Page 4 - Freedom in the world_Neat

immigrants will remain with the United States long after the current contention over issues
like the PATRIOT Act has been put to rest.
The restrictions on freedom posed by counterterrorism measures are worrying. This study
expresses grave concern about attempts to extend executive authority without the usual
congressional and judicial review, extraordinary renditions, mistreatment of those in U.S.
custody, and warrantless wiretaps in contravention of the requirements of U.S. law.
However, the controversy surrounding the Bush administration’s counterterrorism policies
must be assessed at least in part within the context of the strains on civil liberties in
previous times of war. To be sure, the United States should be judged by the standards of
the 21st century, and not by those of yesteryear. It is important and heartening to note the
extent to which the response of civil liberties advocates has been both crisp and ultimately
persuasive with judges, including those presiding in military courts. But it is also
worthwhile to acknowledge the great distance our society has traveled in the evolution of
its democracy. In 1798, newspaper editors were jailed under the Sedition Act; during the
Civil War, habeas corpusprivileges were suspended; during World War I, women peaceably
picketing at the White House for suffrage were imprisoned for “disrupting the war effort”;
during World War II, censorship was imposed and Japanese Americans were placed in
internment camps; and in the Vietnam War era, the FBI and CIA investigated thousands of
Americans whose patriotism was questioned because of their antiwar opinions. Today,
none of these practices would be tolerated, or even seriously considered.
The excesses of these earlier periods of conflict were each addressed and resolved by the
normal workings of the American system, though often after some delay. Regarding
today’s civil liberties controversies, a process of rethinking and adjustment is already
under way as this work goes to print. The executive branch is being challenged by the
courts and by Congress, and Congress is being challenged by the voters. Further
corrections can be expected in the coming months and years. This is the larger, more
important reality that gives Freedom House confidence in the democratic future of the
United States. The American democracy responds to transgressions and is constantly
reinvigorated.
A free press and an independent judiciary continue to be linchpins of the American system
and are essential to preserving freedom in our society. The judiciary’s role in repeatedly
defending individual rights can be seen throughout this study. The rights of religious and
racial minorities, the free speech protections for students and academics, the due process
rights of American citizens (and others) detained as enemy combatants, the ability of
accused criminals to mount an effective defense, the rights of women to secure equal
access to economic opportunity—these are but a few examples of the many aspects of
democratic fairness that are regularly addressed by the courts. The judiciary’s function as
guardian of minority rights is visible now in the national discussion about the rights of gay
men and lesbians to marry, adopt, and inherit. The role of the press as a vital bulwark of
freedom appears throughout this study in much the same way, and with respect to many
of the same issues. The strength and independence of these two institutions has long been
crucial to the protection of American freedoms, and is no less so in the current period of
conflict and uncertainty.
ASSESSMENT OF MAJOR FINDINGS
The study highlights a number of enduring and systemic challenges to American
democracy and the condition of individual freedom in the United States:
Racial Inequality

Page 4 of 168