More Law Enforcement Power, No Accountability; The Counter-Terrorism Legislation Must Fail Statement of Laura W. Murphy, Director ACLU National Washington Office FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Phil Gutis Wednesday, December 6, 1995 202-675-2312 WASHINGTON -- The so-called counter-terrorism legislation being rushed to the House floor after a series of back room deals continues to represent a vast expansion of the powers offederal law enforcement. It totally disregards the lessons of Waco and Ruby Ridge. This bill marks business as usual for the Department of Justice in Washington, D.C.: it demands more federal lawenforcement powers from Congress, and Congress does nothing to ensure the vast police powers ithas already are wielded responsibly. Did we learn nothing from Waco and Ruby Ridge? All Americans - whether left, right or center -- must stand strong in continued opposition to this anti-liberty proposal. But this bill, in fact. would do even more harm than the versions proposed by President Clinton and passed by the Senate. As its final, fitting coup de grace in a bill that hastly expands federal law enforcement powers, the proposed counter-terrorism compromise would virtually destroy the ancient writ of Habeas Corpus, thus stripping the federal courts of their ability to granta remedy for the abuses of those powers that result in the unconstitutional incarceration of prisoners. We unusual allies stand here again today to urge the House of Representatives to reject this bald attempt to give even more power to federal law enforcement agencies. To do otherwise would be to make a mockery of the Constitution and the freedoms it ensures all Americans. All 25 organizations who signed this letter agree that this bill goes too far. Whether we are pro-gun groups like the Gun Owners of America ethnic groups like the Irish National Caucus, religious groups like the Friends Committee on National Legislation, or privacy groups like the Electronic Privacy Information Center: we agree that secret evidence can not be the basis of a deportation order; and that the Executive Branch can not be vested with an imperial-like authority to bar Americans from supporting the legal activities of groups designated "terrorist" organizations. We will not tolerate a return to the bad old days of McCarthyism, when associations and membership in a group, instead of activities, was the basis for governmental action against a person. The so-called "compromise" terrorism bill includes each of these provisions and will not protect civil liberties. We are also releasing today a letter from a diverse group of prominent professors at leading law schools, such as Yale, Stanford, Georgetown and Cornell who agree that the terrorism bill, in their words, "poses an unwarranted threat to the civil ]iberties of law abiding Americans." They have written to Speaker Gingrich arguing that the tragedy of Oklahoma City cannot be used as an excuse to enact terrorism legislation, such as the House terronsm bill, that has nothing to do with preventing another such traged~. The terrorism bill is a product of the politics of fear. It has little support among the American public. We stand together to urge Congress not to pass this bill. It will make us no safer, only less free.