General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe ACLU agrees with the NRA and Paul Ryan about terror watch/no fly lists
https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/until-no-fly-list-fixed-it-shouldnt-be-used-restrict-peoples-freedomsBy Hina Shamsi, Director, ACLU National Security Project
December 7, 2015 | 5:30 PM
The No Fly List is in the news this week, just in time for the ACLUs argument in federal court on Wednesday in its five-year-long challenge [2] to the lists redress process.
Last night, in response to last weeks tragic attack in San Bernardino, California, President Obama urged Congress to ensure that people on the No Fly List be prohibited from purchasing guns. Last week, Republicans in Congress defeated a proposal that would have done just that. "I think its very important to remember people have due process rights in this country, and we cant have some government official just arbitrarily put them on a list," House Speaker Paul Ryan said.
There is no constitutional bar to reasonable regulation of guns, and the No Fly List could serve as one tool for it, but only with major reform. As we will argue to a federal district court in Oregon this Wednesday, the standards for inclusion on the No Fly List are unconstitutionally vague, and innocent people are blacklisted without a fair process to correct government error. Our lawsuit seeks a meaningful opportunity for our clients to challenge their placement on the No Fly List because it is so error-prone and the consequences for their lives have been devastating...
...We disagree with Speaker Ryan about many things. But hes right that people in this country have due process rights. We want to see them respected.
Sgent
(5,857 posts)due process is a right. Being placed on a "terrorist" list and losing rights (to travel, buy guns, whatever) without the ability to challenge that designation in court violates the right to due process.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)It appears the ACLU has placed some qualifiers into their position. The No Fly list needs both policy reform and physical overhauling, and the relevant restrictions of purchasing firearms shouldn't be instituted until after that overhaul is complete.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)safeinOhio
(32,656 posts)From the ACLU
In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia. The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)the other dozens of rights-restricting policies on Ryan's platform...
As an aside, how is the ACLU's al-Awlaki lawsuit going? Did they determine they hitched their horse to a losing wagon, or are they still trying to dig themselves out of a hole?