From: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel)
Subject: Palestinian deportation case tests immigration law
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 00:59:21 GMT

/** mideast.action: 37.0 **/
** Topic: IPS:U.S.: Palestinian deportations **
** Written 10:34 pm  Nov 16, 1992 by pnmideast in cdp:mideast.action **
From: <pnmideast>
Subject: IPS:U.S.: Palestinian deportations

/* Written 12:04 am  Nov 14, 1992 by newsdesk@igc.apc.org in igc:ips.englibrary */
/* ---------- "UNITED STATES: Palestinian deportat" ---------- */
Copyright Inter Press Service 1992, all rights reserved.  Permission to re-
print within 7 days of original date only with permission from 'newsdesk'.

Area: Asia, eastern
Title: UNITED STATES: Palestinian deportation case tests immigration law


an inter press service feature

by jane hunter

sacramento, california, nov 11 (ips) -- a deportation case against
two palestinians in los angeles marks the first test of a
controversial u.s. immigration law which the government says
denies non-citizens the constitutionally protected rights to free
speech and association.

if the government prevails in its claim that it can deport
khader hamide and michel shehadeh for raising money for
palestinian causes, all non-citizens campaigning for social change
in their native lands would be liable for deportation, according
to attorneys for the nation's leading constitutional rights
organisations which are representing the palestinians.

hamide, 38, and shehadeh, 36, both longtime residents of the
united states, were arrested in jan. 1987 along with five other
palestinians and hamide's kenyan wife. they were held without bail
in high security prisons for two weeks until a judge --unswayed by
the government's argument that they posed a threat to national
security -- released them on their own recognizance.

none of the group, widely known as the 'l.a. eight', was ever
charged with a criminal offence. instead, the government began
deportation efforts, charging six of them with technical visa
violations and trying several times to expel hamide and shehadeh
on political grounds.

at the opening of the trial in late october, marc van der hout
of the national lawyers' guild (nlg) noted the government had so
far brought four sets of charges against the two.

this time, the government is trying to prove that hamide and
shehadeh ran afoul of a section of the 1990 immigration act which
prohibits non-citizens from providing ''material support'' to a
terrorist organisation.

although it has refused to make public the details of the
evidence it says it has, the justice department has accused the
palestinians of providing material support to the popular front
for the liberation of palestine (pflp), part of the palestine
liberation organisation (plo).

hamide and shehadeh deny belonging to the pflp. and their
attorneys claim that the 1990 statute was not intended to cover
funds raised for such activities as health or cultural and social
programmes in the israeli-occupied territories. (more/ips)

united states: palestinian deportation case tests immigration law(2-e)

united states: palestinian deportation (2)

during opening arguments in the case, david cole of the new
york-based centre for constitutional rights (ccr), contentended:
''if you are a palestinian and you want to support your people
back home, as a practical matter, you have to send your money
through the plo and its constituent organisations. there is simply
no reasonable alternative''.

duke austin, a spokesperson for the immigration and
naturalisation service (ins) in washington said the case will
hinge on whether a non-citizen is allowed to provide political
support to groups outside the united states that are ''tied to
terrorism''.

in a telephone interview with ips, austin said the ins expected
the case to clarify what, under the 1990 law, ''are the full
panoply of rights of someone not a citizen''.

the american civil liberties union (aclu) and some of the other
70 civil and constitutional rights groups that have formed the
committee for justice to support the 'l.a. eight' have argued
strongly against the government's position.

in a statement, the american immigration lawyers' association
called the trial ''an assault on the crucial rights of non-
citizens and...a throwback to guilt by association'', a reference
to the mccarthy-era immigration law which the 1990 act replaced.

the government devoted the first two weeks of its case to an
attempt to establish that the pflp was a terrorist organisation.
its main witness, ariel merari, an adviser to the israeli prime
minister and the israeli defence forces, describes himself as an
anti-terrorism expert.

judge bruce einhorn permitted prosecutors to accredit merari as
an expert witness on international terrorism, telling defence
attorneys their strenuous objections would be appropriate later in
the proceedings.

defence lawyers and the committee for justice, however,
challenged merari as an expert, saying he can neither speak nor
read arabic and lacks any broad knowledge of palestinian affairs.

yet to be addressed, van der hout told ips last week, is the
1990 statute's use of the word ''terrorism'', which he contended
was ''unconstitutionally vague''. the law defines neither
''terrorism'' nor what a ''terrorist organisation'' might be.

the trial, which is set to resume next month after recessing
last week, may yet be affected by the incoming administration of
president-elect bill clinton.

''we hope a new justice department will take a look and see
that the bush administration's interpretation of the law is
entirely unreasonable,'' van der hout told ips. (end/ips/jh/yjc/92)

** End of text from cdp:mideast.action **
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive