Freedom in Times of War and Conflict

In an effort to prevent abuse of powers by the United States government, the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution. Over time, various exceptions have been made to these rights with the belief that such exceptions were in the public interest. During times of war especially, the nation has struggled to maintain a reasonable balance between civil liberties and national security.

:: Foreign War and Domestic Freedom: A Delicate Balancing Act  is a robust lesson plan from teacher James McGrath Morris, in cooperation with 'NOW with Bill Moyers,' which examines the restriction of civil liberties post-9/11 in a historical context.

:: Imprisoning Japanese Americans After the bombing of Pearl Harbor, people of Japanese descent living in the U.S. were subjected to widespread racial hatred and distrust. The U.S. government ultimately imprisoned more than 120,000 Japanese Americans in concentration camps, in clear violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.

:: 9/11, Oklahoma City and Race Sixty years after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the U.S. experienced the 9/11 terrorist attacks. From Alabama to Massachusetts and from Michigan to Wisconsin, Arab and Muslim Americans were subjected to a vast surge in hate crimes and bias incidents at the hands of fellow Americans. Asian Pacific Americans — Sikh Americans in particular, often confused for Arab or Muslim Americans because they wear turbans as part of their religious practice — also were targeted for attack. Indeed, Bablir Singh Sodh is believed to have been the first murder victim of the 9/11 Backlash.

Amidst this climate of fear and misplaced blame, a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center immediately following the attacks asked more than 1,000 adults nationwide, "Would you favor or oppose … allowing the U.S. government to take legal immigrants from unfriendly countries to internment camps during times of tension or crisis?" Twenty-nine percent of respondents were in favor, and 57 percent were not.

Pew's research director Michael Dimock told the Village Voice, "A clear majority were opposed. But I know people who looked at that number and went, 'Oh my god, nearly three in 10 people are in favor of this?'" Moreover, he said, "a higher proportion said, 'don't know,' or refused to answer this than the other questions. There may be some people in their heart of hearts who support the idea and don't say so over the phone. I'm sure that it did happen."

While the U.S. government did not imprison Arab and Muslim Americans in a blanket fashion as it had done with Japanese Americans following Pearl Harbor, federal agents did round up, interrogate and detain at least 1,200 immigrants from "Middle Eastern" nations.

More drastic measures were considered as well. Commissioner Peter Kirsanow of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, for example, talked openly about the possibility of internment for Arab Americans (citizens and not), at a Commission hearing in Detroit on July 19, 2002. According to reports, he raised the idea as a serious option in the event of future terrorist attacks, stating that, if the perpetrators of any such attack "come from the same ethnic group that attacked the World Trade Center, you can forget about civil rights." Kirsanow later told Detroit Free Press, "Not too many people will be crying in their beer if there are more detentions, more stops, more profiling; there will be a groundswell of public opinion to banish civil rights."

After reviewing this information with students, ask them to compare and contrast the 9/11 Backlash against the nation's response to the Oklahoma City bombing:

In 1995, a white, native-born man who had adopted anti-government, white supremacist teachings — Timothy McVeigh — blew up a federal building in Oklahoma City, killing 169 men, women and children. Then and now, there are hundreds of hate and anti-government "Patriot" groups in this country with thousands of members who embrace ideologies like those that inspired McVeigh's terrorist action. Yet, after the Oklahoma City bombing, there was neither a "backlash" of hate crimes against white, native-born men, nor any kind of suggestion that the government should detain or imprison white men in masse. Compare and contrast this response with the response to 9/11. Explore ways in which race, ethnicity and national origin may have influenced people's willingness to a) indict an entire group of people for the actions of a few, and b) weaken civil rights and liberties in the name of safety or security.