Central Americans seeking sanctuary in the US standing at the border.
Photo taken by Bing Guan, one of the photographers involved in the lawsuit.
Five American journalists from the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit this Wednesday against the Department of Homeland Security for violating their First Amendment rights. The lawsuit claims that Customs and Border Protection officials tracked and interrogated the journalists (Bing Guan, Go Nakamura, Kitra Cahana, Ariana Drehsler, and Mark Abramson). The journalists described being pulled aside multiple times when crossing the US-Mexico border between November 2018 and January 2019 for further screening where officials searched through their cameras/notebooks, some of which contained "confidential source material." The journalists had been documenting migrants moving towards the border, and when targeted, they were thoroughly questioned about who caravan leaders were, who was aiding migrants, who the "instigators" were, and other similar inquiries. Furthermore, according to Special Agent Wes Petonak, all the journalists are also on a Homeland Security dossier of 59 people suspected to be linked to the caravan, marking their headshots with a large "X" over them so that they'd be more closely watched and investigated. CBP has yet to respond to the accusation.
If the claims are true, it definitely raises large concerns about invasions of privacy as well as the government's response to and actions regarding the border situation. Tracking and interrogating journalists when there is no evidence that they have broken a law is clearly a violation of the First Amendment. I understand that for certain situations there are debates about needing to take further actions to ensure the nation's safety, but I don't think that that claim works in this case. I believe that the motivations behind these actions are just another result of Trump's "build the wall" mentality. I also think that a part of these actions are an attempt to control the media narrative and censor journalists who are reporting unfavorable things about the border situation, which is always worrying given how much twisted news can impact the public and how this suggests that the government is keeping unsavory secrets. CBP already has a horrible reputation from its cruel and inhumane detention camps and other despicable actions so I would not be surprised at all if more foul play was occurring.
1. Do you think there is any justification behind CBP's actions?
2. Do you think there is a point where some personal rights should be sacrificed for the country's safety? If yes, when?
3. What is the best way to fight invasions of privacy such as government tracking?
10 comments:
I don't think the CBP had a strong justification to search the journalists. Although I acknowledge that there is the possibility of the CBP just wanting to ensure safety, this seems to be more a case of stereotype overpowering the truth. As you mention, Sabine, the Trump "build a wall" mentality seems to play a role in this search. Unless the interactions pose as a threat to American security, the CBP shouldn't have violated the migrants' and journalists' privacy by searching through their confidential information. However, I think the part of monitoring the journalists closely is logical (or watching from the background and not interfering immediately), just to make sure nothing bad is happening. Of course, this method should be implemented in moderation, as it can also be an extreme breach of privacy.
I agree that perhaps in very extreme, emergency-related situations safety should be valued over individuals' rights; however, in this scenario, I do not see any threats to the nation or American people in which the journalists need to give information to the CBP; however, this can severely hurt immigrants. Because of this, I do not think CBP"s actions are justifiable. I think the best way to fight invasions of privacy would be to perhaps protest and make people more aware of this issue through media platforms. This allows this issue to be dealt with as part of the national agenda since the media's purpose is agenda-setting.
I don't think there is any excuse for the CBP's actions. Journalists should have free reign to report on any activity happening on the border, and expose any cruelties that may (and do) happen. I'm not convinced of the safety excuse because, although security is important, neither the wall nor the cruel treatment of migrants have done much to increase it in the first place, and I doubt this will break the trend.
I do believe there is a breach in privacy when simple journalists are getting searched this way more then anybody else going through the border. Although, I do have some of the issues to bring up though. It seems that people are very sensitive to illegal immigrants once they come through for their ability to live in the US. The thing is, we have hired multiple institutions by government to stop these illegal immigrants from coming through. Even so we have had many immigrants come through without knowledge. It seems that these institutions are trying to find out how to stop them and finding more information this way could help. People are very critical of this though and make it hard for institutions to do their job. There needs to be better rules behind what these institutions are not able to do and what they are able to do. Even more, if these laws are broken we should have punishments for them then just questioning of the CBP.
I think that there is a justification in CBP's actions; clearly they wanted intel on who these caravan leaders were in order to.. protect the border? I don't agree with their actions but I do understand why they did what they did.
I personally don't find illegal immigrants to be a danger I deal with in daily life. From personal experience, my knowledge is many immigrants who have crossed the border illegally did so in order to escape THEIR dangerous situations. And of course I think people's rights are always to an extent. I really think that people take the idea of their "rights" too far and begin to disrespect and encroach on the rights of others. There has to be a balance, and many Americans are too hell-bent on getting what they want to see that. One place where I do see the overlook of rights for national safety is with gun control. Now, I know this is a sensitive topic so bear with me. Personally, I'm terrified of guns, but I do see where people would feel safer with one. My philosophy is pretty pacifist, and yet I can also see the other point of view. However, people really don't need to be toting around military grade weapons. I also feel that people need to have some guidance regarding their rights when it comes to the environment. Yeah, you can do this and that, but if it is contributing to the deterioration of our planet, no broski come on. I think people take the "rights" thing to far; they are there to protect your basic rights as a human being, not to help you get away with every little thing your life of luxury entails.
I do respect the anger the journalists feel towards the CBP; their right to privacy was violated. It is my knowledge that journalists may observe and write about different things, despite their association with the US, etc. So yeah, bad CBP.
CBP’s misconduct is unlawful on many accounts. One of the accounts is violation of reporter’s privilege (recognized by CA and a majority of states). When the defendant seeks information protected by the shield law, the courts set up a balancing test. The test weighs how important information is to the defendant and whether the defendant can get the information elsewhere, among other factors. Given that this case is of high scrutiny, I believe that the CBP will have a difficult time proving the balancing test. The CBP would have to prove that the reporters’ information is critical and compelling to their case and that speech should not be protected by the shield law and by extension, the First Amendment.
I do believe that there is some type of justification behind the CBP's actions however it is very unclear to understand. I'd hope that what they are doing is more beneficial rather than just trying to cover up. It is also very hard for us citizens to protect our privacy since most of our information is on the internet and all these companies like Facebook and Google are passing it around. But the government tracking a person with no criminal conviction is concerning and can raise the question is who is being tracked by the government without anyone knowing. The overall situation is slightly concerning but this is definitely a topic that can have people catastrophizing and the answer for why these journalists were being investigated is still hard to figure out.
I believe that there is really no justification behind CBP’s actions. CBP obviously violates the first amendment by tracking down and even further questioning journalists. If our country is now exposed to federal organizations interrogating journalists and intervening their privacy, then the amount of journalists would dramatically decrease in the years. I do agree that I am more convinced there is no excuse by CBP’s actions because I hate the idea of stereotyping and dividing races, but they also do not have a right to invade a journalists’ privacy in the first place. Like Olivia stated above, these illegal immigrants are illegal because they are forced to escape the dangerous situations of their own country. There is no way most people would do something illegal just to try it out or do something fun. Furthermore, There is a point where personal rights should be sacrificed for the country’s safety but this is not one of them. It should only be sacrificed when they are lawfully convicted of certain crimes. Unfortunately, the best way to fight invasions of privacy could really only be protesting, since it is our government we are against.
I don't think there's a strong justification for the CBP's actions. I agree with Sabine, I think these journalists were just another pawn in Trump's "build-a-wall" mentality. They were clearly on their regular course of business and not doing anything suspicious, and therefore didn't warrant that many searches or that much attention in general. If the part about the "X" over their photos are true, then this situation would truly have no justification. Because maybe the CBP just puts a lot of close attention on those near the border but there is no explanation for why they would be that concentrated on a just a group of journalists.
I agree that the CBP's actions were a violation of rights. Their actions weren't justified as they were an invasion of privacy. I don't really feel like the journalist's interactions with the migrants were a huge danger or anything and they didn't warrant CBP officers' searching of confidential information and questioning of these journalists. While safety is an important priority, I feel like this "build-a-wall" mentality played a major role in the CBP's actions rather than safety. Thus, while I think it is necessary to prioritize safety, possibly restricting rights to a certain extent in order to do so, I don't think the infringement on rights applies to this situation.
Post a Comment