The International Court of Justice in the Hague is the U.N.'s highest court, often referred to as the World Court. It issued a historic decision today in the case of 52 Mexican nationals on death row in the U.S. who alleged they hadn't been provided with their right to consular assistance pursuant to the Vienna Convention. The Court ruled that the United States violated the rights of 51 of the prisoners and ordered their cases be reviewed.

The text of the judgment is here (pdf.).

Major Kudos to Sandra Babcock, who did amazing work to get the Mexican government to file the case --after which she prepared it, argued it and won it!

[comments now closed]

by TChris

A new survey by the Council on Excellence in Government points to the difficulty that Americans have reconciling their concerns about terrorism with their concerns about privacy.

• "nearly 60 percent of adults in the survey said government should have access to personal information that companies collect about consumers if there is any chance it will help prevent terrorism," but ...

• "72 percent of adults have only some or very little trust in government to use personal information properly," while ...

• only 16 percent "endorsed creation of a national identification card."

The survey also shows that Americans have become less worried about terrorist attacks (at least in their own neighborhoods) after 9/11, but most believe that the United States will be targeted in another major attack, at home or abroad, in the next few months. However, "84 percent of Americans don't change their daily routine when the nation's color-coded threat level rises."

by TChris

As jury deliberations in the Tyco trial enter their tenth day (previously discussed here), the public's focus has been less on the outcome than on the conduct of juror number four. Juror four appears to be holding out for a particular verdict, although one note that the jury gave to the judge suggests that the other jurors "do not all have the same views of guilt or innocence." Some courtroom observers believe that juror four flashed an "OK" sign at the defense a few days ago, while others didn't see it. Now the juror can't brush her hair without someone interpreting her curled fingers as another "OK."

The defense continues to move for a mistrial on the theory that the jury has hung. On Tuesday, the defense added that juror four has been subjected to "venomous and just outrageous statements" in online chat rooms. If juror four knew about the online comments, she might feel coerced to change her vote, but there is no indication that she knows her failure to join with the majority has provoked such animosity, so the judge is still waiting to see whether a verdict will be rendered.

The animosity is misplaced. No matter how overwhelming the evidence may appear, it is up to each individual juror to decide whether the prosecution proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jurors should listen to each other respectfully and should consider the views of other jurors, but the parties are entitled to the best individual judgment that each juror can provide. If juror four hasn't been persuaded to change her vote after listening to the other jurors, she should apply the law to the facts as she sees them. That's what her oath as a juror requires her to do.

Being a juror isn't easy, and no juror deserves to be attacked simply because members of the public disagree with her view of the evidence. If the jury hangs and another six month trial ensues, that's the way the system works. Attacking a juror for doing what she thinks is right can only discourage other members of the community from serving on juries in the future -- or from bringing their independent judgment to the juries upon which they serve.

by TChris

All it takes is an election year to persuade John Ashcroft's Justice Department to support the Constitution. The Justice Department is siding with sixth grade student Nashala Hearn, who has twice been suspended by the Muskogee, Oklahoma School District for wearing a hijab -- a scarf that covers the head -- to school, in violation of a dress code that prohibits head coverings.

The district says it is merely enforcing its dress code equally. The Justice Department agrees with Hearn that the right to practice a religion without governmental interference trumps the district's dress code. Hearn justly complains that Christian students are allowed to wear crosses while Muslim students aren't allowed to wear the hijab.

The district created the dress code to control "gang" behavior. Nobody argues that Hearn belongs to a gang. The policy isn't narrowly tailored to address the perceived harm, and its application to Hearn plainly violates her right to religious expression. The Justice Department got this one right.

Bump and update: We posted this a day early. Via Skippy, we learn that Julia of Sisyphus Shrugged has posted the full schedule and station details for Air America. The New York Times reports on today's launch here. The fun starts at noon, ET.
*************
original post 3/30 12:06 am

Liberal talk radio station Air America hits the airwaves Wednesday. If you aren't in one of their starting cities, you can tune in on the internet here. The cities are: New York (WLIB 1190), Chicago (WNTD 950), Los Angeles (KBLA 1580) and San Francisco (to be announced).

Janeane Garofalo will be on for 3 hours every weeknight. Other prime talkjocks include Al Franken (whose show will be called "The O'Franken Factor") and Lizz Winstead (The Daily Show) and rapper Chuck D, who will have a weekend morning show. Bobby Kennedy will have also have a weekend show.

Update: Atrios will be making an appearance on Wednesday's opener.

[Edited to correct date to Wednesday.]

The Department of Homeland Security is expanding a controversial new policy that began in Hartford, CT to Denver and Atlanta: Those ordered deported will be jailed immediately and no longer allowed time to put their affairs in order:

Immigration-law experts said the program violates constitutional rights and called for less costly alternatives. "Jailing and the restraint of physical movement is the greatest power that government can wield over the individual in our society. Unfortunately, with this policy, the Department of Homeland Security has eschewed case-by-case consideration in favor of a blanket detention policy that violates basic due-process principles," said Marshall Fitz, associate director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, an advocacy group.

Where are we going to put them?

It will add hundreds of new immigrants to a rapidly growing noncitizen prison population. The number of detained immigrants has increased from a daily average of 7,444 in 1994 to 21,500 last year, according to federal statistics....Federal immigration officials have been lobbying to expand the prison system that holds them.

There are better alternatives:

Immigrant-rights advocates say there are cheaper alternatives that respect civil liberties. Many call for releasing and monitoring deportable immigrants using ankle bracelets, which can cost as little as $4 a day compared with $85 per day in immigration detention centers. Immigration officials say they are trying such measures in a handful of cities but cited no specifics.

From the AP:

In one of the bloodiest days in weeks for the U.S. military, five troops died when a bomb exploded under their military vehicle west of Baghdad on Wednesday. At least four foreign nationals, including one American, were killed in a separate attack and some of the bodies were burned, beaten and hanged from a bridge. The explosive device that killed the American troops blew up when their vehicle ran over it, U.S. Army Col. Jill Morgenthaler said in Baghdad. The attack happened in Anbar province, which encompasses Fallujah, Ramadi and other towns where anti-U.S. insurgents are active.

In the second incident, the Iraqis dragged the bloody bodies through the streets:

It was reminiscent of the 1993 scene in Somalia, when a mob dragged the corpse of a U.S. soldier through the streets of Mogadishu, eventually leading to the American withdrawal from the African nation.

The European Court on Human Rights has overturned a ban on prisoner voting that dates back to 1870. The case was brought by a prisoner serving a life sentence. As a result of the ruling, 70,000 British prisoners will have their voting rights restored:

The law, brought in not long after transportation to the colonies was abolished and later enshrined in the Representation of the People Act of 1983, denies 70,000 sentenced prisoners the right to vote in parliamentary and local elections. Seven judges at the Strasbourg court ruled the ban breached article three of protocol one to the European convention on human rights, which guarantees "free elections ... under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature".

Eighteen of the countries which have ratified the European convention give prisoners full voting rights, while 13 ban all prisoners from voting. The rest, including Britain, allow some categories to vote. In Britain those remanded in custody who have not yet been sentenced and those imprisoned for contempt of court or failure to pay fines can take part in elections.

This is every lawyer's nightmare in a high profile case.

Scott Peterson's lawyers received a call from an unidentified tipster who reported that s/he had been on a bus trip with a potential juror who had made it past the first few rounds of questioning in the case, and that the juror had bragged about getting on the jury, and said that Scott Peterson was "guilty as hell" and that he would "get what's due him."

During questioning by the Judge today, the juror admitted taking the bus trip but denied making the comments. The Judge ordered the unidentified tipster to come to court on May 10 and testify. We're a little curious as to how the Court can enforce the order if no one knows the name of the tipster. On May 11, the juror will report back to court and learn if she is still on the jury.

Outside court, Geragos praised the tipster and said the alleged stealth juror "wasn't the first and won't be the last." "It's extremely distressing to anyone connected to the criminal justice system to think that anyone would lie their way onto a jury in order to execute someone," Geragos said.

The San Francisco Chronicle has more:

People with ulterior motives are called stealth jurors, and their tactics to get onto panels are becoming more pervasive in high-profile cases, according to legal consultants. "We are seeing it more and more," said Rich Matthews of Decision Analysis, a consulting firm in San Francisco. "People have hidden agendas - some moral, others for financial reasons."

Often jurors are offered book and movie deals while serving on big cases. Others are so consumed with meting out their version of justice that they forget to keep an open mind. He said it was rare for a whistle-blower from outside the jury to come forward as the tipster did in this case. The worst part, according to Matthews, is there are no absolute telltale signs to ferreting out these stealth jurors, just vague clues.

Ralph Nader is now giving campaign advice. Today, he advised John Kerry to loosen up:

John Kerry has got to get loose,'' Nader said. "He cannot allow political consultants to put handcuffs on his mind and his imagination. He's got to stop talking Senate-ese and be the old John Kerry I knew 23 years ago.''

Appearing on Crossfire, he denied that his candidacy will take votes from Kerry:

"The Democrats should just stop whining and go to work,'' Nader said. "They should be landsliding Bush.'' .... As for liberals who call him vindictive or egomaniacal, Nader said, "That means they're out of arguments.''

Nader plans to meet and discuss strategy for booting Bush with Kerry and Howard Dean in the next month. The strategy we'd like to see from Nader is one where he drops out of the race and endorses and campaigns for Kerry.

In a strange twist of the child porn laws, a teen in Pittsburgh is charged with child pornography for taking pictures of herself and posting them on the internet. Law Prof Michael Froomkin says:

To me this seems a real case of arresting a victim, the person the rule is designed to protect, and a fairly poor use of prosecutorial discretion. I could vaguely understand it if it were a profit-making business, but this sounds from the admittedly sketchy news report as if it’s more a case of a confused, probably lonely, child who needs counseling (and friends), not a trial and a police record.

It’s true that child porn is an unusually strict liability crime, in which possession alone, without intent or even knowledge, constitutes the offense. It’s also true that police and prosecutors are not always reasonable about some kinds of offenses. Still, this prosecution simply cannot be what the drafters of this statute had in mind.

Common Dreams has the text of the Floor Statement of Sen. Daschle on the Abuse of Government Power. Here's a portion:

There are some things that simply ought not be done – even in politics. Too many people around the President seem not to understand that, and that line has been crossed. When Ambassador Joe Wilson told the truth about the Administration's misleading claims about Iraq, Niger, and uranium, the people around the President didn't respond with facts. Instead, they publicly disclosed that Ambassador Wilson's wife was a deep-cover CIA agent. In doing so, they undermined America's national security and put politics first. They also may well have put the lives of Ambassador Wilson's wife, and her sources, in danger.

When former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill revealed that the White House was thinking about an Iraq War in its first weeks in office, his former colleagues in the Bush Administration ridiculed him from morning to night, and even subjected him to a fruitless federal investigation. When Larry Lindsay, one of President Bush's former top economic advisors, and General Eric Shinseki, the former Army Chief of Staff, spoke honestly about the amount of money and the number of troops the war would demand, they learned the hard way that the White House doesn't tolerate candor.

....Senator McCain, Senator Cleland, Secretary O'Neill, Ambassador Wilson, General Shinseki, Richard Foster, Richard Clarke, Larry Lindsay ... when will the character assassination, retribution, and intimidation end? When will we say enough is enough?

How about now?