The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) began the "I'm a Constitution Voter" campaign, to get Americans to consider civil liberty concerns when they go to vote in November. The ACLU is asking voters to sign a petition opposing warrantless surveillance and opposing torture. The petition also states;

• "I believe that government officials, no matter how high-ranking, should be held accountable for breaking the law and violating the Constitution.
• I reject the notion that we have to tolerate violations of our most fundamental rights in the name of fighting terrorism.
• I am deeply committed to the Constitution and expect our country's leaders to share and act on that commitment—every day, without fail."

The ACLU also has a number of "activist tools" available, such as information on canvassing, how to write a letter to the editor, and how to ask questions at a candidate event.

Sign the Constitution Voter pledge here.

The Justice Department argues that new rules for national security investigations will help protect Americans from a terror attack. The Los Angeles Times reports that these "changes would expand rules the department enacted after the Sept. 11 attacks that permitted the FBI to conduct 'assessments' of threats of terrorism and espionage even in instances where little or no proof existed of criminal activity." Some privacy and civil liberties advocates were briefed on the rules last week by Justice Department officials, and afterwards expressed the concern that this would allow for racial profiling.

OMB Watch signed on to a letter sent to ranking members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, "expressing concern with changes to federal guidelines that would lower the bar for the FBI's law enforcement and intelligence investigations."

"We ask that you thoroughly question FBI Director Mueller this week about the extent of these changes and convene a hearing of civil liberties experts to discuss the implications of the guidelines once they become public and before they go into effect."

"It appears that fundamental changes will be made in the FBI and Department of Justice rules that govern criminal investigations and domestic intelligence gathering, and the implications of those changes require your dedicated oversight. We also ask that you prevent any funding from being used to implement these changes until the next Attorney General has a chance to review them."

For more information on the new rules, read this article from the latest OMB Watcher, Critics Ask DOJ to Drop Proposed Expansion of Domestic Surveillance Powers.

On September 15, the Global Nonprofit Information Network (GNIN) issued a series of fact sheets that concisely document how the war on terror hampers charitable activities.

• Counterterrorism & Charities At a Glance
• U.S. Counterterrorism Laws Are Impacting Charities
• U.S. Charities Are Not a Significant Source of Terrorist Funding
• Charities Are Being Shut Down Through a Process That Is Secretive, Arbitrary, and Unfair
• Treasury Department Enforcement Actions are Unclear and Unfair, and Penalties are Disproportionately Harsh
• Counterterrorism Policies Discourage Charities From Attacking the Root Cause of Terrorism
• The Treasury Department's Counterterrorism Policies are Unfairly Suspicious of Specific Types of Charities and Styles of Giving
• A Better Federal Counterterrorism Strategy Would Improve Charities' Effectiveness and Keep America Safer

To view the seven fact sheets, please click here.

The Los Angeles Times reports that eight members of a group planning protests at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis have been arrested by the Ramsey County Sheriff's Department and charged with conspiracy to commit terrorist acts. According to the article, the group planned to block traffic and "considered barricading bridges, spraying delegates with urine and possibly kidnapping delegates." The charges could result in prison sentences of up to five years and fines of $10,000 or both.

A trial on these charges will raise important issues about the definition of terrorism and how it can or should be distinguished from free speech, including protests. OMB Watch raised concerns about political use of Patriot Act powers in this 2001 report. We will continue to track this case and report on new developments.

Posted by Kay Guinane, 12:54:27 PM