ACLU of Ohio Associate General Counsel speaks out about a recent editorial critical of the organization’s recent inquiry into the use of drones for targeted killings in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The syndicated story criticizing the ACLU’s request for documents relating to the federal government’s use of drones was grossly off-base (“ACLU has strayed far from its mission,” February 19, 2010.)

The ACLU has had a long history of ensuring government officials do not operate in the shadows and are subject to full accountability from the American people.

The right to know is perhaps one of the most fundamental rights granted under the Constitution. In order for democracy to function, the people must have unfettered access to information about government programs, policies and actions. Without consistent oversight from the people, there is a greater chance of corruption, wrongdoing or negligence.

In addition to advocating for full government transparency, the ACLU continues to address a variety of civil liberties issues in the courts, legislature and community.

Recently, the ACLU filed a legal brief in the Ohio Supreme Court arguing that cell phones cannot be randomly searched by police officers. The Court made a landmark ruling in the ACLU’s favor in late December 2009.

As the nation’s oldest civil liberties organization, the ACLU has long been on the forefront in the fight for fairness, privacy and accountability. While the nation, courts, and lawmakers may change over the years, the fundamental rights we defend do not.

Karyn Justice

Associate General Counsel

American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio

The Blade discusses some of the great work done by the ACLU’s National Security Project in uncovering some of the government’s abuses in the war on terror.

THE release by the Department of Defense of the names of 645 of the estimated 750 detainees at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan is a step in the right direction by the administration of President Obama.

The fate of the hundreds of prisoners at the U.S. Naval Air Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the U.S. Air Force Base at Bagram, near the Afghanistan capital of Kabul, is a loose end that the United States must tie up, certainly at Bagram before withdrawing its forces from Afghanistan.

It is important because in both cases the United States has departed from its path of justice and human rights by holding prisoners at these sites for long periods, in some cases more than eight years, without trial or access to defense counsel. At Bagram, until this release of names, some prisoners were held in anonymity, without their families or anyone else except U.S. and possibly Afghan officials aware of their presence in the prison.

The Department of Defense released the names not out of a sense of justice but as a result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU represents some of the Bagram prisoners and had demanded from the U.S. government information about the prisoners’ conditions of detention, including the rules and regulations of the prison.

The ACLU also sought information about how long prisoners had been held and where and under what circumstances they had been captured. Most are believed to be Afghans captured in Afghanistan, but some are likely to be citizens of other countries, perhaps captured elsewhere and transferred to Bagram. Two prisoners died in Bagram in 2002, prompting charges of abusive treatment.

Another shocking story comes out about the federal government’s ineffective, error-ridden terrorist watch lists.

The Transportation Security Administration, under scrutiny after last month’s bombing attempt, has on its Web site a “mythbuster” that tries to reassure the public.

Myth: The No-Fly list includes an 8-year-old boy.

Buster: No 8-year-old is on a T.S.A. watch list.

“Meet Mikey Hicks,” said Najlah Feanny Hicks, introducing her 8-year-old son, a New Jersey Cub Scout and frequent traveler who has seldom boarded a plane without a hassle because he shares the name of a suspicious person. “It’s not a myth.”

Invasive and possibly ineffective body scanners will be implemented soon in Columbus and several other airports around the country.

If you plan to fly from Port Columbus when the weather warms up, there’s a good chance you’ll have to step into a full-body scanner first.

The airport expects to receive at least two full-body scanners by late spring or early summer to enhance its security screenings.

Airport officials are awaiting final confirmation and further details from the Transportation Security Administration, which will pay for and operate the scanners. Columbus had been put on a list by the TSA last year to receive the full-body scanners, said Rod Borden, chief operating officer of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority.

TSA spokesman Jon Allen said the 150 body scanners the TSA has already secured are manufactured by Rapiscan and cost $160,000 apiece. They will be distributed across the country in coming months.

A student columnist at OSU’s Lantern makes strong points about how the U.S. should be handing terroist threats and improving security.

The war on terrorism is changing the world we live in at an astonishing pace. After the recent developments with the so-called “underwear bomber” and a double agent that took the lives of eight high-level CIA operatives in Afghanistan, authorities in the United States are scrambling to beef up security at home and abroad.

In the end, strengthening the Patriot Act and concocting all sorts of new measures will not ensure peace of mind for the American people. We are playing a high stakes game where civil liberties are beginning to play second fiddle to national security.

At first glance, this would seem like a marvelous idea. Let’s put armed guards in every terminal sporting camouflaged fatigues and grenade-launching M-16 machine guns, just like in the good old days. While we are at it, let’s put up 15-foot walls around our homes, complete with barbed wire and an observation deck with a guy dressed in medieval garb brandishing a bow with flaming arrows.

Some would argue that we have no other choice but to become more like a “police state,” akin to some horrible nightmare from George Orwell’s novel “1984.” This is a dangerous slippery slope and before you know it we might be living in a world where Big Brother constantly watches us, tells us what to think and how to act. If anything, we are well on our way.

The Blade discusses recent revelations about the Transportations Security Administration’s practices in the wake of the 9/11 attacks and War on Terror.

AFTER 19 hijackers commandeered four airliners with box cutters and crashed three of them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001, improving security at U.S. airports became a top government priority. The problem: It sometimes seems as if a modern-day version of the Keystone Kops was put in charge of the operation.

Further questions about the competence at the federal Transportation Security Administration have been raised by reports that the agency posted closely guarded secrets about passenger screening practices online for the entire world to peruse.

An old version of a 93-page TSA operating manual put on the Internet, inadvertently, officials say, spells out procedures and technical details for screening operations, metal detectors, and explosive detection systems at U.S. airports.

A new chart outlines several of the proposed changes to the USA Patriot Act set to be renewed by the end of 2009.

Confused by all the proposed changes to the Patriot Act ricocheting through the Capitol? The Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) has put together a handy chart comparing the current law with the various amendments in the House and Senate.

The chart compares proposed amendments (.pdf) to National Security Letters (NSLs) and the so-called “lone wolf” provisions of the Patriot Act. The proposals have only been passed by the judiciary committees, and face further amendments before they hit the full House and Senate for votes.

According to Gregory Nojeim, CDT’s director of project on freedom, security and technology, although neither of the current proposals goes far enough in fixing all of the problems that civil libertarians find in the Patriot Act, they do show improvements.

The Dispatch discusses why it’s important the 9/11 detainees are being tried in a criminal court in New York.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has decided that five Guantanamo Bay detainees who are charged with plotting the 9/11 terrorism attacks will have their day in court in the federal courthouse in lower Manhattan, blocks from where 2,751 people perished in the collapse of the World Trade Center.

Critics, from everyday people to Republican lawmakers, have come up with all sorts of reasons not to allow this civilian trial to be conducted in New York City: It will pose too much of a safety risk, both for the site and for the judge and jurors. It will give terrorist boss Khalid Sheik Mohammed a platform to spew his anti-American rhetoric. The trial will turn into an indictment of the Bush administration and its terror-fighting tactics.

And the worst claim of all: There’s no way that these men will get a fair trial in New York. One group says they’re sure to be convicted, no matter how poor the case against them, while another group claims Mohammed and his cohorts are certain to go free on some legal technicality.

Have Americans really become so craven after 9/11? Has their distrust in the legal system become insurmountable?

More stories of U.S. anti-terror laws unfairly affecting those who have no connection to terrorists.

For months, Somalis living in Columbus have complained that it has become increasingly difficult to send money home to family members because of banking-industry fears that the funds could end up with terrorists.

Huntington, JPMorgan Chase and Charter One are among the banks that have closed accounts set up by remittance companies, said Omar Tarazi, a local lawyer who has worked with the Somali American Chamber of Commerce and several remittance companies.

Somali leaders said remittances that refugees send home are a lifeline to families and friends struggling in the war-torn African nation. It has few banks, so remittance companies are crucial to sending money home.

The leaders say banks fear being held liable if authorities discover that the money is funding extremists. The Patriot Act requires due diligence of banks in making sure that funds are tracked.

The Lima News discusses the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and the War on Terror.

[…]

One of those examples lies 90 miles off the shore of Florida. The military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, continues to be a black eye for our country around the world. President Barack Obama promised during last year’s campaign to close the military prison, but now he has found it not so easy to do.

It should be unimaginable that a country that prides itself on the rule of law has held people suspected of being terrorists — and in some cases, known not to be — based only on belief. Yes, our country was attacked. Yes, dangerous people still mean to do us harm. But forgetting our principles, giving up our way of life, lets the terrorists win, as Bush would have put it.

And another is going on here in this country. Shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Congress rushed through the Patriot Act. It’s a law most commonly used for drug offenses, but Bush got members of Congress to pass without reading an act Republicans rightly refused to pass for President Bill Clinton.

But the nation is at war, right? So what rights to privacy should Americans expect to have? The same ones the U.S. Constitution says we have, actually.

The Blade reasons that the government is right to investigate reported use of torture during CIA investigations.

THE appointment by Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., of a federal prosecutor to look into reports of CIA torture of prisoners was controversial but necessary.

A fundamental argument against such a move was that the new administration of President Obama should focus on the problems of the present and future rather than dig up the bones of the more odious deeds of eight years of President George W. Bush. In general, Mr. Obama has done that.

Another case against the probe is concern that it may set off bureaucratic combat or, more seriously, inflame the sort of noncooperation between the CIA and the Justice Department, which includes the FBI, that contributed to the failure of U.S. agencies to read and share intelligence that could have headed off the tragic 9/11 attacks.

The ABJ makes a compelling case for looking at all levels of the chain of command who decided to use torture techniques.

Eric Holder explained that ”as attorney general, my duty is to examine the facts and follow the law.” He offered the context on Monday as part of selecting John Durham, a veteran federal prosecutor in Connecticut, to look into whether a full criminal investigation should be launched into the brutal treatment of terrorism suspects by CIA employees and contractors. What Holder didn’t emphasize is that prosecutors also have much discretion, especially in these instances, when broader elements of public policy are involved, officials at the lower rungs taking their cues from higher-ups.

The attorney general chose well in tapping Durham, who already has been investigating the CIA’s destruction of interrogation videotapes. Durham is positioned to move quickly.

Make no mistake, he will find appalling behavior. On Monday, the Justice Department released a long-secret report chronicling abuses inside CIA overseas prisons. The new details included interrogators staging mock executions, using a handgun and power drill for intimidation and blowing smoke into prisoners’ faces to make them vomit. The report relays how a CIA interrogator grabbed a prisoner’s neck, squeezing the carotid artery until he began to faint.

Critics and supporters of the use of torture techniques debate whether the U.S. has beneifted from it’s use.

An internal CIA report made public Monday says the agency’s heavily criticized interrogation techniques led to the 2003 arrest of a Columbus truck driver who eventually pleaded guilty to providing assistance to al-Qaida.

The 2004 report, released after an order by a federal judge, asserted that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attack, provided CIA interrogators with information that “led to the investigation and prosecution” of Iyman Faris, a native of Pakistan who was living in Columbus.

[…]

But Carrie Davis, staff counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, said, “There have been studies galore showing that these so-called enhanced interrogation techniques — or torture — are ineffective.

“Generally, the problem is there is no way to verify the accuracy of this information and when somebody is being tortured they’re going to say anything. So there is a real question of accuracy.”

A federal court judge in Toledo ruled that a local charity’s assets were wrongfully frozen when the U.S. government placed them on a terrorist list without any due process or means to challenge the labeling.

The U.S. government violated the constitutional rights of a local Muslim charity when it froze its financial assets in 2006 and prevented it from adequately defending itself against allegations of ties to terrorism, a federal judge in Toledo has ruled.

Judge James Carr released a 100-page order Tuesday that favored arguments by KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian Development Inc., which sued the government in October.

The ruling, which attorneys have called unprecedented, agreed with the organization’s assertions that KindHearts was denied due process and subjected to the unlawful seizure of its property.

Clevleand’s Hopkins Airport will be one of a few airports to test invasive full body scanners as part of its new security program.

The next time you go through airport security at Hopkins, you might be asked to go through a whole body image scan…that can see beneath your clothes. The machines seem like something out of science fiction.

You go into a little booth and stand still. In another room, a Transportation Security Administration official gets a picture of your body — It’s kind of a cross between an X-ray and a nude photo……revealing any metallic or non-metallic threats.

Use of the machines here is just a test for the next 30-60 days. After that, the TSA will look at how well they worked, and how passengers reacted. They’re also optional–you can still get the traditional pat-down if you’d prefer.