Unbeknownst to the general public, a bizarre sequence of events has been unfolding in the Bush administration within the past few days. About the same time the president was nominating his current top legal counsel, Harriet Ellan Miers, to the Supreme Court, the Department of Homeland Security was rapidly attempting to clean up a mess caused by the Department of Justice, led by Alberto Gonzales, Bush's previous top legal adviser.
Last Tuesday the DHS sought to reverse a catastrophic decision made by the Board of Immigration Appeals in favor of the DOJ in the case Li v. Gonzales.
What began as an illegal Chinese immigrant's petition for asylum here in the United States turned out to be the condemnation of his religious practice, affirmation of the assimilation of church and state, condoning of Chinese government-sanctioned torture and a tragic precedent set for future interpretation of "religious freedom."
What's most surprising is that the DOJ has been the driving force behind this atrocity.
Xiaodong Li of Ningbo, China, was arrested in his home in April of 1995 during an underground religious meeting. Because Li's meeting had not been registered with the Chinese government as part of the official state "Christian" church, and because Li had been passing out unapproved religious materials, he was in violation of Chinese law. As a result, he was handcuffed, imprisoned, interrogated and tortured.
Eventually Li was released on bail, but lost his job and was forced by the police to clean public toilets, without pay, until his hearing. Knowing that he was guilty under Chinese law, which allows only the freedom of certain state-friendly forms of religion, and that he would undoubtedly end up in jail for practicing his religion, Li fled China. By 1996 he had settled in Houston illegally, and in 1999 Li applied for asylum under the United Nations' Convention Against Torture.
To this day Li's testimony is unopposed and, in fact, corroborated by the State Department, which has reported a Chinese governmental campaign to suppress the activity of unregistered religious groups between 1994 and 1997.
After hearing Li's case, an immigration judge determined that Chinese law against unregistered religion is an institutional form of persecution and ruled that Li could not be deported unless circumstances in China change.
Unfortunately, the decision to withhold removal was appealed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, then under the DOJ, and the immigration board reversed the decision.
According to the BIA, which also found Li's testimony credible, the Chinese Christian should be returned to his country because he cannot prove that the discrimination is a result of his religious beliefs. Instead, board members argued that his treatment was the mere result of his disobedience of government law intended to maintain social order rather than suppress certain religions.
It is no wonder the Bush administration, which has been an outspoken proponent of religious freedom, would want to reverse this decision.
The case, however, wasn't halted there. This summer, Li v. Gonzales was brought before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which tragically upheld the initial reversal.
Last week, in a surprising twist, the DHS, which now oversees U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly the INS), filed a motion with the BIA to reverse its decision. Miraculously, the board spontaneously reversed it decision on Thursday, just two days later.
Unfortunately, Bush's DHS has acted too late. Whether or not Li will now be allowed to remain in the U.S., the 5th Circuit Court's written decision still stands, and unless challenged, it can be used as precedent in future cases.
At the core of the decision stands the newly invented (and flawed) distinction between "right to religious belief" and "right to religious practice." This idea of separation is akin to the brainwashing of the Chinese Communist Party, the constitution of which permits "freedom of religion" in thought, but the laws of which prohibit the practical expressions of those beliefs.
Few religions that I know of (save gnosticism) permit such a separation of the mind from the material word. As Xiaodong Li's (and President Bush's) own Christian religion states, "faith without works is dead."
There has been a glaring discrepancy between what the administration says about human rights and the actions the DOJ has taken. The Li v. Gonzales decision, as it stands, poses a dangerous threat to religious freedom even here in our own country.Andrew Rennekamp is a first-year Biomedical Ph.D. student from East Stroudsburg, Pa. Any Ice Today Lady? appears on Tuesdays.
