In Defense of Our Enemies, Part MMMXLI
The ACLU will support a school when it pulls the plug on a teenaged girl who wants to freely express that Jesus Christ is the greatest influence in her own life, but if the US government wants to deny a visa to a man known to hobnob with terrorists (including our favorite Blind Sheik of WTC I), the ACLU will snap on their helmets and rally to the cause of…um, uh, er…fr…ee…speech???
Federal Judge Says Government Must Act on Muslim Scholar’s Visa Request (6/23/2006)
NEW YORK — A federal judge today ruled that the government cannot continue to stonewall the visa application of Tariq Ramadan, a prominent European Muslim scholar, and that the government cannot bar non-citizens from the United States simply because of their political views. The decision comes in a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and the New York Civil Liberties Union challenging a part of the Patriot Act known as the “ideological exclusion” provision.“Today’s ruling reaffirms that the government cannot use the immigration laws to silence and stigmatize its political critics,” said Jameel Jaffer, Deputy Director of the ACLU’s National Security Program and lead attorney in the case. “As the court recognized, the ideological misuse of the immigration laws has significant effects on the freedom of academic and political debate inside the United States.”
The ACLU brought the lawsuit on behalf of the American Academy of Religion, the American Association of University Professors and PEN American Center. The groups say that the government’s refusal to allow Ramadan into the country is violating their right to hear constitutionally protected speech.
In 2004, Ramadan accepted a tenured position at the University of Notre Dame, but the government later revoked his visa, referring to a provision of the Patriot Act that applies to non-citizens who have “endorsed or espoused terrorism.” In the decision issued today, however, Judge Paul A. Crotty of the U.S. District Court for the Second Circuit noted that Ramadan “shuns violence as a form of activism and has consistently spoken out against terrorism and radical Islamists.” Judge Crotty also pointed out that, “while the United States has not granted Ramadan a visa to enter the country, Great Britain, its one staunch ally in the battle against terrorism, has not only admitted him into England so that he may teach at Oxford, but has enlisted him in the fight against terrorism.”
Ramadan submitted a new visa application in September 2005 but the government has not acted upon it, arguing that Ramadan might make future comments that would render him inadmissible under the Patriot Act provision. Judge Crotty emphatically rejected that argument.
“Allowing the government to wait for ‘possible future discovery of statements’ would mean that the government could delay final adjudication indefinitely, evading constitutional review by its own failure to render a decision on Ramadan’s application. The Court will not allow this,” wrote Judge Crotty.
Throughout his ruling, Judge Crotty underscored the need for judicial review in this case, stating that the government may not invoke national security “as a protective shroud to justify the exclusion” of people whose political views it disfavors.
“While the Executive may exclude an alien for almost any reason, it cannot do so solely because the Executive disagrees with the content of the alien’s speech and therefore wants to prevent the alien from sharing this speech with a willing American audience,” wrote Judge Crotty.
“Americans have a right to meet with foreign scholars and to hear speech that is protected by the First Amendment,” said ACLU attorney Melissa Goodman. “The free exchange of ideas is a fundamental cornerstone of our democracy that should not be abandoned simply because the administration is afraid of its critics.”
Yet another dirty ACLU whitewash. Ramadan is not simply a “prominent scholar” at intellectual odds with the Bush administration. His connections to international terrorists and love for radical Islam are deep, documented and generational (Good ol’ granddad was a founder of the Muslim Brotherhood). A sampling from the “prominent scholar’s” goody bag:
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/318
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/326
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=ia&ID=IA26606
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles//ReadArticle.asp?ID=14843
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21199_The_Tariq_Ramadan_Case&only
That Ramadan is being represented by the ACLU is no surprise. It’s just another chapter in his history of mingling with the enemies of freedom.
The Bill of Rights does not extend to overseas foreigners not even present in our country, let alone those closely connected to international terrorists. Our Constitution does not guarantee a work visa for a foreign national who espouses jihad. The First Amendment cannot be interpreted, no matter how loosely, to require that a terrorist sympathizer be imported to the US because a group of Ivory Tower imbeciles demand to hear him speak. If it is interpreted such, Mumia Abu-Jamal must be sprung immediately to go on his speaking tour. The faculty demands their rights!
As a sovereign nation, the US may deny entry to anyone for any reason pursuant to any binding treaties or other international agreements, which by the way, we may back out of if no longer in the national interest. I can’t imagine that there is anything that compels this nation to have someone who has regularly smoked-and-joked with the most putrid brand of international terrorist forced through customs.
This case demonstrates yet another dimension to the dementia. It’s unsurprisingly hypocritical that the ACLU would represent someone who promotes Islamic law and education. What happened to their spirited defense of the sacred “wall of separation?” I guess their Hierarchy of Anarchy places the violent overthrow of Western Civilization above “women’s rights,” “gay rights” and “free speech.” (Except, when the “right” of free speech is taken to mean that the US must allow a terrorist supporter into the country so professors may hear him).
Email This
Posted by G. Fortunato on June 26, 2006 7:09 pm
» Filed Under ACLU, Border Control/Homeland Security
Trackback URL:
