House Democrats last month lead a 25-hour sit-in in order to try and force the GOP leadership to allow a vote on a measure that would bar people from the no-fly list from buying firearms. They want, in essence, for people who are accused of being suspected terrorists from buying firearms and explosives.
The biggest part of the problem here is the so-called "no-fly, no-buy." The idea is that if you are on a federal watchlist such as the no-fly list, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. That's where the slippery slope begins.
Civil rights are in danger of being violated.
As the ACLU writes, "Our nation’s watchlisting system is error-prone and unreliable because it uses vague and overbroad criteria and secret evidence to place individuals on blacklists without a meaningful process to correct government error and clear their names."
House Democrats can usually be counted on to protect the 4th Amendment along with the constitutional right to due process. However, in this case, the Democratic Party finds itself on the wrong side of the Constitution.
It is an assault on due process, because the federal government can deny you your 2nd Amendment rights without even telling you why you should be denied them. It would continue a program that is rife with inaccuracies and problems. Several people have ended up on the no-fly zone, including Senator Ted Kennedy and even Representative John Lewis, who is one of the most prominent backers of the measure.
Another problem is profiling. The list disproportionately affects Muslims, and according to the Intercept, nearly half of the people on the watchlist have no recognized terrorist ties or affiliation. In fact, a six-year-old boy was placed on the no-fly list in Canada, showing how error-prone these lists are.
Gleen Greenwald, one of the most prominent anti- mass surveillance opponents wrote in a piece for the Interceptabout how the Democrats are arguing for profiling, something that the Democratic Party is usually against.
“Democrats, in unison, are actually arguing that the U.S. government must constrain people whom they are now calling ‘potential terrorists,’” Greenwald wrote. “Just spend a moment pondering how creepy and Orwellian that phrase is in the context of government designations.”
In addition to the added fact that profiling is well...wrong, it also places a fundamental piece of our judicial system on its head. In America, at least in theory, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. With the no-fly list, the government presumes you are guilty of being a suspected terrorist without actually telling you are suspected of being a terrorist. The government already assumes you're guilty and can deny you certain rights.
House Democrats need to think about the implications. They are wrong on this issue and need to think long and hard about the civil rights violations being pushed by their party right now.
