The Supreme Court has ruled that VP Dick Cheney does not need to reveal secret energy documents--at least for now, and in all likelihood, not before the election. It sent the case back to the lower court for further review:

The Bush administration won't have to reveal secret details of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force before the election, after the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a lower court should spend more time sorting out the White House's privacy claim.

In a 7-2 decision, justices said the lower court should consider whether a federal open government law could be used to get task force documents. Even if that court rules against the administration, appeals would tie up the case well past November.

by TChris

Some supporters of the Bush administration are hoping that the Federal Elections Commission will overlook Michael Moore's constititutional right to free speech by banning broadcast advertising of his documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11.

In a draft advisory opinion placed on the FEC’s agenda for today’s meeting, the agency’s general counsel states that political documentary filmmakers may not air television or radio ads referring to federal candidates within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election.

The FEC would presumably have no authority over ads for Fahrenheit 9/11 that don't mention Bush, but since the movie is about Bush, Moore would effectively be banned from running ads that tell the public what his movie is about. And Moore isn't the only documentary maker affected by the potential ruling.

The FEC ruling may also affect promotion of a slew of other upcoming political documentaries and films, such as “Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War,” which opens in August, “The Corporation,” about democratic institutions being subsumed by the corporate agenda, or “Silver City,” a recently finished film by John Sayles that criticizes the Bush administration.

The First Amendment prohibits the government from regulating the content of political documentaries. Should the government be entitled to prevent documentary makers from telling potential audiences what to expect from their films?

by TChris

Will Thomas Joe Miller-El make a second trip to the Supreme Court? The justices granted his first certiorari petition and ruled last year that the Fifth Circuit erred by failing to grant him a "certificate of appealability" (a procedural requirement that permits an appeal from the denial of a habeas corpus petition only if a judge believes that "reasonable minds could differ" about the outcome of the case). Justice Kennedy, writing for an 8-1 majority, noted that Miller-El made a strong showing that prosecutors at his trial systematically excluded blacks from his jury, entitling him to pursue that issue on appeal.

Miller-El's case thus returned to the Fifth Circuit, which was unpersuaded that blacks were intentionally excluded from Miller-El's jury despite compelling evidence to the contrary and despite Justice Kennedy's strong suggestion that Miller-El deserved a new trial.

Not only did the Fifth Circuit fail to take Kennedy's hint, it also - and this is far worse, from the standpoint of judicial integrity - entirely ignored his logic. Indeed, its opinion adopts the analysis of the lone Supreme Court dissenter in Miller-El's case, Clarence Thomas.

Edward Lazarus makes a strong argument that Miller-El has earned a second trip to the Supreme Court.

[T]the Fifth Circuit's [decision] will also have the effect, if it is left standing, of nullifying the Supreme Court's central message in its Miller-El decision. And that message urgently needs to be heard: The Court was right to stress that the judiciary at every level should be more vigilant in policing prosecutorial abuse of the peremptory challenge system.

by TChris

Bad laws often seek cover in "feel good" names. So it is with Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2004 (Bill No. HR 4547). Masquerading as a law that champions drug treatment while protecting children, the bill is just another attempt to shift power from judges and the federal sentencing commission to federal prosecutors while implementing even harsher mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes: this time, for the distribution of drugs (including marijuana) to minors.

From an email describing the law:

For example, it would make the sale of any quantity of any controlled substance (including marijuana) by a person older than 21 to a person younger than 18 subject to a 5-year minimum mandatory sentence. The punishment for a second offense of underage marijuana distribution would be mandatory life imprisonment.

It creates new mandatory life sentences without possibility of release for a
variety of drug crimes, including virtually any federal drug conviction
following two prior felony drug convictions (including prior state felonies). It directly repeals most of the few guidelines provisions that the Commission has managed to pass over the last few years ameliorating the severity of federal drug laws for first-time and low-level offenders (including, for those who follow such things, the minor role cap).

This bill is the brainchild of Jim Sensenbrenner, who controls the House Judiciary Committee. Sensenbrenner worked hard for the passage of the Feeney Amendment, and he's likely to do everything he can to jam this one down the throats of Representatives with the expectation that they won't want to seem soft on drugs (or unsympathetic to children) in an election year.

Please tell your Congressman: Just Say No to Mandatory Minimums.

A lot of visitors are coming to TL from this page on Air America Radio which says that we will be on the Majority Report tonight, filling in for Atrios. Actually, we will be on the show July 7, not tonight. But welcome anyway, stick around a while, we hope you find us interesting.

by TChris

In an incident that calls to mind Rodney King, cameras have again captured an instance of Los Angeles police interaction with a crime suspect that appears to be abusive. News footage from a helicopter shows a man driving a car (apparently stolen) to the end of a dead-end street, then running down a path.

After [running] about 30 yards, the man appears to surrender by putting his hands in the air and dropping to the ground. Then as two officers have him on the ground, the third officer arrives and is seen apparently trying to kick the suspect in the head and striking his upper back and neck at least 11 times with a flashlight.

The officers involved were from the Southeast Division of the LAPD.

A juror has been removed from the Scott Peterson trial for discussing media coverage of the trial with his girlfriend. After being dismissed, the juror, an airport screener, said if the vote was today, he would have voted "not guilty" as the prosecution hasn't put on evidence to convince him Peterson killed his wife--only that he lied about some things.

Mark Geragos asked for a mistrial and the request was denied.

In a stunning defeat for the U.S., it has withdrawn its resolution seeking immunity for American peacekeepers from prosecution for war crimes.

Facing strong opposition, the United States announced Wednesday it was dropping a resolution seeking a new exemption for American peacekeepers from international prosecution for war crimes. U.S. deputy ambassador James Cunningham made the announcement after a U.S. compromise that would limit the exemption to one final year failed to get support from key Security Council opponents.

One reason for the rejection:

Several council members refusing the compromise cited the abuse of Iraqi detainees by U.S. soldiers and Secretary-General Kofi Annan's opposition to renewing the exemption for a third year.

President Bush's position:

by TChris

If you're going to be in Manhattan on June 28, you might want to check this out:

Come discuss plans to protest at the Republican National Convention around the issue of the criminal justice system. The Campaign to End the Death Penalty-NYC invites you to an initial discussion and strategy session on these plans: PROTEST THE TEXECUTIONER and the Criminal Injustice System at the Republican National Convention!

by TChris

As TalkLeft has repeatedly argued, prison abuses in Iraq and Guantanamo are merely an extension of the less heralded abuses inflicted on prisoners at home. That point may be starting to sink in, as evidenced by a public forum about the inequities of the criminal justice system held in the Waterloo/Cedar Falls area of Iowa last night.

The evening focused on injustice at home and abroad, and how prison abuse in Iraq and the U.S. are closely related. After the speeches and discussion, attendants marched to the Black Hawk County Courthouse to emphasize their message of peace and justice.

by TChris

Documents released by the Bush administration concerning the interrogation of detainees raise more questions than they answer, says Human Rights Watch.

The released documents stop in April 2003 and do not cover practices at Abu Ghraib and other military prisons in Iraq, Human Rights Watch said. Even so, they show that in December, 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld approved the use of techniques, such as the use of guard dogs to instill fear in detainees, stripping detainees nude, and the use of painful stress positions, that violate the law. Rumsfeld later rescinded his approval of these techniques on Guantanamo detainees, yet they later featured prominently in the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

Human Rights Watch calls for "an independent investigation, not a selective self-investigation." In addition, it wants the administration to release everything, "including the 2003 memoranda from Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the senior U.S. military officer in Iraq authorizing coercive interrogation techniques there," and documents relating to CIA interrogation practices.

The Memphis Police Department has good reason to be down in the dumps....State auditors have found that drugs, guns and money went out the property room door.

More than $2 million worth of cocaine along with 560 pounds of marijuana,
66 guns and a small fortune in cash vanished from the Memphis Police
property and evidence room, a state audit released Tuesday shows.

Federal prosecutors say the loot was carted out the property room's back
door and sold. Numerous city workers and accused drug dealers face federal charges. One Memphis lawyer has been charged with laundering profits through his firm. The comptroller's report found that property room accounting was so sloppythat the stolen amounts could even be higher than auditors suggested.