E-News for ACLU-AL Friends

National ACLU News

Freedom Under Fire: Dissent in Post-9/11 America

Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, some government officials, including local police, have gone to extraordinary lengths to squelch dissent wherever it has sprung up, drawing on a breathtaking array of tactics -- from censorship and surveillance to detention, denial of due process and excessive force.

In the tense times following 9/11, the ACLU launched the "Safe and Free" campaign to oppose actions that threaten our fundamental rights and freedoms without making us safer. Here are a few examples of our work to protect dissent:

• In the years following 9/11, ACLU attorneys around the country have provided direct representation to many individuals and organizations targeted for exercising their First Amendment right to criticize the government.
• The ACLU has documented examples that the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) investigate community groups who are clearly not involved in terrorism. ACLU affiliates and community groups across the country have filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, seeking the actual FBI files of the targeted groups or individuals as well as information about how the JTTFs are funded. Our clients include religious and labor groups and groups working for fair trade, nuclear disarmament, human rights, Native American rights, animal rights and social justice.
• The U.S. is also denying visas to foreign nationals whose political views the government disfavors. Once used to bar suspected Communists from entering the country, the practice of “ideological exclusion” has been resurrected by the Patriot Act. Ideological exclusion violates Americans’ First Amendment right to hear constitutionally protected speech by denying foreign scholars, artists, politicians and others entry to the U.S.

We are challenging ideological exclusion in two cases. One case challenges the exclusion of Swiss professor and leading Muslim scholar, Tariq Ramadan; the other challenges the exclusion of Adam Habib. The ACLU represents the academic, religious and professional organizations that had invited these scholars to speak, including the American Academy of Religion, the American Association of University Professors and the American Sociological Association. Department of Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice are named as defendants in the suits.

ACLU of Alabama News

PRESS RELEASE: University of Alabama Anti-War Protestors Acquitted; ACLU Celebrates Free Speech Victory

TUSCALOOSA – Tuscaloosa County District Court Judge Joel Chandler today (May 2) acquitted four anti-war protestors charged with disorderly conduct for putting on a skit in the Ferguson Center on the University of Alabama campus on February 29.

The skit, aimed at bringing attention to the plight of Iraqi civilians caught up in the war, lasted less than two minutes and ended with audience applause. No one was harmed. Witnesses say that the skit was obviously street theater and that no one seemed panicked or concerned for their personal safety during the performance. Following the event, Tim Hebson, Dean of Students, released a statement saying “no one was in danger at any time.”

After the skit, four of the participants – two University of Alabama students, an Iraq war veteran and a student from the University of North Carolina – were detained by campus police and questioned for approximately four hours. They were subsequently led away in handcuffs and taken to the Tuscaloosa County Jail where they were charged. The two University of Alabama students also face charges by the University that they violated the Code of Student Conduct.

“We cannot allow the disorderly conduct statute to be read so broadly as to make it a crime to engage in free speech. This is especially true at a time when freedom of expression is so critical to our democracy,” stated Allison Neal, Staff Attorney for the ACLU of Alabama.

The ACLU-AL and the Alabama Chapter of National Lawyers Guild (NLG) represented the protestors and will continue to represent the Alabama students in their University judicial proceedings. The students contend that a number of the provisions in the code of conduct are vague and subjective, and therefore could punish speech that is protected by the First Amendment. For example, the students were charged with “disruption or obstruction of teaching, research, administration, disciplinary proceedings, or other University activities, including its public-service functions, whether on or off-campus, and other authorized non-University activities which occur on University premises.” The potential sanctions faced by the students range from a written warning to permanent expulsion.

“There are very important First Amendment principles at stake,” said staff attorney Allison Neal. “Not only were these students’ free speech rights under attack, but such actions by a university can have a chilling effect on all students’ right to free speech.