Political Science

The cases of Sacco and Vanzetti and Turkmen vs. Ashcroft (hereafter Turkmen) are one of the most politically controversial in American history, either in notoriety or in illustrating some of the loopholes of the American legal system. Sacco and Vanzetti predates Turkmen by almost a century, yet, there are stark similarities on both cases that are present despite differences in the historical and political circumstances surrounding them. Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were both Italian immigrants tried and convicted for the robbery and murder of two people in South Braintree, Massachusetts in 1920. Turkmen is a class lawsuit filed on behalf of eight named plaintiffs who were illegal aliens, all Muslim, and of Arab and South Asian descent, rounded up and subjected to racial profiling and prolonged detention by the FBI and INS  for immigration violations following the September 11 terrorist attacks. Until present, Sacco and Vanzetti remains highly debated in terms of the culpability of the accused as well as whether or not the trial was conducted in a manner that conformed to due process requirements. On the other hand, Turkmen forced America to confront important issues such as human rights and due process violations involving persons suspected of engaging in terroristic activities.

Plaintiff mistreatment
The abusive conditions surrounding the confinement of the plaintiffs in Turkmen was the second fundamental issue raised in their petition, which all things considered, were alleged to have  violated the Constitution (Turkmen v. Ashcroft, 2006, p. 4). In the petition, the plaintiffs enumerated several cases of mistreatment and abuse at the time of their confinement physical and verbal abuse, sleep deprivation, strip searches, being confined in tiny cells, denial of medical attention and exercise, and denial of hygiene items. Moreover, plaintiffs were deliberately scorned or deprived of the chance to perform their religious practices and personal items such as personal identification and cash which were confiscated from their or their house upon their arrest were never returned to them.  These forms of abuse and mistreatment, they allege, were made on account of their professed Islamic beliefs, race, and ethnicity.  In Sacco and Vanzetti, the aforementioned forms of mistreatment were not as pronounced, although both plaintiffs were subjected to prejudice and discrimination based on their citizenship status and political leanings -  as Italians and anarchists.

Due process issues
Several due process issues have been noted in both cases, especially as they related to people who are illegal immigrants and under suspicion for embracing radical ideologies that are considered a threat to national security (anarchism and terrorism). Due process is a term that embodies the concept of legal fairness and is considered a fundamental tenet in American jurisprudence such that No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (Center for Constitutional Rights, 2009). In Goldberg vs. Kelly (cited in Turkmen vs. Ashcroft, 2009), the Supreme Court ruled that procedural due process mandates that an individual facing deprivation of life, liberty, or property is entitled to 1) adequate notice 2) hearing and 3) a neutral judge. In Sacco and Vanzetti, the question of whether or not a fair trial has been given the plaintiffs remains highly contentious until now. Retrospective opinions of legal experts and observers opine that a retrial should have been granted given the pervasive prejudice on the part of judge presiding over the trial (Montgomery, 1960). Judge Webster Thayer possessed a blatant bias against the plaintiffs and made his sentiments public, allegedly calling the accused Bolsheviki and warning that he would get them proper (Temkin, 2009, p. 65). Moreover, allegations of a frame-up by law enforcement, perjuring or coerced witnesses, and the highly politicized climate that stirred passions because of the unpopular political beliefs of the accused are said to have convicted Sacco and Vanzetti, not guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as required for criminal proceedings. In Turkmen, plaintiffs emphasized that the government had violated their  rights under the equal protection clause because of the use of racial and religious profiling. They alleged that they have been singled out and rounded up because of their religion, country of origin, and race. Due process violations were also alleged such as depriving them of counsel and by detaining them for prolonged periods without charges and maintaining their incarceration even after their immigration cases have been deliberated upon and during which removal or voluntary departure could have been in effect. Although the Supreme Court later ruled to uphold claims on alleged physical abuse and mistreatment of the plaintiffs, it found that the US government had the right to detain immigrants based on race, religion, or national origin, and it can lawfully detain them  so long as an eventual removal is deemed reasonably foreseeable (Turkmen vs. Ashcroft, 2009). Moreover, illegal immigrants do not enjoy the same rights as U.S. citizens and cannot expect reciprocal privileges under the law. For instance, the right to counsel, is provided the illegal alien, but at his own expense, not at the governments (Turkmen vs. Ashcroft, 2006).

Similarities and differences
Undoubtedly, both Sacco and Vanzetti and the Turkmen cases were both highly politicized ones. Both cases arose out of a time in history when American capitalism was heavily challenged and threatened by competing ideologies, anarchism in the first, and Islamic fundamentalism on the latter.  Critics of the verdict on Sacco and Vanzetti claim that the real intention of the government of incarcerating the two Italian immigrants were to put a stop to the spread of anarchist philosophy in defense of capitalism. During this period, the communist ideology began to gain steam in Europe and the Red Scare was prevalent in the US (Temkin, 2009).  In Turkmen, the 911 tragedy aroused the passions of the American people to an extent that racial bigotry and discrimination ran high against Muslims or Arabs who were immediately presumed to be terrorists. Prejudice and force used against minorities and immigrants were common in both cases, but the physical and verbal abuses, however, were graver in Turkmen, as documented and substantiated by the OIG. To a certain extent, such display of force was tolerated by the American people because of the tremendous loss of life in 911, but at the price of the civil rights of innocent individuals who happened to have an Islamic sounding name and who come from Islamic countries.