|
MPAC Bulletin – November 30, 2006
Federal judges slows administration
attempts to shut down charities
In a significant development on the right of charitable giving, a federal judge ruled that the Bush administration violated the U.S. Constitution when it froze the assets of more than two dozen alleged terrorist groups after the 9/11 attacks. The ruling held that an executive order President Bush issued on Sept. 24, 2001, designating 27 groups and individuals as "specially designated global terrorists", was "unconstitutionally vague" and flawed because it failed to explain the criteria used to make the designations and included no process to challenge the decision.
The challenge brought to the federal courts was based on the premise that domestic political groups in the U.S. can support humanitarian causes in troubled regions without supporting terrorism. Specifically, U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins ruled against freezing the assets of two political organizations with purported ties to terrorist groups based in Sri Lanka and Kurdistan. The lawsuit focused on two of the groups whose assets were frozen as a result of the executive order. The Liberation Tigers of Sri Lanka and the Partiya Karkeran Kurdistan (PKK) are both known to have committed terrorist activities, according to the State Department, but also have independent political or humanitarian entities. The ruling prohibits the Administration from seizing the assets of the group's non-violent political entities.
Over the past five years, the Bush Administration has designated several charities "specially designated terrorist groups" under Executive Order 13224. As a result of the designation, several U.S. charities have been effectively shut down without any checks or balances from Congress or the Judiciary. Since the War on Terror began, a handful of Muslim American charities have had their operations suspended by government action (including having their assets frozen). To date, such efforts have not yielded a single conviction of anyone involved with the designated charities for terrorist financing or support. Those charities have either been shut down or have been under more scrutiny because of their desire to provide humanitarian aid to the Palestinians in particular. Even Yusuf Islam and Tariq Ramadan have been denied entry to the United States for supporting Palestinian humanitarian efforts in recent years.
While the issue of charitable giving, free of government intrusion and harassment, is far from being settled, Judge Collins' decision to challenge the Bush Administration on unfettered designations of charities is a positive step. With Congressional leadership set to change hands in January, MPAC will continue to call upon the Judiciary and Congress to conduct proper oversight to ensure that American tax dollars are not wasted on cases that are based on nothing more than guilt by association and religious profiling. MPAC also continues to work in coalition with a broad array of Muslim and secular non-profit organizations to call for the release of frozen assets of Muslim charities.
Associated Press – November 29, 2006
Judge faults Bush order on terror groups
By LINDA DEUTSCH
A federal judge struck down President Bush's authority to designate groups as terrorists, saying his post-Sept. 11 executive order was unconstitutional and vague.
Some parts of the Sept. 24, 2001 order tagging 27 groups and individuals as "specially designated global terrorists" were too vague and could impinge on First Amendment rights of free association, U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins said.
The order gave the president "unfettered discretion" to label groups without giving them a way to challenge the designations, she said in a Nov. 21 ruling that was made public Tuesday.
The judge, who two years ago invalidated portions of the U.S. Patriot Act, rejected several sections of Bush's Executive Order 13224 and enjoined the government from blocking the assets of two foreign groups.
However, she let stand sections that would penalize those who provide "services" to designated terrorist groups. She said such services would include the humanitarian aid and rights training proposed by the plaintiffs.
The ruling was praised by David Cole, a lawyer for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Constitutional Rights, who represented the plaintiff Humanitarian Law Project.
It "says that even in fighting terrorism the president cannot be given a blank check to blacklist anyone he considers a bad guy or a bad group and you can't imply guilt by association," Cole said. He said the Humanitarian Law Project will appeal those portions of the executive order which were allowed to stand.
A U.S. Department of Justice spokesman had a mixed reaction to the judge's ruling.
"We are pleased the court rejected many of the constitutional arguments raised by the plaintiffs, including their challenge to the government's ban on providing services to terrorist organizations," Justice spokesman Charles Miller said Tuesday. "However, we believe the court erred in finding that certain other aspects of the executive order were unconstitutional."
The judge's ruling was a reversal of her own tentative findings last July in which she indicated she would uphold wide powers asserted by Bush under an anti-terror financing law. She delayed her ruling then to allow more legal briefs to be filed.
The long-running litigation has centered on two groups, the Liberation Tigers, which seeks a separate homeland for the Tamil people in Sri Lanka, and Partiya Karkeran Kurdistan, a political organization representing the interests of Kurds in Turkey.
Both groups have been designated by the United States as foreign terrorist organizations…..
http://www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/feeds/ap/2006/11/29/ap3211940.html
|
