The Grinch stole Christmas from all the Who's down in Whoville, that's how the story goes. More recently, however, by an Executive Order signed on July 17th entitled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq" the Grinch could've just gotten himself elected President, made vague statements about the threats those Who's posed to national security and seized their property. But that's silly... right?
Of course it's silly, our country is still unsure if it's willing to elect a black man, let alone a green one. But as for the President we have, that Order is sadly quite real. Some of the more disturbing portions...
Section 1. (a) Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,
So, in essence, if you fall into any of the categories listed below, your property may be seized by the federal government and frozen like a drug kingpin's bank account. And some of the scarier 'groups' you might very well fall into?
(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:
(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or
(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;
The first bit of the bolded sentence makes sense. Guys who've actually committed such acts of violence are criminals and the government has the right to take such actions to prevent further damage. But that bolded section... Where have we heard the executive branch use that? Oh right, every single disgusting act from that office in the last 6 years. Wire tapping, phonebanking, black site prisons, torture that isn't torture (does he just "like me", or does he really like me like me?), and the utter destruction of habeas corpus. If you are deemed dangerous by the administration that brought you these first 5 installments in the "Destruction of American Civil Liberties" series then any amount of your property may be seized and frozen for an unstated amount of time.
But that's not all, my favorite part comes next:
(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or
(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.
Remember the "Telephone Game" from when you were a kid? You stood in a line or sat in a circle and the person at the front of the line came up with some complicated, hard to remember sentence and whispered to the next person who whispered it to the next person, and so on down the line until the last person said what they heard out loud to see how distorted the sentence had gotten?
Turns out this was good preparation for this law. Why? Well, if you are 'guilty' of subsections ii or iii and have your property blocked under those provisions you become a "person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order" and the cycle begins again. So, to put it simply:
Beth baked Johnny a cake and Johnny fixed Fred's pipes. Fred did Ahmed's taxes and Ahmed made a donation to his mosque back home that the federal government deemed meant Ahmed posed a significant risk of aiding in the commission of a violent act in Iraq. So now kiddies, who's the dangerous terrorist mastermind here who should have their livelihoods taken away?
What did you say? Nobody? Oooooh, I'm sorry, the answer we were looking for was every last one of them. We said Ahmed posed a significant risk, so he's gone. Fred provided services to him, so he's gone. Johnny provided Fred services, and since we took Fred's property that makes Johnny guilty. And poor Beth, she just had to go and provide material support to someone who provided services to someone who provided services to someone we say might maybe do something.
Comment away, my copy of Deathly Hallows just showed up from Amazon so I have my weekend planned out.