Joseph Longley, Equal Justice Works Fellow, ACLU's National Prison Project

Jay Diaz, General Counsel, ACLU of Vermont, American Civil Liberties Union

COVID-19 was not the only deadly public health crisis of the past year and a half. The overdose epidemic killed a record 93,000 Americans in 2020, ravaging communities across the country, and may be on track to be worse in 2021. While the nation has combated COVID-19 by prioritizing medical research, vaccine production, treatment development, and implementation of common-sense public health measures, our response to the overdose epidemic has been tragically meager. In this moment of investment in our nation’s infrastructure, it is time for federal, state, and local governments to change course and invest in proven, life-saving public health tools to finally stem the tide of overdoses across the country.

It is no mystery what prevents overdose deaths. Studies consistently show that medical treatment and prevention, not punishment, saves lives. Yet, the most effective support for our family members, friends, and neighbors who use drugs are largely underfunded, and in some cases, outlawed.

Safe consumption sites, like the ones Rhode Island recently legalized, are a prime example of where investment needs to be made and barriers lifted. These medical facilities provide an individual who uses drugs with sterilized equipment and access to health care services and overdose reversal medications as needed, free from fear of criminal prosecution. Already operational in Canada, Australia, and Europe, these facilities are proven to save lives because they bring people out of the shadows to use drugs more safely, access substance use disorder (SUD) treatment information and referrals, and receive immediate medical intervention. In addition to preventing overdoses, safe consumption sites are proven to reduce the incidence of HIV and hepatitis C, among other diseases, benefiting everyone.

Yet despite all of the benefits, the implementation of common-sense programs like these has been stymied by years of stigma-based messaging, fearmongering, and moral panic about drug use. The Trump administration fought tooth and nail to shut down a proposed safe consumption facility in Philadelphia. It is crucial that the Biden administration allow safe consumption sites to operate and save lives in communities across the nation.

The nation also needs an all-hands-on-deck approach to harm reduction, ensuring ubiquitous access to fentanyl test strips, syringe service programs, and naloxone, the overdose-reversing medication. Emergency departments across the country should be ready to provide patients with appropriate screening, SUD medication, and direct referrals for long-term SUD treatment. Additional investments should be made in transportation to drug treatment clinics and more mobile clinics, for which the Biden administration recently loosened restrictions, to reach individuals in rural communities. And jails and prisons should ensure access to medications for opioid use disorder for everyone who needs it.

Not only do harm reduction policies like these save lives, but they also often save money. One study shows that $1 spent on new syringes decreased the cost of HIV treatment by $7. A study in California estimated that enrolling someone in a program that uses medication for opioid use disorder would save an average of over $17,000 per year versus detoxification, savings realized in decreased crime. States and localities can save more money by cutting spending on unnecessary and counterproductive criminal justice system expenditures — no longer arresting, prosecuting, convicting, incarcerating, and punishing people for drug possession. That money is better invested in our people’s health, housing, and education, counteracting the despair at the root of the overdose epidemic.

It is time to follow the evidence and make meaningful investments in prevention and treatment programs that will curb the horrific number of needless deaths. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen how smart investments in public health can save countless lives. We must make smart investments in our prevention and treatment infrastructure to ensure people at risk of overdose can receive the care and support they need.

Date

Friday, September 10, 2021 - 4:45pm

Featured image

Edmontonian with a sign that reads "harm reduction saves lives," photos of loved ones and crosses with purple ribbons and hearts gather for International Overdose Awareness Day at Capital Plaza outside the Federal Building.

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Share Image

ACLU: Share image

Related issues

Criminal Justice

Show related content

Imported from National NID

42945

Menu parent dynamic listing

22

Imported from National VID

43603

Imported from National Link

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Teaser subhead

States and localities should use this moment to tackle the overdose epidemic.

Hina Shamsi, Director, ACLU National Security Project

In the early days after 9/11, I hoped desperately — alongside so many others around the country and the world — that our government would make wise choices, that it would meet violence with justice, transparency, accountability, and a commitment to fundamental rights. We knew that too often in American history, political leaders respond to traumatic events by clamping down on our civil rights and liberties, and only come to regret it after terrible human costs. And we knew that those costs are borne primarily by Black and Brown people and immigrants, whom the government has always wrongly viewed through a security threat lens.

So that September, 20 years ago, I remember feeling some hope mixed with great trepidation as I listened to President Bush addressing the press after a visit to an Islamic Center in Washington, D.C. “This is a great country,” he said. “It’s a great country because we share the same values of respect and dignity and human worth.”

I’ve thought about that a lot in the years since. Where did that human worth go when our government set up a nationality-based registry for 10 years and tore apart Muslim families and communities? When it tortured detainees and locked them away without charge or trial at Guantánamo? When it passed the Patriot Act and began mass suspicionless surveillance of our private communications? When it wrongly put Americans on watchlists? When it launched forever wars and created a program of secretive, unlawful, unaccountable killing, even outside of war zones in multiple parts of the world?

Together, we resisted many of those abuses. And thanks to the persistent leadership and work of impacted communities, independent media, and rights advocates and allies, some of the worst injustices came to light and ended. We no longer have systemic CIA and military torture or CIA “black sites.” “Special registration” of Muslims here at home was finally and formally dismantled under President Obama in 2016. And the NSA’s collection of virtually every American’s call records ended after Edward Snowden’s 2013 revelations about the scope of government surveillance took our breaths away.

But too many of those abuses are not over. That’s largely because successive presidents invoked extraordinary powers reserved for what should be exceptional — war — and created a legal and policy framework that has resulted in a cascade of human rights and rule of law violations at home and abroad. As a result, our country’s national security policies are grounded in militarization and unlawful lethal force; indefinite detention and unfair trials at the Guantánamo Bay prison; unfair watchlists, and racial, ethnic, and religious profiling here at home; and warrantless surveillance of Americans as well as others.

None of these abuses promote our collective security and fundamental rights. Enough is enough.

20 years later we have another choice to make: We could continue on a path grounded in war-based policies that have destroyed the lives of Brown, Black, and Muslim communities in the United States and multiple parts of the world. Or we could try something new, something that reflects our best aspirations for ourselves and each other: What we need is for our political leaders to invest in our collective security, in racial justice, and in our fundamental rights. We’ve already begun to have these conversations, especially around policing. We must keep going.

The system we have now is corrosive. Think of the Trump administration’s militarized response to the racial justice protests last summer, or its disgraceful “Muslim ban.” Those responses stole directly from the post-9/11 national security script.

Our political leaders must invest in our collective security, in racial justice, and in our fundamental rights.

President Biden can begin to right the wrongs by ending key policies that hurt us, that have never served our needs, and will not serve our future. We have concrete, achievable paths for his administration and Congress to follow.

The administration needs to end indefinite military detention and unfair trials in order to finally close Guantánamo. Almost 20 years after the prison first opened, 39 Muslim men remain indefinitely detained there. 27 of those men have never even been charged with a crime; in fact, 10 have been cleared for transfer or release, some of them for years. Many of the men are torture survivors, and some were disappeared into CIA “black sites” before being sent to the prison. At $540 million per year, Guantánamo is the most expensive prison in America, if not the world. The Guantánamo military commissions have been marred by legal and ethical problems from day one. Almost 20 years later, the only certainty about this military trial system is that it is broken and incapable of providing justice.

At home and around the world, Guantánamo is a symbol of racial injustice, abuse, and disregard for the rule of law. It can and must be closed responsibly, and the Biden administration has the power to do it. It can start by swiftly transferring prisoners who have not been charged with a crime to third countries where their human rights will be respected. It can finally acknowledge that the fundamental fairness requirements of the Constitution’s due process clause apply to prisoners, which would help ensure a judicially-managed resolution to indefinite military detention. It can stop opposing prisoners’ federal court challenges to habeas petitions to allow for court-ordered releases. And in the military commission system, if the government has enough evidence that is untainted by torture to prosecute prisoners — including those facing the death penalty — it should pursue plea agreements that will allow meaningful justice to be done.

The Biden administration should also end another centerpiece of our “forever wars:” our government’s program of unlawful, secretive, and unaccountable killing of people outside even recognized war zones. For almost 20 years, successive presidents have claimed the unilateral power to authorize this extrajudicial killing with no meaningful accountability for wrongful deaths and civilian lives lost and injured. The lethal strikes program began during the Bush administration, and the Obama administration entrenched an architecture for it with little transparency, no accountability, and no endgame in sight for the precedent it unleashed.

The Trump administration built on this precedent, issuing secret killing rules (now public as a result of ACLU litigation) that demonstrate how easily internal executive branch constraints and norms can be cast aside. This program has profoundly damaged the rule of law and — again — exacted an appalling toll on Muslim, Brown, and Black communities in multiple parts of the world.

Earlier this year, over 113 organizations from the U.S. and around the world demanded that President Biden end the lethal strikes program. The groups include the ACLU and others focusing on human rights, groups from impacted countries, as well as veterans’ groups, and others focused on peacebuilding and racial, social, and environmental justice.

President Biden must disavow and end the program and provide acknowledgement and redress for civilian lives lost and injured. Congress also needs to act: it must reassert its role in deciding and limiting wars, with all of their costs to human rights and civil liberties. It needs to do so by repealing the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for use of Military Force (authorizing the wars in Afghanistan and against the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq), which presidents from Bush to Obama to Trump have invoked to justify lethal force and detention far beyond Congress’ original purpose. It needs to pass the bipartisan National Security Powers Act, which would be the most important recalibration of the balance of power between the president and Congress in decades. This legislation would ensure that a president must obtain Congress’ authorization or approval before launching military interventions — except in a genuine emergency, and then only for a short period. It requires that the president’s national security powers must be used for clearly defined purposes, subject to regular review by Congress, and only as a last resort.

Third, as my colleague Hugh Handeyside explains, we urgently need to end biased law enforcement profiling and fundamentally overhaul the watchlisting system because they violate basic rights and norms: transparency, accountability, due process, and equal protection under the law. As former FBI agent Terry Albury recently said about post-9/11 surveillance and investigation of Muslims and communities of color, “What the F.B.I. was directing us to do was to go into these communities and instill fear and then generate this paranoia within these people so that they know that they’re under suspicion perpetually.” Albury went to prison for four years after what he called his awakening — a decision to leak classified information about the Justice Department and FBI rules that permit discriminatory and devastating abuses that are still happening today. These abuses have to end.

Finally, the pervasive power of our government’s mass surveillance regime is now clearer than ever. My colleagues Patrick Toomey and Ashley Gorski explain the essential reforms Congress must enact to end corrosive, suspicionless, post-9/11 security surveillance, which can “chill the very kind of speech and association on which democracy depends.”

We all have a job to do. We must push our political leaders to dismantle this old architecture, repair the damage done, and put in place the changes we need to see. The country we want must ground security for everyone in human rights, equality, dignity, and accountability, in action as well as words. That’s what makes us truly courageous and strong.

 

Date

Friday, September 10, 2021 - 3:45pm

Featured image

A statue of the goddess Justitia holds a pan of scales in front of the building of the district and regional court.

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Share Image

ACLU: Share image

Related issues

Privacy

Show related content

Imported from National NID

42933

Menu parent dynamic listing

22

Imported from National VID

42993

Imported from National Link

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Teaser subhead

Will Biden and Congress follow it?

In 2015, the ACLU sued psychologists James Elmer Mitchell and John “Bruce” Jessen, whom the CIA enlisted to design, implement, and oversee its post-9/11 torture program. Our clients were Suleiman Abdullah Salim and Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud, who survived the torture, and the family of the late Gul Rahman, who was kidnapped, experimented on, and tortured to death in CIA custody.

While courts shut down every previous lawsuit involving CIA torture on secrecy and immunity grounds, our clients repeatedly prevailed against Mitchell and Jessen’s attempts to have the case dismissed. The lawsuit ultimately resulted in a historic settlement in 2017, but the traumas that the CIA inflicted on our clients and the program’s many other victims and survivors cannot be reversed.


“These doctors … dedicated their work not to serve prisoners or to alleviate their ordeal, but instead, dedicated their knowledge to increasing the pain of the sick and to increasing the mental distress of the sick and … to intensify their torture.”

– Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud, torture survivor


Twenty years after 9/11, we look back on this seminal case with Mohamed, Suleiman, and Obaid Ullah (Gul Rahman’s nephew), and ACLU Senior Staff Attorney Steven Watt in this week’s episode of At Liberty. Listen to the podcast for the full discussion about what the litigation achieved, what the U.S. still needs to do to make amends to victims and survivors, and how to prevent the government from using torture in the future.

Survivors of the CIA Torture Program Almost 20 Years Later

 

Read more about what the Biden administration can do to address the legacy of torture.

Date

Friday, September 10, 2021 - 3:30pm

Featured image

CIA torture survivors and victims

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Tweet Text

[node:title]

Share Image

CIA torture survivors and victims

Related issues

Police Practices

Show related content

Imported from National NID

42972

Menu parent dynamic listing

22

Imported from National VID

50433

Imported from National Link

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Standard with sidebar

Teaser subhead

On At Liberty, we reflect on what justice for victims and survivors would look like, and how to ensure the government never uses these inhumane tactics again.

Pages

Subscribe to ACLU of Florida RSS