The ACLU agrees with the NRA and Paul Ryan about terror watch/no fly lists

[friendly_iconoclast]

Reposted from GD:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027439041

https://www.aclu.org/blog/speak-freely/until-no-fly-list-fixed-it-shouldnt-be-used-restrict-peoples-freedoms

Until the No Fly List Is Fixed, It Shouldn’t Be Used to Restrict People’s Freedoms

By 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 ACLU’s argument in federal court on Wednesday in its five-year-long challenge [2] to the list’s redress process.

Last night, in response to last week’s 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 it’s very important to remember people have due process rights in this country, and we can’t 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 he’s right that people in this country have due process rights. We want to see them respected.

No doubt this will cause consternation and/or cognitive dissonance in some.
The resulting logical twists should be quite amusing to watch...

[saturnsring]

1. wouldnt that same logic mean the no-fly list is also unconstitutional?

[gejohnston]

2. yes it is and

the ACLU and progressive have been saying that since its creation.

[saturnsring]

3. thanks

[safeinOhio]

4. ACLU position on the Second Amendment

So happy to see you standing up for them.

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.

[gejohnston]

5. we know, but not relevant

the issue is Bush's list of names.
https://www.aclu.org/news/court-rules-no-fly-list-process-unconstitutional-and-must-be-reformed

If we are talking about DiFi's bill, the no fly list isn't really relevant either since the bill would give the AG the authority to add any name based on reasonable suspicion.