FBI’s Power To Track And Map “Behaviors” And “Lifestyle Characteristics” Of American Communities Raises Alarm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 27, 2010

Atlanta – The American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia today asked the FBI to turn over records related to the agency’s collection and use of race and ethnicity data in local communities.  According to a 2008 FBI operations guide, FBI agents have the authority to collect information about and map so-called “ethnic-oriented” businesses, behaviors, lifestyle characteristics and cultural traditions in communities with concentrated ethnic populations. While some racial and ethnic data collection by some agencies might be helpful in lessening discrimination, the FBI’s attempt to collect and map demographic data using race-based criteria for targeting purposes invites unconstitutional racial profiling by law enforcement, says the ACLU.

“Georgia residents deserve to know about a race-based domestic intelligence program with such troubling implications for civil liberties,” said Azadeh Shahshahani, National Security/Immigrants’ Rights Project Director with the ACLU of Georgia. “We hope that the Freedom of Information Act request filed today will bring to light the extent of the FBI’s racial data gathering and mapping practices and whether the agency is abusing its authority.”

The FBI’s power to collect, use, and map racial and ethnic data in order to assist the FBI’s “domain awareness” and “intelligence analysis” activities is described in the 2008 FBI Domestic Intelligence and Operations Guide (DIOG). The FBI released the DIOG in heavily redacted form in September 2009, but a less-censored version was not made public until January of this year, in response to a lawsuit filed by Muslim Advocates. Although the DIOG has been in effect for more than a year and a half, very little information is available to the public about how the FBI has implemented this authority.

“The FBI’s mapping of local communities and businesses based on race and ethnicity, as well as its ability to target communities for investigation based on supposed racial and ethnic behaviors, raises serious civil liberties concerns,” said Michael German, ACLU policy counsel and former FBI agent. “Creating a profile of a neighborhood for criminal law enforcement or domestic intelligence purposes based on the ethnic makeup of the people who live there or the types of businesses they run is unfair, un-American, and will certainly not help stop crime.”

ACLU affiliate offices across the country today filed coordinated Freedom of Information Act requests to uncover records about the FBI’s collection and use of racial and ethnicity data from their local FBI field offices.  In addition to the ACLU of Georgia, the requests were filed by ACLU affiliates in Alabama, Arkansas, California (Northern, Southern and San Diego), Colorado, Connecticut, Washington, D.C., Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Virginia.

The DIOG provisions in question are available online at: www.muslimadvocates.org/DIOGs_Chapter4.pdf

The entire DIOG is at: www.muslimadvocates.org/latest/profiling_update/community_alert_seek_legal_adv.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 7, 2010

WASHINGTON – The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Georgia and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (Lawyers’ Committee) filed a motion late yesterday in a Washington, D.C. federal court to intervene in a challenge to the Voting Rights Act brought by the state of Georgia. The civil rights coalition is defending the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Act and challenging the state’s flawed and racially discriminatory voter-registration practices.

Section 5 has protected racial and language minorities’ access to voting across the South and the nation since 1965 and requires some states with a history of discrimination in voting procedures to submit new procedures for federal review before they are implemented.

“The many U.S. citizen minority voters in Georgia who were incorrectly flagged as non-citizens under the state’s voter-verification procedures can attest to the fact that discrimination in voting continues and the need for Section 5 remains,” said Laughlin McDonald of the ACLU Voting Rights Project.

The coalition filed the motion to intervene in the case, Georgia v. Holder, on behalf of the Georgia State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials; Coalition for the People’s Agenda; Georgia State Rep. Tyrone Brooks; Edward Dubose, President of the Georgia State Conference of the NAACP; and Helen Butler, Executive Director of the Coalition for the People’s Agenda.

The state’s questionable voter-registration procedures rely on error-ridden government databases for citizenship verification and require birth certificates and other documents as proof of citizenship that many people, especially students, minorities and the elderly cannot easily access.

Shortly before the last presidential election, the procedures in place at the time resulted in thousands of U.S. citizens being incorrectly flagged as non-citizens and subject to being denied the right to vote. A federal court in Georgia blocked the procedures in October 2008 pending Section 5 review after a coalition of voting rights groups, including the ACLU and Lawyers’ Committee, challenged them in a lawsuit, Morales v. Handel.

In May 2009, the Department of Justice blocked the procedures that mandated the use of the flawed voter-verification databases after review under Section 5, citing their discriminatory impact on minority voters.

“Without Section 5’s preclearance protections, there is no doubt that racial and language minorities in Georgia and other covered jurisdictions would be subject to new forms of discrimination in voting,” said Robert A. Kengle, an attorney with the Voting Rights Project of the Lawyers’ Committee.

“These flawed procedures would burden or deny the right to vote to many thousands of eligible Georgia voters,” said Chara Fisher Jackson, Legal Director of the ACLU of Georgia. “We are confident that the federal court in the District of Columbia will block Georgia’s discriminatory election procedures and uphold the Voting Rights Act.”

Attorneys on the case, Georgia v. Holder, include McDonald and Meredith Bell-Platts of the ACLU Voting Rights Project, Fisher Jackson of the ACLU of Georgia, Art Spitzer of the ACLU of the Nation’s Capital, and Kengle, Jon Greenbaum and Mark A. Posner of the Lawyers’ Committee.

The motion for intervention can be found online at:

The DOJ letter blocking the state’s voter verification procedures can be found online at: www.aclu.org/voting-rights/morales-v-handel-letter-civil-rights-division-acting-assistant-attorney-general-georgi

from: The Daily Report
The Huffington Post
July 2, 2010

Azadeh Shahshahani

This past February, I was at a hearing in the Georgia House Defense & Veterans Affairs Committee to testify against a measure that would have had the effect of keeping the prison at Guantanamo Bay open by urging Congress to prohibit the transfer of Guantanamo detainees to the United States. I read a statement to the committee issued by prominent experts on national security and counter-terrorism detailing how keeping Gitmo open endangers U.S. national security. In response, one of the committee members, Representative Burke Day, stated that not only would he not vote against the measure, but that he would further amend it to clarify that the men held at Guantanamo be subjected to “waterboarding, skate boarding, surf boarding, whatever.” The fact that a state legislator would make light of torture was shocking enough. I was further taken aback that no legislator present for the hearing that day expressed outrage over the remarks.

This blase official attitude towards torture, though extreme, is not unusual. Despite disavowing torture, the Obama administration continues to shield from civil liability, criminal investigation, and public scrutiny Bush administration officials who authorized torture.

This is all the more unacceptable as a growing public record of official documents and testimonies makes undeniably clear that detainees were tortured, abused, and, in over 100 cases, even killed in U.S. custody since 9/11. The documents further reveal that officials at the very highest levels of our government authorized and encouraged the mistreatment.

Through several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has uncovered over 150,000 pages of formerly-secret government documents related to the abuse and torture of prisoners in U.S. custody overseas.

The documents, which have informed much of what we know about the Bush administration’s torture program, are also the basis of The Torture Report, an unfolding, online narrative that aims to give a full account of the Bush administration’s torture program by bringing together government documents, investigations, and witness statements.

According to Larry Siems, the principal author of The Torture Report: “These documents leave no doubt that under the Bush administration the United States violated domestic and international bans on torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, committing abuses we shielded from the eyes of the world. Few of these abuses have been properly investigated and still fewer prosecuted, and there is too little public conversation about our legal and ethical obligations to seek the healing and recovery of those we have abused.”

One of the investigation records unearthed through the ACLU’s FOIA lawsuit focuses on allegations of abuse committed by soldiers stationed in Fort Benning, Georgia. The Criminal Investigation Division of the Department of Defense initiated an investigation after Playboy Magazine published an article in May 2004, titled “Death and Dishonor.” Soldiers quoted in the article alleged that soldiers assigned to the 1/15th Infantry Battalion had, among other things, shot an unarmed Iraqi while he was fleeing, hog-tied him and physically assaulted him, and “dug inside wounds of EPWs [enemy prisoners of war] while they were incapacitated.” The investigation determined that “there are indications that the allegation of abuse of an EPW while in custody could have occurred; however, there were no direct witnesses and the suspect is deceased.” The investigation was closed on or about July 26, 2004.

Earlier this week, on the occasion of Torture Awareness Month, the ACLU of Georgia sponsored an event called “Reckoning with Torture: Memos and Testimonies from the ‘War on Terror’,” where local artists took the stage with politicians, activists, and professors to read from testimonials and memos that have brought the abuses to light.

One of the documents read was an excerpt from a legal memo signed by Jay Bybee, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, and issued to the CIA, in which the use of waterboarding was authorized: “In this procedure, the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual’s feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner. As this is done, the cloth is lowered until it covers the nose and mouth. Once the cloth is saturated and completely covers the mouth and nose, air flow is slightly restricted for 20 to 40 seconds due to the presence of the cloth. This causes an increase in carbon dioxide level in the individual’s blood. This increase in the carbon dioxide level stimulates increased effort to breathe. This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of ’suffocation and incipient panic,’ i.e., the perception of drowning. During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of twelve to twenty-four inches. . . . You have orally informed us that this procedure triggers an automatic physiological sensation of drowning that the individual cannot control even though he may be aware that he is in fact not drowning.”

In his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in January 2009, Attorney General Holder declared that waterboarding amounts to torture.

Yet an ongoing investigation of the torture program initiated by the Justice Department in August 2009 excludes top-level officials. The administration also continues to withhold from the public key documents relating to the CIA’s rendition, detention, and interrogation program; has urged courts not to allow torture victims to bring claims under the Constitution; and has invoked the “state secrets” privilege to prevent torture victims from having their day in court.

The administration must change course now by broadening the scope of the criminal investigation to include senior officials who authorized or encouraged the abuse, and by allowing the victims of torture to have their day in court. Doing otherwise will institutionalize impunity and do irreparable damage to the rule of law. And it will also no doubt lead to normalization and continued official endorsement of torture of the kind witnessed in the Georgia legislature.

At the event held earlier this week, Professor Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im spoke about his visit to Guantanamo a few years back: “The thought of being kept in detention for six years, eight years in these conditions is unbearable…as human beings, we often hear about atrocities being committed and wonder why? These atrocities happen because we and people like us allow them to happen. When will they stop? When we and people like us stop them.”

It is past time for us as a country to reckon with torture. One hundred fifty thousand pages of torture documents demand accountability.

Arizona Racial Profiling Law Threatens Civil Liberties

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 30, 2010

Atlanta – In response to civil liberties threats caused by the recent passage of Arizona’s racial profiling law, the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia issued a travel alert today informing Georgia residents of their rights when stopped by law enforcement when traveling in Arizona. The unconstitutional law, known as SB 1070, requires law enforcement agents to demand “papers” from people they stop who they suspect are not authorized to be in the U.S.  If individuals are unable to prove to officers that they are permitted to be in the U.S., they may be subject to warrantless arrest without any probable cause that they have committed a crime.

Although the law is not scheduled to go into effect until July 29, the ACLU of Georgia is concerned that some law enforcement officers are already beginning to act on provisions of the law.  Moreover, there has been a history of rampant racial profiling by law enforcement in Arizona, especially in Maricopa County, as well as a stated anti-immigrant policy of “attrition through enforcement” by Arizona lawmakers meant to create a hostile enough environment for Latinos and other people of color that they voluntarily leave the state.

“It is imperative that Georgia residents understand their rights before traveling in Arizona,” said Debbie Seagraves, Executive Director of the ACLU of Georgia. “Residents of Georgia should be aware that under this law, people who look ‘foreign’ are more likely to be stopped for minor infractions like having a broken taillight or jaywalking and then asked for their ‘papers’ if police believe, just by looking at them, that they could be in the country unlawfully.”

In addition to the travel alert, the ACLU has made available in English and Spanish materials on individuals’ rights if stopped by law enforcement in Arizona or other states as a result of SB 1070 or for any other reason. The materials include a downloadable card with instructions – applicable in any state – on coping with vehicle stops and questioning by police, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents or the FBI, as well as a Frequently Asked Questions document about SB 1070. 

“Our goal is to protect Georgia residents from illegal harassment from law enforcement and to make sure they know their rights should they encounter it,” said Azadeh Shahshahani, the ACLU of Georgia National Security/Immigrants’ Rights Project Director.  “A high proportion of our residents fit the racial profile that police will inevitably use to enforce the law.  Unfortunately, it is very possible that Georgia residents will experience racial profiling and unlawful detentions in Arizona as a result of this extreme and discriminatory measure.”

The ACLU and other leading civil rights organizations filed a lawsuit challenging the Arizona law in May, but until the law is struck down, the ACLU warns that individuals traveling in Arizona must be aware of their rights if stopped there. 

The travel alert is available on the ACLU of Georgia Website. 

Materials informing individuals of their rights when stopped by law enforcement and more information about the Arizona law, including an ACLU video and slide show, can be found at: www.aclu.org/what-happens-arizona-stops-arizona

Materials informing individuals of their rights when stopped by law enforcement optimized for mobile devices is available at: mobile.aclu.org

More information about the ACLU’s lawsuit, including information on co-counsel and plaintiffs, can be found at: www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/aclu-and-civil-rights-groups-file-legal-challenge-arizona-racial-pr

More information about the ACLU of Georgia’s work on racial profiling, including the reports on racial profiling in Cobb and Gwinnett as a result of 287(g), can be found at: www.acluga.org

###

The ACLU of Georgia’s mission is to advance the cause of civil liberties in Georgia, with emphasis on rights of free speech, free assembly, freedom of religion, due process of law and to take all legitimate action in the furtherance of such purposes without political partisanship.

The ACLU of Georgia National Security/Immigrants’ Rights project is aimed at bringing Georgia and its localities into compliance with international human rights and constitutional standards in treatment of refugee and immigrant communities, including immigrant detainees.

ACLU Filed Friend-Of-The-Court Brief With Georgia Supreme Court

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 7, 2010

 ATLANTA – The Supreme Court of Georgia heard oral arguments today regarding the constitutional rights of criminal defendants with limited English proficiency (LEP) to court interpreters. The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Georgia and Legal Aid Society – Employment Law Center (LAS–ELC) filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case charging that denying LEP individuals interpreters during criminal trials violates the U.S. Constitution.

“We don’t have two systems of justice in this country – one for English-speakers and another for everyone else,” said Azadeh Shahshahani, Director of the National Security/Immigrants’ Rights Project at the ACLU of Georgia. “The constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection apply to everyone in this country, not just to fluent English speakers.”

The ACLU’s and LAS-ELC’s brief was submitted on behalf of Annie Ling, a Mandarin-speaker who was sentenced to 10 years in prison and five years probation after a trial without an interpreter to assist her. Because of her limited English, Ling did not understand that she had the option to plead guilty rather than going to trial and face a much longer sentence, and at the trial, she could not understand the testimony for or against her. Her own trial attorney admitted that because of her limited English skills, he could not properly communicate with her without an interpreter. However, he decided not ask the court for an interpreter because he felt it would make the trial “take a lot longer” and make the jury “impatient.”

“Georgia’s justice system failed Ms. Ling from the beginning to the end,” said Araceli Martínez-Olguín, an attorney with LAS–ELC. “Georgia had an obligation to provide her with an interpreter in order to guarantee her civil rights as well as her rights to a fair trial and competent legal counsel.”

The ACLU’s and LAS–ELC’s brief argues that denying LEP individuals interpreters during criminal trials violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as the Sixth Amendment rights of criminal defendants to confront witnesses, be present at their own trial and receive effective assistance of counsel. In addition, the brief argues, Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires the state of Georgia to provide competent interpretation services to all LEP individuals who come into contact with its court system. 

“Our Constitution promises all criminal defendants a fair trial,” said Jennifer Chang Newell, a staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “But the Constitution’s promise is meaningless when a defendant’s right to liberty is determined at a trial that is incomprehensible to her.”

Attorneys on the case, Ling v. Georgia, are Newell and David Wakukawa (a volunteer attorney) of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, Azadeh Shahshahani and Chara Fisher Jackson of the ACLU of Georgia and Martínez-Olguín of the Legal Aid Society – Employment Law Center.

The legal brief can be found at: www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights/ling-v-state-georgia-amicus-brief

From the Blog of Rights

http://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/why-colleges-should-not-enter-dangerous-terrain-local-enforcement-immigratio-0

(Originally posted on AJC.com)

Jessica Colotl, the 21-year-old exemplary Kennesaw State college student who fell victim to the Cobb sheriff’s abuse of the 287(g) power, which delegates some federal immigration enforcement authority to certain state and local agencies, is out on bond and hopes to restart her education soon.

The Cobb County Sheriff’s Office’s diversion of precious resources meant for securing public safety is case in point for why the unaccountable enforcement of immigration laws by local police in Cobb County and elsewhere in Georgia needs to end immediately.

As if this case was not proof enough about the perils of local enforcement of immigration laws, some are now calling for universities to also enter the dangerous terrain of acting as immigration police.

Undocumented college students are by and large talented high achievers who arrived in the U.S. as children because of the choices their parents made. They grew up in this country and persevered against the odds to graduate from high school and secure admission to Georgia colleges.

Our common interest in providing educational access for undocumented young people was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1982 landmark case of Plyler v. Doe, the Court held that undocumented students have an exceedingly important right to basic public education as a matter of due process and equal protection.

The court observed that denying undocumented children access to k-12 primary education “raises the specter of a permanent caste of undocumented resident aliens, encouraged by some to remain here as a source of cheap labor, but nevertheless denied the benefits that our society makes available to citizens and lawful residents.” This rationale applies with equal force to higher education, increasingly essential to an individual’s potential and opportunity.

Denying higher education access to Georgia’s undocumented students would mean failing to capitalize on the state’s investment in their k-12 education.

And denying these students access to affordable college education is short-sighted because they are likely to remain in Georgia and may well regularize their immigration status under current or future federal laws. Many of those students may one day be legal residents and citizens.

Facilitating educational access to students also promotes economic growth. College graduates who are likely to remain in Georgia earn higher wages and therefore generate significantly more in income, sales and property taxes. Their increased earning power and disposable income stimulates growth in Georgia’s economy. A better educated population also increases competitiveness in the global economy.

Allowing educational access to undocumented students is a legitimate policy choice by the state and permissible under federal law.

When the North Carolina attorney general advised the state’s community colleges that federal law required them to verify the immigration status of enrolled students, the federal Department of Homeland Security clarified in a letter that federal law did not in fact impose such a requirement. Community colleges in North Carolina have since backed off on a policy to bar undocumented students.

Jessica Colotl’s attorney described her as “an American in her heart because she believes in the values of this country.” Jessica and the thousands of undocumented youngsters in their situation who have grown up here are American.

Denying them further educational access flies in the face of the values of fundamental fairness shared by all Americans and makes no economic sense. 

Jessica Colotl, the 21-year-old exemplary Kennesaw State college student who fell victim to the Cobb sheriff’s abuse of the 287(g) power, which delegates some federal immigration enforcement authority to certain state and local agencies, is out on bond and hopes to restart her education soon.

The Cobb County Sheriff’s Office’s diversion of precious resources meant for securing public safety is case in point for why the unaccountable enforcement of immigration laws by local police in Cobb County and elsewhere in Georgia needs to end immediately.

As if this case was not proof enough about the perils of local enforcement of immigration laws, some are now calling for universities to also enter the dangerous terrain of acting as immigration police.

Undocumented college students are by and large talented high achievers who arrived in the U.S. as children because of the choices their parents made. They grew up in this country and persevered against the odds to graduate from high school and secure admission to Georgia colleges.

Our common interest in providing educational access for undocumented young people was recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1982 landmark case of Plyler v. Doe, the Court held that undocumented students have an exceedingly important right to basic public education as a matter of due process and equal protection.

The court observed that denying undocumented children access to k-12 primary education “raises the specter of a permanent caste of undocumented resident aliens, encouraged by some to remain here as a source of cheap labor, but nevertheless denied the benefits that our society makes available to citizens and lawful residents.” This rationale applies with equal force to higher education, increasingly essential to an individual’s potential and opportunity.

Denying higher education access to Georgia’s undocumented students would mean failing to capitalize on the state’s investment in their k-12 education.

And denying these students access to affordable college education is short-sighted because they are likely to remain in Georgia and may well regularize their immigration status under current or future federal laws. Many of those students may one day be legal residents and citizens.

Facilitating educational access to students also promotes economic growth. College graduates who are likely to remain in Georgia earn higher wages and therefore generate significantly more in income, sales and property taxes. Their increased earning power and disposable income stimulates growth in Georgia’s economy. A better educated population also increases competitiveness in the global economy.

Allowing educational access to undocumented students is a legitimate policy choice by the state and permissible under federal law.

When the North Carolina attorney general advised the state’s community colleges that federal law required them to verify the immigration status of enrolled students, the federal Department of Homeland Security clarified in a letter that federal law did not in fact impose such a requirement. Community colleges in North Carolina have since backed off on a policy to bar undocumented students.

Jessica Colotl’s attorney described her as “an American in her heart because she believes in the values of this country.” Jessica and the thousands of undocumented youngsters in their situation who have grown up here are American.

Denying them further educational access flies in the face of the values of fundamental fairness shared by all Americans and makes no economic sense.

By Péralte C. Paul

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

A group of civil rights advocates, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, are seeking a permanent injunction blocking Georgia’s citizenship voter verification requirements, arguing in a federal court Monday that it targets and discriminates against minorities.

To read the article, click here.

ACLU Lawsuit Prompts Reform To Rectify Unconstitutional Standards

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

May 21, 2010

ATLANTA – Governor Sonny Purdue signed into law a bill repealing the unconstitutional Kosher Food Labeling Act and replacing it with a new law mandating that consumers be fully informed about the standards under which any kosher food product is certified as being kosher. The bill, signed Thursday, was prompted by an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit and was passed by the Georgia legislature last month.

The previous Kosher Food Labeling Act required that any food sold as kosher in the state meet “Orthodox Hebrew religious rules and requirements,” delegitimizing alternative interpretations of kosher adhered to in other Jewish communities. The new law no longer institutionalizes an official definition of kosher and instead requires that all food and food establishments represented as being kosher clearly disclose to consumers the practices and standards by which the food was prepared.

“The state should never be in the position of deciding which religious beliefs are ‘legitimate’ and which are not,” said Debbie Seagraves, Executive Director of the ACLU of Georgia. “The state legislature did the right thing by making clear that the power to define what is religiously acceptable should never rest with the government. These are personal religious decisions.”

The ACLU, ACLU of Georgia and cooperating attorneys from King & Spalding filed a lawsuit last year on behalf of Rabbi Shalom Lewis of Congregation Etz Chaim in Cobb County challenging the constitutionality of the Kosher Food Labeling Act.

“The Georgia legislature is to be commended for creating a law that affirms our nation’s bedrock American principle of respecting everyone’s religious beliefs,” said Rabbi Lewis who, as a Conservative Jew, had been unable to lawfully fulfill his rabbinical duties to supervise food establishments because his theological interpretation of the kosher laws differ from that of Orthodox Judaism. “It has been very gratifying working with the Orthodox community to achieve this result, which provides protection to consumers by enabling them to make informed choices about the food they buy and fosters enhanced respect and mutuality within the community.”

One of the most vital services that Lewis provides to his congregants is serving as their mashgiach, the Hebrew term for a person who supervises any type of food service establishment – including restaurants, grocery stores and caterers – to ensure that food is acceptably kosher. But because Lewis cannot certify the preparation of food in accordance with Orthodox Hebrew requirements, he has been prohibited by law from serving as the mashgiach of any kosher food operation – a fact that jeopardized his ability to fulfill his calling as a duly ordained rabbi of the Jewish faith and impeded his religious freedom. If Lewis had violated the state’s previous kosher laws by supervising food establishments using a different interpretation of kosher than the law had required, the laws could have been enforced against him, damaging his reputation and subjecting him and others to criminal charges and fines.

The ACLU’s lawsuit charged that the Kosher Food Labeling Act violated the religious liberty guarantees of both the U.S. and Georgia Constitutions by endorsing only “Orthodox Hebrew religious rules and requirements” and criminalizing the practices of the many people across the state who, while seeking kosher products, subscribe to interpretations of kosher that differ from those of Orthodox Jews.

“Previous law in Georgia violated the fundamental pillars of religious liberty by endorsing one particular set of beliefs and impeding the free religious exercise of those who believe differently,” said Daniel Mach, Director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. “The government should never take sides in theological debates.”

The ACLU of Georgia and the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief were joined by the Atlanta law firm King & Spalding LLP as co-counsel for Rabbi Lewis.

The new law can be viewed at:

www.aclu.org/religion-belief/georgia-kosher-labeling-law

A copy of the ACLU’s complaint is available online at:

www.aclu.org/pdfs/religion/lewis_v_perdue_complaint.pdf

Additional information about the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief is available online at: www.aclu.org/religion

Additional information about the ACLU of Georgia is available online at:

www.acluga.org

By Rhonda Cook and Andria Simmons
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
http://test.ajc.com/news/illegal-immigrant-ksu-student-483440.html?printArticle=y

1:24 p.m. Friday, May 14, 2010

The Kennesaw State University student at the center of a heated debate over immigration left the Cobb County jail late Friday morning. Jessica Colotl had turned herself in earlier Friday. She posted bond, which had been set at $2,500, and left the jail, accompanied by her attorney, around 11:40 a.m.

Cobb County Sheriff Neal Warren secured a warrant to arrest Colotl, 21, Wednesday night on charges of lying on a jail booking form. A KSU officer had arrested Colotl in March for driving without a license.

She was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement but a month later, at the urging of KSU, Colotl’s friends and advocacy groups, ICE agreed to defer her case until she completed her degree. She was released from a federal detention center in Alabama and allowed to return to the metro Atlanta area.

Warren said he issued the arrest warrant this week after learning that Colotl gave a false Duluth address when she was booked into the jail for the traffic violation in March.

In another development Friday, federal immigration officials said they will revisit the decision to defer the case against Colotl.

Ivan Ortiz-Delgado, spokesman for the federal department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Friday the recent charges brought against Colotl will require the agency to reconsider her status.

“The charges brought against her changed the conditions” that led to ICE’s decision to defer her case and release her from custody, Ortiz-Delgado said.

“ICE will review Ms. Colotl’s case agian and make an appropriate determination. However, that has not happened yet,” Ortiz-Delgado said.

Her attorney, Chris Taylor, and advocates will hold a news conference Friday afternoon. It is not known if Colotl will attend.

But Taylor said in a  statement Thursday that he did not foresee any complications in her posting bond and being released from jail.

“It is obvious from all the documents that I’ve seen that she has done nothing wrong and has given her proper address to Cobb County and immigration officials,” Taylor said. “There has been no crime committed. Jessica looks forward to defending herself against these false and baseless charges.”

The American Civil Liberties Union on Friday accused Warren of  “misplaced priorities and abusing the power granted to him” by the 287(g) program, which trains local law enforcement officers to work with federal authorities in identifying illegal immigrants who are arrested. The Georgia ACLU office has asked the Department of Homeland Security Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Division and the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division to look at the case.

“Jessica’s case is yet another outrageous example of the unaccountable local enforcement of immigration laws in Cobb County gone awry,” said Azadeh Shahshahani, ACLU of Georgia National Security/Immigrants’ Rights Project director. “It is past time to put an immediate end to the 287(g) program in Cobb, which has led to racial profiling and the targeting of hard-working members of the community, the separation of families and the creation of an atmosphere of terror among immigrant communities in Cobb. 287(g) in Cobb has led to a less safe community for us all.”

Nancy Bodiford, a spokeswoman for the Sheriff’s Office, said authorities were tipped off about the false address by a member of the media and that led to the arrest warrant. A reporter went to the residence listed on Colotl’s public booking records and discovered she did not live there. The reporter was not identified.

Workers in the leasing office for the Duluth apartment complex at the address on the arrest warrant told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Thursday that they didn’t have anything “to share at this time.”

Colotl, a Mexico native, has been in the United States for much of her life, coming here with her parents when she was 10. Friends said the family moved often until Colotl graduated from DeKalb County’s Lakeside High School in 2006 with a 3.8 grade-point average.

Her troubles began March 29 when she was stopped on the KSU campus and charged with impeding the flow of traffic. She reportedly told the officer she had a Mexican driver’s license but could not find it; she offered him a Mexican passport that expired in August 2007 as identification. While driving without a license is a relatively minor offense, making a false statement is a felony with a maximum punishment of five years in prison and a $1,000 fine.

The student, who will turn 22 next week, was arrested the next day, taken to the Cobb County jail and handed over to immigration authorities under an agreement the county has with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the 287(g) program.

Colotl was then taken to the Etowah Detention Center in Alabama to await deportation.

At the urging of KSU President Daniel Papp and others, she was released May 5 and the federal immigration agency, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, gave her a year’s reprieve so she could complete her degree. Friends say she is two semesters away from graduating.

ICE spokesman Ivan Ortiz said Colotl was granted “deferred action” status, which did not change her immigration status but effectively delays her deportation. If conditions change, she could be placed back into removal proceedings.

Ortiz said ICE is waiting to assess the new charge before any decisions are made.

“Our priority is to remove those who pose the great risk to the security of our communities and national security,” he said. “In this case, this woman is not a criminal alien. That does not mean we are going to look the other way and we are not going to process her. But our priority is the removal of dangerous convicted criminal aliens.”

Colotl’s situation has sparked debate between human rights groups and advocates for stronger immigration laws.

Human rights organizations and Latino community groups decried the sheriff’s actions as being a “witch hunt” and a waste of money.

“We are very concerned that Cobb County is taking action against Jessica in retaliation for speaking out,” said Mary Bauer, the legal director of the Southern Poverty Law Center. “We think these actions are illegal, and we’ll be in looking into that closely. This highlights the urgent need for Congress to reform our broken immigration system.”

D.A. King, an outspoken critic of what he says is lax enforcement of immigration laws, said the major concern is Colotl’s enrollment at a public university.

“The focus of these violations should be on the Board of Regents [of the University System of Georgia],” he said. “The young lady who was in this country illegally is by far the most sympathetic figure in this mess.”

University System spokesman John Millsaps with the university system said college applications ask about citizenship but there is no process for verifying it if the would-be students says they are a U.S. citizen. The question of immigration status becomes an issue only if a college applicant says he is from another country. Out-state-students and exchange students pay four times the in-state rate and Colotl was assumed to be a Georgia resident because she graduated from a DeKalb County high school.

Papp has said that Colotl will now be charged out-of-state tuition.

Others argued over whether a federal program that trains local law enforcement on immigration enforcement is Draconian or a necessary tool that should be applied the same for everyone.

Cobb was the first law enforcement agency in Georgia and one of a few nationwide to be accepted into the federal 287(g) program, an agreement with immigration officials to check the status of everyone taken into the jail. Cobb just renewed its contract with the federal government in October.

The 287(g) program was designed to find violent illegal immigrants, but critics say it more often catches minor offenders such as those violating traffic laws.

Debbie Seagraves with the Georgia office of the American Civil Liberties Union said local law enforcement abuses the program and the handling of Colotl was evidence of that.

Warren, the Cobb sheriff, defended the program in a written statement Thursday.

“I value any tool that helps me enforce the law and remove violators from our community,” he said.

Press conference will be Friday, May 14^th, 2 p.m., Plaza Fiesta

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 14, 2010

Atlanta – The ACLU of Georgia today called for an immediate end to the 287(g) program in Cobb County in light of the Cobb Sheriff’s misplaced priorities and abuse of power granted to him under this program, as illustrated by the case of Jessica Colotl.  The ACLU of Georgia is in contact with the Department of Homeland Security Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Division and the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division in relation to this demand.

“Jessica’s case is yet another outrageous example of the unaccountable local enforcement of immigration laws in Cobb County gone awry,” said Azadeh Shahshahani, ACLU of Georgia National Security/Immigrants’ Rights Project Director.  “It is past time to put an immediate end to the 287(g) program in Cobb, which has led to racial profiling and the targeting of hard working members of the community, the separation of families, and the creation of an atmosphere of terror among immigrant communities in Cobb.  287(g) in Cobb has led to a less safe community for us all.”

The ACLU contacted the Department of Homeland Security on Jessica’s behalf, in light of the concern that the 287(g) program was being misused to target a bright college student in spite of what ICE has repeatedly claimed to be the program’s aim: targeting perpetrators of the most dangerous crimes.

An ACLU of Georgia report released in October 2009 recounted stories of 10 community members in Cobb and their families impacted by 287(g).  The report entitled, “Terror and Isolation in Cobb: How Unchecked Police Power under 287(g) had Torn Families Apart and Threatened Public Safety,” can be found here: http://www.acluga.org/287gReport.pdf

The press conference will be Friday, May 14^th, at 2 p.m.  The ACLU of Georgia will be joined by Jessica Colotl’s attorneys and other human rights groups.

###

The ACLU of Georgia’s mission is to advance the cause of civil liberties in Georgia, with emphasis on rights of free speech, free assembly, freedom of religion, due process of law and to take all legitimate action in the furtherance of such purposes without political partisanship.

The ACLU of Georgia National Security/Immigrants’ Rights project is aimed at bringing Georgia and its localities into compliance with international human rights and constitutional standards in treatment of refugee and immigrant communities, including immigrant detainees.