A Holiday Season Like No Other

by Gerry Mowris

AS WE APPROACH THE HOLIDAYS, THE IMPACT OF SEPT. 11 weighs heavily on our minds and hearts. As a nation, we pray for those who are fighting, remember the victims, and comfort those left behind. We have found solace in spiritual worship, comfort in family, and peace in giving.

In the midst of the emotion, many of us are struggling to make sense of another dilemma: balancing civil liberties and public protection. As we watch the War on Terrorism unfold, we are dismayed by the substantial restrictions on our civil liberties. At the same time, we want our government to stop the terrorists before they strike again. Balancing civil liberties with public protection is very difficult and has been the subject of much public debate and scrutiny. Even some academics who usually balk at any restrictions on civil liberties are now more willing to compromise in the face of serious threats on America. And those who would have howled at a personal search before Sept. 11 now are willing to have luggage and vehicles searched to protect public places, to enter Disney World, to approach an airport, as well as to board an airplane.

As Lawrence Tribe, a Harvard law professor, stated, "Civil liberties is not only about protecting us from government, it is also about protecting our lives from terrorism." The danger is going so far in the name of the War on Terrorism that we lose the freedoms that our country has worked so hard to secure and even harder to guard. Once freedoms are compromised, they can be lost. The path back will be long and hard.

This dilemma is not unique to our times. The Bush Administration is not breaking new ground in detaining 1,000-plus people for further investigation. The Administration is merely updating government policies that can be found in many past war times and even in some past internal crises. Those who study history know that Civil Libertarian presidents such as Lincoln and Jefferson took similar actions in times of national emergency. Is it necessary, however, to go so far as to intercept attorney-client conversations in the name of national security? How far is too far? As lawyers, we are uniquely positioned to participate in this debate and to use our advocacy skills to make sure we have protected the integrity of the Bill of Rights when the last terrorist is eliminated. If we let well-intentioned legislators pass PATRIOT laws without debate or thought about the consequences, we are likely to regret it.

We should bear in mind that asserting rights on behalf of clients and questioning governmental overreaching is not unpatriotic. It is our duty. If we don't speak up, who will?

Elsewhere in this issue you will read Military Lawyers: A Sense of Duty. The article showcases a few of the Wisconsin-licensed lawyers who blend civilian and military obligations. We might stop to thank them and every lawyer who helps to defend our country and Constitution.

I wish all our members a safe and happy holiday season.