Citizens Rights During Wartime

In the airports, Muslim people became “the usual suspects”, were thoroughly searched and often interrogated. In her article, O’Connor claims that the lives of American Muslims changed forever, and the statement is hard to disagree with (“How 9/11 Changed These Muslim Americans’ Lives Forever.”) Those who had nothing to do with the September 11 attacks, their children and grandchildren were sentenced to face racism, hate and violence.

After a horrible terroristic attack that shocked the whole world on September 11th in the center of New York City, Muslims in the Western world have been constantly fighting against prejudice. After September 11, media interest in Islam increased, where Islam was usually portrayed in a negative way. Before 9/11, many Muslims lived the normal, everyday life. However, the attack has changed lives of many people that belonged to the Muslim community, where they were the victims of guilt. Unfortunately, many Americans were introduced to Islam, after the 9/11 attack, thus even till today, Islam is associated with terrorism. For the past ten years, Muslims felt excluded from the American society by being rifled, attacked, discriminated, checked

In society today many citizens feel violated with the security methods taken by homeland security. “On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States marked the beginning of the global war on terrorism. The methods used are justifiable as they provide protection against possible threats or attacks. This attack on U.S. soil increased surveillance of both American citizens and foreign nationals” (Andrew, C., & Walter,

There are five main positions on how the courts should view civil liberties during war time: success, no exception, maybe, dilemma, and living constitution. “Success” is the “whatever it takes to win” approach, meaning that rights given to the individual by the US constitution can be revoked during wartime. “No exception” is the opposite to the success approach, meaning that no matter what an individual’s rights cannot be revoked at any time for any reason. The stance of “maybe” means if there is an immediate threat then

According to the Bill of Rights, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Nowhere in the First Amendment does it state that in times of war, the government can change the laws that have been made to protect the people of the United States. Although some thought President Wilson’s actions were just, he did not abide by the rules of the First Amendment, and because of that, he went too far in limiting people’s civil liberties during World War

During WWII many civil liberties were affected and felt by the American people; some of these decisions include new policies on foreigners and civil defense groups in towns. A major facet of homefront life in WWII was the discrimination faced by Japanese/German/Italian Americans, especially the Japanese, After the attack on Pearl Harbor which drew the United States into the war, Americans developed a fear towards immigrants and foreigners; not unlike the fear felt during the 1920’s after WWI. Local, state, and federal governments began drafting new laws and policies against persons whose ancestry is that of any of the Axis powers (Italy-Germany-Japan). For instance, a new law stated that all residents (“enemy aliens”) of German, Japanese, or Italian descent were required to register with the government, submit to fingerprinting, and list all their organizational affiliations. In addition, many of these peoples were forced to submit to curfews and travel restrictions. Furthermore, during this time, Japanese persons could not join the military until 1943 due to racism and fears of the American people. In February of 1942, Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which designated certain areas as war zones, and allowed for the removal of anyone for any reason. This led to the internment of Japanese people. Japanese-Americans were forced to either store or sell nearly all their property and belongings, only permitted to take “necessities”,

This law prohibited any speech that interfered with the drafting of men into the armed forces. The media is forced to silence, due to the fear of any repercussions, from the government. Merely voicing an opinion in the media about any war is now so looked down upon that it takes away freedom from the media to reach all types of audiences.

9/11 shifted the primary role of the US government to keeping US citizens safe, but it is not at the expense of individual freedoms. After the 9/11 attacks took almost 3,000 lives and shocked not only the US but other countries, the US decided to make changes to certain things, in order to prevent more attacks. The government did this by detaining illegal aliens, teaming up with other countries, creating a new department of Homeland Security, and bumping up security. These actions did not take away individual freedoms, they are rather saving lives and keeping the US safe from unwanted threats.

One reason why Susan N. Herman shows effectively that the Patriot Act can go wrong is the story Herman tells in Rereading America: Cultural contexts for critical thinking and writing about Sami Omar Al-Hussayen. Herman speaks about Al-Hussayen who was a thirty four year old doctoral student at the University of Idaho, he was studying towards his degree in computer studies. Al-Hussayen was a Saudi Arabia citizen and came to the United States on a student Visa with his wife Mafa and his three young sons. Al-Hussayen was a Muslim student leader, shortly after the attack of 9/11 Al-Hussayen held a candlelight vigil disapproving the attacks as an affront to Islam. Al-Hussayen shortly after the

After the devastating attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, this country scrambled to take action to provide future protection. New techniques had to be developed to protect the nation from the menace of terrorism. Along with the new techniques came the decision to enact laws that some believed crossed the threshold of violating civil liberties this county and those living in it were guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. “On October 26, 2001, the Public Law 107-56, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, also known as the USA Patriot Act, was signed into effect” (Stern, 2004, p. 1112). While speaking to Congress,

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 impacted the American people without many of them realizing it. The act called for increased monitoring of computer networks, phone lines, and online history inside the United States and allowed the government to deport suspects (ACLU). What was created by the act has snaked its way into all aspects of our lives, creating a sense of order and restricting some freedom. However, some say that this imposition into our daily lives limits our freedoms and actions allowed us by the Constitution. Many interest groups voice strong resentment for the act while others try to demonstrate the strengths and triumphs of the Homeland Security Act. This paper will show the differing viewpoints of those that feel that the

The agonizing terrorist attacks of September 9th, 2001 left the country in emotional distress. The United States of America decided to prepare for tragic attacks like this and reevaluated its immigration and foreign policies, the citizens of the US also became united and stronger from these attacks. This ideology that the US has become more united after an attack that killed nearly 3,000 people has become mainstream and may be true in some cases, but many people overlook the impact it had on the millions of Muslim Americans. The Muslim generation before us had its own problems dealing with racial discrimination and hate crimes, many people believed it stop their but this contempt was passed on to my generation. The discrimination I have received has caused me to change my aspirations in order to ensure that no one else receives the treatment I had gotten.

This was an important time in America post 9/11 because although Muslims were being discriminated and targeted. Muslim American advocacy organizations urged their people to claim their rights as Americans, to raise their voices, to fight back against hate crimes, bias incidents, prejudice and discrimination, and governmental abuses of power. They responded in typical American fashion, through political activism, legal challenges, and social

Forty-five days after the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act, also known as the “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism” Act, or more simply, the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act was created with the noble intention of finding and prosecuting international terrorists operating on American soil; however, the unfortunate consequences of the Act have been drastic. Many of the Patriot Act’s provisions are in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution—a document drafted by wise men like Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington in order to protect American rights and freedoms. The Patriot Act encroaches on sacred First Amendment rights, which protect free speech and expression, and Fourth Amendment rights, which protect citizens against “unwarranted search and seizure” (Justice). The Patriot Act authorizes unethical and unconstitutional surveillance of American citizens with a negligible improvement in national security. Free speech, free thinking, and a free American lifestyle can not survive in the climate of distrust and constant fear created by the Patriot Act.

Civil liberties refer to protections against government actions with their derivatives often rooted in the Bill of Rights. Whilst the right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it can be determined from several amendments, such as the search with “probable cause” outlined in the Fourth Amendment (U.S. Const. am. 4, 1791). Lynch (2012) would define civil liberties as ‘sacred’ and therefore should never be infringed upon. However, the ‘probable cause’ section was abused using powers granted by PATRIOT Act. It is common consensus among the literature that the PATRIOT Act was overreaching and overused to wrongly justify blanket surveillance. However, the PATRIOT Act also violated the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment grants freedom of press (U.S. Const. am. 1, 1791). The Fifth Amendment grants protection to