There's a good editorial in the Des Moines Register on our vanishing privacy rights:

President Bush dismisses the privacy implications of this government spying by calling it a "terrorist surveillance program." That suggests only those guilty of something are affected. But there's no way to know for sure in advance of a search that the party is guilty of anything. Besides, that makes a mockery of the American system of criminal justice, which contains elaborate safeguards that protect even the guilty from unconstitutional searches.

Even if government spying is intended to be directed only at criminal or terrorist plots, there is no way to guard against abuses when the process is done in total secrecy and there are no checks by either Congress or the courts.

Senator Hillary Clinton delivered the opening address at the American Constitution Society Convention in Washington this morning. [Update: I just watched her speech on C-Span 2, it's a good one, catch a repeat if you can]

She announced new proposed legislation to address the security of private information. Declaring privacy to be "synonymous with liberty," Senator Clinton called for greater federal protection for personal data from theft or misuse by private commercial actors, as well as great Congressional and judicial oversight over domestic surveillance and data-mining programs unilaterally crafted by the executive branch.

You can watch her speech here.

[larger version]

Amnesty International Switzerland has an amazing new ad campaign. Just scroll through all the pictures. The campaign is in German, so I have no idea what the text is, but the graphics are so universal, who cares?

Via Living on an Island, the overseas blogger whose created the WordPress theme Relaxation (out of hundreds, it's the one I selected for TalkLeft. How cool that he also cares about civil liberties.)

Update: TalkLeft reader PJ writes in that the sign reads, "It Didn't Happen Here, But Now." Another commenter says it is "It's Happening. Not Here. But Now." More translation below:

Say hello to "Driving While Muslim."

A bill with bi-partisan support has been introduced in New York to allow police to engage in racial and ethic profiling:

The proposed legislation would authorize law enforcement officials to "consider race and ethnicity as one of many factors that could be used in identifying persons who can be initially stopped, questioned, frisked and/or searched."

This is a mistake. The law will be misused. From Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union:

"Racial and ethnic profiling has been shown time and time again to be not only anathema to principles of equality, but it's bad law enforcement," she said in a telephone interview. Lieberman likened targeting people as possible suspects based on race or ethnicity to "tactics used by the Bush administration - like the roundup of Muslims, or special registration of immigrants."

by TChris

The first hot button right wing issue of the political summer -- the proposed amendment to "protect marriage" by prohibiting states from allowing gays to marry -- failed to advance today on a Senate vote of 49-48. Pro-amendment senators who championed the doomed amendment claimed that the issue was worth debating to show "progress" toward its eventual passage. The 2004 vote was 50-48. Not much progress toward bigotry this year.

The Republican Senate is now free to move on to other hot button social issues in its valiant attempt to avoid talking about rising deficits, global warming, chaos in Iraq, inadequate cargo inspection, and the other burning issues of the day that Republicans are incapable of confronting. Speaking of burning, the next non-issue Republicans will raise to distract voters is likely to be a recycled attempt to amend the Constitution to prohibit flag burning. Have you seen much flag burning in the U.S. lately?

Republican Senator James Inhofe (Okla.) at today's gay marriage debate in the Senate (sorry for the caps, that's how I received it from The Senate Majority:

{14:24:36} (MR. INHOFE) (NOT AN OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT }AS YOU SEE HERE, AND I THINK THIS IS MAYBE THE MOST IMPORTANT PROP WE'LL HAVE DURING THE ENTIRE DEBATE, MY WIFE AND I HAVE BEEN MARRIED 47 YEARS. WE HAVE 20 KIDS AND GRANDKIDS. I'M REALLY PROUD TO SAY THAT IN THE RECORDED HISTORY OF OUR FAMILY, WE'VE NEVER HAD A DIVORCE OR ANY KIND OF A HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP.

by TChris

Wen Ho Lee lost his liberty (in solitary confinement) for nine months, but he's more concerned about his loss of reputation. Lee sued the Departments of Energy and Justice for violating his right to privacy "by leaking information that he was under investigation as a spy for China." The government is paying Lee $895,000 to cover his legal fees and associated taxes.

Lee subpoenaed five reporters to prove the source of the leaks. The reporters refused to disclose their sources, resulting in contempt findings, fines and jail sentences. The five media entities (AP, the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and ABC) are sweetening the settlement with another $750,000, essentially buying the freedom (and silence) of their reporters by ending the lawsuit.

by TChris

The ACLU of Indiana filed suit this week to block an Indianapolis ordinance that would prevent former sex offenders from traveling, living, or working within 1,000 feet of a park, playground, swimming pool, recreation center, sports field, or other designated areas where children might congregate.

Calling the ordinance passed in mid-May unconstitutionally vague, the group said it would make law-abiding citizens unwitting violators of the ordinance and hinder their ability to work, vote and worship.

The ordinance applies retroactively, punishing individuals who have long and untroubled residences near a prohibited area (nearly anyplace within city boundaries). The City makes an exception for ex-offenders who are accompanied by another adult, but people who have paid their debt to society shouldn't need an escort to travel to work or to exercise their right to vote.

by TChris

Nizah Hassan, together with the American Civil Liberties Union and the Council on American Islamic Relations, brought a lawsuit challenging the National Security Administration's domestic spying program. U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor "chided the NSA and lawyers for the Department of Justice for failing to respond to the court challenge" even after receiving two extensions of time to do so. The government eventually argued that justifying its actions in court would jeopardize national security, and asked the judge to dismiss the suit. She didn't.

Instead, Judge Taylor will allow Hassan to proceed with a motion that asked the court to summarily declare the spying program illegal.

"The hearing shall be held on Monday, June 12, 2006, as scheduled," Diggs Taylor ordered. "Although defendants have not responded to said motion they may, if they appear, argue against it."

Texas moves one step closer to vigiliantism.

A US state is to enlist web users in its fight against illegal immigration by offering live surveillance footage of the Mexican border on the internet. The plan will allow web users worldwide to watch Texas' border with Mexico and phone the authorities if they spot any apparently illegal crossings.

And in Denver, a local radio host, Peter Boyles, takes donations and forms a company, Billboards Colorado, to put up anti-immigrant rights billboards around the city.

Better reading: Robert Lovato, Michelle Garcia and Salim Muwakkil in the new edition of the Nation.

by TChris

As you surf the web today, keep in mind that Alberto Gonzales might take a keen interest in your viewing habits.

The U.S. is asking Internet companies including Microsoft Corp., Google Inc. and AOL to preserve records of customers' Web activity to aid terrorism and child pornography investigations. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller made the request last week at a meeting with industry executives, said Brian Roehrkasse, a Justice Department spokesman. More talks are scheduled for today and tomorrow. ...

The agency has asked Internet companies to retain records such as lists of e-mails sent and received or information on Web searches.

Whether Gonzales is interested in your perusal of TalkLeft is unknown.

by TChris

Remember when John Ashcroft assured us that the Patriot Act wouldn't be used to access library records? Raw Story has a nice piece that explains how the government kept the truth quiet until the Patriot Act was reauthorized.

[Connecticut] Librarians, members of Library Connection, a not-for profit cooperative organization for resource sharing across 26 Connecticut library branches sharing a centralized computer, were served with a National Security Letter (NSL) in August of last year as part of the FBI's attempt to attain access to patron's records. ...

On September 9 of last year, a federal judge lifted the gag order and rejected the government's argument that identifying the plaintiff would pose a threat to national security.

Yet the government continued to appeal the case throughout the reauthorization debate, passionately arguing that not a single incident of civil liberties violations by the Patriot Act had occurred. By continuing the appeal, the government effectively silenced any evidence to counter their claims.