In a move that possibly sets the stage for a high profile court challenge, a federal judge ruled against the U.S. government yesterday, ordering that the immigration violation hearings of jailed Ann Arbor Muslim leader Rabih Haddad be opened to the press and public.

U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmunds of the Eastern District of Michigan not only ruled that Haddad's case be open to the press and public, but also that all cases classified by the Justice Department's chief immigration judge as "special interest" must be open. The "special interest" determination is made by the office of Chief Immigration Judge Michael Creppy, and is made when the Justice Department feels an open hearing could jeopardize national security in post-Sept. 11 investigation cases.

The government is seeking Haddad's deportation for overstaying a six-month tourist visa which the Lebanese native was granted in 1998. Haddad is also a co-founder of the Global Relief Foundation, a charity whose assets were seized by the government for allegedly funneling money to terrorist organizations. The GRF's offices in Illinois were raided on Dec. 14 of last year, the same day Haddad was detained.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the Ann Arbor News, The Detroit News, the Metro Times and U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Detroit) sued the government - specifically Attorney General John Ashcroft, Creppy and Detroit-based U.S. Immigration Judge Elizabeth Hacker - claiming Haddad's closed removal proceedings violate the constitution.

The case is a classic example of the conflict between national security and the need to have transparent justice, said Richard Rossman, a former U.S. attorney and head of the Justice Department's Criminal Division.

"There are obviously some situations that require the utmost secrecy and confidentiality but they have to be very rare and only in special circumstances," he said.

The ruling "is not surprising because open trials are the bedrock of American democracy," said Jim Secreto, chair of the University's ACLU chapter. "It's the only way we can ensure our government is free, open and responsive to our citizens."

"It shows what we contended all along, that the government abused its power, that it was denying Mr. Haddad his due process rights and secrecy is not warranted in a judicial setting," said Haddad friend Nazih Hassan, president of the Muslim Community Association of Ann Arbor.

Justice Department spokesman Charles Miller would not say whether the government will appeal the decision.

"At this stage we're reviewing the judge's decision and we will make a determination in the near future as to what our next step will be," he said.

Secreto, however, predicted an appeal.

"It doesn't look good when a federal judge tells the government it has not been following the Constitution," he said.

In ordering the hearings open, Edmunds said, "Neither the Creppy directive nor elsewhere does the Government prohibit detainees in special interest cases from revealing that information to the press and public."

The Justice Department had also questioned the district court's jurisdiction in hearing the case. Under its interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act, appeals of immigration procedures - which are handled in administrative immigration courts of the Justice Department -can only be heard in the U.S. Court of Appeals and only after a removal has been ordered. Haddad's case is still pending. Edmunds rejected those claims.

"The plain language of the statute ... clearly indicates that is limited to actions challenging 'an order of removal'" she wrote.

Hacker, the local federal immigration judge, had denied Haddad's bail and said instructions to close that hearing and subsequent hearings came from the chief immigration judge.