http://www.aclu-mn.org/

http://www.aclufl.org/

Albuquerque–The ACLU of New Mexico responded to emerging reports of problems with touch-screen voting machines by urging voters to “guard their vote” when casting their ballots electronically.

Read this press release or
list all press releases

From: Matt Howes, National Internet Organizer, ACLU

1) Act Now to Ensure Creation of a Critical Government Civil Liberties Watchdog
2) Let your Representative know how you feel about his or her vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment

At this very moment, leaders from the House and Senate are engaged in heated negotiations over what could become the most dramatic restructuring ever of our nation’s intelligence agencies. One of the key sticking points is the creation of a robust Privacy and Civil Liberties Board to ensure that government actions do not infringe on our liberties. (more…)

The AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
of New Mexico
cordially invites you to

UNCONSTITUTIONAL

UNM SUB Ballroom, Albuquerque
Monday October 25, 2004 7:00pm

Speakers & Film
Tickets are FREE. Seats are limited.

About the Film:

Unconstitutional is a groundbreaking new documentary that details the shocking way that civil liberties have been infringed upon and rolled back since 9/11. In the rush to pass the USA Patriot Act, intelligence agencies including the FBI, CIA, Homeland Security Department and local law enforcement have been empowered to “protect freedom and democracy” by destroying our freedom and democracy. The film boldly depicts the frightening truth about the rapid loss of American civil liberties and documents those who are fighting back.

Executive Producers: Robert Greenwald, Earl Katz, Dan Raskov
Written, Produced and Directed by Nonny de la Peña
Sponsored by the American Civil Liberties Union

Most web pages can be displayed in any web browser. Some require additional support from a browser plug-in or add-in. (more…)

From: Matt Howes, National Internet Organizer, ACLU

Congress continues to use the proposed intelligence reform legislation to provide cover for some of the worst anti-immigrant provisions in the last decade. These repressive provisions attack the courts’ ability to provide oversight over immigrant proceedings, allow the government to work with oppressive foreign governments against asylum seekers and stipulate new ID requirements that limit even legal immigrants’ ability to get driver’s licenses.

Although the 9-11 Commission did not say the government needed to target immigrants, this bill would expand the government’s ability to deport more people without a hearing. It would also allow the government to seize people who may have entered the United States outside the system in the last five years and throw them into a so-called expedited deportation process without the right to a lawyer or to at least make their case in court.

The government would – with no check or balance on its powers – be allowed to decide whether an individual is allowed to stay or be sent to another country, even ones like Libya, North Korea or Iran, as long as those governments **promise** not to engage in torture. And if for some reason the government cannot deport you, this Republican legislation would allow the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to put you in jail for the rest of your life without any ability to go to court to appeal your imprisonment.

Take Action! Urge Congress to oppose these radical and mean-spirited provisions.

Click here for more information and to take action:

http://www.aclu.org/ImmigrantsRights/ImmigrantsRights.cfm?ID=16842&c=22

UNCONSTITUTIONAL is a new, hour-long documentary from Robert Greenwald – one of the most prolific and progressive producers in Hollywood – in conjunction with the ACLU. This new film, written, directed and produced by Nonny de la Peña, details the shocking way that civil liberties of American citizens and immigrants alike have been infringed upon, curtailed, and rolled back since 9/11 and the USA Patriot Act.

New Mexico will be holding a screening of Unconstitutional on October 25 in Albuquerque.

Learn more (including a preview)

NEW YORK – The American Civil Liberties Union will be monitoring a new plan
by the FBI to, among other things, use
“aggressive - even obvious - surveillance ” techniques on individuals who
are not even suspected of having committed a crime, in advance of the
November 2 general election.

“The FBI plans to deliberately tail people based on their religion or ethnic
origin during a month that is both religiously and politically crucial,”
said Dalia Hashad, the ACLU’s Arab, Muslim and South Asian Advocate.
“Instead of bolstering security, the FBI’s ‘October Plan’is going to stop
Muslims and Arabs from attending mosques during the month of Ramadan, and
participating in the upcoming election.” (more…)

Catch our Director, Peter Simonson, at the Albuquerque bookstore Bound To Be Read TONIGHT from 7-9 pm! Following the film Tattered Documentary, Peter will discuss the USA Patriot Act and data-privacy. Read the latest USAPA news below…

In ACLU Case, Federal Court Strikes Down Patriot Act Surveillance Power As Unconstitutional

NEW YORK - Saying that “democracy abhors undue secrecy,” a federal court today struck down an entire Patriot Act provision that gives the government unchecked authority to issue "National Security Letters" to obtain sensitive customer records from Internet Service Providers and other businesses without judicial oversight. The court also found a broad gag provision in the law to be an “unconstitutional prior restraint” on free speech.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE"Censorship And Secrecy May Potentially Be Turned On Ourselves As A Weapon Of Self-Destruction,” Court Says

NEW YORK - Saying that “democracy abhors undue secrecy,” a federal court today struck down an entire Patriot Act provision that gives the government unchecked authority to issue “National Security Letters” to obtain sensitive customer records from Internet Service Providers and other businesses without judicial oversight. The court also found a broad gag provision in the law to be an “unconstitutional prior restraint” on free speech.

“This is a landmark victory against the Ashcroft Justice Department’s misguided attempt to intrude into the lives of innocent Americans in the name of national security,” said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. “Even now, some in Congress are trying to pass additional intrusive law enforcement powers. This decision should put a halt to those efforts.”

The American Civil Liberties Union and the New York Civil Liberties Union, which brought a challenge to the law earlier this year, hailed the ruling as a signal blow to the current administration’s efforts to expand government surveillance powers in violation of the Constitution.

“Today’s ruling is a wholesale refutation of excessive government secrecy and unchecked executive power,” said ACLU attorney Jameel Jaffer. “As this decision suggests, certain provisions of the Patriot Act should never have been enacted in the first place.”

The ruling is the first to strike down any of the vast new surveillance powers authorized by the Patriot Act. In a 120-page decision, Judge Victor Marrero of the Southern District of New York struck down Section 505 of the law on the grounds that it violates free speech rights under the First Amendment as well as the right to be free from unreasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment.

Since filing the case, the ACLU has labored under a broad gag order under which the government sought at every turn to censor even the most innocuous, non-sensitive information about the case. (The ACLU created a special web page to display the types of information it was forced to ask the court to disclose publicly, online at www.aclu.org/gagorder)

The ACLU originally filed the lawsuit under seal to avoid penalties for violating the NSL statute’s broad gag provision. Similar gag provisions are attached to other controversial provisions of the Patriot Act, including Section 215, which the ACLU has challenged in another lawsuit. (For more information, go to www.aclu.org/section215)

“After laboring under a gag provision for months, it is an enormous relief to be able to tell the world just how dangerous and extreme this Patriot Act power is,” said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson. “As the judge recognized, the Patriot Act imposed a ‘categorical, perpetual and automatic’ gag on every person who received a National Security Letter, as well as their lawyers.”

The court explicitly rejected the government’s increasing move toward secret and coercive investigatory tactics in the post-9/11 environment. In striking down the gag provision, the court said: “Under the mantle of secrecy, the self-preservation that ordinarily impels our government to censorship and secrecy may potentially be turned on ourselves as a weapon of self-destruction.”

“This is an important victory and significant step in the efforts to dismantle the harmful aspects of the Patriot Act,” said Arthur Eisenberg, Legal Director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, which joined the ACLU in bringing the challenge.

The ACLU noted that the Patriot Act provision was worded so broadly that it could effectively be used to obtain the names of customers of websites such Amazon.com or Ebay, or a political organization’s membership list, or even the names of sources that a journalist has contacted by e-mail.

The decision to strike down a key portion of the Patriot Act comes as Republican leadership in the House is trying to expand the Patriot Act. The ACLU said that Members of Congress should take the judge’s concerns to heart as they consider the various proposals to expand law enforcement powers. House Republicans leaders, for example, included several Patriot Act-like powers in their intelligence reform bill that is currently being debated. And in the Senate, many expect law enforcement amendments to be offered to its pending bipartisan intelligence bill.

Judge Marrero’s decision enjoins the government from issuing National Security Letters or from enforcing the gag provision. The judge stayed his ruling for 90 days in order to afford the government an opportunity to raise objections in the district court or the Second Circuit Court of Appeal. Today’s case isDoe and ACLU v. Ashcroft et al., No. 04-CIV-2614. Attorneys in the lawsuit are Beeson and Jaffer of the ACLU and Eisenberg of the NYCLU. The court’s ruling is online at http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=15543c=262.

An ACLU web feature about today’s case is online at www.aclu.org/nsl.