Guantanamo Prisoner, Who Weighs 75 Pounds and is Near Death, Mounts Legal Push for Release

Tariq Ba Odah
Tariq Ba Odah

A Guantanamo Bay prisoner, who has been on hunger strike for over eight years, has launched a legal push for his immediate release from the United States military prison because he now weighs around 75 pounds and is near death.

Tariq Ba Odah is a Yemeni prisoner and resident of Saudi Arabia, who has been confined in “solitary conditions” at Guantanamo for 13 years despite the fact that President Barack Obama’s own review task force—comprised of officials from the top US security agencies—cleared Odah for release in 2009. His body can no longer endure the effects of nasal tube feedings.

A motion [PDF] filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on Odah’s behalf argues under the “laws of war,” particularly the Third Geneva Convention, the US has an “obligation to release seriously wounded and sick prisoners.” It is part of US Army regulation and “binding domestic law.”

Odah meets the “standards of ill health” that should compel his release because he is at 56 percent of his normal body weight. He is suffering from “severe malnutrition.” He often complains to his lawyer, Omar Farah, that he cannot focus or concentrate during their meetings. He is losing his memory and forgot the current year when he was writing a letter to family.

Dr. Mohammed Rami Bailony, who wrote a brief [PDF] in support of Odah’s motion for release, describes Odah’s “diminished weight” as a “shocking medical fact that alone indicates the presence of a crisis-level medical condition presaging organ failure, neurological damage and, inevitably, death.”

Odah does not “wish to die,” the motion for relief declares. “He wishes to be reunited with his family in Saudi Arabia or to be freed to any other safe country where he can begin to recover. At the same time, he feels compelled by the injustice he is enduring at Guantanamo to continue his hunger strike, the only peaceful way for him to protest with self-control and with dignity.”

The motion describes how Odah believes the US military has subject him to abuse so he abandons his hunger strike. He has suffered “violent cell-extractions, force-feeding sessions that leave him wet with his own vomit, and unremitting confinement in solitary conditions in Guantánamo’s Camp 5, where now he says he does not see anyone and he does not see the sun.”

Dr. Sandra S. Crosby, the director and co-founder of the immigration and refugee health program at the Boston Medical Center, also wrote a brief [PDF] in support of Odah that highlights how Odah does not trust the medical staff. The mistrust only compounds the risk that he will die soon.

“Mr. Ba Odah believes—not unreasonably in my opinion—that physicians at Guantanamo have been utilized as instruments of the guard force to coerce prisoners to ‘break the strike,’” Crosby suggests. “When this loss of trust occurs, patients will often not accept appropriate medical recommendations.”

Crosby concludes Odah is at risk of “serious organ damage and/or death.” Odah’s injuries “may be permanent.”

Even if the government claims it could rehabilitate Odah with medical treatment, the motion argues that the circumstances of his detention will likely prevent him from ever recovering.

“Apparently unmoved by his crisis-level weight, the government steadfastly confines Mr. Ba Odah to Guantanamo’s Camp 5, the non-communal housing facility renowned for its punitive, isolative conditions,” the motion declares. “This is exactly the opposite of what Mr. Ba Odah needs. Solitary confinement compromises an individual’s mental and physical health and risks bringing about ‘multiple chronic medical illnesses, depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, and permanent neuropsychological damage.’ Moreover, solitary conditions are ‘a strong exacerbating factor to his already precarious condition.'”

Odah’s attorney visited Tariq on April 21, and he was “nearly unrecognizable” to him.

Farah shared, “He is now enduring more suffering at Guantánamo than he has ever known. All the bones in his midsection are visible through his skin, his jawline and teeth protrude, and he says he is losing sensation in his hands and feet and his memory is fading.”

It should not matter that there is war ongoing in Yemen that prevents him from being returned to the country where he was born. His family emigrated to Saudi Arabia when Odah was an infant. The government can pursue his transfer to Saudi Arabia. Plus, the government has recently transferred Yemeni prisoners to other countries and shown nationality does not have to be a barrier to release.

The US military’s treatment of Odah clearly amounts to torture, and it is unconscionable that he—as well as many others—remain in detention at Guantanamo.

Image from the Center for Constitutional Rights. Not a recent photo. 

LGBT Community Boos Undocumented Transgender Activist for Interrupting Obama at Pride Event

An undocumented transgender woman and activist interrupted President Barack Obama while he was speaking at the White House’s annual LGBT Pride Month reception.

Jennicet Gutiérrez, who is a founding member of Familia: Trans Queer Liberation Movement, was in the audience listening to Obama say how wonderful everything was for the LGBT community. Gutiérrez protested.

“President Obama, stop the torture and abuse of trans women in detention centers!” Gutiérrez shouted. “President Obama, I am a trans woman. I’m tired of the abuse.”

Obama responded, “You’re in my house. As a general rule, I am just fine with a few hecklers, but not when I’m up in the house.”

The LGBT community at the reception erupted into loud applause and cheering. The president scolded Gutiérrez, “It’s not respectful when you get invited to somebody’s [house].” Plus, “You’re not going to get a good response from me by interrupting me like this.”

People who one would think might show solidarity with a person like Gutiérrez booed. Obama escalated his open berating of Gutiérrez, “Shame on you! You shouldn’t be doing this!”

The community of the people launched into a chant. “Obama! Obama! Obama.”

Seeing how that did not convince Gutiérrez to stop trying to get Obama to address a critical issue, the detention and deportation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender immigrants, Obama asked security to escort Gutiérrez out of the reception. She was removed while many in the room stood around laughing at what happened.

Remarkably, Obama stated later in his speech, “We know that transgender persons still face terrible violence and abuse and poverty here at home and around the world.” A person in the audience shouted, “The transsexuals love you.” Everyone applauded and Obama reacted, “Well, that’s the kind of heckling I can always accept.”

After applause, Obama continued, “Seriously, too many folks are still targeted, and transgender women of color are particularly vulnerable. So that kind of ugliness simply doesn’t belong in America. That’s not who we are.”

Apparently, Obama could not have said that when Gutiérrez protested. He had to patronize and shame her for dissenting against him.

In an interview for The Advocate, Gutiérrez said it was the crowd that “most frustrated” her. “I’m just very disappointed with the way it was handled.”

“I’m part of the LGBT community, and they didn’t back me, instead they were booing, which to me was like a slap in the face to all these people in detention centers,” Gutiérrez added.

Initially, Gutiérrez did not plan to protest at the reception. She was able to get on the list of attendees through someone at the group, GetEQUAL. But she “couldn’t help but think about the conditions,” which “LGBTQ Latino/Latina, especially trans women of color, are facing in detention.”

“To me, that was the moment I had to speak up. I had to raise awareness to the President and to everyone else watching that I’m not just going to celebrate, when my trans sisters are facing a lot of violence in the detention centers. [Trans women are facing] sexual and physical abuse, and I just had to send a message.”
(more…)

WikiLeaks Reveals Records of NSA Spying on French Presidents for Information on Political & Economic Affairs

French President Francois Hollande

Top secret intelligence reports and technical documents from the National Security Agency showing the the agency has spied upon the communications of France’s past three presidents were published on June 23.

Julian Assange, the media organization’s founder, described the “Espionnage Élysée” as evidence that France’s elected government has been “subject to hostile surveillance” by a “hostile ally.” French people have a “right to know” this information.

The documents indicate high-ranking officials targeted the communications of Jacques Chirac, who was president from 1995 to 2007, Nicolas Sarkozy, who was 2007-2012, and Francois Hollande, who has been president since 2012. French cabinet ministers and diplomats in those successive governments have been targeted as well.

A “selectors list” published by WikiLeaks shows how the US government justified spying on the officials. For example, the French president’s cell was targeted for intelligence on “political affairs.” France’s Minister of Agriculture was targeted for intelligence on “economic developments.” The country’s Ministry of Finance, Economy and Budget was targeted for intelligence on “international finance developments” between multiple countries. And a presidential aircraft was targeted for intelligence on “political affairs” in the entire European Union.

WikiLeaks also published “intelligence summaries of conversations” between French government officials, which offer a glimpse of the kind of political and economic intelligence the US government is interested in tracking.

In May 2012, the NSA spied on secret meetings Hollande had in Paris to discuss the “eurozone crisis, particularly the consequences of a Greek exit.” The NSA believed Hollande did not want word of meetings to get out because he feared it would “deepen the crisis.” French officials met with German Social Democratic Party, part of the German opposition, and Hollande did not want German Chancellor Angela Merkel to find out and cause “diplomatic problems.” (*Note: It is possible the NSA was spying on talks between Merkel and Hollande in Berlin prior to these secret meetings.)

Intercept summary
Intercept summary published by WikiLeaks

One summary of intercepted communications between a French ambassador in Washington, Pierre Vimont, and a diplomatic advisor to Sarkozy, Jean-David Levitte, from March 24, 2010, shows French government officials were upset that the US wanted to “continue spying on France.” France and the US were trying to work out a “bilateral intelligence cooperation agreement” but US officials had backed away, not wanting to agree to not spy on French officials.

Other summaries WikiLeaks published involve Chirac’s discussion of United Nations appointments, Sarkozy’s potential plans for Israel and Palestinians, and how France planned to show “leadership” during the financial crisis in 2008.

The summary reads, “The President blamed many of the current economic problems on mistakes made by the US government, but believes that Washington is now heeding some of his advice. In his view, this is the first time that the US has not taken the lead in managing a global crisis and France will now take the helm.”

A backlash in France was immediate, with France summoning the US ambassador to France Jane Hartley to respond to the revelations. Hollande described the spying as “unacceptable” and held two emergency meetings with top security officials and lawmakers (many who had just voted for legislation that gives the French government new spying powers). And Hollande sent France’s “top intelligence coordinator” to ensure that the US government is keeping a promise made on surveillance after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden were published in 2013 and 2014.
(more…)

The Saudi Cables: Revelations from Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Lebanon, Sudan & Egypt

wlogo-smWikiLeaks announced it would publish half a million cables and other documents from Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry last week. It released nearly 70,000 files, which the organization’s publisher Julian Assange said would “lift the lid on an increasingly erratic and secretive dictatorship.”

The files, in Arabic, have mostly received a minimal amount attention in the United States press. However, multiple independent journalists around the world have been translating the documents to uncover revelations.

Ali Hadi Al-Musawi, who blogs at 1001 Iraqi Thoughts, sifted through the files for important documents on Saudi Arabia’s influence in Iraq.

“A quick scan of the available documents that relate to Iraq reveal three consistent approaches adopted by the Kingdom in an effort to extend its influence in the country,” Al-Musawi wrote. “Financial and political support for Sunni Arab tribes, politicians, and Kurdish actors that are willing to undermine the central government in Baghdad; close communication with Baath Party officers, financial support, and political asylum for families of high-ranking former officials; and regional diplomatic efforts aimed at undermining the sovereign legitimacy of the Iraqi state.”

Significantly, Al-Musawi called attention to a “three-stage plan” proposed by Saudi Arabia to “co-opt” Sunni Arab tribes and Iraqi politicians.

“The stated goal is to undermine the government of Prime Minister al-Maliki and nurture assets that are sympathetic to Saudi Arabia’s policies in Iraq,” Al-Musawi reported. “The cable recommends close coordination between the Kingdom’s foreign ministry and intelligence agency, and suggests inviting co-opted Iraqis on a regular basis to the Kingdom in order to ‘strengthen relations and exchange views and information.'”

A group of anonymous individuals in Yemen are examining the documents for revelations about Saudi Arabia and their country. The group uncovered a cable that shows the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs order the “transfer of $100,000″ to the Saudi mission to the United Nations for a “campaign” to win a seat on the Human Rights Council.

One memo marked “highly confidential and urgent” from Minister of Foreign Affairs Saud al-Faisal and addressed to the Crown Prince suggests the war being waged in Yemen may have something to do with an oil pipeline to the Yemen coast. It referred to a special Saudi commission’s effort to find a naval port for the Kingdom in the Arabian sea through Oman or Yemen. The commission was “made up of senior level members from the Ministries of Interior, defense, foreign affairs, finance, oil and mineral resources, transportation, economy and planning, as well as the presidency of the General Intelligence.” (more…)

In FBI Sting, Informants Impersonated Islamic State Fighters to Convince Man to Make Propaganda Videos

Amir Said Abdul Rahman Al-Ghazi
Amir Said Abdul Rahman Al-Ghazi (Photo from Cuyahoga County, Ohio) 

A thirty-eight year-old Ohio man was targeted in an FBI sting operation and arrested on June 19 on charges of attempting to “provide material support” to the Islamic State, possessing a firearm as a convicted felon, and trafficking marijuana.

The complaint filed against Amir Said Abdul Rahman Al-Ghazi alleges he took “substantial steps toward creating ISIL [Islamic State] propaganda videos.” He allegedly communicated with two individuals he believed to be members of the Islamic state and attempted to purchase an AK-47 assault rifle. He also allegedly expressed a desire to commit terrorism attacks in the United States.

US Attorney Steven Dettelbach of the Northern District of Ohio declared, “Today’s charges are a stark reminder that the radical and dangerous philosophies espoused by groups such as [the Islamic State] can be spread in our community through computers and social media.”

Special Agent in Charge Stephen Anthony of the FBI’s Cleveland Division stated, “It is clear that no area is immune from the influence of [the Islamic State] and its recruitment machine. We hope this arrest will serve as a strong message to others who may consider providing support to terrorists.”

However, Al-Ghazi “first came to the attention of the Cleveland FBI in December 2012, according to Vicki Anderson, a spokeswoman for the Cleveland FBI.” He was under surveillance apparently for about a year and a half until he allegedly pledged “his support to the Islamic State on Facebook.”

Al-Ghazi, who changed his name from Robert McCollum earlier this year, engaged in no direct action with any terrorist group prior to the FBI’s decision to target him. It does not appear he had the resources and capabilities to launch any kind of an attack. The only weapon he possibly possessed prior to government involvement was a pistol. He had not formulated a plan for an attack before the government became involved in his life.

Three paid informants were responsible for initiating plans and pushing him to commit any alleged criminal actions. They collectively acted to remove barriers and obstacles, which, if the FBI had not been involved, may have discouraged and prevented Al-Ghazi from attempting to provide alleged support to terrorism.

FBI’s Paid Informant Has “Extensive Criminal History”

One of the “confidential human sources” (CHS #1), according to an affidavit [PDF] by Special Agent Ryan Presley, is a “paid confidential informant,” who has worked with the FBI for three years. Al-Ghazi engaged with CHS #1 as early as August 2014.

A second “confidential human source” (CHS #2) is a “paid confidential informant,” who has also worked with the FBI for three years. CHS #2 has an “extensive criminal history” that includes “receiving stolen property, domestic violence, assault/kidnapping, burglary, drug trafficking, weapons under a disability, and fraud-related offenses that spans several years.” CHS #2 received “sentencing benefits/avoided other agency inquiries as the result of actions” of Presley and other Cleveland FBI agents. Al-Ghazi engaged with CHS #2 as early as February 2015.

Al-Ghazi communicated with another “paid confidential informant,” CHS #3, on April 13. Presley was not initially aware that this communication had been ongoing for nearly a year on Twitter. CHS #3 “identified himself/herself as being male, having resided in the United States and United Kingdom, and being an ISIL soldier located in Mosul, Iraq.” (Given this informant communicated with Al-Ghazi for about a year, it is unclear in the affidavit when CHS #3 presented his or herself as an “ISIL soldier.”)

On May 1, CHS #3, who Al-Ghazi believed was an Islamic State fighter in Mosul, “initiated the idea of Al-Ghazi producing ISIL videos in the English language to appeal to those located in the West.” Al-Ghazi allegedly responded that he was interested in documenting the “rise of jihad” in America and then he would “implement chaos to facilitate a way for jihad.” CHS #3 promised him that after his videos were complete they would be uploaded to the Islamic State’s “media arm.”

One of the FBI’s Paid Informants Takes on an Entirely “New Persona”

By June 14, the FBI apparently decided it would be more efficient to have another fake Islamic fighter talking to Al-Ghazi. CHS #1 created an entirely “new persona” and told Al-Ghazi he or she was a member of the Islamic State, who was located in the Middle East. CHS #1 informed Al-Ghazi that as a “member of ISIL” he would have to “assist with the group’s social media efforts” and claimed to be an administrator for an Islamic State-affiliated website. This was enticing to Al-Ghazi. (more…)

‘Meet the Press’ Defends Focus on Gun Violence by Blacks as Part of Charleston Church Massacre Coverage

NBC’s “Meet the Press” aired a video on black convicts in Sing Sing Prison, who deeply regret committing gun violence. There was not necessarily anything wrong with the video itself, however, “Meet the Press” chose to connect it to the Charleston church massacre committed by a white supremacist named Dylann Roof. And then the program responded to a backlash and defended how the show had chosen to cover an act of terror.

Host Chuck Todd declared in a statement:

…The original decision to air this segment was made before Wednesday’s massacre. However, the staff and I had an internal debate about whether to show it at all this week. When we discussed putting it off, that conversation centered around race and perception – not the conversation we wanted the segment to invoke.

We decided against delaying the segment because we wanted to show multiple sides of what gun violence does in this country. We thought the issue of gun violence in our culture and society was an important conversation to continue — too important to put off for another week. The consequences of gun violence should not be hidden..

The show also produced a post-show discussion to address outrage directed at “Meet the Press,” and Todd read the following comment from Twitter, “Unfortunately, Meet the Press decided to show that guns don’t kill people but black powerless kids kill people. Wrong time.”

He then added, “We wanted to have a different conversation about guns, about the societal issues, the why people choose to go get one. It wasn’t meant to be a black and white issue, and I understand maybe in one of these moments when everyone’s only seeing things through black and white.”

But that is exactly what is infuriating people. It is a “black and white issue.” A young white supremacist entered a historic black church to specifically kill black people.

Roof’s manifesto makes it clear he was a white supremacist, who decided to take action because he viewed blacks as “stupid and violent” and thought they had “lower IQs, lower impulse control, and higher testosterone levels in general”—a “recipe for violent behavior.”

“I have no choice,” Roof declared. “I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight. I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet. Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I guess that has to be me.”

The conversation that “Meet the Press” should have had was why someone who felt whites were threatened decided to go into a historic black church and open fire on them in an act that he fervently believed was self-defense.

“Meet the Press” should have talked about white nationalist or white supremacist groups, especially those with ties to fairly mainstream politicians and political organizations. The program should have talked about the history and legacy of terrorism against black people in the United States, but that would have been a discussion that made Todd, the program’s producers, the program’s regular guests, and the program’s weekly audience uncomfortable. So, the program decided to discuss the massacre within the context of gun violence, particularly gun violence by black men, a subject that white Americans would much rather talk about instead of the violence black communities have endured daily in this society.

In the post-show clip, Todd turns to Eugene Robinson, a black columnist for the Washington Post, hoping Robinson will validate the decision by “Meet the Press” to air this segment as part of its coverage of the Charleston church massacre. Disappointingly, Robinson does. (more…)

Podcast: The Dominican Republic’s Plan to Racially Cleanse the Country of Black Haitians

Jemima Pierre (Photo from Twitter)
Jemima Pierre

The Dominican Republic is set to purge its country of hundreds of thousands of black Haitian migrants or black Dominicans of Haitian descent. The government has stripped anyone born in Haiti after 1929 of their citizenship and rendered this entire population stateless. Numerous Haitians have fled or are hiding as they wait to see what the immigration agency will do next.

Army General Ruben Paulino, who leads the immigration agency, said his agency would conduct patrols of neighborhoods with “large numbers of migrants” after June 18. Any “non-citizens,” who were unregistered, would be “repatriated.” The individuals would be loaded on buses, trucks, or ambulances—and then expelled from the country.

On the “Unauthorized Disclosure” podcast this week, Dr. Jemima Pierre, a professor at UCLA of African Diaspora Studies & an editor for Black Agenda Report, joins the show to talk about the Dominican Republic. She describes the history of Haiti and the Dominican Republic, as well as the United States’ role since the US once occupied the island where Haiti and the Dominican Republic are located. She details the anti-black racism that has deep roots in the Dominican Republic.

During the discussion part of the show, the show’s hosts talk about Dylann Roof’s manifesto and share thoughts on the political and media reaction to the church massacre in Charleston. They also talk about a Louisville FOP president and his vitriolic open letter directed toward Black Lives Matter activists. And the show wraps with some quick thoughts about a court ordering US officials to intercept a Guatemalan mother and her child, who were deported, and return them to the United States.

The podcast is available on iTunes for download. For a link (and also to download the episode), go here. Click on “go here” and a page will load with the audio file of the podcast. The file will automatically start playing so you can listen to the episode.

Also, below is a player for listening to the podcast. You can listen to the podcast this way by clicking on the player. And please follow the show on Twitter at @UnauthorizedDis.

Below is a partial transcript of the interview.
(more…)

Google Reveals It Was Forced to Hand Over Journalist’s Data for WikiLeaks Grand Jury Investigation

Jacob Appelbaum

Google released another legal disclosure notice related to the United States government’s ongoing grand jury investigation into WikiLeaks. It informed journalist and technologist Jacob Appelbaum, who previously worked with WikiLeaks, that Google was ordered to provide data from his account.

The disclosure suggests the grand jury investigation may have sought Appelbaum’s data because the US government believed data would contain details on WikiLeaks’ publication of State Department cables.

Appelbaum has been under investigation because of his connection to WikiLeaks for four to five years. He has been detained and interrogated at the US border multiple times. He was one of three subjects of an order the government issued to Twitter for account data for its investigation, which Twitter and other groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) challenged in court.

He was recently profiled along with Chinese activist and artist Ai Weiwei in a short film by Laura Poitras, “The Art of Dissent.” He lives in Berlin, where he has spent the past couple of years reporting on documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden for media organizations like Der Spiegel. His lawyers have advised him not to return to the US.

Google’s full legal disclosure to Appelbaum consisted of 306 pages of documents. He did not post the disclosure in its entirety but shared screen shots of parts of the disclosure through his Twitter account.

On April 1, the government apparently determined there was some information that could be disclosed to Appelbaum.

The government seems to confirm in legal documents that it does not consider WikiLeaks to be a journalistic enterprise. It also writes, “The government does not concede that the [redacted] subscriber is a journalist,” referring to Appelbaum.

Nevertheless, the government broaches the issue and insists “newsmen” may be subject to grand jury investigations of this intrusive nature.

“Journalists have no special privilege to resist compelled disclosure of their records, absent evidence that the government is acting in bad faith,” the government asserts. “Even if the [redacted] subscriber were to bring a First Amendment challenge, he could not quash the order because he could not show that the government has acted in bad faith, either in conducting its criminal investigation or in obtaining the order.”

Later, the government adds, “The government has acted in good faith throughout this criminal investigation, and there is no evidence that either the investigation or the order is intended to harass the [redacted] subscriber or anyone else.”

Appelbaum mentioned that this reminded him of how the government targeted New York Times reporter James Risen when they were investigating CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling. He also recalled that a US border agent once said to him he would be “endlessly harassed.”

That experience would seem to call into question the government’s claim it has not acted in bad faith. Plus, given that his Google data was targeted in secret, Appelbaum could not possibly mount a First Amendment challenge because his lawyers did not even know to file a challenge or what to challenge exactly.

(more…)

Federal Appeals Court Revives Lawsuit Against Bush Officials for Post-9/11 Abuse of Immigration Detainees

Former Attorney General John Ashcroft (Photo by Gage Skidmore)

A federal appeals court reinstated complaints in a lawsuit against former Justice Department officials, who allegedly violated the rights of Arab or Muslim immigrants in the immediate months after the September 11th terrorist attacks. It is very rare for this to happen.

The lawsuit, which was filed on behalf of eight former detainees in 2002 by the Center for Constitutional Rights, seeks to hold former Attorney General John Ashcroft, former FBI Director Robert Mueller, and former Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service James W. Ziglar accountable for subjecting immigrants to harsh confinement on the basis of their race, national origin, and religion. (Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) and Passaic County Jail officials were also named as defendants in the lawsuit.)

In January 2013, a federal court dismissed the complaints after concluding there was no evidence the officials had any “intent to punish” the plaintiffs, who allege their rights were violated.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled [PDF] that the Justice Department officials were not entitled to “qualified immunity.” The appeals court also determined the confinement conditions imposed on immigrants, who were rounded up, were established with “punitive intent.”

“I am very delighted with the court’s ruling,” said Benamar Benatta, who is one of the plaintiffs in the case. “It has been a long and stressful process that has taken a tremendous toll on my life, however, it is this kind of bold decision that restores my faith in the US judicial system and gives me hope that justice will be served at the end.”

In Benatta’s case, he was cleared for release from detention on November 14, 2001, but despite the fact that the MDC had this information, Benatta was kept in solitary confinement until April 30, 2002.

The lawsuit indicates immigrants (or what the court refers to as “‘out of status’ aliens,”) were subject to a “hold-until-cleared policy,” and kept in confinement for “lengthy periods of times—often for months after they were ordered removed from the country—until the FBI affirmatively cleared them of suspicion of wrongdoing.”

The Muslim men, who are plaintiffs, were held in an Administrative Maximum Special Housing Unit ( “ADMAX SHU”). In a tiny cell, they were held:

…[F]or over 23 hours a day, provided with meager and barely edible food, and prohibited from moving around the unit, using the telephone freely, using the commissary, accessing MDC handbooks (which explained how to file complaints about mistreatment), and keeping any property, including personal hygiene items like toilet paper and soap, in their cells. Whenever they left their cells, they were handcuffed and shackled. Although they were offered the nominal opportunity to visit the recreation area outside of their cells several times a week, the recreation area was exposed to the elements and the MDC Detainees were not offered clothing beyond their standard cotton prison garb and a light jacket. Furthermore, detainees who accepted such offers were often physically abused along the way, and were sometimes left for hours in the cold recreation cell, over their protests, as a form of punishment. As a result, they were constructively denied exercise during the fall and winter….

The men were “strip-searched every time they were removed from or returned to their cells, including before and after visiting with their attorneys, receiving medical care, using the recreation area, attending a court hearing, and being transferred to another cell. “ Each time they arrived at the MDC “in the receiving and discharge area and again after they had been escorted – shackled and under continuous guard – to the ADMAX SHU,” they were strip-searched, even though there was absolutely no opportunity for them to obtain contraband.

“[DOJ Defendants] seem to imply once ‘national security’ concerns become a reason for holding someone, there is no need to show a connection between those concerns and the captive other than that the captive shares common traits of the terrorist: illegal immigrant status and a perceived Arab or Muslim affiliation,” the appeals court stated. (more…)