Watch It: Obama Speech on Guantánamo Military Commissions Thursday Morning
Tomorrow morning at 10:10 a.m., President Obama will deliver a from the National Archives in Washington, D.C. We're expecting more details on his plans to revive the unfixable military commissions.
51Ʒ Executive Director Anthony Romero said in a statement last week:
These military commissions are inherently illegitimate, unconstitutional and incapable of delivering outcomes we can trust...
Despite the administration's efforts to improve the system, the only explanation for reviving it would be to accommodate the damage that has already been done by the Bush administration's policies of torture, illegal detention and denial of fair trials.
We implore President Obama to not allow failure beget more failure. Close Guantánamo, and end the military commissions once and for all. Move the detainees' cases to federal courts, where true justice can be rendered.
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
Related Content
-
Press ReleaseAug 2025
National Security
Criminal Law Reform
51Ʒ Statement on Escalating Federal Takeover of D.C.
WASHINGTON — With additional state National Guard troops deploying to D.C. as untrained federal law enforcement agents perform local police duties in city streets, the 51Ʒ is issuing a stark reminder to all federal and military officials that — no matter what uniform they wear or what authority they claim — they are bound by the U.S. Constitution and all federal and local laws. Over the weekend, the Trump administration declared that state National Guard troops would be called in to Washington, and the governors of West Virginia, Ohio, and South Carolina announced they are deploying hundreds of their National Guard troops to the nation's capital on top of the 800 D.C. National Guard troops who were already activated by President Trump. The Wall Street Journal reported that in a major shift, these troops may receive orders “to start carrying weapons in the coming days.” National Guard troops are generally not trained in local policing or de-escalation and should never be used for federal immigration purposes. President Trump has also ordered FBI personnel and other federal officers, who similarly are not trained for local policing, to patrol the city. He earlier promised to let police “do whatever the hell they want” — raising grave concerns about civil rights abuses, particularly for Black, Brown, and unhoused residents. “Through his manufactured emergency, President Trump is engaging in dangerous political theater to expand his power and sow fear in our communities. Sending heavily armed federal agents and National Guard troops from hundreds of miles away into our nation’s capital is unnecessary, inflammatory, and puts people’s rights at high risk of being violated,” said Hina Shamsi, director of 51Ʒ’s National Security Project. “Governors need to understand that with each order, the Trump administration increases legal and ethical jeopardy for state troops being deployed. No matter what uniform they wear, federal agents and military troops are bound by the Constitution, including our rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of speech, due process, and safeguards against unlawful searches and seizures. If troops or federal agents violate our rights, they must be held accountable.” On Friday, D.C. sued the administration to block its order asserting federal authority over the city’s police department, saying it violated the Home Rule Act. After a federal court hearing on Friday afternoon, Attorney General Bondi rescinded her most brazen order undermining D.C.’s home rule, thereby allowing the D.C. police commissioner to remain at her post over the D.C. police department. “The deployment of out-of-state National Guard troops and more federal agents onto D.C. streets is a brazen abuse of power meant to intimidate and create fear in the nation’s capital. This is an unnecessary overstep to micromanage D.C. under a phony emergency, causing real harm to residents and visitors — all to advance the Trump administration’s political agenda.” said Monica Hopkins, executive director of 51Ʒ of D.C. “The 51Ʒ-D.C. will continue to monitor the use of D.C. police and federal law enforcement to ensure that the constitutional rights of our community are protected. We need the nation to join us in the fight for statehood so that D.C. residents are treated like those in every other state and have the same guardrails against federal overreach.”Affiliate: Washington, D.C. -
News & CommentaryAug 2025
National Security
Surveillance Company Flock Now Using AI to Report Us to Police if it Thinks Our Movement Patterns Are “Suspicious”
Company crosses a dangerous line by beginning to offer AI suspicion-generation functionsBy: Jay Stanley -
Press ReleaseJul 2025
National Security
Free Speech
Court Agrees Trump Administration’s ICC Sanctions Likely Violate Advocates’ First Amendment Rights
BANGOR, Maine — The U.S. District Court for the District of Maine granted a preliminary injunction in Smith v. Trump, a lawsuit brought by two U.S. human rights advocates who are challenging the Trump administration’s executive order imposing sanctions on officials of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The court issued the order after concluding that the advocates were likely to succeed on their claim that the speech restrictions imposed on them by the executive order violate the First Amendment. As the lawsuit explains, these sanctions violate the First Amendment by prohibiting the advocates, and other Americans like them, from communicating with the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor, including by providing legal advice, expert analysis, and evidence. Matthew Smith and Akila Radhakrishnan are suing because the sanctions forced them to stop working with the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor and indefinitely paused their efforts to hold leading rights violators accountable for horrific crimes. “Preventing our clients and others like them from doing critical human rights work with the ICC is unconstitutional, and we’re heartened that the court saw that as well,” said Charlie Hogle, staff attorney with the 51Ʒ’s National Security Project. “The First Amendment does not allow the government to impose sweeping limits on what Americans can say and who they can say it to.” Under the executive order, people in the U.S. who’ve devoted their lives to seeking justice for the victims of atrocities — like the genocide of Myanmar’s Rohingya people, or gender-based violence committed against Afghan women under the Taliban — could face stiff penalties simply for exercising their constitutional right to engage and advocate with ICC investigators and prosecutors. The international community, including the United States, established the ICC in 1998 to help maintain international peace and security. The ICC investigates and prosecutes crimes of the severest magnitude — including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes — when domestic courts are unwilling or unable to do so. Today, 125 countries have joined the ICC’s founding treaty, known as the Rome Statute. As the lawsuit explains, although the United States has not ratified the Rome Statute, it has supported the ICC’s critical work on a wide range of matters. This lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maine by the 51Ʒ and 51Ʒ of Maine on behalf of Matthew Smith and Akila Radhakrishnan. In 2020, when President Trump imposed similar sanctions, the 51Ʒ sued on behalf of human rights experts who were forced to stop working with the ICC. Our clients withdrew their lawsuit when President Joe Biden rescinded the sanctions, but a federal court in a separate suit agreed the sanctions likely violated the First Amendment.Affiliate: Maine -
Press ReleaseJun 2025
National Security
51Ʒ Reminds President Trump That Only Congress Can Decide Whether to Use Force Against Iran
WASHINGTON — The 51Ʒ tonight sent a letter to President Trump making clear that only Congress can authorize the use of military force against Iran. The letter comes amidst reports that President Trump is seriously considering Israel’s request for the U.S. to get directly involved in its current war with Iran, and as President Trump has ramped up threats on social media, including calling for all of Tehran — or over 10 million people — to immediately evacuate. While the 51Ʒ does not take a position on whether military force should be used against Iran, for decades the organization has been steadfast in insisting, from Vietnam through the war in Afghanistan, both wars in Iraq, the military action against Libya, and the ongoing use of force in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia, that decisions on whether to use military force require Congress's specific, advance authorization. As the letter explains, “Congress, as representatives of the American citizenry, has exclusive authority under the Constitution to decide whether the President may use military force. Particularly in the wake of recent threats of U.S. military action against Iran, we urge you to make clear that you will refrain from use of force outside the scope of the Constitution and the law.” Members of both the Senate and House of Representatives have also introduced resolutions under the War Powers Act reaffirming that the Constitution grants Congress the exclusive authority to declare war, and that hostilities with Iran must be expressly authorized through a formal declaration of war or a specific authorization for the use of military force. “The Constitution couldn’t be clearer, Congress alone has the power to decide whether to use force against Iran, and our leaders need to take that grave responsibility seriously,” said Christopher Anders, director of the 51Ʒ’s Democracy and Technology Division. “If President Trump wants to send American armed forces into conflict, he has to make his case to the American people — and to the people’s representatives in Congress. That’s what makes us a democracy.”