Judiciary


Secret Trials

What is the justice department hiding? It is inconceivable to me that there is anything that justifies completely hiding a legal proceding from public scrutiny:

Yet this seemingly phantom case does exist – and is now headed to the US Supreme Court in what could produce a significant test of a question as old as the Star Chamber, abolished in 17th-century England: How far should a policy of total secrecy extend into a system of justice?

Dan Gilmour argues:

If the Supreme Court rules, as I suspect it will, that the White House is free to tear up the Bill of Rights under the guise of fighting terrorism (or fighting illegal drugs, the pretext that was used to basically destroy the 4th Amendment under previous administrations), then no one is safe from the predations of a rogue government in the future

Hmmmm, what about a rogue government in the present?
Via Secrecy News.


Ashcroft Tour

Pejman argues that John Conyers’ recent criticism of Ashcroft’s Patriot Act tour is too much:

I understand and respect those who disagree with the USA Patriot Act, but this goes beyond a mere difference of opinion. Conyers is stating that Ashcroft can’t even talk about the measure in speeches across the country. This is just ridiculous, and Conyers’s position is not saved by claiming that Ashcroft is “lobbying.” How can the activity qualify as lobbying when the Patriot Act was passed nearly two years ago?

I do not know if there is legislation that supports Conyers position but if there is I do not like it any more than similar laws (or regulations) that, for example, prohibit recipients of federal funds from providing information on, say condom use, to sexually active clients.
We thrive on a free flow of information and opinions, even information and opinions that we disagree with. Ashcroft should get to talk and he should make a choice to talk to the larger community not just law enforcement folks in closed or semi-closed sessions.
Is Ashcroft lobbying and does Pejman’s argument that the Patriot Act was passed two years ago so it can’t be lobbying hold up? Maybe not. I think that Ashcroft is concerned that congress may move to make changes he does not want. Why else does he, for example, make stops in the home district of the only GOP congressman who voted against it?

U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft is coming to Boise on Monday to talk up the Patriot Act in the home district of the only GOP congressman who spoke against it.
Ashcroft kicked off a monthlong speaking tour of more than a dozen cities this week to deflect growing opposition to parts of the Patriot Act.

Trying to deflect growing opposition may not be lobbying but it does walk just a little bit like it.
The other thing Ashcroft is undoubtably trying to do is build support for the pending Victory Act. Ashcroft is lobbying just as bush is currently on the campaign trail (is his re-election committee paying for this?). They are doing what public officials have done for ever and should continue to do even if we disagree with them: make their cases to the people.


The Iraq Pitch and the Patriot Act

William Rasberry doesn’t want us to be blinded by uraniumgate:

The flap over how the falsehood about uranium purchases from Niger made it into the president’s State of the Union message should not obscure what for me is the most troubling fact: Key members of the Bush administration, convinced in their hearts that America needed to destroy Saddam Hussein, thought it reasonable to exaggerate the threat and deliberately stretch the facts in order to sell the American people on that necessity.

Read his column to see why he thinks this is a pattern of behaviour.
Via Talkleft.


Supreme Candidates and Lists

From the category “If daddy did it then I’m going to fix it now” we have on a current list of possibles for a supreme Court Appointment: Judge Edith Hollan Jones, 54, 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals:

…. President George H.W. Bush went with David Souter when the two were Supreme Court finalists in 1989. Short of a filibuster-proof GOP Senate, Jones would prompt a battle because of opinions freeing Texas schools from affirmative action, criticizing abortion and sex harassment laws, and rejecting a new trial for a death-row inmate whose lawyer slept through much of the trial.

Thanks to Alex at A List a Day who says:

C’mon everyone loves a good list, don’t they? This is the place to find links and commentaries on lists of all sizes and merit.

Via Soundbitten.