Today, the Supreme Court returns for business and John Roberts begins his fourth term as Chief Justice.

According to the latest edition of ACLU Legal Director Steven R. Shapiro’s annual overview, there is no doubt that Roberts presides over a conservative court. Indeed, there is little doubt that the Roberts court is even more conservative than the Rehnquist court that preceded it. Read on to find out what cases we can expect to see before the Court and what’s at stake for our civil liberties.

Also very useful:

• Jonathan Hafetz, incoming staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project, gives a rundown of the case of al-Marri v. Puccuiarelli. Al-Marri is the only designated “enemy combatant” detained in the mainland United States. At issue is whether the president can order the military to seize and indefinitely detain citizens and legal residents in the U.S.
• Chris Hansen, senior staff attorney with the ACLU First Amendment Working Group, explains ACLU v. Mukasey, the ACLU’s successful challenge to the Child Online Protection Act. After two prior trips to the Supreme Court, the law was once again declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in July 2008.
• Laughlin McDonald, Director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project, enlightens us on Northwest Austin Municipal Utilities District v. Mukasey, a challenge to the constitutionality of the recently extended pre-clearance requirements of the Voting Rights Act.

The New York Times and the Christian Science Monitor have also offered their predictions for the term.

Stuart Townsend’s new film Battle in Seattle is the fictional story of the very real protests that rocked the world in November 1999 when thousands of demonstrators took to the streets of Seattle in protest of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Ministerial Meeting. The film stars Martin Henderson, Michelle Rodriguez, Andre Benjamin, Woody Harrelson, Ray Liottaand Charlize Theron, each with unique story, some united in mission, but all affected by what’s at stake when our fundamental right to protest is put to test.

The ACLU has always represented protestors who have been wrongfully arrested and groups that have been infiltrated and spied on. Our right to dissent is one our nation’s founders recognized as one of the most necessary liberties for a democratic society.Codified by the First Amendment and upheld over time as one of our most fundamental freedoms as Americans, the right to assemble, protest, and petition still continue to come under fire today.

Most recently, the ACLU of Colorado and ACLU of Minnesota fought to secure the rights of protestors at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions through lawsuits and negotiations with city officials. And as we all now know, the processing and handling of protestors at the DNC, plus the pre-arrests and house raids at the RNC, shows that our First Amendment right to protest is still threatened.

With regard to the WTO protests, the ACLU of Washington filed suit in March 2000 on behalf of citizens whose rights to freedom of speech were violated by the city’s actions. Plaintiffs were individuals who were either kept out or forced out of the No-Protest Zone solely because they had anti-WTO cartoons, buttons, stickers, or signs. Included was a person who was handing out copies of the First Amendment, but they were confiscated by police. Another plaintiff twice had signs taken away by Seattle police, including one that said, “I Have a Right to Non-Violent Protest.”

In a conversation for the ACLU’s Rights / Camera / Action program, director Stuart Townsend and star Martin Henderson talked about the making of the film and its contemporary relevance. Watch the video here:

The film recently opened in select cities and continues its rollout this Friday. Stuart, Charlize, and Martin will be doing a few Q&A’s as the film opens across the country. For a schedule of showtimes and list of cities and theaters near you, go to: http://www.battleinseattlemovie.com/tickets/.

You may remember that the ACLU is currently challenging the U.S. government’s exclusion of one of South Africa’s leading scholars and political commentators — Adam Habib a Deputy Vice Chancellor at the University of Johannesburg.  In the fall of 2007, the State Department denied Professor Habib’s request for a U.S. visa based on the unfounded accusation that he had “engaged in terrorist activities.” To this day, the government has refused to explain or substantiate this claim, though we believe that Professor Habib — a long-time critic of the war in Iraq and other U.S. terrorism-related policies — is being excluded based solely on ideological grounds.

This week we were happy to see Professor Habib back in the news doing what he does best — offering measured, informed commentary on South African politics (in this instance, his views on President Mbeki’s resignation). It is heartening to see that the U.S. press (as well as the European and African press) has continued to seek out Professor Habib’s expertise despite the government’s baseless claims. Publications like The New York Times, the Washington Post and Newsweek have all featured quotes from Professor Habib recently, and their articles remind us of how much Americans have to gain by engaging with Professor Habib and other foreign scholars like him. (Listen to a podcast of Professor Habib commenting on his case.)

Sadly, the problem of ideological exclusion is much bigger than Professor Habib alone. We hope that under a new administration — whether Democratic or Republican — this shameful practice of excluding foreign scholars based on their political views will come to an abrupt end. A nation long heralded as the world’s leading defender of free expression debases itself when it treats words and ideas as their enemy.

Presidential nominating conventions enjoy icon status in American political culture. Images of intense floor fights, protests outside convention halls, vigorous intra-party debates over policies, platforms and strategies, and occasionally even physical confrontation — as when Dan Rather was famously punched while reporting from the floor of the 1968 Democratic Convention — have all traditionally symbolized the vibrant and sometimes disorderly and tumultuous clash of ideas that fuel any healthy democracy, and in particular serve as an important reminder of the fruits of the free speech and free assembly rights which the Founders guaranteed in the First Amendment. Conventions are, at least in theory, a once-every-four-years opportunity for Americans to assemble and debate critical issues as they select the standard-bearer for their political party.

But such democratic energy and free-wheeling political debate at conventions is now confined to the distant past, part of our national lore but not our current reality. For the last two decades, political conventions have become, by design, far more akin to meticulously choreographed television spectacles than democratic venues in which political disputes are vented and resolved. Inside the convention halls, spontaneous moments, let alone unscripted expressions of unapproved viewpoints, long ago ceased to exist. Those have been replaced by campaign-approved scripts, scheduled down to the last word and second in accordance with poll-tested themes and the prime-time television schedule.

During the last several nominating conventions, the areas outside the convention hall have become increasingly subject to the same degree of micro-control as events on the inside. With each convention, the physical area of extreme control expands to a larger and larger perimeter. Justified by resort to the same rationale used to suppress liberties in general — vague invocations of “security” — both political parties are now able to relegate dissent, protests and disruptions to unseen and highly controlled environments, far removed from the conventions themselves and far out of sight from delegates, political figures, and the establishment media outlets which televises the convention.

Read more…

This day marks a somber occasion for us. We celebrate the Bill of Rights as part of Constitution Day. At the same time, we mourn the loss of freedoms that define us as Americans.

The world has changed. We live in a “new normal.” We must sacrifice some freedom for our collective security. These words, and others like them, have been an all too common theme throughout American history. Crises, both real and imagined, have been used as a pretext for some of the worst abuses of First Amendment freedoms.

The ACLU was founded in 1920 in response to the excesses of the so-called Red Scare following the First World War. Today, the challenges we face to freedom of speech, press, religion, association, and conscience have never been greater.

Americans increasingly are denied access to information vital to self-governance. Political dissent is silenced. Illegal or embarrassing government programs are hidden from the public view. At the same time, the government has secretly pried into every aspect of our private lives. In this surveillance society, our most personal and intimate activities have become an open book for officials to read at their whim without our knowledge.

The Bush administration, supported by a pliant Congress, has used 9/11 as a pretext to needlessly deprive us of our rights under the false blanket of security. But the war on our freedoms did not begin that tragic day seven years ago. It began with the founding of our nation. Less than a decade after the First Amendment was ratified, Congress enacted the Sedition Act of 1798, criminalizing dissent. Then, like now, the greatest threat to our freedoms has come from at home, not abroad.

Liberty and security are mutually reinforcing, not mutually exclusive. We can be safe and free. A vibrant First Amendment is our greatest defense to those who would do us harm. Unless we restore our rights, the enemies of freedom will have won.

We must not resign ourselves to this government-imposed fate. Instead, each of us has a responsibility to stand up for freedom. Declare “I’m a Constitution voter.” Take action today, so that we will all have something to celebrate at next year’s Constitution Day.

One of the most puzzling issues that confront those of us who care about civil liberties is the debate surrounding flag burning. Burning the American flag is offensive to many but done by almost no one. And yet every few years it is brought up as a wedge issue to separate those who love freedom from those who hate America, puppies and apple pies cooling on the windowsill of Grandma’s house. See the latest Civil Discourse comic on the issue.

If politicians were as passionate about ending torture and wiretapping as they are about fantasy fabric burners, I think this nation would be doing alright.

Flag burning isn’t on the front burner today (sorry, I like cheesy puns) but rest assured it will be back. As long as there are politicians that need to gin up votes and nationalistic fervor, there will be a fight to ban the rarely-performed act. I guess it’s a lot easier for them to talk about protecting the flag than to actually protect the freedoms it represents.

With close to 300 protestors arrested so far during the Republican National Convention, the ACLU of Minnesota volunteer attorneys have had their work cut out for them representing people at their arraignments (where arrestees plead “guilty” or “not guilty” to the charges against them). For two days, attorneys from the Public Defender’s office, volunteers with the ACLU of Minnesota and attorneys from the Minnesota Chapter of the National Lawyer’s Guild have been on hand to make sure that every arrestee has the benefit of an attorney for their arraignment.

The overall atmosphere at the Ramsey County Law Enforcement Center is almost surreal. The building’s normal security has been amped up to the point that the entire facility is surrounded by 8- or 9-foot-high chain-link fencing. The perimeter is patrolled by the National Guard, (I’m guessing, I didn’t ask), and you have to pass through a security checkpoint to get within the fenced-in perimeter. Attorneys with their driver’s license and attorney license are allowed to enter with their briefcase but no cell phone. Everybody else must present their ID and they are not allowed to have any bags or other property. Once inside the perimeter, you walk down a fenced corridor to the main doors where you are greeted with another checkpoint where you again show your IDs and have your bag and shoes run through an X-ray machine. As I walked the fenced corridor for the first time, I though how ironic it was that this center routinely houses people who are accused of murder and other horrible violent crimes, all without these massive security precautions.

And what about all those arrests? The numbers so far show that as of Thursday afternoon, about 300 people have been arrested in St. Paul and about 100 in Minneapolis. All but a handful of the Minneapolis arrestees were cited and released immediately.

St. Paul is a different story. Some people were cited with misdemeanors, processed and released within a few hours; but the vast majority of people were charged with “gross misdemeanors” or felonies. They were held up until their 36 hours expired. (Minnesota law requires individuals in custody to be charged and brought before a judge or released after 36 hours, not including the day of arrest, weekends and holidays.)

Wednesday was a big day in arraignment court because, for most of the arrestees, their 36 hours was up at noon. According to the Star Tribune, 71 people were arrested on felony charges. Twenty-seven of them were dismissed outright. We have been told that all but around 25 of the rest have already been reduced to lesser charges. Our volunteer attorneys were surprised by the high bail amounts they saw on Tuesday, and Wednesday was more of the same.

On Tuesday one of our attorneys told the judge for the record that in his 30 years of practicing criminal law, he has never seen $2,000 bail for charges of disorderly conduct. By Wednesday evening when the calendar turned to the last 50 or so misdemeanor arraignments, bail amounts were down in the $200 to $500 range for out-of-state defendants and no bail for in-state residents. Our attorneys heard stories from many people, including journalists, who reported being swept up by police without regard to their actions. One person reported that he worked for a security company and he was on his way to report to his assignment — at the convention — when police arrested him along with others. Complicating matters for those who have been released is the seizure and holding of their property. We have been getting calls all day from people who are in a jam because their car keys, backpacks, purses, wallets, credit cards, IDs and cell phones were taken by police. They are not able to drive their vehicles home because they don’t have their keys and they can’t get a place to stay without access to their money.

Outside the Law Enforcement Center on Wednesday evening, the atmosphere was a mix of joy and apprehension. Family members and friends came to await the release of their loved ones and friends. Clusters of people gathered on the sidewalks and boulevards to reunite with people being released. A guitarist played mellow music to one small group of people and the assembled group was peaceful. Across the street, a group of police on horseback watched the sidewalk in anticipation. Another group of police in riot gear was assembled nearby the mounted patrol. On the other side, at least one more group of police in riot gear also kept a watchful eye on the peaceful crowd. By the time I left the LEC when court was winding down, all but one group of police in riot gear had left the area.

The ACLU of Minnesota will continue to provide attorneys for the arraignments of people taken into custody in RNC-related arrests and we will be reviewing police actions and arrests for possible civil rights litigation to vindicate the constitutional rights of protestors and journalists.

We *heart* the ACLU of Minnesota. Our affiliate office in St. Paul has been fighting tirelessly for free speech in the midst of what appears to be a huge government crackdown on civil liberties at the RNC, including coordinating legal defense for tons of people swept up in the mass arrests there.

Notably, they’ve coordinated legal counsel for Amy Goodman, host of DemocracyNow!, and two of that show’s producers who were arrested for trying to do their jobs. Goodman was released on misdemeanor charges three hours after her arrest, while the producers, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar, were held longer and charged with felony intent to riot. Those charges were suspended pending investigation. The ACLU of Minnesota is calling for all charges against Goodman, Kouddous and Salazar to be dropped.

John Lundquist, an ACLU volunteer attorney with Fredrikson and Byron P.A., is counsel for Goodman, Kouddous and Salazar.

The blogging from the Republican National Convention has been excellent. Glenn Greenwald has been providing extensive coverage for Salon, as has Lindsay Beyerstein for Firedoglake, to name a few.

Today Glenn wrote about the revelation today that the FBI had been working with the Ramsey Country sheriff’s department to raid houses of suspected "anarchists" on Sunday, which resulted in the seizing of several boxes of literature. The ACLU of Minnesota sued for the release of that literature over the weekend, and will seek an emergency appeal after losing an initial motion.

The federal government’s role in these local events is no surprise: since 2006, the ACLU and its affiliates have filed several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for information on the Pentagon’s surveillance of anti-war groups. Just last month, the ACLU of Maryland released documents it had obtained through a Public Information Act lawsuit for the release of information related to the surveillance of local peace groups and anti-death penalty activists. Last year we released a report about the documents that resulted from our FOIA requests and profiles a few of the people who were targeted by the Pentagon.

As Glenn points out today, this kind of federal-level surveillance and subsequent raids have a chilling effect on free speech and protest, both of which are supposed to be protected under the First Amendment. He contrasts the lack of outrage over this abuse of government power with the huge outcry against the Chinese government for squelching free speech and protest during the Olympics:

[H]ow is our own Government’s behavior in Minnesota any different than what the Chinese did to its protesters during the Olympics (other than the fact that we actually have a Constitution that prohibits such behavior)? And where are all the self-righteous Freedom Crusaders in our nation’s establishment organs who were so flamboyantly criticizing the actions of a Government on the other side of the globe as our own Government engages in the same tyrannical, protest-squelching conduct with exactly the same motives?

In Minnesota, hundreds of innocent people are being swept up in mass arrests for simply exercising their right to express dissent. That’s not something that is supposed to happen in this country. Where’s the outcry over how protestors are being treated here at home?

The silence is deafening.

As you can imagine, the ACLU affiliate in Minnesota has been kept extremely busy during the Republican National Convention there. In addition to coordinating five lawsuits to protect free speech, our affiliate there has assembled a team of attorneys to be on hand at the jails where those arrested are being booked.

What we know is that there have been five raids conducted on houses and meeting places during which law enforcement agents confiscated the personal property of people planning to protest at the RNC. It looks as though much of the property seized during the was outside the parameters of the search warrants, and our Minnesota affiliate is working to secure the release of boxes and boxes of literature that were seized by the Ramsey county sheriff’s office during the raids.

We also know that on Monday Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman was arrested along with two camera operators. While Goodman was released in about three hours, the cameramen fared worse—they were charged with “probable cause—felony riot,” a charge which is supposed to require a weapon and injury (there were neither). After calls from the ACLU of Minnesota, those charges were deferred pending an investigation.

Finally, we know that later yesterday mounted police surrounded hundreds of people who were sitting on public property listening to an outdoor concert, rounded them up and arrested them. It appears that the police arrested a whole lot of people who were doing absolutely nothing wrong, and yet following the sweeping arrests they charged about 250 of the people with gross misdemeanors and felonies.

The ACLU has assembled a team of attorneys who are in the jails now and who are offering limited defense to all of those arrested at their upcoming arraignment. After the charges have been sorted through, the affiliate expects the volunteer lawyers will provide further counsel for those whose civil liberties have been violated.

The ACLU of Minnesota is working hard to protect free speech and the right to political dissent which is at the heart of our democracy. The ACLU is calling for an investigation into government misconduct throughout the RNC. Our statement is here.