Human Rights First's U.S. Law and Security Digest is a weekly report to help keep you up to date about developments in U.S. national security law and policy that have an impact on civil liberties and human rights.

"Yes, I've been read into the program but that's part of a process. I said I would look at the program, look at the letters, and give my answers. I haven't yet figured out precisely when and precisely how. I understand that the time is coming."

Attorney General Michael Mukasey, interview with The Wall Street Journal, in response to whether he believes waterboarding is torture.

"One of America's greatest strengths is the soft power of our value system and how we treat prisoners of war, and we don't torture...And I believe, unlike others in the administration, that waterboarding was, is – and will always be – torture. That's a simple statement."

Tom Ridge, the first secretary of the Homeland Security Department, January 18, interview with the Associated Press.

PADILLA RECEIVES SEVENTEEN-YEAR PRISON SENTENCE
On Tuesday, January 22, U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke sentenced Jose Padilla to seventeen years and four months in prison, departing from the federal sentencing guidelines which recommended a sentence between 30 years and life. Prosecutors had argued that Padilla and his co-defendants should each receive life sentences for their role in conspiring to aid Islamic terrorist organizations overseas. Judge Cooke disagreed, stating that "[t]here is no evidence that these defendants personally maimed, kidnapped or killed anyone in the Unites States or elsewhere." Judge Cooke's decision was also influenced by Padilla's detention for 3½ years as an "enemy combatant" at a South Carolina Navy brig. She criticized the government's treatment of Padilla at the brig and stated that "the conditions were so harsh for Mr. Padilla...they warrant consideration in the sentencing in this case." Padilla's co-defendants, Adham Amin Hassoun and Kifah Wael Jayyousi, were sentenced to fifteen- and twelve-year prison terms respectively. All three defendants plan to appeal their sentences. The Justice Department has not yet stated whether it also intends to appeal Judge Cooke's ruling. Read more.

GUANTANAMO DETAINEE ALLEGES HIS INTERROGATIONS WERE TAPED
Lawyers for "high-value" Guantanamo detainee Majid Khan have alleged that Khan's interrogations were videotaped and that the videotaping continued after 2002. The allegations discredit CIA Director Michael Hayden's previous claims that the agency stopped videotaping interrogations in 2002. Khan's lawyers filed their latest round of documents with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in January, but their papers were not made public until last week. Authorities have accused Khan of researching ways to carry out terrorist attacks in the U.S. and aiding in the transfer of money to other terrorist suspects. He was captured in Pakistan in 2003 and brought to a secret CIA prison, where he remained for three years until his transfer to Guantanamo in September 2006. Khan's attorneys claim that he was subjected to "a ruthless program of state-sponsored torture" while in CIA custody. Khan has written several letters to the court describing his treatment, but the allegations of torture have been redacted from public court papers. Read more.

WHITE HOUSE RENOMINATES BRADBURY TO TOP LEGAL POST
On Wednesday, January 23, the White House renominated Steven Bradbury for the job of assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Council (OLC), despite controversy over Bradbury's involvement in drafting legal opinions in 2005 authorizing harsh CIA interrogation techniques on terrorist suspects. Bradbury has been the OLC's acting chief for the past two years. However, due largely to the Justice Department's refusal to share classified legal opinions on a variety of terrorism issues, the Senate has repeatedly blocked Bradbury's nomination to the post. Following the release of news reports in October 2007 claiming that Bradbury had authored memos approving interrogation techniques such as head slapping, exposure to extreme temperatures and waterboarding, Democrats urged the Bush administration to find another nominee. Democrats have described the memos as an effort to circumvent laws prohibiting torture, but the White House has insisted that Bradbury's legal opinions do not contradict existing laws and rules. His nomination will likely be a focus of questions next week when Attorney General Mukasey appears before the Judiciary Committee for his first public hearing since his nomination in November 2007. Read more.

SENATE DEBATES NEW SURVEILLANCE LAW AND TELECOM IMMUNITY
On Thursday, January 24, the full Senate voted 60-to-36 to set aside a bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee that would have given a secret intelligence court more authority to oversee wiretaps on terrorist suspects. The defeated bill omitted a measure providing immunity to phone carriers that previously assisted the National Security Agency (NSA) in its warrantless wiretapping program. Now the Senate is poised to consider a second measure, already passed by the Senate Intelligence Committee and backed by the White House, that would give immunity to the phone companies and a freer hand to the NSA in eavesdropping on foreign-based communications without judicial checks. A final vote on the measure is expected next week. The current law, which was adopted in August 2007, is set to expire on February 1. Senate Democrats have been pushing for a one-month extension of the law to allow more time for debate, but Republicans strongly oppose the idea. The House has approved its own version of a surveillance bill, calling for greater oversight of wiretapping activities but refusing to grant retroactive immunity to telecom companies. On Thursday, the White House finally handed over internal wiretapping program documents to members of the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees. Members of the House first requested the documents last May, stating that they would not consider telecom immunity until they had read them. Read more.

JANUARY 30: PANEL ON PRIVACY AND NATIONAL SECURITY
The Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law will host a panel entitled "Big Brother or Small Sacrifice? Privacy and Security in the Information Age." The event will begin at 4:00 p.m. at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Moot Court Room, 55 Fifth Avenue, New York City. For more information please contact Jordan Walerstein at Jcwally@gmail.com.

FEBRUARY 1: CONFERENCE ON NATIONAL SECURITY
The Center on Law and Security at New York University School of Law will hold a conference entitled "Intelligence and the Age of National Security." The full-day event will begin at 9:15 a.m. in Greenberg Lounge, Vanderbilt Hall, 40 Washington Square South, New York City. More information.

FEBRUARY 1: CONFERENCE ON NATIONAL SECURITY COURTS
The American University Washington College of Law Program on Law and Government and The Brookings Institution will host a conference entitled "Terrorists and Detainees: Do We Need a New National Security Court?" Elisa Massimino, Director of the Washington Office at Human Rights First, will participate in a panel discussing a national security court for detention decisions. The full-day event will begin at 9:30 a.m. at the American University Washington College of Law, 4801 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Room 603, Washington, DC. More information.

FEBRUARY 7: ROUNDTABLE ON TRYING TERRORISM CASES
Fordham Law School will host a roundtable entitled "Trying Cases Related to Allegations of Terrorism: Judges' Roundtable." The event will begin at 6:00 p.m. at Fordham Law School, McNally Amphitheatre, 140 West 62nd Street, New York City. More information.

back to top

© 2006 Human Rights First