The FBI’s terrorism watch list violates the Constitution, federal judge says
A federal judge ruled Wednesday that an FBI watch list of more than 1 million “known or suspected terrorists” violates the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens in the database.
The decision from U.S. District Judge Anthony J. Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia in favor of 23 Muslim Americans who sued over their inclusion in the Terrorist Screening Database found that the watch list infringes on their constitutional right to due process. Trenga noted that the list restricts their ability to fly and engage in everyday activities and backed the plaintiffs’ concerns that they were flagged secretly and without a clear methodology.
“There is no evidence, or contention, that any of these plaintiffs satisfy the definition of a ‘known terrorist,’ ” wrote Trenga, adding that even harmless conduct could result in someone being labeled as a “suspected terrorist” on the watch list.
This isn’t going to trickle down to us though because whereas these people were denied due process we received our due process in our trial court.
If this goes farther the challenge is going to be on due process grounds not on anything else. I admit the decision contains some encouraging language, the Crux of the issue is that these people were put on a list without having done anything at all. Whereas we were all convicted, or signed a plea.
There are many people who were added to the sex offender registry many years after they were convicted and completed their sentence. And there are many more who have had the duration of their registration extended or had other restrictions added without due process by legislative fiat.
And while people listed on the SOR have (mostly) been convicted of a crime, I was under the impression that the rationale behind the registry was not punitive. Certainly, there is no evidence that people on the list pose any extraordinary risk to the public or are likely to commit another similar crime in the future.
Maybe someone could make the connection with the registry or IML. Regardless, this seems like a good decision.
C
I agree it’s probably not going to trickle down. But by them putting everyone they can on the list like is currently being done with no evaluation as to whether this individual is a threat to society it’s really no different than what was done to these muslins.
I read an article in the local news 20 yrs. ago about someone put on the registry for spanking his kids. He was going through a divorce , his wife filed the charges and able to get child abuse charges which put him on the registry. I could list many more similar or even less of a threat to society but listed right along with the worst with QPublic not being able to know the difference from the registry. So how is it really different from this case.
We did not in fact receive our due process, you are not thinking. We had due process FOR what the laws were when we went to court, we got NO due process on made up legislation that came years and decades after our sentences were over. Heck I got off probation before my current lawyer was even born. ( hired a lawyer to look over my chances of a challenge ) .
I’m with you guys, it would be super if this did set some useful precedent for us, but we already know that the courts see our due process as being fulfilled at trial and that “registration isn’t a punishment.”
There are plenty of judges (especially Federal ones who don’t have to worry about being elected) that are able to see between the lines on what these laws actually do. But remember, the Supreme Court gets to cherry pick what it feels are the most crucial constitutional problems in any case that gets put before them, and unfortunately for us the problem in this case is due process, the pain and suffering the law causes is only permissible with sufficient due process, and unfortunately they see us as having received ours.
If anyone finds an argument that the court will buy otherwise I’ll pledge a year of my salary for the sustainer on that one but so far it hasn’t happened, and this case isn’t going to be the one either.
At most all you can appreciate in this decision is the empathic joy that lots of laws suck for lots of people, and sometimes we get them fixed.
Do the arguments against the watch and no fly list sound irily familiar to another unconstitutional list the government has created
Obviously this is good because hopefully people will see that the registry is a huge waste of time and manpower in conjunction with illegal. But let’s be realistic, the laws are getting worse. Some states you can’t live with your kids, Florida has an upcoming bill to allow civil suits. My charge is from 2007. I did prison and probation like so many others with no issues. I’ve gone to college, bought a house. I’ve done the right thing as often as possible to be a good person. No one cares because all they think it’s I’m going to snatch some kid. I just want a chance to see my kids graduate from high school. To go watch my son play in concert band. Go to a park with my toddler. Normal stuff that won’t hurt anyone, except it hurts my kids because I can’t. Hurt me, I don’t care. I beat myself up this and stuff from the army constantly. Eventually this will kill me by stress or something else. What choice do we really have but to sit back, and hope the fac can save me before society kills me.
“An individual’s placement into the [watch list] does not require any evidence that the person engaged in criminal activity, committed a crime, or will commit a crime in the future,” the judge wrote, “and individuals who have been acquitted of a terrorism-related crime may still be listed.”
Sounds familiar….
First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
It stands to reason then that keeping US citizens in detention facilities indefinitely of stamping passports or keeping public sec offender registries also violates due process.
So we can’t violate the rights of a person who could be a terrorist but we can our own citizens.
“Trenga noted that the list restricts their ability to fly and engage in everyday activities”
Wow, that would be terrible if that happened to us. Oh wait….
Replace the words Muslim or Terrorist watch list and change it to Registered offenders. Almost everything they are saying, keeping us from flying, traveling, or even crossing the county line without permission or a re-registration. Again for those who are going to have a fit, I am not comparing us to People of the Muslim faith, I am saying no other class of people charged with a crime have many if any restrictions on them. A person who kills 5 people and then gets released and has no probation faces no restrictions other than what all ex felons face. No voting, no owning a weapon, cannot work at certain jobs etc. They can live anywhere they want, other than if someone runs a background check and doesn’t want them. I would rather live next to 1000 sex offenders than 1 person who killed their entire family. I get tired of my neighbors slowing down and looking at my house as they pass by like they are expecting me to be standing on the front porch having my way with an under age person.
“The Council on American-Islamic Relations hailed the ruling as a “complete victory.” In a statement, Nihad Awad, its executive director, said the groupʼs “legal team has finally brought an end to the secretive watchlist, which is effectively a [MUSLIM REGISTRY] created in the wake of the widespread Islamophobia of the early 2000s.”‘
This…in the article. You’re right.
Glad to see I’m not the only one here that is beyond frustrated. The laws where I’m at changed after I was sentenced. Before I had a chance to de-register after 20 years (this month is my 20th year), but they changed the law. What ever happened to at minimum the grandfather rules?
I have been beyond fortunate in my situation and state as I don’t feel any restrictions locally (no kids to worry about either). Part of being fortunate means I have the financial ability to travel – but given the IML that’s damn near out of the question. I sure as heck am not setting foot into the state of Florida.
To say I’m angry is an understatement.
but blacklisting Citizens based on a 20 plus year old accusation that is not related to anything is constitutional ? Preventing citizens from marital relationships and quality time with their children and families for 20 year old criminal accusations that are completely non related and not of a child endangerment or trafficking nature is constitutional ? court is ran by imbecility at its worst. the prejudices are overwhelming.
There is no scientific basis for keeping people with sex offenses on registries if they’ve been proven to have lower recidivism rates than nearly every other type of offense which is not required to register. It’s basic logic really. We just need a highly competent lawyer to articulate this in front of the right judge on the right case. Trying to prove such a point by defending a repeat offender would be a terrible opportunity.
Sure wish I was only a terrorist of a murderer instead of a horrible felon that met a date at a bar for his 21st birthday 24 years ago.. Feel safer already..