Replies

August 10, 2004
U.S. to Give Border Patrol New Powers to Deport Illegal Aliens
By RACHEL L. SWARNS

WASHINGTON, Aug. 10 — Citing concerns about terrorists crossing the nation's
land borders, the Department of Homeland Security announced today that it
planned to give border patrol agents sweeping new powers to deport illegal
aliens from the frontiers abutting Mexico and Canada without providing the
aliens the opportunity to make their case before an immigration judge.

The move, which will take effect this month, represents a broad expansion of
the authority of the thousands of law enforcement agents who currently
patrol the nation's borders. Until now, border patrol agents typically
delivered undocumented immigrants to the custody of the immigration courts,
where judges determined whether they should be deported or remain in the
United States.

Homeland Security officials described the immigration courts — which hear
pleas for asylum and other appeals to remain in the country — as sluggish
and cumbersome, saying illegal immigrants often wait more than a year before
being deported, straining the capacity of detention centers and draining
critical resources. Under the new system, immigrants will typically be
deported within eight days of their apprehension, officials said.

Immigration legislation passed in 1996 allows the immigration service to
deport certain groups of illegal aliens without judicial oversight, but
until now the agency only permitted officials at the nation's airports and
seaports to do so. The new rule will apply to illegal aliens caught within
100 miles of the Mexican and Canadian borders who have spent 14 days or less
within the United States. The border agents will focus on deporting
third-country nationals, rather than Mexicans or Canadians, and they are
expected to begin exercising their new powers on Aug. 24 in Tucson and
Laredo, Tex.

"There is a concern that as we tighten the security of our ports of entry
through our biometric checks that there will be more opportunity or more
effort made by terrorists to enter our country through our vast land
borders," Asa Hutchinson, the undersecretary for border security at the
Department of Homeland Security, said at a news conference.

"We recognize that we have to secure those and that's the president's first
principle of immigration reform," Mr. Hutchinson said. "America must secure
its borders and this is a part of that effort."

The decision was hailed by officials who have long complained that the
nation's porous borders represent a serious threat to national security. But
it prompted a flurry of criticism from advocates for immigrants who warned
that the new system lacked adequate safeguards to ensure that people fleeing
persecution, American citizens lacking paperwork or other travelers with
legitimate grounds would not be improperly deported.

Mr. Hutchinson said that border agents would be trained on asylum law and
that immigrants who demonstrated a credible fear of persecution would be
sent to see immigrant judges, not returned to hostile governments. "That
right," he said of the right to apply for asylum, "is very important."

But Homeland Security officials provided little details about the training,
and advocates said that they feared that mistakes would be made when border
agents decide who will be deported and who will not, often in the vast,
inhospitable plains of the southern deserts.

No-Fly List Raises Civil-Liberty Concerns

Aug 10, 4:24 PM (ET)

By DAVID KRAVETS

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The Sept. 11 Commission wants the government to expand
the no-fly list airlines now check to keep suspected terrorists off planes,
consolidating as many as 12 secret lists maintained by different
intelligence agencies.

That worries the American Civil Liberties Union, which has already sued the
government, saying the airlines' effort to keep terror suspects and other
dangerous people off planes ensnares innocent passengers and subjects them
to unnecessary searches and delays. Also, the government provides no way for
those wrongly named to get themselves removed.

"Right now, if you're on the list, you're in a no-fly jail. There is now way
out of this," said Barry Steinhardt, the director of the ACLU's Technology
and Liberty Project.

Commissioners agree the government has a "definite interest" in ensuring the
protection of passengers' civil liberties as well as their safety. Their
report, however, didn't spell out how the government should improve its
checks and balances for the watch lists.

In lawsuits filed in San Francisco and Seattle, the ACLU has demanded the
government explain how wrongly flagged travelers - usually targeted because
they have names similar to those on the list - can get off it. The ACLU also
wants to know how many people are on the list.

"They have to make the best efforts to make sure it's accurate and has to
have a procedure to make sure people mistakenly identified can get off the
list," Steinhardt said.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who privately reviewed the government's
"sensitive" data, ordered the government in June to further explain why it
hasn't disclosed certain documents in response to the ACLU's Freedom of
Information Act request.

Breyer said the government has refused to say why the number of people on
the list should not be disclosed. He also wonders why the government
classified its procedure for adding names to the list as "non-disclosable
sensitive security information."

"In many instances, the government has not come close to meeting its burden,
and, in some cases, has made frivolous claims of exemption," Breyer wrote.

Authorities have repeatedly refused comment on Breyer's ruling or questions
about the no-fly list.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Transportation Security
Administration and other agencies cite security concerns for not publicly
disclosing to the ACLU why two of the group's clients - peace activists who
publish a magazine critical of the Bush administration - were detained at
San Francisco International Airport. The two believe they were wrongly
detained because their names popped up in the database.

The agencies even blacked out names of government officials in charge of the
list, including the FBI employee responsible for responding to inquiries
from the public regarding names appearing on the list.

President Bush last year authorized the FBI to establish the consolidated
database the commission recommends be used at airports. Homeland Security
Director Tom Ridge, when announcing the creation of the still unfinished
mega-database last year, said "the job of the new Terrorist Screening Center
is to make sure we get this information out to our agents on the borders and
all those who can put it to use on the front lines."

The Sept. 11 Commission urged that the government take over pre-screening
responsibilities from the airlines even before a new system is developed.

The list the airlines use includes only the people the government believes
"pose a direct threat to aviation." Many names of potential terrorists, now
kept in a slew of government databases, have been held back from the
airlines because some agencies consider the information too sensitive to
share.

That problem can be solved, the commission said, if the lists are
consolidated and the TSA takes charge of preflight passenger screening.

"Because air carriers implement the program, concerns about sharing
intelligence information with private firms and foreign countries keep the
U.S. government from listing all terrorist and terrorist suspects who should
be included," the report said.

The airline industry has welcomed that recommendation, which is expected to
be the subject of congressional debate this month. House leaders say they
want legislation to implement the commission's proposals in September, and
Senate leaders by October.

"We are all for the government being in charge of that, of the government
assuming that responsibility," said Diana Cronan, a spokeswoman for the Air
Transport Association of America, which represents 22 airlines, including
all major U.S. carriers. "They have all the information. They're trained and
they have the intelligence."

The commission noted its airline screening proposal, as well as other ideas
that would increase the government's power over the public, could tread on
civil liberties. That's why it recommends the creation of an executive
branch board committed "to defend our civil liberties" at a "time of
increased and consolidated government authority."

"How that may be fashioned is probably best left to the Congress and
president," said commission spokesman Jonathan Stull.