Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Taylor Comerford
POL S 202 AG
War on Terror Paper
February 20, 2018
The United States, as a liberal democracy, codifies citizenship in a series of rights and
liberties. However, for several groups this construction has been dramatically impacted by the
1
September 11th terror attacks, and the subsequent War on Terror. In utilizing the presidential
power to persuade, George W. Bush proliferated the term “axis of evil countries”, and through
corresponding military action, proved that such rhetoric described Arab Muslims. As
demonstrated in Raza v. City of New York (2013), the NYPD was influenced by the prevalence of
this racial threat to gather secret intelligence on Arab Americans. The domestic tactics
challenged in Raza restricted the rights of Muslim and Arab citizens, thus limiting the fullness of
American citizenship experienced by these ethnic groups. In this paper, I will address
presidential action and rhetoric, its implications on domestic policy in Raza v. City of New York,
and its discriminatory affects on Arab Americans. I assert that federal language and action in
the War on Terror has resulted in racial projects which diminish the ability of Arab Americans
To contextualize the actions of the NYPD, one must first understand the impact of
presidential rhetoric in the War on Terror. Following the attack on the World Trade Center,
George W. Bush experienced an unprecedented “rally effect”, which boosted his approval rates
from 51% to over 90% (Jones). As Hetherington and Nelson assert, this gave Bush, as the chief
of state, a profound power to persuade the public and legislative bodies (Hetherington and
Nelson 37). This influence is exemplified by the impact of the phrase “axis of evil” in President
Bush’s 2002 State of the Union Address, used to describe Iran, Iraq, and North Korea as the
greatest sources of American threat. The indictment of such states was bolstered by Bush’s
military actions, which followed the expansion of Presidential war powers under the AUMF.
Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001, and Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003 targeted
Afghanistan and Iraq respectively. By describing Middle Eastern states as “evil”, and
concentrating military attacks to those states, President Bush deeply racialized terrorism for the
2
American public. To utilize the theoretical framework of Haney-Lopez, “axis of evil” became a
dog whistle for the American populous, denoting that individuals of Arab citizenship or descent
While Bush never explicitly advocated for a racialized domestic policy, the American
public interpreted his language and action in this way. The sweeping generalization that terrorists
were Middle Eastern extended to all individuals appeared to be Arab or Muslim, including
American citizens (Volpp 562). In a Gallup poll following the September 11th attacks, one-third
of American’s surveyed supported the internment of Arab Americans (Jones). This dramatic
sentiment against an ethnic group, regardless of citizenship status, indicated the profound impact
of presidential action. In this way the American populous internalized the language of the War
The NYPD was not exempt from the pervasive influence of the presidential response to
terrorism, as demonstrated in Raza v. City of New York. The case is an example of the domestic
War on Terror, as law enforcement agencies have identified groups American citizens as
adversaries. In this case study, five Muslim community leaders partnered with the ACLU in
filing a suit against Mayor Micheal Bloomberg, Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, and
Deputy Intelligence Commissioner David Cohen, viewed as the orchestrators of the NYPD
“Muslim Surveillance Program”. Through this program, the city’s Intelligence Division used
informants, undercover officers known as “Mosque Crawlers”, and warrantless video and
internet surveillance to map the Muslim communities in New York (Chowdhury 278). The
plaintiffs asserted that “muslim beliefs” and Arab ethnicity were being used as “the basis for law
defendants claimed such actions were legal, the case was settled in January 2016 in favor of the
3
plaintiffs, securing legislation to both bar future profiling based on race or religion, and to create
Program”).
To apply the contentious actions of Raza v. City of New York to the framework of a racial
project, the NYPD must be shown to have interpreted a racial identity in order to redistribute a
resource to or from this group (Omi and Winant 125). The defendants of the case and their
supporters rebut that the actions of the Intelligence Division were discriminatory (“Legal
radicalization for terrorist purposes include “enclaves of ethnic populations” and “ideological
evidence was found linking any these individuals to acts of terror (Chowdhury 283).
Furthermore, as all the communities targeted were Muslim and Arab, the only basis of such
investigations was the stigma against these groups in connection to terror. This satisfies the
constitutional protections. Matthew Wasserman describes the impact of the NYPD program as a
“chilling of speech and association”, as members of Muslim and Arab communities became
aware of surveillance, and intimidated into reduced societal participation (Wasserman 1790).
The plaintiffs asserted that members of their community felt they could no longer act or speak
freely, even distancing themselves from their faith and heritage out of fear of arrest or attack
(Wasserman 1791). As the freedoms of religion and association are embodied in the First
Amendment, the suppression of these rights through the intimidation of American Muslims is a
4
racial project (Chowdhury 285). Furthermore, these individuals were targeted for surveillance
due to their religious affiliation and/or ethnicity. This is a violation of their fourteenth
amendment right to equal protection under the law (Chowdhury 285). Proponents of the
Surveillance Program assert, like Cohen, that the “terrorist threat… is unique and continuing”
(“Declaration of David Cohen”). Yet, the counterclaim that this restriction of right was
necessary only further proves the existence of a racial project. In asserting that the newfound
threat of Arab terrorism justifies the infringement upon constitutional rights, one concedes that a
new understanding of a race has led to a reduction in the citizenship of that group. This is the
The statement “not all citizens are created equal” aptly summarizes the role of both
negative and positive racial projects (Volpp 582). The assets that are allocated within the
societal hierarchy, whether it be education, wealth, etcetera, are unevenly distributed along ever
changing conceptions of race (Omi and Winant 152). The rights at the essence of American
citizenship are no different. In connecting the American view of terrorism to Arab or Muslim
identity, President Bush’s expanded influence and War Powers paved the way for racialized
domestic policies. The NYPD, clearly influenced by the sentiment of the President, translated
this stigma into targeted policy. By deeming all Arabs as capable of terrorism, the New York
Intelligence Division engaged in a racial project, limiting the rights of its Muslim residents, and
5
Works Cited
Chowdhury, Nuzhat. “I, Spy (But Only on You): Raza v. City of New York, the Civil Rights
Disaster of Religious and Ethnic-Based Surveillance, and the National Security Excuse.”
Columbia Human Rights Law Review, vol. 46, no. 1, 2014, pg. 278-331.
Hetherington, Marc J. & Michaeal Nelson. “Anatomy of a Rally Affect: George W. Bush and the
War on Terrorism.” PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2003. pg. 37-42
6
Haney-Lopez, Ian. Dog Whistle Politics: How Coded Racial Appeals have Reinvented Racism
Jones, Jeffery M. “Rally Boosting Bush Approval Ratings.” Gallup. 3 Apr. 2003.
Jones, Jeffery M, “The Impact of the Attacks on America.” Gallup. 25 Sep. 2001.
Omi, Michael and Howard Winant. Racial Formation in the United States. Routledge, 2015.
“President Delievers State of the Union Address” The White House Archives. 29 Jan. 2002.
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html.
Complaint, Raza v. City of New York, No. 13-cv-3448-PKC-JMA, 5-9 (E.D.N.Y. June 18, 2013).
2018.
Volpp, Leti. “The Citizen and the Terrorist.” Immigration and Nationality Law Review, vol. 23,
Wasserman, Matthew A. “First Amendment Limitations on Police Surveillance: The Case of the
Muslim Surveillance Program” New York University Law Review, vol. 90, no. 1, 2015,
pg. 1786-1826.
7
8