The USA Since 9/11
Since 9/11 the U.S. government had enacted a number of major and far-reaching laws and taken administrative actions all in the name of national security and the ‘war on terror.’ The net results of these actions, when looked at as a total package, are that Americans’ basic freedoms have been eroded to the point that in many areas we are no longer ‘the land of the free’. In some cases, citizens of some unlikely nations - countries that our government criticizes and in some case sanctions for civil rights abuses – are better off legally than U.S. citizens.
Since this ‘war’ has been going on for 10 years now, I was taken aback when I started researching and saw these various laws and directives all in one pile in one place. I guess they get implemented piecemeal over the years, and it kind of sneaks up on you. I was also shocked that I had not heard of some of these measures and laws since some of them seem downright draconian in that they are law of our land – the land of the free! This experience drove me to do some more research.
Background:
In the decade since September 11, 2001, the U.S. has reduced civil liberties in the name of an expanded security state. The changes have come in a several forms, established in different ways and enacted in a variety of processes. Partially because of the piece-meal nature of the changes, the evolution has gone under the radar of the population at large, and any concerned interest in changes being made tends to be short lived. The very nature of these changes, and their collective impact on the society as a whole raises an important question. At what point does the reduction of individual rights in the U.S. change how we define ourselves? When do we fall from the pinnacle as THE Land of the Free?
Many countries have constitutions that purport to guarantee freedoms and rights. But their governments have broad discretion in denying those rights and there are few real avenues for challenges by citizens. And this is precisely the problems many see with some of the new laws now in place in the U.S. It is particularly alarming when you look at the changes all together – as a program of initiatives rather than each change or new initiative in isolation.
A Long And Growing List Of Security Measures:
The list of powers acquired by the U.S. government since 9/11 puts us in rather troubling company with some countries and regimes that we would normally not want to be associated with:
Assassination of U.S. Citizens: Pres. Obama has claimed, as did Bush before him, the right to order the killing of a U.S. citizen considered a terrorist or an abettor of terrorism. (Nigeria, Iran and Syria are routinely criticized by for such extrajudicial killings of ‘enemies of the state’)
Indefinite Detention: Under a law signed in November 2011, terrorism suspects are to be held by the military and the president has the authority to indefinitely detain citizens accused of terrorism. Note that an amendment that would have exempted U.S. citizens was killed in the senate and the Obama administration opposes efforts to challenge this authority in federal courts. (Both China and Cambodia have been singled out for harsh criticism by the U.S. for ‘prolonged detention’.)
Arbitrary Justice: The president now decides whether a person will receive a trial in the federal courts or by military tribunal. Note that this system that has been ridiculed around the world for lacking basic due process protections. (Egypt and China have been denounced for years for maintaining separate military justice systems for selected defendants.)
Warrantless Searches: The president may now order warrantless surveillance, including a new capability to force companies and organizations to “turn over information on citizens’ finances, communications and associations”. Under a new provision enacted by the Obama administration, the government can now use ‘national security letters’ to demand, without probable cause, that organizations turn over information on citizens. (Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are the only major countries that presently allow their governments such widespread discretionary surveillance.)
Secret Evidence: The government can use ‘secret evidence’ to detain individuals and, in fact, employs secret evidence in both federal and military courts. It also forces the dismissal of cases against the U.S. by simply filing declarations that the case would require the government to reveal classified information that would harm national security. Such claims are largely accepted by federal judges without question. In some case even legal opinions have been classified.
Secret Court: The government has increased the use of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has also expanded its secret warrants to include “individuals deemed to be abetting hostile foreign governments or organizations”. In 2011, Obama added a provision, when renewing these powers, allowing the secret searches of individuals who are not part of an identifiable terrorist group. The Obama administration has also asserted the right to ignore congressional limits on such surveillance. (Pakistan places national security outside of legislative control and in the hands of the military.)
Immunity From Judicial Review: Like Bush, Obama has successfully pushed for immunity for companies that assist in warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens, in effect blocking the ability of the citizenry to challenge the violation of privacy. (This is a method the Chinese have used for years to stamp out dissent).
Continual Monitoring Of Citizens: The Obama administration claims that it can use GPS devices to monitor every move of targeted U.S. citizens without securing any court order or review. (Saudi Arabia and Cuba are infamous for their widespread use of this surveillance methodology.)
Extraordinary Renditions: The U.S. government now has the ability to transfer both citizens and noncitizens to another country under the system known as “extraordinary rendition”. This system has been denounced worldwide for us moving our prisoners to other countries (in the past, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan) where purportedly torture methods are employed during interrogations (does the term ‘water boarding’ ring a bell?). The Obama administration says it will not allow such abuses used under Bush, but insists on retaining the right to order such transfers – including the transfer of U.S. citizens.
Where Does All Of This Leave Us?
Some politicians shrug and say the increased powers are merely a response to the times we live in. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R – S.C.) was quoted recently as saying, “Free speech is a great idea, but we’re in a war.” Even if this were the case, doesn’t such an approach assume that at some point terrorism will “surrender” and this “war” will end? Even more to the point, do Graham’s words assume that when that ‘end’ comes, all these oppressive laws and procedures will be repealed?
Other politicians rationalize that, while such powers may exist, it really comes down to how they are used. In my opinion, that is the liberal approach to this question – it was horrible when Bush had these powers, but they certainly can not denounce those powers residing with the much wiser Obama.
We should not overlook that an authoritarian government is usually defined as such not by the use of authoritarian powers, but by the ability – the authority – to use them. Jonathan Turley, Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University, explains it this way. “If a president can take away your freedom, or your lives on his own authority, all rights are little more than a discretionary grant subject to executive will.”
Back To Basics:
The framers of our Constitution lived under autocratic rule and understood the dangers first-hand. James Madison warned that we needed a system that did not depend on the good motives of those in power. “If men were angels, no government would be necessary,” he said.
Professor Turley also makes the point, “Since 9/11, we have created the very government the framers feared: a government with sweeping and largely unchecked powers resting on the hope that they will be used wisely.”
Given all this information I was really shocked when I ran across this bit of information during my research. The ‘indefinite detention’ provision in the defense authorization bill seemed to civil libertarians like a betrayal by Obama. So Obama publically stated his displeasure with that provision and was on record that he would veto any bill containing said provision. However, the senator who sponsored the bill disclosed on the Senate floor (evidently ‘under the radar’ of press coverage on the subject), that it was in fact the White House that asked for the removal of any exception for U.S. citizens from the indefinite detention program. Ok, dishonesty from politicians is nothing new. But, we are talking basic democratic freedoms here, not political games of some type.
Benjamin Franklin’s comments after the signing of the Constitution are more famous than Madison’s warnings, and more to this point. Franklin was confronted by a woman wanting to know, “Well, Doctor, what have we got – a republic or a monarchy?” He responded, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.”
But the real question from all of this is whether we are kidding ourselves. Let’s think about this! The President of the U.S. now has the legal authority to take the following actions on U.S. citizens:
1.) Order the assassination of someone ‘considered a terrorist’ without a trial,
2.) Indefinitely detain a citizen ‘accused’ of terrorism,
3.) Arbitrarily decide whether the citizen is tried by military tribunal or in the federal court system,
4.) Order warrantless surveillance, including a new capability to force companies and organizations to turn over information on citizens’ without probable cause,
5.) Utilize ‘secret evidence’ in trying a citizen and, in fact try them in ‘secret courts’,
6.) And most alarming of all – The president of the United States can transfer U.S. citizens to a detention center in another country under the system known as “extraordinary rendition”.
Is the U.S. now really “The Land of The Free?” I think the founding fathers have probably all gathered at a ‘Wailing Wall’ somewhere – or reluctantly washed their hands of the entire mess we have made of the ‘republic’ Benjamin Franklin had reference to.
Larry Matthews
Till Next Time. Pura Vida.