Ghost of Bruno

9/11: The Day Our Civil Liberties Perished?

Apparently not, according to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

In a recent case, the court ruled unanimously that protesters may not be required to pass through metal detectors when they gather next month for a rally against a U.S. training academy for Latin American soldiers.

In the overwrought words of Judge Geral Tjoflat: "We cannot simply suspend or restrict civil liberties until the War on Terrror is over, because the War on Terror is unlikely ever to be truly over...Sept. 11, 2001, already a day of immeasurable tragedy, cannot be the day liberty perished in this country."

Does a requirment that protestors pass through a metal detector truly equate with liberty perishing? Is my liberty in danger of perishing every time I get on a airplane? When I walk into a federal building? Every time I walk through the doors of a federal courthouse, such as, for instance, the very courthouse in which the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals resides?

Have Judge Tjoflat and his colleagues no sense of irony?

I agree with Judge Tjoflat that the War on Terror is not likely to be over soon. I seriously doubt, however, that this country will suffer very much from requiring protestors to walk through a metal detector. If we ask the little old lady flying to Pasedena to pass through a gizmo, is it such a great burden to ask earnest young protestors to do so as well?

Finally, what does history tell us about the role of courts and the contours of "civil liberties" during a time of war? This will be the subject of my upcoming posts.

Update: The opinion quoted above can be found here.

Where I Stand

I mentioned in my introductory post that we are presently engaged in World War IV. I take this view because of the writings of those such as Norman Podhoretzand Mark Helprin, both of whom have said it better than can I. I take this view because I stood and watched the World Trade Center Towers fall to the ground, as my fellow citizens jumped to death on September 11, 2001. I take this view because, but for the heroic actions of some Americans over the fields of Pennsylvania, we would probably still be rebuilding the White House or the Capitol Dome. I take this view because I know that today there are thousands of suicidal jihadists who would love to meet with 72 virgins in the next life, but not before they kill as many Americans as possible as their parting gift to this life.

World War IV is a term I will probably use alot on this site. I don't think the term can be overused. The fundamental challenge we now face as a society is to resist the temptation to assume that the worst is past us. As Tom Junod wrote in Esquire in August of this year, the enemy does not think the worst is past us:

"We were attacked three years ago without warning or predicate event. The attack was not a gesture of heroic resistance nor the offshoot of some bright utopian resolve, but the very flower of a movement that delights in the potential martyrdom expressed in the squalls of the newly born. It is a movement that is about death, that worships death, that seeks to accomplish death whereever it can, on a scale both intimate and global."

As Americans, we are an optimistic people, and this is a good thing. I fear that optimism is not our ally, however, on this present issue, in this present age.

If the premise that we are engaged in World War IV is accurate, then it follows that the issues of the day should be placed in the context of this fact. One example as food for thought: how much national energy should be directed at the issue of whether consenting adults who happen to be gay wish to be married? Another example along these lines: how much national energy should properly be directed at what our Presidential candidates--one of whom will be making the key decisions as to our conduct of World War IV--did thirty years ago as young men in their 20's?

I realize that the current political parties would like to frame the national debate around selected and poll-driven issues such as these, but that does not mean that the rest of us must go along for the ride. This is our country. We should frame the debate.

I say let's start doing just that.

Introduction

Welcome to Ghost of Bruno.

I will be writing about politics, philosophy and the law on this weblog. I will attempt to do so in the spirit of Giordano Bruno, who was willing to burn at the stake for his integrity--although I doubt anything worth being burned alive over will come up on these pages. On a good day, some of these ramblings may even have some humor in them, as well as the occasional personal anecdote.

I am a father, a husband, and a lawyer, keenly interested in the fact that we are now engaged in World War IV. In my humble view, if we do not win this War, nothing much else matters. For those who care, I am not a fan of much government, I am skeptical of the wisdom of most of public officials, and I think people should be left alone to live their lives. Unless they are hijacking airplanes or otherwise trying to destroy Western Civilization.

I welcome your comments and criticisms. But most important, let's discuss things with intellectual integrity, in the spirit of Bruno.