San Francisco once again demonstrates it is the epitome of liberalism--or at least, of live and let live. Thursday, in a supreme act of civil disobedience, San Francisco gave out marriage licenses and 50 couples were wed--with the stamp of imprimateur of its new mayor, Gavin Newsom, who supports gay marriage.

In a historic act of civil disobedience, San Francisco defied state law and issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples Thursday, a move expected to ignite a constitutional showdown starting today.

The city's action marked the first time in the United States that gays and lesbians could wed and have their marriages recognized by a government body.
A San Francisco lesbian couple who have been together five decades were the first to marry, followed by dozens of other couples who said their vows in City Hall ceremonies.

The New York Times reports here.

Our view: Go for it, insist on it as your civil right. Marriage should revolve around love and commitment, not gender. Adoption, in vitrio fertilization and other techniques that can bring the joy of children to same sex unions is a blessing.

Remember CAPPS II? A new report is slamming the program.

CAPPS II would divide passengers into three categories: green, screened normally at the gate; yellow, given extra screening; and red. TSA officials say passengers given a red rating will be forbidden to fly and will be questioned at the airport by law enforcement officials.

...CAPPS II is supposed to compare personal data about passengers collected by airlines -- name, address, date of birth and telephone number -- with commercial databases held by marketing companies and others.

Mathematical formulas called algorithms would be used to combine and cross check all kinds of information about every passenger -- how long they have lived at their address, for example -- but also intelligence held by U.S. agencies about individuals and groups. The program then comes up with a threat score -- a bit like a credit rating -- for each traveler.

The program has been blasted by civil libertarians:

Critics contended that it would violate travelers' privacy and Fourth Amendment rights; brand some citizens terror suspects on the basis of potentially inaccurate data that they cannot challenge; and was being expanded for use against all kind of law-breakers and suspects, not just terrorists.

The report says the program flunked a series of tests:

Concerned lawmakers set a series of eight tests -- enacted into law in several funding bills -- that the system had to pass before money could be released to fund its implementation. The tests included establishing a process for correcting erroneous information and restoring the right of wrongly labeled innocent passengers to travel by air; assuring the security of the system from hackers and internal abuse; addressing privacy concerns; and -- crucially -- providing evidence that the screening will actually turn up potential terrorists.

The summary says the Transportation Security Administration failed on all these counts.....

Update: The Chicago Tribune has more on the report.

The FBI wants more wiretapping authority--in particular, it wants to be able to intercept calls on a new protocol--Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP):

The debate over government interception of Internet communications has expanded to a new technology, namely Voice over Internet Protocol (“VoIP”) transmissions. Indeed, representatives of the FBI’s Electronic Surveillance Technology Section in Chantilly, Virginia have been meeting secretly with the Federal Communications Commission since July, 2003, exploring ways to provide the FBI with more regulatory authority to “wiretap” Internet communications, and in particular VoIP transmissions. [i] The FBI along with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the U.S. Department of Justice want VoIP providers declared as “telecommunications carrier[s]” under the Federal Communications Act of 1996 and the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (“CALEA”).[ii] These three federal law enforcement organizations declared that if left unregulated, VoIP would provide a means of communications whereby “terrorists, spies, and criminals … [can] most likely evade lawful electronic surveillance.” [iii]

....The FBI now has taken the position that the combination of the federal wiretap laws, originally enacted in 1964, and amended numerous times since,[xiv] along with CALEA, give it the authority to wiretap DSL and other types of broadband services, including VoIP. [xv]

Here's a description of VOIP, the use of which

....Voice Over Internet Protocol allows analog voice signals to be digitized into packets of data, sent over a series of networks, and reassembled at the other end. [iv]. In other words, telephone calls that have traditionally, since the late 19th century, been made through Public Switching Technology Networks (“PSTN”) are now initiated, transmitted and received through computer networks, and thereby avoid long distance telephone charges. The technology, introduced in 1995, stumbled along until recent improvements in the sound quality and transmission reliability have made “phone carriers …practically tripping over each other to announce aggressive VoIP strategies aimed at both consumers and businesses

Here is the text of the press release by the National Lawyers Guild on the victory in Des Moines today. It should be up on their website soon.

The U.S. Attorney announced this afternoon that it withdrew the subpoena seeking records relating to the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) chapter at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. Subpoenas directed at four activists were also withdrawn. The NLG subpoena sought records relating its leadership and to a forum held at Drake on November 15, 2003, the day before a protest at which 12 were arrested. A gag order placed on employees of Drake University has also been lifted.

NLG President Michael Avery said, "The government was forced to back down in this case and it shows that people can and should stand up to the government when it is abusing its powers. The Lawyers Guild is grateful to our many friends and allies who supported us in the face of this attack by the government. This experience demonstrates that the American people cherish their right of free expression and the right of political groups to dissent from government policies."

Late Monday night, prosecutors from the United States attorney's office for the southern district of Iowa issued a statement confirming their investigation but saying that its scope was limited to finding out more about one activist involved in a protest at an Iowa National Guard based in Johnston, Iowa, the day after the forum. Prosecutor Stephen Patrick O'Meara said in a statement, "The narrow purpose and scope of that inquiry has been narrowed to determine whether there were any violation s of federal law, or prior agreements to violate federal law, regarding unlawful entry onto military property…" Federal officials had previously refused to provide any information about the grand jury inquiry.

Bump and Update: Victory in Des Moines! The Government has withdrawn its subpoenas.

************
Original post

This from the Des Moines Register:

Federal officials Monday said a grand jury inquiry involving four peace activists and Drake University is not part of an anti-terrorism investigation. U.S. Attorney Stephen Patrick O'Meara said late Monday that the investigation focuses on unlawful entry onto military property at Camp Dodge on Nov. 16, and whether plans were laid for that at a conference the day before at Drake. Suggestions that the investigation is related to the Patriot Act "are not accurate," O'Meara said.

The investigation has alarmed peace activists in Iowa and around the country, who question whether the federal government is trying to silence dissent. "We're very alarmed," said Bill Dobbs, spokesman for United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of roughly 600 anti-war groups. "I sure hope those subpoenas are quashed, and I hope there's an investigation into just how this happened." O'Meara said his office does not prosecute people who are peacefully and lawfully engaged in rallies.

"The United States attorney emphasizes that the investigation regarding any attempted breach of the security fence at the Iowa National Guard Base is dangerous both to the person or persons attempting to breach the security fence, as well as a legitimately perceived danger to the base itself," he said.

The return date for the subpoenas has been continued to March:

Earlier Monday, O'Meara's office postponed court appearances for the four activists. They had been scheduled to appear before a grand jury today. All now have been told to appear on March 9.

More details on the case and postponement are here.

How scary is this?

An American Airlines pilot terrified passengers when he asked Christians to identify themselves and allegedly went on to call non-Christians 'crazy'. Some passengers on the flight from Los Angeles to New York were so worried they tried to call relatives on their mobile phones.

The pilot, whose name was not released, asked Christians on Friday's flight to raise their hands. He then suggested non-Christians talk to the Christians about their faith. ...He continued to say, 'Well, you have a choice: you can make this trip worthwhile, or you can sit back, read a book and watch the movie',' ...The pilot also told passengers he would be available for discussion at the end of the flight...Flight attendants notified ground control.

American Airlines spokesman Tim Wagner said the incident was being investigated. 'It falls along the lines of a personal level of sharing that may not be appropriate for one of our employees to do while on the job,' he added.

Personal sharing? Sounds like a nut job to us.

[link via Nitpicker]

In another first for a low blow to civil liberties and our right to peaceful assembly, the FBI has subpoenaed records of the National Lawyers Guild:

The National Lawyers Guild will move to quash an FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force subpoena issued on Wednesday, February 4, 2004. The subpoena asks Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, to produce all records relating to a November 15, 2003 antiwar conference at Drake University called "Stop the Occupation! Bring the Iowa Guard Home!" The conference was sponsored by the Drake Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild and was followed the next day by a demonstration at the Iowa National Guard Headquarters in Johnston, at which 12 protestors were arrested on misdemeanor charges.

The subpoena asks Drake University for all records relating to the November 15 conference, as well as information about leaders of the Drake University chapter of the National Lawyers Guild and the location of Guild offices and any annual reports since 2002. In addition, it asks for "all records of Drake University campus security reflecting any observations made of the November 15, 2003 meeting, including any records of persons in charge or control of the meeting, and any records of attendees of the meeting."

Writing for Alternet, Kari Lydersen gives us the bad news: Judging by the first two weeks of the year, the forecast is not good for the Bush Administration's treatment of civil liberties.

If the first few weeks of 2004 are any indication, the Bush administration is stepping up its assault on civil liberties. A few legislative victories for civil liberties have done little to stop the over all trend toward more and more repressive legislation. Looking at what’s happened in just the first two weeks of 2004, here’s an overview of eight things to expect the rest of the year.

Guantanamo detainees, the Patriot Act, emphasis on the death penalty, more mandatory minimum sentences, pushing the drug war, treating immigrants as "exploited workers" and "guests." Scary, read the whole thing.

In a related piece, Lyderson explores whether civil liberties will be a non-issue in the 2004 election.

With Massachussetts front and center in the controversy over gay marriages, some news articles are speculating that John Kerry's position on the issue may take on increased significance. He supports civil unions but opposes gay marriages. Yet, he was one of 14 senators voting against the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Here's an article describing all of the Democratic candidates positions on civil unions and gay marriage.

Michael Meehan, a senior adviser for the Kerry campaign, told Fox News yesterday that Mr. Kerry opposes homosexual "marriage," but that he still "thinks there's a lot of gay bashing going on, and he won't stand for that."

...Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean has said he was "proud to sign the nation's first law establishing civil unions for same-sex couples," but has also said he opposes raising that status to official marriage. Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina has said he favors letting states decide the question of gay "marriage." Wesley Clark has generally avoided the issue on the campaign trail, but has said that "families come in many shapes and sizes" and was in favor of giving same-sex couples the "same rights and responsibilities" as heterosexual couples.

Since all the major candidates oppose gay marriage, we're not sure why it is perceived to be that big of an issue. The issue to us is Bush's plan to push a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage--now that, must be stopped.

[comments now closed]

The Pentagon has pulled the plug on LifeLog, its "stunningly ambitious effort to build a database tracking a person's entire existence." Defense Tech has the details.

Run by Darpa, the Defense Department's research arm, LifeLog aimed to gather in a single place just about everything an individual says, sees or does: the phone calls made, the TV shows watched, the magazines read, the plane tickets bought, the e-mail sent and received. Out of this seemingly endless ocean of information, computer scientists would plot distinctive routes in the data, mapping relationships, memories, events and experiences.

LifeLog's backers said the all-encompassing diary could have turned into a near-perfect digital memory, giving its users computerized assistants with an almost flawless recall of what they had done in the past. But civil libertarians immediately pounced on the project when it debuted last spring, arguing that LifeLog could become the ultimate tool for profiling potential enemies of the state.

The Massachussetts Supreme Court yesterday ruled in favor of gay marriages:

The Massachusetts high court ruled Wednesday that only full, equal marriage rights for gay couples - rather than civil unions - would be constitutional, erasing any doubts that the nation's first same-sex marriages would take place in the state beginning in mid-May.

The court issued the opinion in response to a request from the state Senate about whether Vermont-style civil unions, which convey the state benefits of marriage - but not the title - would meet constitutional muster. The much-anticipated opinion sets the stage for next week's constitutional convention, where the Legislature will consider an amendment that would legally define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Without the opinion, Senate President Robert Travaglini had said the vote would be delayed.

A big raspberry today to Ohio--the Legislature has passed, and the Governor is poised to sign, one of the most sweeping same-sex marriage ban bills in the nation:

The bill stipulates that same-sex marriages would be "against the strong public policy of the state." The bill also prohibits state employees from getting marital benefits spelled out in state law for their unmarried partners, whether homosexual or heterosexual.

Thirty-seven states have passed laws recognizing only marriages between men and women. Gay rights groups consider Ohio's legislation particularly restrictive because of the benefits ban.