In an attempt to have a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union
tossed out of court, city attorney Peter Farrell said Thursday
that the NYPD had valid reason to conduct surveillance
specifically targeting Islamic men and women, their businesses
and places of worship.
The program, conducted by the NYPD’s so-called Demographics Unit
and uncovered in 2011 through an Associated Press investigation,
singled out area Muslims and people of Middle-East descent as
fair game as part of an alleged counterterrorism operation
conducted with the assistance of a former high-ranking Central
Intelligence Agency officer.
The “Muslim surveillance program,” the ACLU argued in
their complaint filed in June, “imposed an unjustified badge
of suspicion and stigma on hundreds of thousands of innocent New
In court this week, Farrell said that before the case continues,
US Magistrate Joan Azrack should let the city introduce evidence
specific to the six plaintiffs being represented by the ACLU.
According to the attorney, the evidence will show that the city
was justified in running its spy program because those plaintiffs
in particular had documented ties to people, places or activity
associated with extremist ideologies.
“If it turns out that there is an adequate basis for
investigating these six plaintiffs, then that’s it, the case is
over,” Farrell told the judge.
ACLU attorney Hina Shamsi said the city’s tactic was
“inflammatory, incendiary innuendo,” and, as Newsday’s
John Riley reported, “displayed the same disregard for First
Amendment freedoms as the lawsuit challenged.”
“They are using speech, protected activities and unwitting
associations as reasonable suspicion,” Shamsi said.
Farrell hopes he will get to soon show the court that the two
mosques, three individuals and a charity represented by the ACLU
exhibited certain connections that justified surveillance.
According to the AP, police say one of the mosques was frequented
by a man who was recently convicted for lying to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation about wanting to join the Taliban or
al-Qaeda. The security team of the other mosque allegedly
sponsored survival team outings in which participants were dubbed
“jihad warriors,” the city wants to show.
The city filed a letter with the court earlier this week
insisting “the NYPD followed leads suggesting that certain
individuals in certain mosques may be engaging in criminal and
possibly terrorist activity.” The agency did not, the city
claimed, target mosques “simply because the attendees were
The city also said that one of the plaintiffs “made
statements” supporting violent jihad, another tried to
organize a trip to Pakistan to train with “extremists” and
a third testified as a character witness during the trial of a
blind sheik convicted in the 1990s of plotting to blow up
landmarks in NYC.
In a statement about the city’s strategy, the ACLU called it
“deliberate distraction at best,” and, at worst, “it
verges on the very type of discriminatory and meritless profiling
at the heart of this case.”
For two years, the AP has reported on the NYPD’s Demographics
Unit with the help of leaked documents revealing the city would
“deploy officers in civilian clothes throughout the ethnic