Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger
I thought I’d do a follow-up to my Let Civil Liberties & Freedom Ring! post about the erosion of civil liberties in Britain—which, in my opinion, is akin to what
has been happening here in the United States in the past decade. My inspiration for a second post on the subject was Glenn Greenwald’s most recent piece at Salon—Homeland Security’s laptop seizures: Interview with Rep. Sanchez.
I have been reading about the seizures of cell phones and laptop computers by the DHS. I have found it troubling that our government has no compunction about confiscating the personal property of some of its own citizens without any warrant, probable cause, or suspicion that the citizens may have been involved in a criminal activity.
Our civil liberties and rights are being eroded while most of us sit silent. Where is the outcry? Even a watchdog like Greenwald talks of how he had become “inured” to the abuses of our civil liberties and how “severe incursions start to seem ordinary.” Greenwald wrote:
“Such was the case, at least for me, with Homeland Security’s practice of detaining American citizens upon their re-entry into the country, and as part of that detention, literally seizing their electronic products — laptops, cellphones, Blackberries and the like — copying and storing the data, and keeping that property for months on end, sometimes never returning it. Worse, all of this is done not only without a warrant, probable cause or any oversight, but even without reasonable suspicion that the person is involved in any crime.”
Greenwald goes on to talk of how there is no law which authorizes the DHS with such powers—and how we citizens have no recourse to have our personal property returned to us if it is confiscated. Few members of Congress appear concerned. There is, however, one person who is attempting to address the problem—Rep. Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat from the state of California. Greenwald reports that Sanchez has introduced H.R. 216, a bill that would require DHS to issue rules governing searches and seizure, impose some reporting requirements, and give some “modest” rights to people who have had the property seized by DHS.
There is always a huge outcry when someone brings up gun control. Why don’t people get as concerned about the diminution of their Fourth Amendments rights as they do about restrictions being put on their Second Amendment rights?
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
**********
I recommend the reading of Greenwald’s entire article. I also recommend listening to his interview with Rep. Sanchez here. (Scroll down to the end of Greenwald’s article for the interview.)
Source: Glenn Greenwald (Salon)
Bob,Esq.,
I understood your sarcasm. Still, there are many who think that most/all liberals support everything President Obama does/everything thing that happens under his Administration. I do, however, know liberals who don’t see (or choose not to see) the despicable things that are being done while Obama serves as head of the Executive Branch.
In Re: DHS
I’d love to see the arguments as to why it’s unconstitutional.
I guess it’s the conservative in me that never liked the unnecessary increase in bureaucracy.
FFLEO,
Here’s a nifty quote that illustrates how hysteria precludes a sense of proportion:
“In 2001, terrorists killed 2,978 people in the United States, including the five killed by anthrax. In that same year, according to the Centers for Disease Control, heart disease killed 700,142 Americans and cancer 553,768; various accidents claimed 101,537 lives, suicide 30,622, and homicide, not including the attacks, another 17,330. As President Bush pointed out in January, no one has been killed by terrorists on American soil since then. Neither, according to the FBI, was anyone killed here by terrorists in 2000. In 1999, the number was one. In 1998, it was three. In 1997, zero. Even using 2001 as a baseline, the actuarial tables would suggest that our concern about terror mortality ought to be on the order of our concern about fatal workplace injuries (5,431 deaths) or drowning (3,247). To recognize this is not to dishonor the loss to the families of those people killed by terrorists, but neither should their anguish eclipse that of the families of children who died in their infancy that year (27,801). Every death has its horrors.”
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/03/0079957
Before this becomes another Tuscon thread?
Could we collectively consider reigning that in and staying more on topic of the initial posting: the 4th Amendment abuses of the DHS?
Bob,
I understood the sarcasm too. I was simply contrasting it with the reality.
Bob, Esq.
Not much.
So FFLEO,
How are you enjoying the hysteria?
Elaine,
In Re: Tuscon
I stand by what I (and Jon Stewart) have been saying all week.
Nothing constructive will get done until people calm down and start thinking and acting rationally in lieu of simply reacting for the cameras.
Bob Esq.
For the record, I understood your sarcasm.
In Re: “Change we can believe in”
Homer: “In case you didn’t notice, I was being sarcastic Marge.”
Bob,Esq.,
P.S. A fine speech in Tuscon doesn’t make things “all better.”
Bob,Esq.,
What Buddha said.
eniobob,
Excellent. Despite being made nearly 40 years ago, “The Prisoner” is still totally relevant to the present.
Bob,
No. “Change we can believe in” was the lie that got Obama the power. His abuse of power is still intrinsically evil.
Maybe that’s why there are so many former Obama supporters posting here.
Food for thought.
Don’t you understand; when Bush did it, it was evil.
But when Obama pressed further from where Bush left off, it’s change we can believe in.
eniobob,
Thanks for that video clip!
rafflaw,
I agree with you about allowing DHS to make its own rules. I would have written a longer post–but I felt it would be better for people to read Greenwald’s article.
*****
FF Leo,
I agree–even though I found myself in disagreement with his opinion of the Citizens United case.
*****
Buddha,
Gotta pat down and X-ray little old ladies like me for perverse fun and for profit, doncha know?
😉
“Our civil liberties and rights are being eroded while most of us sit silent. Where is the outcry? Even a watchdog like Greenwald talks of how he had become “inured” to the abuses of our civil liberties and how “severe incursions start to seem ordinary.” Greenwald wrote:”
I wonder how the people who “back in the day”when all this security started,you know when people said oh I’m not doing anything wrong they can check my cell phone calls etc,etc.
Can’t help it BIL :
Elaine,
This is a great topic. The Greenwald article was also useful in understanding the full breadth of these searches. I am not sure that I agree with Greenwald and Sanchez that this bill is a good first step. I understanad the difficulty in getting a bill through the House now, but to now introduce the proper bill and force the Right to vote against upholding the 4th amendment is the wrong way to go at it. If Congress allows Homeland Securityto make its own rules, they will just promulgate this same egregious behavior. By the way,can’t we get rid of that “homeland” word in the title? It has a very National Socialist ring to it.
I will begin by stating that Glenn Greenwald is a must-read constitutional lawyer.
Just mounting evidence that the DHS is an unconstitutional organization that should be dismantled.
They’re engaged in the draconian and nonjudicial usurpation of citizen’s 4th Amendment rights and a huge waste of money – money that is largely being funneled to insiders who gamed the system for private gain – like former DHS head Michael Chertoff who has a substantial financial interest in selling the backscatter X-ray devices that are of dubious function in stopping actual terrorists and expose people needlessly to ionizing radiation.