ACLU Rights Only Geographical?

Free Market News
Dec. 01, 2005

Apparently, the concept of "civil liberties" depends on where you live, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. Although the organization has long had a blind spot on Second Amendment issues, the First and Fourth Amendments have generally been fairly well defended by its officials. In fact, the New York CLU continues to fight local police actions, including as co-respondents in a new lawsuit to restrain the NYPD from videotaping political demonstrations.

However, in Miami, Florida, it's a different story. In the face of recent police raids in that city, presumably to ferret out reportedly terrorist cells there, the local ACLU chapter has come out in support of clear violations of Bill of Rights protections. The police have announced they will be staging "random shows of force at hotels, banks, and other public places to keep terrorists guessing and remind people to be vigilant."

Police Chief John Timoney admitted there was "no specific, credible threat of an imminent terror attack in Miami," but declared the city "has repeatedly been mentioned" as a potential target, in intelligence reports. He also cited the fact that 14 of the 19 alleged September 11 attackers had lived in South Florida at some time or another. Florida's ACLU executive director Howard Simon, rather than objecting to this announcement, was instead cautiously supportive: "What we’re dealing with is officers on street patrol," he reportedly said, "which is more effective and more consistent with the Constitution. We’ll have to see how it is implemented."

Response from libertarians was anything but civil. "I don’t know what to say!" said Jay, on the Stop the ACLU site. "Their inconsistency on this issue has me completely confused. …While I am for searches on airplanes, and subways, it sounds a little scary that I might just be minding my own business and…BOOM, everyone is surrounded and asked for I.D.’s." From other venues, Cato Institute fellow Radley Balko reportedly said, "If the terrorists hate us for our freedom, then...are we ever appeasing the terrorists." Paul Watson of prisonplanet summed it up with the pronouncement, "American Police State: The Frog Has Cooked."

AN ACLU CLARIFICATION

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Contact: Alessandra Soler Meetze at 305-576-2337 ext. 16.

ACLU Statement on Miami Shield Program

There is some confusion over the specifics of the “Miami Shield” Program. Reports differ as to whether the plan involves large squads of officers stopping everyone at a locale and then demanding people to produce identification. Although the Miami Police Department has claimed that “Miami Shield” will respect people’s right, much of its constitutionality will depend on how the program is implemented.

If police officers plan on stopping people and demanding identification without any reason to believe that there is criminal activity, that is unconstitutional.

When law enforcement stops people based on individualized suspicion of wrongdoing, that is always both more effective and consistent with constitutional principles.

Other post 9-11 law enforcement tactics such as randomly searching subway users in New York City or conducting mass pat-down searches of everyone entering the Raymond James Football Stadium in Tampa violate constitutional principles and are a waste of law enforcement resources.

----------------

Suzette M. Laboy, Broadcast Editor for the AP of Florida issued the following retraction:

MIAMI (AP) - In a Nov. 28 story about the Miami Police Department’s new counterterrorism initiative, a police official discussing a hypothetical exercise said that officers might surround a bank building and check the identities of people entering and leaving. The story should have made clear that police will not be checking identification without cause