Skip to main content

Civil rights lawyer describes profiling of and discrimination against Muslims

February 25, 2016

Azmy mainly cited the case Hassan v. City of New York to describe the extent and unlawfulness of the surveillance of Muslim communities.
Azmy mainly cited the case Hassan v. City of New York to describe the extent and unlawfulness of the surveillance of Muslim communities.
At an event titled “Challenging Muslim Profiling in Post 9/11 Era,” Baher Azmy, Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and a constitutional law professor at Seton Hall University, addressed the unconstitutionality of religious profiling that has been “embraced” in the post-9/11 era.

By Maria Biery C’18

On February 24, Penn Law hosted the event titled “Challenging Muslim Profiling in Post 9/11 Era” as a part of its 8th Annual Public Interest Week. Baher Azmy, Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and a constitutional law professor at Seton Hall University, addressed the unconstitutionality of religious profiling that has been “embraced” in the post-9/11 era. Azmy also discussed possible solutions with Penn Law professor Kermit Roosevelt. The talk was sponsored by the National Lawyers Guild, the American Constitution Society, and the Muslim Law Student Association.

Azmy mainly cited the case Hassan v. City of New York to describe the extent and unlawfulness of the surveillance of Muslim communities.

“In 2011, in a series of reports that ultimately won a Pulitzer Prize, the AP revealed that the NYPD was conducting a broad human mapping and surveillance program targeting Muslims exclusively and without any suspicion whatsoever,” Azmy said.

The reason for this mapping, explained, was that the NYPD embraced a theory of radicalization post-9/11. He noted that a “hyperbolic” video titled “Third Jihad, depicting camps of Muslims that were ready to attack the United States, ran in a loop at NYPD stations.

“There was this kind of endorsement of, I think, what we can fairly call Islamophobic speech,” he said.

Azmy explained that singling out a group for their chosen religion is unconstitutional. In addition, these programs haven’t shown results in finding terrorists. “The injury,” according to Azmy, “has come from being treated differently.”

“There are basic economic harms affecting businesses,” he added. “Those that were surveilled said that they lost money. Mosques experience a sort of free exercise injury in their religious observance.”

This discrimination, Azmy observed, has come from the fact that surveillance of Muslim communities has become accepted practice in the post-9/11 era. Cases that were unconstitutional were deemed lawful for reasons of national security.

Stereotyping groups doesn’t route out the problems of terrorism and surveying those groups doesn’t work either, he concluded.

“Part of the solution, tactically,” according to Azmy is, “trying to build power among these groups. Build power and strength within the groups so they can demand their inclusion in the political community.”

Roosevelt agreed while also adding that, “We need more empathy. A lack of empathy, a failure of empathy, is a fundamental problem.”

Tweets from this event: