It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In No-Fly List Lawsuit, DOJ Argues ‘No Constitutional Right Not to Become an Informant’

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 02:44 AM
link   



In No-Fly List Lawsuit by American Muslims, DOJ Argues ‘No Constitutional Right Not to Become an Informant’

The United States Justice Department has moved to dismiss a lawsuit in which American Muslims allege that that twenty-five law enforcement officials, particularly FBI agents, had them placed on the No Fly List after they refused to become government informants in their community.

In April, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and Creative Law Enforcement Accountability and Responsibility (CLEAR) Project filed a lawsuit on behalf of four American Muslim men, which claimed that they were “among the many innocent people who find themselves swept up in the United States government’s secretive watch list dragnet.” When they “declined to act as informants” for the FBI and to “spy on their own American Muslim communities and other innocent people,” they faced retaliation from the FBI and subsequently discovered they were on the No Fly List.

...

The Justice Department’s motion to dismiss [PDF] plainly argues “there is no constitutional right not to become an informant.” The department cited United States v. Paguio, a case from 1997 in which prosecutors “argued that prosecutors indicted her in order to pressure her co-defendant fiancé to cooperate.” The court ruled “there is no constitutional right not to ‘snitch.’”

Therefore, the Justice Department maintains that submitting the names of these four American Muslims to the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) for “consideration for the No Fly List,” even if based on their refusal to become informants, would not violate their constitutional rights. There is no clearly established right so the agents being sued are entitled to “qualified immunity” from their claims.




Wow.

What county are we in again?

It's one thing if they have specific knowledge of any crime and refuse to inform, but this takes it to a whole other level.
edit on 30-7-2014 by loam because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 03:09 AM
link   
Isn't this called "pulling a heavy" or "muscling" someone, in organized crime and gangs? I really fail to see the difference in modus operandi with both sides.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 03:12 AM
link   
a reply to: loam

Do as I say: FBI motto

Do as I do: terrorism.

The times of media manipulation we live in would be so ridiculous.. If people didn't continue to live by this unfounded rhetoric.
edit on 30-7-2014 by rockintitz because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-7-2014 by rockintitz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   
a reply to: loam

If that isn't bad enough, they will entrap you as well. Ask Randy Weaver and read about Ruby Ridge. They wanted him to join and report on white supremacist in his area and he said no.The FBI paid him after several refusals to shorten a shotgun barrel shorter than law allows because his family was in bad shape and needed money. They said they would prosecute unless he informed on the White Supremacist as they asked.

After the shootout, and his family members being killed, he was awarded 3 million by the jury for his lawsuit. These people are ruthless. The only difference between them and the mob is the mob has rules.




top topics
 
9

log in

join