Opinion
Reading Los Angeles: Join The Times' new book club
Opinion Editorial
Editorial

Surveillance by religious stereotype?

Why did the U.S. spy on five prominent Muslim Americans?

A report that the U.S. government conducted electronic surveillance on five prominent Muslim Americans is troubling. It deserves a fuller response from the government than a boilerplate assurance that it doesn't choose targets of surveillance based on their political or religious views.

Relying on a spreadsheet supplied by former National Security Agency contract worker Edward Snowden, the online news site Intercept reported that, between 2006 and 2008, the government tracked the email accounts of Faisal Gill, who had served in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and four other men, including Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, this country's largest Muslim civil rights organization.

The article suggested that the men might have been targeted for surveillance because of their religion or peaceful advocacy, although no evidence of that was given. It noted that all of the men deny involvement in terrorism. None has been charged with a crime arising from the surveillance. The article also quotes a former FBI counter-terrorism official as spinning outlandish theories about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the United States, and it refers to a directive for intelligence personnel that used "Mohammed Raghead" as the name of a hypothetical surveillance target.

It isn't clear whether any or all of the men were subjected to surveillance under the provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. That 1978 law requires the government to demonstrate to a special court that there is probable cause that an American citizen or permanent resident is an agent of a foreign power or terrorist organization. (It's possible that there can be probable cause to subject someone to surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes without there being probable cause to charge him with a crime.)

The notion that the FBI would target innocent individuals because of their views isn't fantastic in light of the agency's past activities, and profiling of Muslims was an unfortunate aspect of the official reaction to 9/11. That doesn't mean that the past is prologue in this case and that these five men were the victims of religious bias, but the suspicion is understandable.

The American Civil Liberties Union and several other organizations have called on President Obama to make a "full public accounting" of the government's surveillance practices. It's unrealistic to expect the administration to publicize classified information in specific cases, but the FBI's inspector general should inquire into the circumstances of these investigations and any broader role that religious stereotyping might be playing in the selection of targets for surveillance.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • What if Starbucks' 'Race Together' had caught on in corporate America?
    What if Starbucks' 'Race Together' had caught on in corporate America?

    Howard D. Schultz, the chief executive of Starbucks, said in a letter to employees on Sunday that baristas would no longer be encouraged to write the phrase "Race Together" on customers' coffee cups, drawing to a close a widely derided component of the company's plan to promote a discussion...

  • Where do 'religious freedom' acts mention gays or lesbians?
    Where do 'religious freedom' acts mention gays or lesbians?

    Poor Mike Pence. The Indiana governor, eyeing a long-shot presidential bid, probably didn't expect the hot mess he got himself into by signing his state's version of the federal Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, or RFRA. And it showed.

  • Malibu can't pass off guesthouses as low-income housing
    Malibu can't pass off guesthouses as low-income housing

     A judge’s recent ruling that the city of Malibu couldn’t count guesthouses toward its state-mandated plan for low-income housing came as something of a shock. Who knew Malibu was even required to think about low-income housing? Not much, mind you — just 188 units of...

  • Indiana law shows LGBT people the closet door
    Indiana law shows LGBT people the closet door

    In a private ceremony Thursday, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signed into law Senate Enrolled Act 101, the innocuous sounding Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It prevents state and local governments from enacting laws that would "substantially burden" a person's exercise of his or her religion....

  • Could the anti-immigrant loudmouths pass a U.S. citizenship test?
    Could the anti-immigrant loudmouths pass a U.S. citizenship test?

    To listen to talk radio and cable television, which are dominated by conservatives, the national and state debates over immigration give the impression that most legal residents of the state of California oppose immigrant workers here illegally and might even be favorably disposed to Mitt...

  • Raise the minimum wage, but don't forget about the cost of housing
    Raise the minimum wage, but don't forget about the cost of housing

    One of the best reasons to raise L.A.’s minimum wage is the region’s incredibly high cost of housing. Metropolitan Los Angeles is ranked the least affordable rental market in the nation because the city has a dual problem -- low incomes and high costs.

Comments
Loading