FREE SPEECH OUTRAGE

Even after 12 grueling years of battling the government's attempts to
deport him,Michel Shehadeh hasn't lost his faith in America or the
constitutional rights he came here to exercise. The Garden Grove man
is one of the "L.A. Eight," a group of seven Palestinians and one
Kenyan (the wife of one of the Palestinians) targeted by the FBI, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Department of Justice
because of their links to the pro-Palestinian cause.

Their case, argued on Nov. 4 before the U.S. Supreme Court, is based
on a variety of legal complexities, including the proper jurisdictions
for battling government deportation orders. But the issue comes down
to one simple question: Do legal immigrants have the same free-speech
rights as American citizens?

As Mr.Shehadeh told us, 12 years ago he was sleeping in his Long Beach
apartment with his 3-year-old son when about 13 INS agents raided his
apartment with guns drawn. He abhors terrorism, he told us, so he was
shocked to learn that he had been under FBI surveillance for 3 years
and couldn't believe that he was being arrested for handing out
pro-Palestinian pamphlets. Neither Mr. Shehadeh, who came to the
United State to attend college in 1975, nor the seven others had ever
been convicted of any crimes.

They enlisted the support of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination
Committee (ADC) and other civil rights organizations, and have
prevailed against the government in four separate court appearances.
Many court-watchers view this as a landmark immigration case.

According to Kamal Nawash, the ADC general counsel who has worked on
the case on behalf of the L.A. Eight, the FBI accused the group of
being involved in fund-raising activities on behalf of the Popular
Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a PLO faction the United States
calls an "international terrorist organization." They were arrested
based on a 1952 law that allows deportation of immigrants who advocate
communism. Since the PFLP is run by a avowed socialist, the government
was able to justify these arrests.

The fund-raising charges were dropped. But, in the meantime, the INS
charged some members of the group with routine immigration violations.
The anti-communist immigration statute was overturned in the midst of
the case, but the government wouldn't relent, issuing new charges
based on the L.A. Eight's support for an alleged terrorist
organization. After changing course after each defeat, the government
eventually based its case on technical matters, claiming the INS and
only certain courts have jurisdiction over these particular
deportation matters.

What the government is trying to do, Mr. Nawash told us, is keep
certain deportation cases out of courts that have the jurisdiction to
decide constitutional issues. The feds tailored their latest argument
to assure that the high court will only judge technical evidence and
neglect the broader First Amendment implication.

Regardless of what legalistic games the Department of Justice plays,
the ultimate issue is indeed constitutional. Mr. Shehadeh and the
others were (and still are) legal residents of the United States. They
were accused of supporting a terrorist group, but engaged in no
violent activities. The accused claim they were merely supporting a
Palestinian homeland and other Mideast policies in conflict with
official U.S. policy by distributing literature and sponsoring
cultural events. Mr. Shehadeh said his activities were purely in the
spirit of free debate and differed little from the anti-apartheid and
other political protests typical across college campuses at the time.

Testifying before Congress with regard to this case, then-FBI Director

William Webster said: "If these individuals had been United States
citizens, there would not have been a basis for their arrest." Yet the
government has been pursuing this matter for 12 years. Mr. Shehadeh
told us it's "like living with a sword hanging above your head with a
hair - any time it could break."

"People are scared to death to give their opinions," Mr. Nawash told
us, pointing to the "chilling effect" the government's actions have
had on legal immigrants. He thinks it's wrong for the government to
pursue such a tenuous case for so long, and that legal immigrants
deserve the same speech rights as U.S. citizens.

We agree. It's outrageous for the government to harass legal citizens
for peacefully expressing their political views, no matter how
offensive some officials might find them. The Supreme Court will only
decide the jurisdiction in which immigrants targeted for deportation
based on their political views can fight the matter. But if the court
rules in favor of the L.A. Eight, it might go a long way toward
guaranteeing legal immigrants the same speech rights as al other citizens.

Amazingly, the long ordeal hasn't eroded Mr. Shehadeh's faith in
America. "On the contrary. When you fight for something that hard it
becomes so dear to you. I feel I belong now because I've been engaged
in defending the ideas of this country, the ideas of the
Constitution," he told us.

He could probably teach the Department of Justice and the INS a lesson
or two about constitutional rights.

Checked-by: Rich O'Grady