Posted on 12/14/2015 11:39:23 AM PST by Kaslin
Last week, the House Oversight Committee held a hearing on the terrorism and visa waiver programs. Department of Homeland Security's Deputy Assistant Secretary Kelli Ann Burriesci was asked to testify. Her testimony can be found here. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) ripped into her for giving scarce and I'm being generous with that term details on what process is offered to American citizens before they're added on the terrorism watch list for mere suspicion, not conviction, of being terrorists.
"What process is afforded a U.S. citizen, not someone who has overstayed a visa, not someone who crossed the border without permission, but an American citizen; what process is currently afforded an American citizen before they go on that list," asked Gowdy.
Trey Gowdy Grills DHS Official on Due Process
"I'm sorry, um, there's not a process afforded the citizen prior to getting on the list; there is a process should someone feel they are unduly placed on the list," responded Burriesci after a few seconds of silence.
"Yes, there is," interjected Gowdy.
"When I say process, I'm actually using half of the term due process, which is a phrase we find in the Constitution that we cannot deprive people of certain things without due process. So I understand Mr. Gude's* idea, which is wait until your right has taken from you, and then you petition the government to get it back; I understand that's his idea. My question is can you name another constitutional right that we have that is chilled, until you find out it's chilled and then you have to petition the government to get it back. Is that true with the First Amendment?
Gowdy was obviously striking at President Obama's half-baked proposal to ban people on these lists from buying firearms. Burriesci tried again to reference the criteria of the lists, which was cut off by Gowdy who said that wasn't his question.
"That is not my question. My question is what process is afforded a U.S. citizen before that person's constitutional right is infringed?" he said.
He then gave hypotheticals about blocking people on the terrorism watch list from setting up a website, a Google account, or preventing them from entering houses of worship until they petition the government to get their rights back. Gowdy then listed the Sixth and Eighth Amendments, which protect Americans from cruel and unusual punishment and the right to a counsel for a speedy trial.
Burriesci couldn't name another constitutional right that would be stripped in the same manner as our Second Amendment rights.
Needless to say, this was messy, but it's an issue that’s been debated for years.
The lack of due process concerning the terrorism watch list is well known. Civil liberties organizations have been suing the government over this issue within this Bush-era anti terror program, along with noting the lack of transparency and secretive nature of these lists that strip Americans of their Fifth Amendment rights. Remember, nearly 300,000 people on these lists have zero ties to terrorism, the vast majority don't even live in the U.S. (that prevent them from buying firearms here outright), and the people are placed on the list based on mere suspicion. There are no more than 10,000 Americans on these lists; no one has ever been convicted.
Any American can be added to the list, and there's no guide as to how one can readdress this issue. Name mismatches occur all the time; even 18-month old babies find their names of the terror watch lists.
Steps are being made in bringing more sunlight into this rather despicable anti-terror program. The government will now actually tell you if you're on the list, whereas before they wouldn't tell you, nor would they give you a process in how to remedy the situation. That's unconstitutional and the appeals process for those on the no-fly list still lack procedures that the ACLU finds adequate. Yes, the ACLU is actually right on this issue. Unless a major overhaul is conducted, they feel no freedoms should be restricted. The LA Times agreed as well.
At the same time, Democrats did warn that this program could run amok; Republicans ignored them. Now, Democrats want to set the Fifth Amendment on fire to destroy the Second, while Republicans are now recognizing that terror watch lists represent the worst of American national security policy. Both parties are to blame for hypocrisy. Yet, I think most agree that having your rights stripped based on suspicion is beyond atrocious. For nearly 10,000 Americans, this administration pretty much is looking for a way to institute a soft gun ban for you. In a liberal's eye, keeping firearms from 10,000 people, who we'll assume are law-abiding, and reducing access to guns makes perfect sense, even if they haven't been convicted.
You'd have to be on cocaine to actually think this is a good Obama policy.
*Gude is a reference to Ken Gude, a senior fellow at the left-wing Center for American Progress, who was also asked to appear before the committee.
It was most refreshing to see that Trey voted AGAINST the extension through 2020 of the intrusive ‘No Child’s Behind Left’.
Unfortunately, it failed due to the lousy Republican’s crossing over to Debbie Washerwoman Schultz’s gang. And even more unfortunately seeing Congressman Posey included with the traitors.
Gowdy is a good man!
Yeah, let's do that.
Trey Gowdy has taken so many of the Obama Admin to the perverbial wood shed! Is it a more severe terrifying punishment than being fired or going to prison? No really, I want to know!
Let me know when those shags in DC actually hold someone IN GOVERNMENT accountable and fire or send them to prison!!!!
Exactly, they have zero authority over each other. They deal in words only.
“Let me know when those shags in DC actually hold someone IN GOVERNMENT accountable and fire or send them to prison!!!”
When I saw the headline, I thought the same thing. Getting pretty tired of “strong words” or “taking someone to the woodshed”. Seems like it’s all just Kabuki theater.
Gowdy is a good man.
Paul Ryan is going to cost us. Probably in lives as well as rights.
Proper assessment of Ryan.
He is, like so many Republicrats, a disgraceful mistake.
I would like to see him as Attorney general.
“speechlessly incredible” ... Trey Gowdy, U.S. Attorney General ... for either President Ted Cruz or Donald Trump ...
Even Philip K. Dick, favorite author of libs, thought “precrime” enforcement was a bad idea.
Ditto!
And you can tell where her dedication to duty is when she says she is a "career government employee"
OK, this is just SO UNFAIR to fascist ba$tards for rightwingnuts like Gowdy to keep bringing up centuries old manuscripts. After all, we need to be about saving the world.
I like Trey Gowdy.
So do I
Thank goodness someone in America is concerned with this obvious flaw in Obama's plan. To think that the media is complicit and knowingly hides this important fact from the public is frightening.
He would be perfect.
Plenty of politicians are gonna talk a good game for the next several months leading up to Nov 2016. Talktalktalktalktalktalktalk. Lots of promises. Lots of smoke being blown up our......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.