Articles Tagged ‘Safe and Free’

Are you flying home for the holidays? Nervous about running the gauntlet of new high and low tech invasions of privacy at the airport? Well, the good folks at the ACLU of Massachusetts have put together a guide for the modern, airborne civil libertarian.

This is intended as a guide to procedures and technologies you may encounter in your travels. Much of the information here is based on DHS internal policy–not law–so it is subject to change and inconsistent application.  If you encounter different policies at the airport or feel your rights are being violated, please contact the ACLU.

Learn more about the TSA’s naked power grab at the ACLU Airport Security page.

Scanning

Many airports now require passengers to go through a scanner that uses advanced imaging technology. The scanner uses radiation to provide agents with an electronic image of your naked body. Although TSA says that the capability to store and transmit images of passengers’ bodies will not normally be activated, the agency requires this functionality in all the airport scanners it purchases.

These scanners are known by a variety of names:

• “Advanced Imaging Technology” (AIT) scanners
• “Whole Body Imaging” (WBI) scanners
• “full-body” scanners
• “naked” scanners

The scanners use “backscatter” or “millimeter wave” radiation to see through your clothes.  A TSA agent in another room will see an image of your body that could include a revealing look at your entire body, including breasts, genitals, buttocks, and external medical devices.

Option: Ask not to go through this scanner

You can tell the TSA agent that you do not wish to go through the scanner.  TSA agents are required under TSA policy to honor your request, but might try to encourage or pressure you to go through anyway.  To be as clear as possible, say, “I opt out.”  If you opt out, you will be subject to a “standard pat-down.”

You also have the right to opt your children out of the scan.

The “standard pat-down”

The TSA’s “standard pat-down procedure” is now a more invasive form of the pat-down search that you might have experienced in the past.

TSA says that during the new standard pat-down, a screener of the same sex will examine your head, shirt collar area, and waistband, and may use either the front or back of his or her hands to feel your body, including buttocks, around breasts, and between the legs, feeling up to the top of the thigh.  Women in tight skirts that don’t allow an agent to feel the thigh area may be asked to remove the skirt in a private screening area and will be given a gown or towel to put on.

Option:  Let TSA know about sensitive areas

Tell TSA agents about things such as injuries or conditions that could cause you pain if certain parts of your body are touched or pressed, as well as any medical devices that could be dislodged by a search, or any other reason that TSA agents should be careful when touching your body.

Option: Ask to be patted down in a private location

If you are uncomfortable being patted down in front of other passengers, you can request that TSA agents take you to a private area.

The “resolution pat-down”

If an “anomaly” is detected during the pat-down–or when you go through the AIT scanner–you will be subjected to a “resolution pat-down.”  TSA agents will take you to a private area and do a more intense pat-down, which includes using the front of the agent’s hands for a more thorough search, including the groin area.

Option: Ask to take a witness with you.

If you are taken to a private area for a “resolution pat-down” search, you can ask to bring a witness with you, or ask TSA to provide a witness for you.  This search should also be conducted by a person of the same gender.

Other Things to Know

Traveling with Children

While you may opt your children out of an airport scan, there is no exemption for children from the pat-down searches. TSA says it must “screen everyone, regardless of age (even babies).”

Religious Head Coverings

Option: Tell TSA about religious head coverings

If your religion does not allow you to remove your head covering, you can tell TSA officials.  They may ask you to pat-down your headwear, then rub your hands with a cloth and place it in a machine to test for chemical residue.  If the TSA official still wants you to remove your religious head covering, you have the right to ask to do this in a private area.

Searches of Bags, Laptops, and Electronics

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claims the right to search and confiscate laptops, mobile phones, digital cameras, and other electronic devices upon entry to the United States, without any suspicion of wrongdoing.  In some reported cases, CBP has held travelers’ electronics for more than a year.

The ACLU and other organizations have filed a lawsuit challenging these searches.

Option: Ask to see a supervisor, and get a receipt

You have the right to have the initial search conducted in front of a supervisor.  If they take your electronics, you can ask for a receipt so you can track where they are and seek their return.

Fingerprinting

All visitors and lawful permanent residents are fingerprinted on entry into the U.S. from abroad.

Border Interrogations

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials have the authority to ask your immigration status when you are entering or returning to the United States or leaving the country.  They have the power to determine whether or not non-U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents have the right of entry.

Law enforcement officials reportedly ask some people about their political and religious beliefs, where they worship, and how often they pray.  The ACLU believes that such questions are inappropriate.

Option: Decline to answer

If you think you are being asked inappropriate questions, you may say, “I am sorry.  I believe you are asking me questions about my protected religious and/or political beliefs and practices. I do not wish to answer these questions.”  This may cause you delay, but is permissible.

Option: Ask to speak to a supervisor

If you think you are being asked inappropriate questions, you can ask to speak to a supervisor–but be aware that this might cause you further delay.  Also ask to speak to a supervisor if you are denied the right to use a restroom or to have family or friends told where you are.  You may also file a complaint with the Civil Rights Office of the Department of Homeland Security if you have been held for a long time, asked inappropriate questions, or treated inhumanely. See below.

Option: Ask to have an attorney present

If you are selected for a longer interview by law-enforcement officials and you are a U.S. citizen, you have the right to have an attorney present.  If you are not a U.S. citizen, you generally do not have the right to an attorney when you are having an extended interview.

Option: Ask for help

If you are delayed a considerable length of time, you can ask CBP officials to allow you to make a call, or make a call for you.

Asylum

If you are told you cannot enter the country and fear you might be persecuted or tortured if sent back to the country you traveled from, you can tell the official about your fear and ask for asylum.

How to Complain

Tell the ACLU

The ACLU might be able to help you file your complaint or try to get an answer. Call your local ACLU affiliate for assistance.

You may also file a complaint online:

http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/tsa-pat-down-search-abuse

File a Complaint with the Department of Homeland Security

You can file a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security if you have had any of the following problems:

• being detained for long periods of time when coming back to the country;
• being asked inappropriate questions when returning to the U.S.;
• being treated differently at airports and ports of entry because of your race, religion, or national origin;
• being forced to go through the AIT scanners at airports, even though you have told agents you do not wish to go through;
• being patted down in an inappropriate manner;
• if you believe your rights have been violated in any other way.

You may also file a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security’s Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP) if you are:

• repeatedly being delayed when trying to board an airplane because of security concerns; or
• being told you are on a list and not being allowed to fly.

Complaints should include the following:

• your name;
• date of birth;
• phone number;
• mailing address;
• email address;
• a written description of the incident, giving as much detail as possible, including (if available) the name and agency of the individual(s) alleged to have committed the violation.

Contact:

By mail or phone
The Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Building 410, Mail Stop #0190
Washington, DC 20528

Phone: 202-401-1474
Toll Free: 1-866-644-8360
TTY: 202-401-0470
Toll Free TTY: 1-866-644-8361
Fax: 202-401-4708

By e-mail
crcl@dhs.gov

Online

Travler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP)

http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc_1169676919316.shtm

There are 70 airports around the country already using the controversial body scanners. These machines use low-dose radiation to produce strikingly graphic images of passengers’ bodies. Further, their effectiveness in keeping us safe is debatable. Authorities at DHS say you can opt out of the naked scan. But doing so will subject you to new and highly invasive manual searches of your body, including your most intimate parts by TSA officers.

The government is also searching and seizing laptops and other electronic devices of international travelers. Never before in history have customs officers been able to routinely pore through a lifetime’s worth of letters, photographs, purchase records and other data with no suspicion.

With the holiday travel season fast approaching, we need to make sure that security measures are in place that actually make us more secure without compromising passenger privacy.

Send Secretary Napolitano A Message

NEW YORK – The American Civil Liberties Union today filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit on behalf of 10 U.S. citizens and lawful residents who are prohibited from flying to or from the United States or over U.S. airspace because they are on the government’s “No Fly List.” None of the individuals in the lawsuit, including a disabled U.S. Marine Corps veteran stranded in Egypt and a U.S. Army veteran stuck in Colombia, have been told why they are on the list or given a chance to clear their names. One of the clients on the ACLU’s case was born and raised in Las Cruces, NM.

“More and more Americans who have done nothing wrong find themselves unable to fly, and in some cases unable to return to the U.S., without any explanation whatsoever from the government,” said Ben Wizner, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. “A secret list that deprives people of the right to fly and places them into effective exile without any opportunity to object is both un-American and unconstitutional.”

The ACLU of New Mexico joined the national ACLU and its affiliates in Oregon, Southern California, and Northern California in filing the lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice, the FBI and the Terrorist Screening Center in U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The plaintiffs on the case are:

• Steven Washburn, a U.S. citizen born and raised in Las Cruces, NM and a U.S. Air Force veteran who was prevented from flying from Europe to the United States or Mexico; he eventually flew to Brazil, from there to Peru, and from there to Mexico, where he was detained and finally escorted across the border by U.S. and Mexican officials;
• Ayman Latif, a U.S. citizen and disabled Marine veteran living in Egypt who has been barred from flying to the United States and, as a result, cannot take a required Veterans’ Administration disability evaluation;
• Raymond Earl Knaeble, a U.S. citizen and U.S. Army veteran who is stuck in Santa Marta, Colombia after being denied boarding on a flight to the United States;
• Samir Mohamed Ahmed Mohamed, Abdullatif Muthanna, Nagib Ali Ghaleb and Saleh A. Omar, three American citizens and a lawful permanent resident of the United States who were prevented from flying home to the U.S. after visiting family members in Yemen;
• Mohamed Sheikh Abdirahman Kariye, a U.S. citizen and resident of Portland, Oregon who was prevented from flying to visit his daughter who is in high school in Dubai;
• Adama Bah, a citizen of Guinea who was granted political asylum in the United States, where she has lived since she was two, who was barred from flying from New York to Chicago for work; and
• Halime Sat, a German citizen and lawful permanent resident of the United States who lives in California with her U.S.-citizen husband who was barred from flying from Long Beach, California to Oakland to attend a conference and has since had to cancel plane travel to participate in educational programs and her family reunion in Germany.

According to the ACLU’s legal complaint, thousands of people have been added to the “No Fly List” and barred from commercial air travel without any opportunity to learn about or refute the basis for their inclusion on the list. The result is a vast and growing list of individuals who, on the basis of error or innuendo, have been deemed too dangerous to fly but too harmless to arrest.

“Without a reasonable way for people to challenge their inclusion on the list, there’s no way to keep innocent people off it,” said Nusrat Choudhury, a staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. “The government’s decision to prevent people from flying without giving them a chance to defend themselves has a huge impact on people’s lives – including their ability to perform their jobs, see their families and, in the case of U.S. citizens, to return home to the United States from abroad.”

“The right to move freely for work and to visit family members should never be denied without due process,” said Peter Simonson, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Mexico. “Because of secret no-fly lists, Las Cruces native and U.S. Air Force veteran Steven Washburn was put through a costly, distressing ordeal and to this day doesn’t know the reason why.”

In addition to Wizner and Choudhury, attorneys on the case are Kevin Díaz and cooperating attorney Steven Wilker with the ACLU of Oregon; Ahilan Arulanantham, Jennie Pasquarella and cooperating attorney Reem Salahi with the ACLU of Southern California; Alan Schlosser and Julia Harumi Mass of the ACLU of Northern California; and Laura Ives of the ACLU of New Mexico.

Newly-Released Judicial Opinion Explains Decision Ordering Release of Mohamedou Salahi

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 12, 2010
CONTACT: (505) 266-5915 Ext. 1003; mmccoy@aclu-nm.org

NEW YORK – A Washington D.C. federal court opinion ordering the release of Guantánamo prisoner Mohamedou Ould Salahi (sometimes spelled “Slahi”) and providing the reasons for the granting of his habeas corpus petition was made public Friday, April 9th. Federal District Judge James Robertson ruled on March 22 that the U.S. could not continue to detain Salahi, a Mauritanian citizen who has been in U.S. custody since 2001. Judge Robertson’s opinion was released today after undergoing a classification review; some portions were withheld as classified.

The American Civil Liberties Union joined attorneys Nancy Hollander and Theresa Duncan of the law firm Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg Ives & Duncan P.A. and Linda Moreno of Linda Moreno P.A. in challenging Salahi’s detention, arguing that the government had no reliable evidence that he was part of al-Qaeda when he was seized in 2001.

“After subjecting Mr. Salahi to illegal renditions to three countries, brutal physical and psychological torture and almost daily interrogations for most of the nine years he has been in U.S. custody, the government could not even tip the scales ever so slightly to justify Mr. Salahi’s detention,” said Hollander, the lead attorney in the case. “It is well past time for him to go home.”

“As Judge Robertson’s opinion makes clear, the allegations that Mr. Salahi participated in the so-called Millennium Plot to attack the Los Angeles airport and recruited two of the 9/11 hijackers are not supported by any credible evidence,” said Duncan. “The truth is the government was wrong when it first detained him, wrong when it tortured him and is wrong in continuing to detain him.”

After Salahi was arrested in Mauritania on suspicion of ties to al-Qaeda, the U.S. government illegally rendered him to Jordan, where he was detained, interrogated and abused for eight months. He was then rendered to Bagram, Afghanistan and finally to Guantánamo, where he has been held in U.S. custody since August 2002.

“Salahi’s illegal detention for more than eight years without charge or trial embodies the most egregious abuses of Guantánamo,” said Jonathan Hafetz, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. “The district court’s decision invalidating that detention and ordering Salahi’s release is an important step towards restoring the rule of law.”

While at Guantánamo, Salahi was held in total isolation for months, kept in a freezing cold cell, shackled to the floor, deprived of food, made to drink salt water, forced to stand in a room with strobe lights and heavy metal music for hours at a time, threatened with harm to his family, forbidden from praying, beaten and subjected to the “frequent flyer” program, during which he was awakened every few hours to deprive him of sleep. The government falsely told him that his mother had been arrested and was being sent to Guantánamo. Salahi’s abuse was confirmed and well documented in a 2009 report by the Senate Armed Services Committee that investigated allegations of detainee abuse at Guantánamo.

Marine Corps Lt. Col. Stuart Couch, a military lawyer originally assigned to prosecute the case against Salahi in the military commissions, determined that Salahi’s self-incriminating statements were so tainted by torture that they couldn’t ethically be used against him. Couch told his supervisors that he was “morally opposed” to Salahi’s treatment and for that reason he refused to participate in the prosecution.

The original habeas challenge to Salahi’s unlawful detention was filed in 2005 in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Department of Justice is appealing Judge Robertson’s decision.

Lawyers on the case are Nancy Hollander and Theresa Duncan of Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg Ives & Duncan P.A.; Linda Moreno of Linda Moreno P.A.; Jonathan Hafetz, Melissa Goodman and Jonathan Manes of the ACLU; Arthur Spitzer of the ACLU of the Nation’s Capital; Brahim Ould Ebety of Nouakchott, Mauritania; and Emmanuel Altit of Paris, France.

The ruling is available online at: www.aclu.org/national-security/salahi-v-obama-et-al-order

###

The mission of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico is to maintain and advance the cause of civil liberties within the state of New Mexico, with particular emphasis on the freedom of religion, speech, press, association, and assemblage, and the right to vote, due process of law and equal protection of law, and to take any legitimate action in the furtherance and defense of such purposes. These objectives shall be sought wholly without political partisanship.