EDITORIAL
Justice Department must remember duty

No one should be surprised that the American Civil Liberties Union intends to challenge some of the draconian measures linked to Sept. 11 investigations undertaken by the Justice Department.

This doesn't make the ACLU unpatriotic or unconcerned about the war on terrorism and the threat to domestic security that terrorism presents.

Indeed, as Attorney General John Ashcroft was gracious (and smart) enough to say: "I'm glad I live in a country where the ACLU can criticize me and urge debate on the issue. I consider it my job as attorney general to make sure that this and all freedoms endure."

We have our doubts that Mr. Ashcroft is interested in much more than patting the ACLU on its head and defending its right to speak out. He might entertain debate, but there's little chance he will change his mind about what he believes is necessary for American security.

Still, he used the right words and that counts for something.

But after that, consider Mark Corallo, a Justice Department spokesman whom Ashcroft turned loose to continue the conversation. Corallo adopted a rhetorical scorched-earth policy.

Calling ACLU objections "patently absurd," Corallo argued that since all of the United States is a war zone now, suspects, including U.S. citizens, can be held as "enemy combatants."

"When you are held as an enemy combatant," he said, "you are not entitled to contest your detention."

Who decides who is an enemy combatant? The Justice Department. The Constitution, in other words, is arbitrarily suspended for some of us.

We don't agree entirely with everything the ACLU objects to. But like the ACLU, we believe that some of Ashcroft's post-9/11 policies are positively chilling — such as the San Francisco anti-war newsletter whose founders' names have been placed on an FBI "extra scrutiny" airport checklist.

"If people don't like the way policies are being enacted," Corallo said, "they can vote other people in."

That's plain wrong. The Bush administration was elected (by a minority of votes) to enforce the Constitution and protect the rights of Americans for four years. That duty is not, as Corallo seems to think, optional.

Corallo's words require retraction and an apology.