November 26, 2001

FOR THE SAKE OF SECURITY
Analyzing Civil Liberties in the Wake of the September 11 Terrorist Attacks

Grades:  6-8,9-12
Subjects:  Civics, Current Events, Language Arts

Related New York Times Article
"Bush's New Rules to Fight Terror Transform the Legal Landscape", By MATTHEW PURDY, November 26, 2001

Overview of Lesson Plan: In this lesson, students evaluate the effectiveness and fairness of proposed military tribunals designed to fight terrorism. They will then compare American civil liberties, as stated in the U.S. Bill of Rights, with changes in these rights that may take place for some individuals living in the U.S., as a result of the U.S.A. Patriot Act.

Suggested Time Allowance: 45-60 minutes

Objectives:  Students will:

  1. Respond to a quotation about the potential need for ethnic profiling as a result of the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001.
  2. Find out what steps the United States government is taking to defend national security in light of the attacks on September 11, 2001, by reading and discussing "Bush's New Rules to Fight Terror Transform the Legal Landscape."
  3. Consider ways in which military tribunals currently being established as a result of the U.S.A. Patriot Act may differ from civilian court trials within the United States.
  4. Consider which items in the American Bill of Rights might be affected with the establishment of the U.S.A. Patriot Act, and share their feelings about each of these potential restraints on American civil liberties.

RESOURCES / MATERIALS:

ACTIVITIES / PROCEDURES:

  1. WARM-UP/DO-NOW: Write the following quotation from Warren B. Rudman, former Republican senator from New Hampshire and the chairman of the president's foreign intelligence advisory board on the board prior to class:
    "As far as ethnic profiling; it's very troubling. It pains me to say this, but some of it may have to be done. We just have to recognize that we cannot bend over backwards in our innate American fairness to overlook that there are some people trying to hurt us."
    In their journals, students respond to these questions, which should also be posted:
    • What is ethnic profiling?
    • What is the "innate American fairness" that Rudman is referring to in the quotation?
    • Do you agree or disagree with Rudman's statement?
    After five minutes, invite students to share what they've written with the rest of the class.
  2. As a class, read and discuss "Bush's New Rules to Fight Terror Transform the Legal Landscape," focusing on the following questions. Given that this is a long article, you may wish to assign separate groups of students to read each of the four sections that the article is divided into, and then share what they learn with the rest of the class before going over the questions as a group.
    1. What are some of the new laws and federal regulations that the U.S. government is putting into effect to protect the country from further attack, in the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001?
    2. By and large, whom will these new policies affect the most?
    3. What criticisms have been made of these new policies?
    4. Why did Spanish officials recently refuse to extradite eight men suspected of involvement in the September 11 attacks?
    5. Why has the United States government decided to instate these new policies?
    6. Why do representatives of the United States government argue that these new policies do not fall within the category of racial profiling? How do those who disagree respond?
    7. For what does the acronym U.S.A. Patriot Act stand?
    8. What, in general, does the U.S.A. Patriot Act say?
    9. Which civil liberties, specifically, do the U.S.A. Patriot Act and similar new laws affect the most?
    10. What concerns does immigration lawyer Noel Saleh have about these new laws and policies?
    11. According to the article, to what extent have these new laws and policies been put into effect thus far?
    12. Why, in mid-October, did the immigration service refuse entry of a Jordanian on his way from Cairo to Los Angeles?
    13. Who, according to the article, will make up the tribunals that will look into the guilt or innocence of suspected terrorists?
    14. When did President Bush originally order the establishment of these tribunals?
    15. How many commission members will need to be in agreement in order to prosecute an alleged terrorist?
    16. What are some arguments given in the article for and against the establishment of these military tribunals?
    17. What are the so-called "voluntary" interviews described in the article, and why are they being described as voluntary?
    18. Why are some police chiefs resisting cooperating with the F.B.I. in the investigatory sweeps that the government has been requesting?
    19. How does Walter E. Dellinger, compare those restrictions with which he is comfortable with those that he is not?
  3. Organize students into groups, explaining that each group will be setting up its own tribunal to look at one of the following cases, each of which could potentially result in a threat to national security. Point out that each of these scenarios is at least alluded to in the article "Bush's New Rules to Fight Terror Transform the Legal Landscape."
    • The case of a Jordanian - an official of the Palestinian Liberation Organization - who was on his way from Cairo to Los Angeles to attend flight school.
    • The case of a Muslim who, at the end of Ramadan, makes a charitable contribution to an orphanage in South Lebanon that was established by Hezbollah.
    • The case of a person from Kuwait who left a piece of luggage unattended in an airport on September 13, 2001.
    • The case of a college student being held after a "voluntary" interview with officials showed that he or she has relatives who are connected with the Taliban.
    • The case of a foreigner from the Middle East who is caught traveling within the United States, using an expired visa.
    Keeping in mind the scenario that they have been given, students will work in groups to answer these questions:
    • Overall, do you think that this scenario warrants suspicion? Why or why not?
    • Would this scenario warrant suspicion if the person were not a Middle East foreigner? Why or why not?
    • What is the maximum length of time that your group feels this person should be detained, unless concrete proof of guilt is found?
    • In what ways will your tribunal resemble a regular criminal trial, and in what ways will it be different? For example, who will be appointed to represent the suspect/detainee? What rights will this suspect/detainee have, and not have? How big will the jury be, or will a single official determine his or her fate?
    • How much information about the process and what is learned from it would your group be willing to release to the media for sharing with the public?
    • What do you think will be the defendant's biggest challenge in terms of representing/defending him or herself?
    • Does the fact that a defendant has information about terrorist activity, automatically make him or her a terrorist (or guilty) in this scenario?
    Based on what they decide, each group will create a compare/contrast chart showing ways that its military tribunal is similar to, and differs from, that of a civilian trial. Groups will then share what they did, and the conclusions that they drew with the rest of the class. If time permits, and if you feel it would be helpful, combine the results of each group's compare/contrast charts onto a larger class chart.
  4. WRAP-UP/HOMEWORK: At the top of ten separate sheets of paper, have students paraphrase in their own words, the freedoms assured each American by each one of the Bill of Rights (the first ten Amendments to the United States Constitution). Then, below each one, students will describe in a paragraph how, if at all, this particular freedom might be affected by the policies being established by the U.S.A. Patriot Act. In another paragraph students will explain whether or not they think this particular freedom is worth endangering for the sake of national security. They will also suggest how Pentagon officials should structure tribunals so as to protect and defend that freedom to the extent they believe is both safe and possible, given current conditions, and the potential threats students feel we face from terrorist groups. Have students take turns sharing what they wrote with the rest of the class.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

EVALUATION / ASSESSMENT:
Students will be evaluated based on initial journal responses, participation in class and group discussions, compare/contrast charts that they create, and thoughtful reflective writings in determining the correlation between military tribunals and civil liberties within the United States.

VOCABULARY:
tribunals, installations, detail, prosecute, bolstered, extradite, visas, balked, precarious, innate, abet, qualms, infiltration, surveillance, intrusion

EXTENSION ACTIVITIES:

  1. In an essay, explain your feelings on the tricky balance that must be maintained between national security and civil liberties within the United States, especially in the wake of the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001. Using what you learned in class, share your own views on how far the United States should go to preserve one at the risk of the other. Use as much concrete information as you can to back up your views.
  2. After researching the process one must go through to obtain a United States Visa, create a flowchart explaining this process.
  3. According to the article "Bush's New Rules to Fight Terror Transform the Legal Landscape," President Bush established the tribunals "not as an executive order but rather as a military order...in his constitutional capacity as commander in chief of the armed forces." In an essay, or a compare/contrast chart, explain the distinctions between the role of the president as chief executive, and as commander in chief of the armed forces, specifying what rights he has, and what limits there are to his powers, within each of these roles.
  4. Stage a class debate on the pros and cons of military tribunals, as opposed to civilian trials as a way to deal with people who are potential threats to national security.

INTERDISCIPLINARY CONNECTIONS:
American History- Select another time in U.S. history when, for the sake of national security, the rights of citizens or foreigners have been tested. For example, you may wish to research the Alien & Sedition Act of 1798, the Japanese interment camps established during World War II, treatment of Communist supporters during the Cold War, or the targeting of members of the Black Panthers during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s. In an essay, compare the treatment of the group that you select with the treatment of Arabs and Muslims within the United States today.

Global Studies- Find out what the Nuremberg trials were, and explain the reasoning behind these international tribunal events, how they were carried out, and what was learned from them that might affect the establishment of the current tribunals that the United States is now putting together. In an essay, share what you have learned.

Journalism - Take an informal poll on how others in your school feel about the government's approach to terrorism since September 11 - including any steps the government has taken - and then write an article for the school paper on your fellow students' views.

Math- Using census data, and other information that you can find, create a circle graph showing the ethnic makeup of the United States today. On your graph, identify what percent of Americans originate from countries in the Middle East that are currently under intense scrutiny for association with the Taliban and other Middle Eastern terrorist groups. Approximately how many immigrants does this translate into? In a second circle graph, show what portion of this targeted population are currently American citizens and how many others from this region are here - both legally and without official paperwork?

Media Studies- After seeing the movie "A Few Good Men," write an essay in which you consider whether or not the outcome of this military trial would have been the same in a civilian courtroom.

Copyright 2001
The New York Times Company

Unterricht konkret