Advertisement
Opinion L.A.

Opinion: Why innocent people are on the watch list

By Michael McGough
Share

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

The New York Times reports Wednesday that an alleged terrorist who is acquitted of a crime may still be kept on a terrorist watch list. The paper quotes Ginger McCall of the Electronic Privacy Information Center as saying: ‘In the United States you are supposed to be assumed innocent. But on the watch list, you may be assumed guilty, even after the court dismisses your case.’

This sounds plausible, but it assumes that acquittal under the onerous (for the prosecution) burdens of the criminal justice system is the same as being cleared of suspicion. And it raises a question: If individuals should be removed from the watch list because they have been acquitted of a crime, what about the other people on the list who haven’t even been charged with one?

Advertisement

The watch list is a queasy-making feature of the war on terror, even when it doesn’t contain mistakes. But its relationship to the criminal justice system -- or lack thereof -- is a reminder that not every aspect of the WOT can be handled by the courts.

RELATED:

Get smarter on security

How not to catch a terrorist

McManus: The high cost of protecting America

--Michael McGough

Opinion L.A.
Michael McGough

Michael McGough is the Los Angeles Times’ former senior editorial writer, based in Washington, D.C. He wrote editorials for The Times from 2006 to 2021. Before that, McGough worked for 30 years for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette as a reporter, editorial writer, editorial page editor and Washington correspondent. He wrote about law, national security, politics, foreign policy and religion. McGough is a graduate of Allegheny College and also attended the University of Kent at Canterbury in England and Yale Law School, where he received a master of studies in law degree.

Advertisement