Muslims civil rights groups and their partners have decided to sue the NYPD over its spy program:
by Eileen Sullivan (AP)
WASHINGTON (AP) — One of the Obama administration’s go-to civil rights groups in its efforts to build relationships with American Muslims is suing the New York Police Department over its surveillance programs, some of which were paid for with federal money.
Eight Muslims filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday in New Jersey to force the NYPD to end its surveillance and other intelligence-gathering practices targeting Muslims in the years after the 2001 terrorist attacks. The lawsuit alleged that the NYPD’s activities were unconstitutional because they focused on people’s religion, national origin and race.
It is the first lawsuit to directly challenge the NYPD’s surveillance programs that targeted entire Muslim neighborhoods, chronicling the daily life of where people ate, prayed and got their hair cut. The surveillance was the subject of series of stories by The Associated Press that revealed the NYPD intelligence division infiltrated dozens of mosques and Muslim student groups and investigated hundreds.
The Muslims suing the NYPD are represented by Muslim Advocates, a California-based civil rights group that meets regularly with members of the Obama administration.
One of the lawsuit’s plaintiffs stopped attending one New Jersey mosque after learning it was listed in an NYPD file. The mosque, like and dozens of others along the East Coast and listed in NYPD files, was not linked to terrorism either publicly or in the confidential police documents.
Syed Farhaj Hassan, a specialist in the U.S. Army Reserves, said he worried that if his name, or the name of one of his mosques, turned up in a police intelligence dossier, it could jeopardize his military security clearance or job prospects.
“Guilt by association is a career stopper, it’s a show stopper, it’s an ender,” he said. “What happens when that name comes up when you’re looking for a job?”
The Obama administration has offered few comments on the NYPD’s programs, even as it released plans in the past year for local police departments around the country to counter violent extremism and build relationships in Muslim communities.
Since last fall, the Justice Department has been reviewing requests to investigate the NYPD. And President Barack Obama’s counterterrorism adviser has said the NYPD does not appear to be breaking any laws. The NYPD has received large federal counterterrorism grants since the 2001 attacks, and a White House anti-drug program has helped pay for some of the NYPD’s surveillance equipment.
When asked about the lawsuit Wednesday, NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly said, “I would just refer them to the New Jersey Attorney General’s report that found no wrong doing.”
Kelly was referring to findings from a three-month review that New Jersey’s attorney general conducted in response to outrage over the NYPD operating secretly in New Jersey neighborhoods where Muslims lived and worked. The state attorney general found that the NYPD did not violate any state laws when it spied on Muslim neighborhoods and organizations, and found there is no recourse for the state of New Jersey to stop the NYPD from infiltrating Muslim student groups, video-taping mosque-goers or collecting their license plate numbers as they prayed.
No court has ruled that the NYPD programs were illegal. But the division operates without significant oversight: The New York City Council does not believe it has the expertise to oversee the intelligence division, and Congress believes the NYPD is not part of its jurisdiction even though the police department receives huge amounts of federal funding each year.
Kelly has said his department is obligated to do this type of surveillance in order to protect New York from another 9/11. He has said the 2001 attacks proved that New Yorkers could not rely solely on the federal government for protection, and the NYPD needed to enhance its efforts.
The lawsuit alleges that these enhancements violate constitutional rights.
“The NYPD program is founded upon a false and constitutionally impermissible premise: that Muslim religious identity is a legitimate criterion for selection of law-enforcement surveillance targets,” according to the lawsuit.
Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates, said, “There is no reason a police officer should be scribbling notes on little girls attending an elementary school.”
The advocacy group, representing the plaintiffs for free, has a good and constructive relationship with the Obama administration, Khera said.
In 2009, Khera was the only representative from an American Muslim advocacy organization who was invited to attend the White House iftar dinner, a Muslim tradition of breaking the daily fast during the holy month of Ramadan, the group said. The organization was invited to a meeting at the White House in 2010 to discuss views on a Supreme Court vacancy. And the Justice Department invited the group to sit on a panel last year about confronting discrimination since 9/11.
Khera said her organization has asked the Obama administration to look into the NYPD’s programs, and she thinks more could be done.
“We do not think that they’ve been given sufficient attention and attention in a speedy manner,” Khera said. “We do think this is an immensely important issue to have the nation’s largest police department targeting Americans based on religion. We do think it merits the attention of the federal government.”
The White House said it would not comment on pending litigation.