"I think it's very much a reflection of the fact that there was a very aggressive assault on civil liberties," said ACLU national deputy executive director Dorothy Ehrlich. "Over the past seven years, many Americans felt their own cherished values were under attack, and they didn't want to sit by."

The ACLU counted about 250,000 members in the final year of Bill Clinton's presidency. Today, the organization has about 500,000 card-carriers, 2,500 of them in Utah.

Fundraising has increased in kind. According the IRS, the nonprofit had about $44 million in annual revenues in the 2000 fiscal year. In the fiscal year ending in March of 2007, it collected more than $80 million.

Seems like the forces to protect freedom-of-speech in the groundsetting Wikileaks.org case have spoken: Henry Weinstein at LA Times reports that a coalition of media and public interest organizations today urged judge Jeffrey White to rescind the shutdown of Wikileaks.org, which presents "restraint on free speech that violated the First Amendment", and is generally considered to become a representative case for free online speech. The dirty dozen organizations fighting for your voice and mine include the EFF, the ACLU, The Times, AP, Gannett, Hearst, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Society of Professional Journalists.

The U.S. Supreme Court today refused to review a legal challenge to the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program. The case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys and national nonprofit organizations who say that the unchecked surveillance program is disrupting their ability to communicate effectively with sources and clients. The court's decision today lets stand an appeals court's ruling on narrow grounds that plaintiffs could not show with certainty that they had been wiretapped by the National Security Agency.

The following quote can be attributed to Jameel Jaffer, Director of the ACLU's National Security Project:

"Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act intending to protect the rights of U.S. citizens and residents, and the president systematically broke that law over a period of more than five years. It's very disturbing that the president's actions will not be reviewed by the Supreme Court. It shouldn't be left to executive branch officials alone to determine what limits apply to their own surveillance activities and whether those limits are being honored. Allowing the executive branch to police itself flies in the face of the constitutional system of checks and balances."

The American Civil Liberties Union asked a federal judge on Monday to block the March 4 presidential primary in Ohio's biggest county if it switches to a paper ballot system that doesn't allow voters to correct errors.

In a follow-up to a suit it filed Jan. 17, the ACLU of Ohio asked for a preliminary injunction against any election in Cuyahoga County if the switch is made.

The lawsuit argued that the proposed paper-ballot system would violate voters' constitutional rights because it doesn't allow them to correct errors on ballots before they are cast.

In the first decision of its kind, a federal judge today ordered the government to stop the deportation of Egyptian national Sameh Khouzam based on a secret and unreliable "assurance" from the Egyptian government that it will not torture him upon his return. The judge called for Khouzam's immediate release from jail under reasonable conditions of supervision and granted his habeas corpus petition. The American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a lawsuit on Khouzam's behalf, applauded the judge's ruling.

...

The U.S. State Department has documented widespread Egyptian persecution and discrimination against Christians and other religious minorities, as well as widespread use of torture in Egypt. A State Department report on the matter is available at:
www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78851.htm

Senator Robert Casey, Jr. (D-PA) sent a letter to Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff supporting Khouzam and denouncing Egypt’s diplomatic assurances. That letter is available at:
www.aclupa.org/downloads/CaseytoChertoffonKhouzam.pdf

Congressman Joseph Pitts (R-PA) also sent a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice requesting Khouzam’s deportation be cancelled. That letter is available at:
www.aclu.org/immigrants/gen/29982prs20070604.html

More here:

Mr. Khouzam's lawyers say he was detained and beaten by Egyptian authorities after he refused to convert to Islam. They say he escaped from a hospital, went straight to the airport and got on a plane to the United States. While he was in the air, Egyptian officials called U.S. officials and said Mr. Khouzam was wanted for killing a woman, and the U.S. canceled his visa.

"The issue in this case does not concern any right of Khouzam to remain in the United States," Judge Vanaskie wrote. "The right at stake here is to be free from torture."

Local mirror of Judge Vanaskie's decision freeing Khouzam and barring his deportation

The ultra-secret court that approves government eavesdropping of terrorists and spies inside the United States rejected Tuesday an ACLU request to declassify portions of its decisions that struck down a controversial government spy program. The ACLU asked the secret court in August to review the classified orders and release the parts that made rulings on surveillance law, but the Justice Department told the court it could not and should not do so.

In its third ever publicly released decision in its 29-year history, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court denied, on national security grounds, to review the classification of earlier secret court orders that struck down a government spy program that, for five years, targeted Americans for surveillance with getting court orders.

...

"A federal court interpretation of a federal law should not be kept secret," Jaffer said. "If courts abdicate their role to oversee the classification decisions of the executive branch, it extends their unchecked power even more."

Basically, this Court interpreted a federal law, issued a decision and now the ACLU wants to see that decision, but the Court says that it believes the executive branch when it says "no, this is secret".

Where have the checks and balances gone?

Local mirror of FISC's decision deferring to the executive branch.