The following op-ed appeared in USA Today on April 1, 2014

Overzealous security precautions keep America from living up to its ideals.

Last month, as Syria's civil war entered its fourth year, bloodshed continued without pause and the number of refugees continued to swell. Those are among the reasons that the Obama administration took an important step to sustain a U.S. tradition of protecting refugees, including Syrians fleeing their country. But the administration can do more.

The United States has long provided haven and resettlement to those escaping tyranny. And though resettlement will clearly not be the solution for the vast majority of the world's 15 million refugees, it can be a critical and life-saving option for the most vulnerable.

For decades, Republican and Democratic administrations have provided this lifeline while taking precautions to keep out individuals who wish to do us harm. But we've failed in maintaining the right balance, unjustly barring people who are not terrorists and who pose no threat to the USA. Because they have been wrongly labeled by provisions of our immigration law, these victims face uncertain and fearful futures.

Dubious definition

Our immigration law defines terrorism broadly to include any collection of individuals that uses armed force against any government, even a murderous tyranny opposed by the United States. It does not recognize that in a civil war, it is often impossible for civilians to avoid some contact with such people.

For instance, the law bars entry to an individual fleeing Syria if she had sold food or provided shelter to U.S.-backed Syrian rebels.

The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department recognized this problem and acted to address it. On Feb. 5, they announced two waiver provisions for applicants otherwise eligible for protection who provided "insignificant" or "limited" support to groups that, while still considered terrorist organizations under immigration law, are not officially designated terrorist groups.

To be eligible, individuals must disclose the support and show that they neither intended to support nor knew that their support would further terrorist or violent acts.

Some members of Congress have accused the administration of putting national security at risk, arguing that even this minimal accommodation puts American lives in danger. But they have this backward. The Obama administration hasn't gone too far; it hasn't gone far enough.

The fine details of the rules still falsely label refugees as a threat. For example, the rules block refugees who have provided non-lethal support to the very groups our government backs if that support was not trivial. But why should we punish Syrians for following our lead?

Expand the waiver

There are other categories of refugees who still fall afoul of current law, such as former combatants who never acted against U.S. interests and have laid down their arms, and individuals who provided "insignificant" support for groups that the U.S. has designated as terrorist groups. The administration should consider expanding its waiver to include these groups.

To be sure, while a waiver gives an applicant a chance, it does not give anyone a free ride to refugee status. Case-by-case review is part of granting any waiver.

Individuals must still meet all other eligibility requirements, including passing extensive security and background checks, and must not pose a threat to national security. The goal is to make certain that no dangerous individual — whether from al-Qaeda or any other group in Syria or elsewhere seeking to harm America for any reason — gains U.S. resettlement.

We are not suggesting that the United States admit waves of new refugees. While there are more than 2 million Syrians outside their homeland, the U.S. resettlement program for Syrians is focused only on several thousand of the most vulnerable.

What granting the waiver — and considering its expansion — achieves is the restoration of a measure of justice and common sense to the process while doing no injury to the nation's security needs. By protecting those fleeing terrorists and persecution, it provides a ringing affirmation of our heritage and history as a compassionate, welcoming country.

That is something all Americans should support.

Elliott Abrams, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, was a deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush administration. Eric P. Schwartz, dean of the Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, was assistant secretary of State for population, refugees and migration in the Obama administration. They are members of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom.

To interview a USCIRF Commissioner, please contact USCIRF at [email protected] or 202-786-9812.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 26, 2014 | USCIRF

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) today urged President Obama during his visit to Saudi Arabia later this week to raise religious freedom concerns and call for the release of prisoners of conscience.

“Religious freedom or belief fits squarely within the announced focus of the President’s Saudi visit: regional and security concerns,” said USCIRF chairman Robert P. George.  The Saudi government’s severe restrictions on religious freedom breed religious extremism and insecurity.  Given President Obama’s statement just last month that religious freedom is key to U.S. foreign policy and national security, the Saudi visit gives the President the opportunity to raise this issue with an ally with whom we share many concerns and challenges.  According to the White House, the agenda also will include ways to counter violent extremism, yet Saudi Arabia’s new terrorism law and subsequent royal decrees outlining details of the law appear to stifle all forms of dissent, including criminalizing atheism and any criticism of Islam. 

“Saudi Arabia remains truly unique in the extent to which it restricts the public expression of any religion other than Islam,” said Chairman George.  “Not a single church or other non-Muslim house of worship exists anywhere in the country.  The government elevates its own interpretation of Sunni Islam over all other interpretations.  It has arrested and detained Shi’a Muslim dissidents and continues to imprison individuals for apostasy, blasphemy, and sorcery.”

In May 2012, the Saudi government detained two Saudis, Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi and Saud Falih Awad al-Enezi, allegedly for becoming members of the Ahmadi community in Saudi Arabia.  While they could face the death penalty for apostasy, they remain detained without charge.  Their current whereabouts and status are unknown, and they have had no access to legal counsel.  Raif Badawi, the founder and editor of the Free Saudi Liberals website which encourages religious and political debate, was arrested in June 2012 in Jeddah and charged with apostasy and “insulting Islam” through electronic channels, among other charges.  In January 2013, a Saudi court elected not to pursue the apostasy charge, which carries the death penalty.  In July 2013, Badawi was sentenced by the court to 600 lashes and seven years in prison and his website was shut down. 

“I urge the President to press King Abdullah to release Sultan Hamid Marzooq al-Enezi, Saud Falih Awad al-Enezi, and Raif Badawi,” Chairman George said.  “These prisoners of conscience have done nothing more than exercise their internationally-guaranteed rights of freedom of religion and expression.”

The U.S. has designated Saudi Arabia for 10 years as a “country of particular concern,” or CPC, for systematic, ongoing, and egregious violations of religious freedom under the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act.  Although it has been designated a CPC since 2004, an indefinite waiver on taking any action in consequence of the CPC designation (which is an option under the International Religious Freedom Act) has been in place since 2006.

To interview a USCIRF Commissioner, please contact USCIRF at 202-786-0613 or [email protected].

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

February 14, 2014 | USCIRF

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) today welcomed the recent announcement by the Departments of Homeland Security and State of two new waivers that would help ameliorate some of the unfair effects of overbroad bars on refugees, including those from Syria, fleeing religious or other persecution.

“The terrorism-related provisions are meant to exclude terrorists. That is the right goal and must be pursued unyieldingly. But we must avoid overbroad language that unintentionally and perversely excludes refugees fleeing terrorist groups and authoritarian regimes, which often includes individuals fleeing religious persecution,” said USCIRF Chairman Robert P. George. “It is particularly unfair when overbroad provisions deny individuals refugee status because they aided opposition groups the United States has supported. The waivers help ensure that the United States is meeting its moral, humanitarian, and legal obligations to vulnerable individuals seeking refuge from persecution, while also vigilantly protecting U.S. security,” continued Chairman George.

On February 5, 2014, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department announced two waivers of U.S. immigration law’s terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds. The exemptions, issued pursuant to authority granted by Congress, apply to individuals who provided only “insignificant” or “limited” support to groups that are not on any U.S. government list of designated terrorist groups. According to the announcement, such support includes routine commercial or social transactions, certain humanitarian assistance, or support provided involuntarily under substantial pressure. To be eligible for an exemption, individuals must disclose the support and show that they had neither the intent to support nor knowledge that the support would further terrorist or violent activities.

Being granted a waiver is only one step in a long process. Individuals must meet all other eligibility requirements, including passing extensive security and background checks, and must not pose a threat to the security of the United States.

USCIRF also commends our fellow citizens and the United States government for providing desperately needed humanitarian aid to Syrian refugees, and we welcome the announcement that the United States will resettle 2,000 of the most vulnerable refugees in our country. Given the depth and gravity of the Syrian refugee crisis, however, USCIRF believes we can and should do more. “While third-country resettlement will not be a solution for the vast majority of Syrian refugees, we urge the U.S. government to increase its resettlement commitment. With more than 2 million Syrian refugees – many of them children -- and the number growing fast, this crisis places an entire generation at risk of hunger, disease, illiteracy, trafficking, and indoctrination into extremist ideologies inconsistent with democracy and universal human rights, including religious freedom,” said Chairman George.

To interview a USCIRF Commissioner, please contact USCIRF at 202-786-0613 or [email protected].