance and criminalization of political dissent,
under the guise of security.
In response to recent inquiries, we offer the following “Know
Your Rights” information in the hope that it will
be used in the prevention of racial and ethnic bigotry and government
repression of political
organizing. September 11th’s tragedy should not be
compounded by the repression of
democracy and liberties in the United States.
KNOW YOUR
RIGHTS!
What rights do I have?
The
Right to Advocate for Change. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the rights of groups and
individuals who advocate changes in laws, government practices, and even the form of government.
The
Right to Remain Silent. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution provides
that every person has the right to remain silent in the face of
questions posed by any police officer or government agent.
The Right to be Free
from "Unreasonable Searches and Seizures." The Fourth Amendment
is supposed to protect your privacy. Without a warrant, no government
agent is allowed to search your home or office and you
can refuse to let them in. Know, however, that it is easy for the
government to monitor your telephone calls, conversations in your office, home, car, or
meeting place, as well as mail. E-mail is particularly insecure. The
government has already begun stepping up its monitoring of
e-mails. Use of an encryption program such as PGP offers
relatively secure protection for e-mail communication.
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS CANNOT BE SUSPENDED EVEN DURING
A STATE OF EMERGENCY OR WARTIME.
What should I do if agents come
to question me?
1. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TALK TO THE
POLICE, FBI, INS, OR ANY OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENT OR INVESTIGATOR. You do not
have to talk to anyone: on the street, at your home or office, if you've been arrested, or even
if you're in jail.
Only a judge has the legal authority to order you to
answer questions.
2. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO LET POLICE
OR OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENTS INTO YOUR HOME OR OFFICE UNLESS THEY HAVE A SEARCH
WARRANT OR ARREST WARRANT. Demand to see the warrant. The warrant must specifically
describe the place to be searched and the things to be
seized. If they have a warrant, you cannot stop them from entering and searching, but you
should still tell them that you do not consent to a
search. This will limit them to the scope of the search authorized by the
warrant.
3. IF THEY DO PRESENT A WARRANT,
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO MONITOR THEIR SEARCH AND ACTIVITIES. You have
the right to observe what they do. You
have the right to ask them for their names and
titles. Take written
notes including their names, badge numbers, and what
agency they are from.
Have your friends who are present act as
witnesses. Give this
information to your lawyer.
A warrant does not give the government the right to question, nor does it obligate you to answer
questions.
4. IF THE POLICE OR FBI OR INS OR
ANYONE ELSE TRIES TO QUESTION YOU OR TRIES TO ENTER YOUR HOME WITHOUT A WARRANT, JUST
SAY NO! Police and other law enforcement agents are very skilled at getting
information from
people. Many people are afraid that if
they refuse to cooperate, it will appear as if
they have something to hide. Don't be
fooled. The police are allowed to (and do) lie to you. Although agents may seem nice and
pretend to be on your side, they are likely to be intent
on learning about the
habits, opinions, and affiliations of people not suspected of
wrongdoing, with the end goal of stopping political activity
with which the
government disagrees. Trying to answer agents' questions, or trying
to "educate them" about your cause can be
very dangerous. You can never
tell how a seemingly harmless bit of information that
you give them might be used
and misconstrued to hurt you or someone else.
5. IF YOU ARE STOPPED ON THE
STREET, ASK IF YOU ARE FREE TO GO. If you
are stopped by the police, ask them why. If they do not have a good
reason for stopping you, or if you find yourself chatting
for more than about a
minute, ask “Am I under arrest, or am I free to go.” If they do not state that you are under arrest, tell them that
you do not wish to continue speaking with them and that you are going to go about your
business. Then do so.
6. ANYTHING YOU SAY TO THE
POLICE, FBI, INS, ETC. WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU AND OTHERS. Once you've
been arrested, you cannot talk your way out of it! Don't
try to engage the cops in dialogue or respond to their accusations.
7. THE FBI MAY THREATEN YOU WITH
A GRAND JURY SUBPOENA IF YOU DON'T TALK TO THEM. They may give you a subpoena
anyway, so anything you tell them may permit them to ask you more detailed questions later. You may also have legal grounds to refuse to answer questions
before a grand jury. If you are given a grand jury subpoena, you
should call a lawyer immediately (see contact information at the end).
Tell your friends and movement groups about the subpoena and discuss how to respond. Do not try to deal with this alone.
8. IF YOU ARE NERVOUS ABOUT
SIMPLY REFUSING TO TALK, TELL THEM TO CONTACT YOUR LAWYER. They should stop trying to question you once
you announce your
desire to consult a lawyer. You do not
have to already have
one. Remember to get the name, agency,
and telephone number of any investigator who visits you.
How should I respond to threatening letters or calls?
If your home or office is broken into, or threats
have been made against you, your organization, or someone you work with, share this information
with everyone affected. Take immediate steps to
increase personal and office security. You should discuss with your organization and with a
lawyer whether and how to report such incidents to the
police and the advisability of
taking other legal action. If you decide to make a report, do not do so without a lawyer present.
What if I suspect surveillance? Prudence is the best course, no matter who you
suspect, or what the basis of your suspicion. Do not hesitate to confront suspected agents
politely, in public, with at least one other person
present, and inquire about their business. If the suspect declines to answer, he or she at
least now knows that you are aware of the surveillance. If you suspect government agents are monitoring you, or are harassing you,
report this as
described at the end of this packet.
What if I am not a citizen?
1. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO REVEAL YOUR
IMMIGRATION STATUS.
2. DO NOT TALK TO THE INS, EVEN
ON THE PHONE, before talking to an immigration lawyer. Many INS officers view
“enforcement,” meaning deporting people, as their primary job.
They do not believe that explaining immigration options is part of their job, and most will
readily admit this. (Noncitizens
who are victims of domestic abuse should speak with an expert in both immigration law and domestic
violence.) A noncitizen should always speak with an immigration law
expert before speaking to the INS either in person or by telephone.
3. KNOW AND ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS!
All noncitizens have the following rights,
regardless of your immigration status:
1. The right to speak to an attorney
before answering any questions or signing any documents;
2. The right to a hearing with an
Immigration Judge;
3. The right to have an attorney at that hearing and in any interview
with INS (however you do not have the right to a free,
government-paid lawyer); and
4. The right to request release from
detention, by paying a bond if necessary. Noncitizens must assert these rights. If you do not demand these rights, you can be deported without seeing either
an attorney or a judge. Leaving the U.S. in this way may have serious consequences for
your ability to later enter or to gain legal
immigration status in the U.S.
4. TALK TO AN IMMIGRATION
LAWYER BEFORE LEAVING THE U.S. Anyone not a U.S. citizen may be barred from coming back to the U.S. if they fall into certain categories of people barred from entering. This includes some lawful permanent residents and applicants for green
cards. Some noncitizens that have been in the U.S. without INS permission may be permanently barred from re-entering. In addition, some noncitizens that leave the US and return with INS permission may be
swiftly removed from the U.S. if they end up in immigration proceedings.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Partnership for Civil Justice In
Washington, DC, request assistance or report incidents of harassment to (202) 530-5630, or legal@justiceonline.org
National Lawyers Guild National office: (212) 627-2656,
www.nlg.org National Immigration Project: (617)
227-9727
First Amendment Foundation. A resource on civil liberties and the right
of political dissent.
(202) 529-4225.
National Immigration Law Center. Immigration law information is
available on www.nilc.org
American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
Report hate crimes and harassment
against Arab Americans and Muslims to (202) 244-2990.
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
Advocating for American-Muslim rights and against
acts of discrimination. (202) 488-8787
Lolan Sevilla
Program Coordinator
Speak Out is the country's only national not-for-profit organization that promotes progressive speakers and artists on campuses
and in communities nationwide. Committed
to social, political, cultural and economic justice, Speak Out encourages critical and imaginative thinking about domestic and international issues through
artistic and educational forums. Speak Out works with 200 speakers and
artists who represent the breadth of social movements as well as critically-acclaimed exhibits and films which inform and
empower young people to take action for positive social change. For a complete listing, send us your full mailing
address.
Speak Out Phone: (510) 601-0182
P.O. Box 99096
Fax: (510) 601-0183
Emeryville CA 94662
Email: lolan@speakoutnow.org
On the Web: http://www.speakoutnow.org
Purnima M. Manghnani, MPH
Research Associate
Harder + Company Community Research
444 DeHaro Street,
Suite 202
San Francisco, CA 94107
Tel. 415/522-5400
Fax. 415/522-5445
Voice. 415/273-5101
E-mail: pmanghnani@harderco.com
