Civil Liberties

By NY Times & Rabbi David Senter

[Rabbi Senter's comments on this case come after the NYT article.] ]

By TINA KELLEY and ELIZABETH DWOSKIN
New York Times April 24, 2008

PATERSON, N.J. — For a dozen years, Mohammad Qatanani has supported the members of the Islamic Center of Passaic County by speaking at funerals, hashing out ethical dilemmas and sometimes opening his home to domestic-violence victims at a moment’s notice.

Mohammad Qatanani, imam of the Islamic Center of Passaic County, faces possible deportation in a dispute over his application for permanent residency.

But now Dr. Qatanani, 44, the imam of the mosque here, requires the support of the members: he has been barred by federal immigration authorities from renewing his driver’s license, and must call on friends to ferry him to hospitals for visits with the sick among his flock. There are fund-raisers for him at the mosque. And after Friday prayers, the hugs the men give him seem to last extra long.

The Shalom Center was invited to join in an Amicus (friend of the court) brief in the case of Yousuf v. Samantar, involving whether survivors of torture by other governments can, in the US, sue officials of those governments as provided in US law. We agreed to join in the Amicus brief, along with other religious groups, and submitted an explanation of our stake in supporting the argument on appeal. For our explanation, see below. First, the essence of the argument we support is this:

When Congress passed the Torture Victim Protection Act (“TVPA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1350 note (2000), it intended to allow survivors of torture to sue former officials of foreign governments in U.S. courts, on the understanding that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1602-1611 (2000), would not bar suits against former officials accused of torture.

Dear Friends,

On Sunday December 10, International Human Rights Day , 200 rabbis / rabbinical students gathered in the first-ever conference on Judaism and Human Rights, brought together by Rabbis for Human Rights / North America. Let me share with you a few glimpses into that meeting -- five moments:

1) Sister Dianna Ortiz, an American Catholic nun who went to Guatemala to serve the poor, was kidnapped in 1989 by a unit of the Guatemalan military commanded by a US CIA officer. She was tortured and repeatedly gang-raped. Her own hands were used by her torturers to torture a friend of hers. She survived; her friends and co-workers were tortured to death.

SOME QUESTIONS TO ASK OURSELVES:

Can human rights be effectively protected when power is being exercised from the top down without public accountability or challenge, and when the society – Israeli or American – is defined by the culture and institutions of permanent war?

Specifically, in our situation today in the US, is it possible to prevent --

the use of torture;

the indefinite imprisonment of various kinds of captives (including US citizens and immigrants) with no counsel, charges, trials, or any other redress;

the warrantless searching and surveillance of millions of citizens;

SOME QUESTIONS TO ASK OURSELVES:
ARE HUMAN RIGHTS ACTUALLY PROTECTED
IF WE CONFINE OUR WORK TO "HUMAN RIGHTS"?

Can human rights be effectively protected when power is being exercised from the top down without public accountability or challenge, and when the society – Israeli or American – is defined by the culture and institutions of permanent war?

Specifically, in our situation today in the US, is it possible to prevent --

the use of torture;

the indefinite imprisonment of various kinds of captives (including US citizens and immigrants) with no counsel, charges, trials, or any other redress;

THE SHALOM CENTER
A Prophetic Voice in Jewish, Multireligious, and American Life
6711 Lincoln Drive, Philadelphia PA 19119
215/844-8494 www.shalomctr.org office@shalomctr.org

NOVEMBER 1 , 2006

The Honorable xxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Member of Congress [or
United States Senator]

Dear Congressman/ woman/ Senator:

I am transmitting to you a set of petitions signed by Philadelphians who gathered at the Federal Courthouse in Philadelphia on the day President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act.

We gathered to mourn the signing of the Act, which is a betrayal of the principles of the Constitution and of several of its specific passages.

By Kate Monaghan
CNSNews.com Correspondent
October 17, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - President Bush Tuesday signed into law the much contested Military Commissions Act of 2006, the law aimed at defining how suspects in the war against terrorism will be interrogated and prosecuted. Despite much criticism, the president insisted that the act would provide a just response to those accused of terrorism.

"These military commissions will provide a fair trial in which the accused are presumed innocent, have access to an attorney and can hear all the evidence against them," said Bush.

"These military commissions are lawful, they are fair and they are necessary," he added.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO. 04-60001-CR-COOKE/BROWN(s)(s)(s)(s)(s)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

vs.

JOSE PADILLA,
Defendant,
____________________________________/
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR OUTRAGEOUS GOVERNMENT CONDUCT
Mr. Jose Padilla, through undersigned counsel, moves this Court to dismiss the
indictment based on outrageous government conduct and in support thereof states:
BACKGROUND
Mr. Padilla was arrested on May 8, 2002, in Chicago O=Hare International Airport, as
he stepped off an airplane from Zurich, Switzerland. The arrest was purportedly authorized

Philadelphia Inquirer,
Sun, Sep. 17, 2006
Op/Ed Page

Bill would strip courts of the power to protect

By John J. Gibbons

Gibbons served for 17 years as a judge and three years as chief judge on the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. He also argued Rasul v. Bush, the Supreme Court case establishing that Guantánamo detainees have the right to habeas corpus

Much has recently been written about the courageous battle being waged by a small group of Senate Republicans against a determined White House. The conflict is over the rules governing military commissions for suspected terrorists held at Guantánamo Bay. Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), John Warner (Va.), and John McCain (Ariz.) rightly insist that no fair trial, and therefore no American trial, has ever relied on secret evidence or evidence secured by unlawful coercion, and that now is no time to start.

David D. Kirkpatrick for NY Times, p. 1, 4/15/05, 4/16/2005

WASHINGTON, April 14 - As the Senate heads toward a showdown over the rules governing judicial confirmations, Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, has agreed to join a handful of promin