Obama's Accountability, Transparency, and Civil Liberties Record So Far

[QuantumTuba]

Obama came in promising change, largely from the Bush Administration's policy of ignoring the Constitution's limits meant to protect civil liberties and curtail excessive executive power.

How has he actually done on these issues, on which reporting is often sparse?

[Kirsten]

Joe Arpaio's 168 287(g) Officers: Names, Ranks, Serial Numbers, Etc.

Sharing is caring. That's why I'm posting a link to a list of the names, ranks, serial numbers, hire dates, and pay rates for Sheriff Joe Arpaio's 287(g)-trained deputies. (You can view the list, here.) These are the deputies trained by the feds to enforce federal immigration law, and according to this roster released by the sheriff's office in response to a public records request, there are 168 of the Hispanic-hunting gendarmes in Arpaio's ranks.

(Click through for link to list.)

I had asked ICE for this list through a FOIA request. But despite the vaunted "transparency" of the Obama administration, the feds responded to my request with a document wherein the actual names of the deputies involved were redacted. The MCSO to its credit simply coughed up the list shortly after I asked for it. Recently, certain human rights activists in town have informed me that they've been trying to obtain this list to no avail, so now everyone will have it at their disposal. After all, whether they like it or not, these deputies are public servants. We pay their salaries, and have a right to know who they are.

[Kirsten]

I would like to think of this as a tiny glimmer of progress, but it pales in comparison to the continued resistance on other fronts.

Red Cross to Get Data on Prisoners Held in Secret at U.S. Camps

The U.S. military has agreed for the first time to provide information to the International Committee of the Red Cross about prisoners held in secret at detention camps in Afghanistan and Iraq, but it will continue to deny the ICRC access to them, military officials said Saturday.

Only a few dozen detainees are believed to be at each location at any time, usually for several weeks until they are transferred to longer-term prisons. In Afghanistan, that normally means the main prison at Bagram, where the military holds about 600 detainees. Although the ICRC has access to that facility, prisoners there have protested their continuing detention by refusing since last month to see Red Cross workers or participate in videoconference visits with their families.

Unlike the large U.S. military prisons that once operated in Iraq -- where military panels reviewed individual cases for release or transfer to Iraqi-run facilities -- there is no review or adjudication process at Bagram. The military has delayed establishing one because Afghanistan lacks a functioning judicial system.
ad_icon

ICRC spokesman Bernard Barrett declined to comment Saturday.

The Defense Department has refused to make public the list of prisoners held at the main Bagram base. The Pentagon last month denied a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the American Civil Liberties Union to provide names and other information about the detainees, citing national security and privacy concerns.

[QuantumTuba]

My new blog post on this matter.

[President Clive-φ-Davidson]

The logic...
GIVE ME MORE!

[QuantumTuba]

If you enjoyed that, then I presume you will also appreciate my other two posts there. I intend to start posting regularly at that blog.

[President Clive-φ-Davidson]

Okay!

[Kirsten]

blasphemy laws

Around the world, free speech is being sacrificed on the altar of religion. Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simple blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion. This growing movement has reached the United Nations, where religiously conservative countries received a boost in their campaign to pass an international blasphemy law. It came from the most unlikely of places: the United States. While attracting surprisingly little attention, the Obama administration supported the effort of largely Muslim nations in the U.N. Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to free speech for any "negative racial and religious stereotyping." The exception was made as part of a resolution supporting free speech that passed this month, but it is the exception, not the rule that worries civil libertarians. Though the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism. It is viewed as a transparent bid to appeal to the "Muslim street" and our Arab allies, with the administration seeking greater coexistence through the curtailment of objectionable speech. Though it has no direct enforcement (and is weaker than earlier versions), it is still viewed as a victory for those who sought to juxtapose and balance the rights of speech and religion.

A 'misused' freedom?

In the resolution, the administration aligned itself with Egypt, which has long been criticized for prosecuting artists, activists and journalists for insulting Islam. For example, Egypt recently banned a journal that published respected poet Helmi Salem merely because one of his poems compared God to a villager who feeds ducks and milks cows.

[Kirsten]

President Signs Law Giving Defense Department Authority to Exempt Photos From Freedom of Information Act
ACLU Renews Call for Secretary Gates Not to Block Release of Torture Photos

President Obama today signed into law a Homeland Security appropriations bill that grants the Department of Defense (DOD) the authority to continue suppressing photos of prisoner abuse. The amendment, which would allow the DOD to exempt photos from the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA), is aimed at photos ordered released by a federal appeals court as part of an American Civil Liberties Union FOIA lawsuit for photos and other records related to detainee abuse in U.S. custody overseas, although it would apply to other photos in government custody as well. Earlier this month, the ACLU sent a letter to Secretary Robert Gates urging him not to exercise the authority to suppress the photos in their case, stating that the photos "are of critical relevance to an ongoing national debate about accountability."
"We are disappointed that the president has signed a law giving the Defense Department the authority to hide evidence of its own misconduct, and we hope the defense secretary will not take advantage of that authority by suppressing photos related to the abuse of prisoners," said Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU National Security Project. "Secretary Gates should be guided by the importance of transparency to the democratic process, the extraordinary importance of these photos to the ongoing debate about the treatment of prisoners and the likelihood that the suppression of these photos would ultimately be far more damaging to national security than their disclosure. The last administration's decision to endorse torture undermined the United States' moral authority and compromised its security. A failure to fully confront the abuses of the last administration will only compound these harms."

[Kirsten]

At Supreme Court: Can prosecutors be sued for framing defendants?

The US Supreme Court on Wednesday is set to consider an unusual question: Do Americans who have been framed by unscrupulous prosecutors for crimes they did not commit have a right to sue the prosecutors when the fraud is finally exposed? According to the Obama administration, the answer is no.

Solicitor General Elena Kagan argues in a friend of the court brief that local, state, and federal prosecutors must enjoy absolute immunity from citizen lawsuits – even when they sent innocent men to prison for life by fabricating incriminating evidence and hiding exculpatory evidence.

[Ingrid]

I loved this quote from the article..

"Lawyers for the two prosecutors counter that there is no constitutional right "not to be framed.""

Yikes!!!