DOCSLIB.ORG

C:\Documents and Settings\TEXT\MONTREAL 2006

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
C:\Documents and Settings\TEXT\MONTREAL 2006 IN RECOGNITION OF PAST AND PRESENT SERVICE PRESIDENTS OF SSSP, 1952-2008 Ernest W. Burgess 1952-1953 Albert K. Cohen 1971-1972 James A. Geschwender 1990-1991 Alfred McClung Lee 1953-1954 Edwin M. Lemert 1972-1973 Stephen J. Pfohl 1991-1992 Herbert Blumer 1954-1955 Rose Coser 1973-1974 William Chambliss 1992-1993 Arnold M. Rose 1955-1956 Stanton Wheeler 1974-1975 Barbara Katz Rothman 1993-1994 Mabel Elliot 1956-1957 S. M. Miller 1975-1976 James D. Orcutt 1994-1995 Byron Fox 1957-1958 Bernard Beck 1976-1977 Peter Conrad 1995-1996 Richard Schermerhorn 1958-1959 Jacqueline Wiseman 1977-1978 Pamela A. Roby 1996-1997 Alfred R. Lindesmith 1959-1960 John I. Kitsuse 1978-1979 Beth B. Hess 1997-1998 Alvin W. Gouldner 1960-1961 Frances Fox Piven 1979-1980 Evelyn Nakano Glenn 1998-1999 Marshall B. Clinard 1961-1962 James E. Blackwell 1980-1981 Robert Perrucci 1999-2000 Marvin B. Sussman 1962-1963 Egon Bittner 1981-1982 John F. Galliher 2000-2001 Jessie Bernard 1963-1964 Helena Z. Lopata 1982-1983 Joel Best 2001-2002 Irwin Deutscher 1964-1965 Louis Kriesberg 1983-1984 Nancy C. Jurik 2002-2003 Howard S. Becker 1965-1966 Joan W. Moore 1984-1985 Kathleen J. Ferraro 2003-2004 Melvin Tumin 1966-1967 Rodolfo Alvarez 1985-1986 Gary Alan Fine 2004-2005 Lewis Coser 1967-1968 Arlene Kaplan Daniels 1986-1987 Claire M. Renzetti 2005-2006 Albert J. Reiss, Jr. 1968-1969 Doris Y. Wilkinson 1987-1988 Valerie Jenness 2006-2007 Raymond W. Mack 1969-1970 Joseph R. Gusfield 1988-1989 Nancy A. Naples 2007-2008 Kai Erikson 1970-1971 Murray Straus 1989-1990 EDITORS OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS, 1953-2008 Jerome Himmelhoch 1953-1958 Richard Colvard 1978-1981 Joel Best 1996-1999 Erwin O. Smigel 1958-1961 Malcolm Spector 1981-1984 David A. Smith 1999-2002 Howard S. Becker 1961-1965 James D. Orcutt 1984-1987 James A. Holstein 2002-2005 Hyman Rodman 1965-1969 Joseph Schneider 1987-1990 Amy S. Wharton 2005-2008 David Gold 1969-1975 Merry Morash 1990-1993 Arlene Kaplan Daniels 1975-1978 Robert Perrucci 1993-1996 The Society for the Study of Social Problems 901 McClung Tower University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37996-0490 work: (865) 974-3620; fax: (865) 689-1534 [email protected] http://www.sssp1.org (Printed in the USA) PRELIMINARY PROGRAM The Society for the Study of Social Problems 56th Annual Meeting August 10-12, 2006 Hilton Montréal Bonaventure 900 de La Gauchetière West Montréal, Québec, Canada BUILDING JUST, DIVERSE AND DEMOCRATIC COMMUNITIES The United States has been called a “melting pot,” but the reality of life in this country, historically and contemporaneously, has been one of exclusion – exclusion of the poor, the non-White, the non-Christian, people with disabilities, women, gay men, lesbians, bisexual and transgendered people. The United States has been held up by some as the model democracy, and the current federal administration claims to be spreading democracy throughout the world. But the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the impact on the people there can hardly be called democratic. Moreover, the U.S. government chooses to ignore the plight of others, such as those in Darfur, if their suffering does not serve our nation’s political or economic purposes. Of course, the disparity between rhetoric and social reality is nothing new. Sociologists, including the founders of SSSP, have been studying and writing about it – particularly in terms of its consequences on the quality of life of large segments of the population – for decades. But at a time when the radical Right is attempting to – and often succeeding in – dismantling social programs to promote “smaller government,” denying civil rights to individuals and groups it deems “immoral” or a “threat to national security,” bolstering the wealth of the already wealthiest individuals and corporations in the name of “global free enterprise,” it is critical for progressive sociologists – as researchers, teachers, and activists – to reclaim, interrogate, and re- vision the concepts of justice, diversity, democracy, and community. At our 2006 meeting in Montréal, we will explore such questions as: How can we ensure justice and democratic processes in a political climate that fosters mistrust of difference and uses the threat of terrorism to legitimate rolling back rights and increasing military spending and intervention? What do community and democracy mean in the context of globalization? How might we overcome the prevailing attitude of “guilt fatigue” so that social welfare spending is not seen as “charity,” but rather as a communal effort, a partnership between citizens and their government to work toward a prosperous future shared by all? What must be done to reprioritize the U.S. national agenda so that strategies for achieving peace and justice are at the forefront, rather than dismissed as “liberal pie in the sky?” The Canadian location of the meeting offers an ideal vantage point for a comparative analysis of differences in laws, social and economic policies, and public opinion. These and many other related and equally significant questions present enormous challenges, but it behooves SSSP to take a leadership role in answering them. Our mission, after all, is to develop and apply research that makes a difference. Our meeting in Montréal is an opportunity to energize, mobilize, and strategize across national borders, and I encourage our entire membership, and especially our Canadian members, to attend and participate. As artist and poet M. C. Richards wrote, “Freedom is presence, not absence. Centering is the act of bringing in, not leaving out. It is brought about not by force, but by coordination.” Claire M. Renzetti, SSSP President, University of Dayton 2006 Program Committee James Gruber, Co-Chair, University of Michigan, Dearborn Steven Barkan, University of Maine Phoebe Morgan, Co-Chair, Northern Arizona University Michele Paludi, Graduate College of Union University Madelaine Adelman, Arizona State University Stephani Williams, Arizona State University 2 WELCOME TO MONTRÉAL! TABLE OF CONTENTS Welcome to Montréal, which will embrace you with its diversity of Accessibility Services .............................. 3 cultures, sights, sounds and culinary pleasures! AIDS Fundraiser and the Graduate Student and New Member Things to do and see are endless in this beautiful city and its Reception ..................................... 5, 23 surroundings; and there is definitely a lot to do in downtown. For a Awards Banquet ............................. 5, 31, 48 spectacular bird’s-eye view of Montréal take a very short taxi ride, or just hike up to Mount Royal Park. While at the park relax by the Beaver Babysitting Services ................................ 4 Lake, which is situated at the top of the “Mountain.” To discover some of Montréal’s history, go for a quick stroll from the hotel to the Old Port. Book Exhibit ..................................... 4 There, you will find many historic sites and buildings including the City Hall (275 Notre Dame East), Château Ramezay (280 Notre-Dame East), Business Meeting............................ 5, 10, 24 and the Notre-Dame Basilica (110 Notre-Dame West). During summer the Old Port is always bustling along the St. Lawrence River. It is a great C. Wright Mills Finalists - 2005 ...................... 23 place to go for a walk, bike or just do some shopping. There are a multitude of little souvenir stores as well as stalls selling hand-made crafts Committee and Divisional Business Meetings........... 10 and jewelry where you can find great buys to take home. Another historic site is the Saint-Joseph Oratory (3800 Chemin Queen Mary). Division-Sponsored Reception ....................... 23 Getting there requires a short cab ride from the hotel but it is definitely worth seeing. Editors of Social Problems, 1953-2008 .... inside front cover If you prefer to visit some of the many museums of Montréal, McGill Film Exhibit.....................................6-7 University’s McCord Museum of Canadian History is a mere three blocks north from the hotel (690 Sherbrooke W.). They have an amazing Graduate Student Meeting with the Student Board First Nations collection as well as a photographic archive and an Representatives ............................. 5, 10, 23 exhibition of Canadian costumes. Along the same street you will find Montréal Museum of Fine Arts (1380 Sherbrooke W., corner of How to Make Hotel Reservations ..................... 3 Crescent). Their permanent collection is a rich mix of Canadian and How to Register.............................. 3, 49-50 European paintings. The Museum also has a permanent exhibition of antiquities, Islamic art, and art from China, Korea, Japan and India. For Index of Participants.............................42-45 those of you who are interested in contemporary arts, Contemporary Art Museum (Métro Place des Arts) is the place to see. They always host Index of Sessions.................................. 9 interesting exhibitions and have permanent collections of printmaking, sculpture, photography and of course paintings. Listing of Officers and Committee Members............7-9 For a relaxing time outdoors you must visit the Botanical Gardens (4101 Listing of Plenary, Thematic, and Special Sessions....... 11 Sherbrooke East, Métro Pie-IX). This fabulous place is the home of countless flowers, plants and trees. Among its many charms are a Mentoring Program ................................ 5 beautiful Japanese Garden, an Arboretum, a Butterfly House, and a First Nations Garden. Across the street from the Gardens you will find the Open Discussion of Resolutions Being Proposed to the SSSP Biodôme. This is a great place not only for kids but also for persons of Board of Directors ........................... 5, 10, 16 all ages. Biodôme recreates some of the most beautiful ecosystems of the Americas including the Tropical Forest, the Arctic and the St. Lawrence Parking Services................................... 4 Marine Ecosystem. Presidential Address.......................... 5, 11, 24 If you enjoy shopping, you’re in the right city. Just walk two blocks north from the hotel to Ste. Catherine Street and you will see a wide Presidents of SSSP, 1952-2008 .......... inside front cover variety of stores and underground shopping malls.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States District Court for the District of Columbia
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER, AMERICAN BOOKSELLERS FOUNDATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION, and FREEDOM TO READ FOUNDATION, Civil Action Plaintiffs, No. 02-CV-2077 (ESH) v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DAVID L. SOBEL D.C. Bar No. 360418 Electronic Privacy Information Center 1718 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Suite 200 Washington, DC 20009 ANN BEESON JAMEEL JAFFER American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 125 Broad St. New York, NY 10004 ARTHUR B. SPITZER D.C. Bar No. 235960 American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area 1400 20th St., N.W. #119 Washington, DC 20036 Counsel for Plaintiffs INTRODUCTION In this action, Plaintiffs challenge the government's refusal to disclose aggregate, statistical data concerning implementation of controversial new surveillance powers authorized by Congress in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. These new powers raise potentially serious implications for constitutionally protected rights and, accordingly, there is widespread public concern about their scope and implementation. Plaintiffs filed this litigation after defendant Department of Justice (“DOJ”) failed to respond expeditiously to a request under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552. The request sought records related to Defendant’s implementation of the USA PATRIOT Act (“Patriot Act” or “Act”), Pub. L. No. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272 (Oct. 26, 2001), legislation that dramatically expanded the government’s authority to engage in intrusive surveillance of people living in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Suleiman Complaint
    1 La Rond Baker, WSBA No. 43610 2 [email protected] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 3 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 630 4 Seattle, WA 98164 Phone: 206-624-2184 5 6 Steven M. Watt (pro hac vice pending) Dror Ladin (pro hac vice pending) 7 Hina Shamsi (pro hac vice pending) 8 Jameel Jaffer (pro hac vice pending) AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 9 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor 10 New York, New York 10004 11 Paul Hoffman (pro hac vice pending) 12 Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman, LLP 723 Ocean Front Walk, Suite 100 13 Venice, CA 90291 14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 17 18 SULEIMAN ABDULLAH SALIM, MOHAMED AHMED BEN SOUD, OBAID 19 ULLAH (AS PERSONAL 20 REPRESENTATIVE OF GUL RAHMAN), Civil Action No. 21 Plaintiffs, 22 v. COMPLAINT AND 23 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 24 JAMES ELMER MITCHELL and JOHN “BRUCE” JESSEN 25 26 Defendants. 27 COMPLAINT AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES Page | 1 UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 901 Fifth Ave, Suite 630 Seattle, WA 98164 (206) 624-2184 1 I. INTRODUCTION 2 1. Defendants James Elmer Mitchell and John “Bruce” Jessen are 3 4 psychologists who designed, implemented, and personally 5 administered an experimental torture program for the U.S. Central 6 Intelligence Agency (“CIA”). 7 8 2. To create a torture program with a scientific veneer, Defendants drew 9 on experiments from the 1960s in which researchers taught dogs 10 “helplessness” by subjecting them to uncontrollable pain. Defendants 11 12 theorized that if human beings were subjected to systematic abuse, the 13 victims would become helpless and unable to resist an interrogator’s 14 demand for information.
    [Show full text]
  • Guantánamo and Its Aftermath
    Guantánamo and Its Aftermath u.s. detention and interrogation practices and their impact on former detainees November 2008 Human Rights Center International Human Rights Law Clinic In partnership with University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley Center for Constitutional Rights Guantánamo and Its Aftermath u.s. detention and interrogation practices and their impact on former detainees Laurel E. Fletcher Eric Stover with Stephen Paul Smith Alexa Koenig Zulaikha Aziz Alexis Kelly Sarah Staveteig Nobuko Mizoguchi November 2008 Human Rights Center University of California, Berkeley International Human Rights Law Clinic University of California, Berkeley, School of Law In partnership with Center for Constitutional Rights ISBN# 978-0-9760677-3-3 Human Rights Center and International Human Rights Law Clinic, University of California, Berkeley Cover photos: Louie Palu/ZUMA Design: Melanie Doherty Design, San Francisco Human Rights Center, University of California, Berkeley The Human Rights Center promotes human rights and international justice worldwide and trains the next generation of human rights researchers and advocates. We believe that sustainable peace and devel- opment can be achieved only through efforts to prevent human rights abuses and hold those responsible for such crimes accountable. We use empirical research methods to investigate and expose serious viola- tions of human rights and international humanitarian law. In our studies and reports, we recommend specific policy measures that should be taken by governments and international organizations to protect vulnerable populations in times of war and political and social upheaval. For more information, please visit hrc.berkeley.edu. International Human Rights Law Clinic, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law The International Human Rights Law Clinic (IHRLC) designs and implements innovative human rights projects to advance the struggle for justice on behalf of individuals and marginalized communities through advocacy, research, and policy development.
    [Show full text]
  • Image Munitions and the Continuation of War and Politics by Other Means
    _________________________________________________________________________Swansea University E-Theses Image warfare in the war on terror: Image munitions and the continuation of war and politics by other means. Roger, Nathan Philip How to cite: _________________________________________________________________________ Roger, Nathan Philip (2010) Image warfare in the war on terror: Image munitions and the continuation of war and politics by other means.. thesis, Swansea University. http://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa42350 Use policy: _________________________________________________________________________ This item is brought to you by Swansea University. Any person downloading material is agreeing to abide by the terms of the repository licence: copies of full text items may be used or reproduced in any format or medium, without prior permission for personal research or study, educational or non-commercial purposes only. The copyright for any work remains with the original author unless otherwise specified. The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holder. Permission for multiple reproductions should be obtained from the original author. Authors are personally responsible for adhering to copyright and publisher restrictions when uploading content to the repository. Please link to the metadata record in the Swansea University repository, Cronfa (link given in the citation reference above.) http://www.swansea.ac.uk/library/researchsupport/ris-support/ Image warfare in the war on terror: Image munitions and the continuation of war and politics by other means Nathan Philip Roger Submitted to the University of Wales in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Swansea University 2010 ProQuest Number: 10798058 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
    [Show full text]
  • National Security Law: a Career Guide
    National Security Law: A Career Guide Bernard Koteen Office of Public Interest Advising Harvard Law School Bernard Koteen Office of Public Interest Advising Harvard Law School Wasserstein Hall, Suite 4039 Cambridge, MA 02138 (617) 495-3108 Fax: (617) 496-4944 [email protected] www.law.harvard.edu/students/opia © 2014 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College 1 Table of Contents Acknowledgments 2 Introduction to National Security Law 3 Chapter 1: Career Opportunities in the Federal Government 5 The Executive Branch The Department of Justice: Prosecuting National Security Law Capitol Hill Chapter 2: Career Opportunities in the Military 14 Chapter 3: Career Opportunities at the State/Local Level 16 Chapter 4: Career Opportunities at Advocacy Organizations 18 Chapter 5: Career Opportunities at Think Tanks 20 Chapter 6: Preparing for a Career in National Security Law 21 Chapter 7: Personal Narratives 28 Directory of Organizations 53 Acknowledgements Many thanks to all those who are dedicating their efforts to national security, both in government and in non-profit and advocacy work. We are particularly grateful to Jamil N. Jaffer, Carrie F. Cordero, Matthew Olsen, Juliette Kayyem, Eugene R. Fidell, Michael Bahar, Rebecca Weiner, Michael Leiter, and Lindsay Rodman for providing personal narratives for the guide, and to the staff and interns at OPIA. 2 INTRODUCTION TO NATIONAL SECURITY LAW National Security Law (NSL) first began to surface in the law school curricula in the late 1980s. The field has burgeoned since September 11, 2001, for obvious reasons. The demand for NSL lawyers has intensified, within and outside government, as has scholarly interest in the field.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Folks’: Pursuing Justice for Victims of Torture Through Traditional Grounds of Jurisdiction
    REDRESS FOR ‘SOME FOLKS’: PURSUING JUSTICE FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE THROUGH TRADITIONAL GROUNDS OF JURISDICTION Karen Hoffmann, Esq.* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 98 II. THE NEED FOR REDRESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY ........................... 104 III. POSSIBLE VENUES FOR PROSECUTION ............................................ 107 A. United States ............................................................................ 107 B. International Courts ................................................................. 112 C. The Unbearable Lightness of Universal Jurisdiction ............... 114 D. Alternatives: ‘Traditional’ Grounds of Jurisdiction ................ 123 IV. CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 127 * ALDEA — The People’s Justice Center, Reading, PA, USA – [email protected]. 97 98 GA. J. INT’L & COMP. L. [Vol. 46:97 I. INTRODUCTION This is not C.I.A.’s program. This is not the President’s program. This is America’s program. –Former CIA Director Michael Hayden1 After learning the news [of the Senate Torture Report], Mr. Bashmilah pressed Ms. Satterthwaite, who heads the global justice program at New York University Law School, to tell him what might follow from the Senate’s recognition. Would there be an apology? Would there be some kind of compensation?2 It has now been nearly three years since the release of the summary of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on CIA
    [Show full text]
  • Known Unknowns
    \\jciprod01\productn\H\HLC\48-2\HLC204.txt unknown Seq: 1 13-JUN-13 14:34 Known Unknowns Jameel Jaffer* I. “SECRECY” One hundred sixty-six men are imprisoned at the U.S. Naval Station at Guant´anamo Bay.1 Many of these men the government intends to imprison indefinitely without charge or trial.2 Some, though, will be tried for war crimes, and most of these, including those alleged to have planned the 9/11 attacks, will be tried not before regular criminal courts, but before military commissions.3 These commissions are convened at “Camp Justice,” a col- lection of low-slung, prefabricated structures built on a former military air- field several miles from the base’s detention facilities.4 The principal courtroom is in most respects unremarkable. The judge presides from a raised bench at the front of the room. There is a witness box to each side of the bench. Against the wall to the judge’s right is a long, narrow box that can seat as many as thirty jurors. There are similar courtrooms in cities across the United States and around the world. What distinguishes the courtroom at Guant´anamo from others is that, in place of the railing that customarily separates trial participants from the pub- lic gallery behind them, there is a floor-to-ceiling barrier of soundproofed glass.5 Those who travel to Guant´anamo to observe the proceedings — jour- nalists, representatives of civil society organizations, and family members of those who died in the 9/11 attacks — are seated behind the glass and listen * Deputy Legal Director, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation; Fellow, Open Soci- ety Foundations; Visiting Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellants
    USCA Case #11-5320 Document #1363927 Filed: 03/15/2012 Page 1 of 59 [ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED] 11-5320 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT _________________________ AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION and AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUDATION, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, Defendant–Appellee. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA No. 1:10-cv-00436-RMC (Rosemary M. Collyer, J.) BRIEF FOR PLAINTIFFSAPPELLANTS Arthur B. Spitzer Jameel Jaffer American Civil Liberties Union of the Ben Wizner Nation’s Capital Nathan Freed Wessler 4301 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 434 American Civil Liberties Union Foundation Washington, DC 20008 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor Telephone: (202) 457-0800 New York, NY 10004 Fax: (202) 452-1868 Telephone: (212) 549-2500 [email protected] Fax: (212) 549-2654 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] March 15, 2012 Counsel for PlaintiffsAppellants USCA Case #11-5320 Document #1363927 Filed: 03/15/2012 Page 2 of 59 CERTIFICATE AS TO PARTIES, RULINGS, AND RELATED CASES Pursuant to Circuit Rule 28(a)(1), PlaintiffsAppellants American Civil Liberties Union and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation respectfully submit this certificate as to parties, rulings, and related cases: (A) Parties and Amici. The American Civil Liberties Union and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation are the PlaintiffsAppellants in this matter. The Defendant-Appellee is the Central Intelligence Agency. The Department of Justice, Department of Defense, and Department of State were Defendants in the case before the district court, but were voluntarily dismissed prior to the appeal.
    [Show full text]
  • The Complaint (PDF)
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA; GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN; GLOBAL RIGHTS; HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH; INTERNATIONAL COMPLAINT FOR CRIMINAL DEFENCE ATTORNEYS DECLARATORY AND ASSOCIATION; THE NATION MAGAZINE; INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PEN AMERICAN CENTER; SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION; WASHINGTON OFFICE ON LATIN AMERICA; Case No. DANIEL N. ARSHACK; DAVID NEVIN; SCOTT MCKAY; and SYLVIA ROYCE, Hon. Plaintiffs, ECFCASE v. JOHN M. McCONNELL, in his official capacity as Director of National Intelligence; LT. GEN. KEITH B. ALEXANDER, in his official capacity as Director of the National Security Agency and Chief of the Central Security Service; and MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the Unites States, Defendants. JAMEEL JAFFER (JJ-4653) MELISSA GOODMAN (MG-7844) L. DANIELLE TULLY (DT-0509) American Civil Liberties Union Foundation 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 (212) 549-2500 NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION . FOUNDATION, by CHRISTOPHER DUNN (CD-3991) ARTHUR EISENBERG (AE-2012) New York Civil Liberties Union 125 Broad Street, 19th Floor New York, NY 10004 (212) 607"3300 July 10, 2008 COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND IN.JUNCTIVE RELIEF 1. This is a challenge to the constitutionality of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq. ("FISA"), as amended by H.R. 6304, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 ("FISA Amendments Act,,~"FAA," or "Act"), which the President signed into law on July 10,2008. As amended, FISA allows the executive branch sweeping and virtually unregulated authority to monitor the international communications - and in some cases the purely domestic communications - of law- ¡ , I .
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression
    FINAL REPORT 2020-2021 | Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression 1 DEMOCRATICEXPRESSIONDÉMOCRATIQUE FINAL REPORT 2020-2021 | Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression The Public Policy Forum works with all levels of government and the public service, the private sector, labour, post-secondary institutions, NGOs and Indigenous groups to improve policy outcomes for Canadians. As a non-partisan, member-based organization, we work from “inclusion to conclusion,” by convening discussions on fundamental policy issues and by identifying new options and paths forward. For more than 30 years, the PPF has broken down barriers among sectors, contributing to meaningful change that builds a better Canada. 1400 - 130 rue Albert Ottawa, ON, Canada, K1P 5G4 Tél : 613.238.7858 www.ppforum.ca @ppforumca © 2021, Public Policy Forum ISBN: 978-1-77452-043-7 2 DEMOCRATICEXPRESSIONDÉMOCRATIQUE FINAL REPORT 2020-2021 | Canadian Commission on Democratic Expression TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 Commission’s Preamble ................................................................................................................................................ 11 Chapter 1: The Problem Before Us ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ccoh 10388608 Transcript.Pdf
    THE RULE OF LAW ORAL HISTORY PROJECT The Reminiscences of Jameel Jaffer Columbia Center for Oral History Columbia University 2013 PREFACE The following oral history is the result of a recorded interview with Jameel Jaffer conducted by Ronald J. Grele on April 27, May 2, and June 4, 2012. This interview is part of the Rule of Law Oral History Project. The reader is asked to bear in mind that s/he is reading a verbatim transcript of the spoken word, rather than written prose. VJD Session One Interviewee: Jameel Jaffer Location: New York, NY Interviewer: Ronald J. Grele Date: April 27, 2012 Q: This is an interview with Jameel Jaffer. Today’s date is April 27, 2012. The interview is being conducted in New York City. The interviewer is Ronald Grele. Now, if you’ll just talk for a couple of minutes and I’ll just— Jaffer: Sure. I’m Jameel Jaffer. I’m a deputy legal director here at the ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union]. We work on national security issues. Q: Terrific. I wonder if we can start with a little bit of your biography. You were born in Canada? Jaffer: I was, yes. Q: In Toronto? Jaffer: In London, Ontario, although I spent very little time in London—I think about eight months. Then my parents moved to Kingston, Ontario, which is halfway between Toronto and Montreal, right on Lake Ontario. I grew up there. I spent three years at boarding school in Toronto, then came down to the U.S. [United States of America] and more or less stayed here.
    [Show full text]
  • 2:15-CV-286-JLQ 21 Plaintiffs, 22 V
    Case 2:15-cv-00286 Document 1 Filed 10/13/15 1 La Rond Baker, WSBA No. 43610 2 [email protected] AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 3 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 630 4 Seattle, WA 98164 Phone: 206-624-2184 5 6 Steven M. Watt ( pro hac vice pending) Dror Ladin ( pro hac vice pending) 7 Hina Shamsi ( pro hac vice pending) 8 Jameel Jaffer ( pro hac vice pending) AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 9 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor 10 New York, New York 10004 11 Paul Hoffman ( pro hac vice pending) 12 Schonbrun Seplow Harris & Hoffman, LLP 723 Ocean Front Walk, Suite 100 13 Venice, CA 90291 14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 15 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 17 18 SULEIMAN ABDULLAH SALIM, MOHAMED AHMED BEN SOUD, OBAID 19 ULLAH (AS PERSONAL 20 REPRESENTATIVE OF GUL RAHMAN), Civil Action No. 2:15-CV-286-JLQ 21 Plaintiffs, 22 v. COMPLAINT AND 23 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 24 JAMES ELMER MITCHELL and JOHN “BRUCE” JESSEN 25 26 Defendants. 27 COMPLAINT AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES Page | 1 UNION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 901 Fifth Ave, Suite 630 Seattle, WA 98164 (206) 624-2184 Case 2:15-cv-00286 Document 1 Filed 10/13/15 1 I. INTRODUCTION 2 1. Defendants James Elmer Mitchell and John “Bruce” Jessen are 3 4 psychologists who designed, implemented, and personally 5 administered an experimental torture program for the U.S. Central 6 Intelligence Agency (“CIA”). 7 8 2. To create a torture program with a scientific veneer, Defendants drew 9 on experiments from the 1960s in which researchers taught dogs 10 “helplessness” by subjecting them to uncontrollable pain.
    [Show full text]