Baroudi: Yes, in 2014, the US District Court in Detroit convicted her of the charge of unlawful procurement of naturalization. She was sentenced to 18 months of imprisonment and subsequent deportation from the US, where she's lived for so many years. During the unfair trial, Rasmea was prevented from presenting evidence about the events that led to her conviction by an Israeli military tribunal.
DB: So she couldn't talk about the torture.
Baroudi: She couldn't talk about any evidence. The judge, ironically, allowed in the actual conviction documents, but she wasn't allowed to testify about the conviction or the circumstances that led to her arrest, her torture, her coerced confession, her imprisonment, or the subsequent Post Traumatic Stress Disorder from which she suffers to this day. In addition, her expert witness on PTSD was also barred from testifying. It's incomprehensible that the judge admitted her conviction into evidence but barred any mention of the torture and coerced confession that led to it, because he said they were irrelevant. The Israeli military court system has a conviction rate of 99% for the Palestinians brought before it. This flaw in the judge's reasoning was the basis of the appeal, which is that Rasmea was denied the right to present a complete defense because the trial court precluded her and her expert witness from testifying about how her PTSD affected the naturalization process.
DB: On what grounds was the appeal granted?
Baroudi: There were several arguments put forth by her legal team. On February 25, the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted the appeal and vacated her conviction. They looked at the de-naturalization statute, which they said criminalizes knowingly procuring naturalization, contrary to law. PTSD is relevant to whether Rasmea knowingly omitted information on her citizenship application. They found that the trial court's conclusion -- that her PTSD and circumstances of her arrest and torture were irrelevant -- was wrong.
DB: The court implies they believe her that she was tortured and has a right to tell that story.
Baroudi: Yes. The court recognizes that PTSD is relevant to the immigration process and that when the process is asking about your background and arrests and the judge allows convictions from a military court system -- referred to as a kangaroo court system by many organizations and well known scholars -- then PTSD is going to be relevant.
DB: Where does it go? There are two possible outcomes.
Baroudi: The decision of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals becomes final on April 10. At that point the case goes back to the trial court. The first scenario is that the trial judge can find another basis to exclude Rasmea's and her expert witness's testimony and that she can appeal again to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. The more likely scenario is that the trial court allows in the PTSD testimony, and that Rasmea and her expert witness will be allowed to testify at a new hearing about the circumstances of her conviction by an Israeli military court and how the lifelong effects of her PTSD may have affected the naturalization process.
DB: What is your assessment as to the possibility of a positive outcome?
Baroudi: The Sixth Circuit decision language is encouraging the trial court to allow in the testimony because they made a finding that PTSD is relevant. I expect the second scenario, which is a new trial.
DB: Why was she targeted? Torture is such a touchy subject. The Israelis, who have so many complaints you can't keep track of them, are sensitive on this front. Now the Americans are taking their lessons from the Israelis, so the American government is sensitive about torture. There are highly political forces operating, and some are coming down on her and others.
Baroudi: The case came out of an investigation of the 23 anti-war and Palestinian community organizers in Chicago and Minneapolis. She specifically came under attack by the US government because she's a Palestinian, an Arab, an immigrant, and a woman. She's under attack because for decades she's organized for Palestinian liberation and self-determination, the right of return, and an end of Israeli occupation and colonization. This case is of special significance for immigrant activists in the US because it highlights the level of surveillance and repression employed by the US to further the interests of its allies, including the Israeli state -- namely by silencing and intimidating those who speak out and organize against racism and Zionism. Last week the University of California regents adopted a statement condemning anti-Semitic forms of anti-Zionism on university campuses. Although it is unenforceable and raises First Amendment concerns, it's another tool. Rasmea's case is about stopping political speech that advocates for the self-determination of the Palestinians.
DB: This is the age of degrading, disparaging, undermining the Arab-American community. We have a candidate who wants to purge the community. This is happening in this cauldron.
Baroudi: Absolutely. In the post 9/11 climate, prosecutors have used fear mongering and growing anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia to target Arabs and Muslims and launch a smear campaign against people like Rasmea.
DB: Why is this case so important to you?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
