Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ACLU Challenges Government's Authority To Designate Charities As Terrorists Without Due Process

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-25-08 08:02 PM
Original message
ACLU Challenges Government's Authority To Designate Charities As Terrorists Without Due Process
ACLU Challenges Government's Authority To Designate Charities As Terrorists Without Due Process Or Court Oversight (11/21/2008)

Court Should Block Blacklisting Of KindHearts And Lift 33-Month-Old Freeze On Charity's Assets

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org

TOLEDO, OH – A federal court should block the government from blacklisting an Ohio-based charity without providing it due process and should lift a freeze on the organization's assets, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Ohio and several civil rights lawyers argued today. The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) froze the funds of KindHearts for Charitable Humanitarian Development, Inc. more than 33 months ago without notice or a hearing, based simply on the assertion that the charity was "under investigation." OFAC then threatened to designate KindHearts as a "specially designated global terrorist" (SDGT) based on classified evidence, again without providing it with a reason or meaningful opportunity to defend itself.

"OFAC's unlimited authority to seize KindHearts' property and shut it down without giving the charity notice or an opportunity to defend itself is unconstitutional," said Hina Shamsi, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project and lead ACLU attorney on the case. "KindHearts has been in limbo for more than two and a half years and is asking for independent judicial scrutiny of what has been, until now, unilateral government action."

KindHearts' founders established the charity in 2002 – after the government shut down a number of Muslim charities – with the express purpose of providing humanitarian aid abroad and at home in the United States in full compliance with the law. Despite the efforts KindHearts took to implement OFAC guidance and policies and otherwise exercise diligence, OFAC froze its assets in February 2006.

In October 2008, a federal judge granted the ACLU's request for an emergency order blocking the government from designating KindHearts as an SDGT without further judicial review. Today's motion asks the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio to lift the freeze on KindHearts' assets and to block the threatened designation of the charity as an SDGT, or, in the alternative, to block the threatened designation until KindHearts has been provided with constitutionally adequate due process approved by the court.

"The government has threatened to designate KindHearts as an SDGT based solely on suspicion and secret evidence that the charity and its lawyers have not been allowed to see," said Fritz Byers, an Ohio attorney on the case. "In order for real justice to be served, KindHearts must be provided its day in court and the chance to defend its most valuable asset – its reputation."

The attorneys filing the case on behalf of KindHearts are Shamsi and National Security Fellow Alexander Abdo of the ACLU; Byers of Toledo, Ohio; David Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center; Lynne Bernabei and Alan Kabat of Bernabei & Wachtel, PLLC in Washington; and Jeffrey Gamso and Carrie Davis of the ACLU of Ohio.

The ACLU's motion is available at: www.aclu.org/safefree/discrim/37862prs20081121.html

More information about the case can be found online at: www.aclu.org/safefree/discrim/37097prs20081009.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-25-08 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. Due process, what a quaint concept
next they'll be arguing for free speech or some such nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC