From Kyle O'Dowd, Legislative Director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers:

The Amber Alert Bill, with its provisions restricting downward departures in sentencing passed the House and the Senate today. The House vote was 400-yea, 25-nay, 2-present, 8-not voting. You can see how individual House members voted here. For more information on the sentencing aspects of the bill, go here. The Senate vote was 98-0. Senators Kennedy, Leahy and Durbin all sharply criticized the last-minute add-on in floor speeches -- but, in the end, not a single Senator was willing to vote against the Child Abduction Prevention Act.

Here are some of the better comments we've found.

Virginia Democrat Bobby Scott, a leading critic of the bill, said it is "loaded down with an array of crime sound bite provisions that make the AMBER Alert an afterthought." He said "egregious" criminal justice provisions might be good politics but it was bad policy and bad law.

Chief Justice William Rehnquist weighed in by letter:

Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota quoted a letter Thursday from Supreme Court chief Justice William Rehnquist saying that sentencing language could do "serious harm."

Perhaps the best statement came from Congressman and former prosecutor Bill Delahunt (D-MA), which Kyle O'Dowd forwarded to us. If you have a few moments, we encourage you to read it--we've reprinted it below:

U.S. Rep. Sam Farr is introducing a bill Thursday to legalize medical need as a valid defense in federal prosecutions.

The bill's co-sponsors are two congressmen rarely found on the same side of an issue -- Massachusetts liberal Democrat Barney Frank and Huntington Beach conservative Republican Dana Rohrabacher.

The bill by Farr, a Carmel Democrat, applies only to federal trials in states that have passed laws allowing the distribution and use of marijuana, under a doctor's prescription, for medical use.

Frank also is backing a similar bill that would simply allow state law to trump federal law.

There will be a press conference on the Hill tomorrow. We welcome these Congressmens' efforts to fight Ashcroft and his blind, cruel and inhumane crusade to keep terminally ill and other medically suffering patients from obtaining relief for their chronic pain.

Update: We just received this note of caution about the bill from Keith Stroup, Executive Director of NORML:

Librarians are making noise over the Patriot Act :

Every public computer inside this city's library has a new warning taped to its screen. Beware, the message says, anything you read is now subject to secret scrutiny by federal agents.

"We felt strongly that this had to be done," said librarian Linda Wilson. "The government has never had this kind of power before. It feels like Big Brother."

Across the country, in a movement that belies their staid image, librarians are rising up in anger and rallying against a law the Justice Department calls one of its most important new tools to help catch terrorists before they strike.

....Earlier this year, the American Library Association, which has 64,000 members, formally denounced the Patriot Act provision and passed a resolution urging Congress to repeal it. Since then, about two dozen state library groups -- from California to Georgia -- have taken the same stand. And that is only the beginning of the backlash.

Some libraries are taking more drastic action, like destroying records of what their visitors read--and their sign-up logs for computer time.

"This law is dangerous," said Emily Sheketoff, executive director of the ALA's Washington office. "I read murder mysteries -- does that make me a murderer? I read spy stories -- does that mean I'm a spy? There's no clear link between a person's intellectual pursuits and their actions."

We just gained a whole lot of new respect for librarians. Let's hope all businesses catch on and take similar action. This law applies to all business records--from Barnes and Noble to Laptop Lanes and everything in between.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, a moderate conservative, on Wednesday criticized our nation's harsh criminal sentences and said two million people in jail is too many.

He criticized the proliferation of "mandatory minimum" sentences, which can mean long prison terms for relatively minor or nonviolent crimes. "In many cases, our sentences are too long," Kennedy said. Justice Clarence Thomas nodded in apparent agreement. He made his comments after the two justices had asked the House Appropriations Committee for $73.4 million for salaries, upkeep and other court expenses for the 12 months that begin in October.

But Kennedy and Thomas last month both voted to uphold three-strikes laws. And Congress Thursday is poised to pass the Amber Alert bill, that now contains provisions which will drastically reduce judicial discretion in sentencing and in particular, in downward departures, which will result in the imposition of many more mandatory minimum sentences. Someone ought to stop this runaway train.

Yesterday, Tuesday, April 8, 2003, a Senate and House Conference Committee, without a hearing, public notice or a debate in Congress, attached the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act (formerly known as the RAVE Act) to the Amber Alert Bill (a child abduction bill). As Drug Policy Alliance comments, "This is “backdoor” policy-making at its worst and in no way upholds the democratic principles rooted in our legislative process." Take action in three easy steps here.

Congress will also vote on the Hatch-Sensenbrenner amendment to the Feeney Amendment to the Amber Alert Child Protection bill. This bill puts in effect puts sentencings in the hands of prosecutors while tying the hands of federal judges. Go here to act now.

Rep. Feeney is feeling proud of himself. The welcome page of his Web site includes a recent Washington Post editorial, with the following prefatory remarks:

"On April 4, 2003 the soft on crime editorial board of the Washington Post commented on Congressman Tom Feeney's Amendment to the Child Abduction Prevention Act. The amendment that was overwhelmingly passed by the House of Representatives, by a vote of 357 to 58, on March 27th was also opposed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Criminal Defense Lawyers."

For those who are interested, on his Web site, , Rep. Tom Feeney offers C-SPAN coverage of his March 27 introduction of the "Feeney Amendment." (under recent floor speeches section) (requires Real Player). Thanks to Peter Parker of Boston, MA and Todd Bussert of CT for flagging this.

It's not law yet. The full house and senate have to vote on it. For what can still be done to oppose it, see the NACDL webpage on the bill.

Atrios has the update on Bush judicial nominee Priscilla Owen and it's good news. He also has some bad news about a new right-wing nominee.

We received an email earlier that there will be a Senate hearing this afternoon on nominee Jeffrey Sutton, who is strongly opposed for his positions on the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Reuters reports major news in the case of "dirty bomb" suspect Jose Padilla, detained more than a year without charges :

A federal appeals court will be asked to determine if President Bush can declare a U.S. citizen captured in this country an enemy combatant and jail him until the conflict with the al Qaeda network ends. U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey, who is presiding over a case involving "dirty bomb" suspect Jose Padilla, decided on Wednesday to send the matter to the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals to speed resolution of the litigation.

We're not shocked by Hatch's new attempt to repeal the sunset provisions of the Patriot Act, we expected as much from him, but it's still wrong. As Eric Muller at IsThatLegal points out:

The whole point of a sunset provision is to create a deadline by which Congress can assess how well the provision is working before renewing it or making it permanent. The Act has only been in effect for 18 months at this point -- 18 months, I might add, in which the Administration's general stance about its enforcement efforts has been rather secretive. How could anyone actually think that a year and a half under this Administration is long enough to make a judgment about the advisability of permanent and significant changes to the powers of law enforcement?

The ACLU has just fired off this letter to Sen. Durbin. More from the ACLU on this here. [link via Paper Chase]

A California Appellate Court has ruled that possession of marijuana paraphernalia is not illegal under state law. Text of the ruling, In re Johnnie O., may be found here.

The ruling does not pertain to sales, Also, possession of paraphernalia for the ingestion of synthetic THC is technically illegal under the state law. [via email from NORML]

This just in from Kyle O'Dowd, Legislative Director for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers on the Hatch-Sensenbrenner Amendment on sentencing rushed through the House-Senate Conference on the Amber Alert Bill yesterday. Please note the differences between the versions.

At 1:34 this morning, Sen Hatch's staff circulated a new version of the bill.  The overnight changes improve the proposal but it remains highly objectionable. Here is a revised version of yesterday's list based on a preliminary analysis of the new text:

Update: This gives us a sickening feeling. American military uniforms were found at an Iraqi prison, but no sign of our POWS.

There are still seven American POW's missing in Iraq. CNN just reported that the U.S. does not know their fate or whereabouts.

If you have access to a television, the live street scenes are a chance for a first-hand look at the Iraqi celebration in Baghdad. CNN is reporting the rest of the country is quiet.

Wolf Blitzer got hacked for a few seconds. He asked a question of someone of a different location and an unknown, young male voice speaking in a journalistic tone came on and said the Iraqi Minister is being replaced by Howard Stern. Wolf recovered quickly and went to someone else.

We wonder where Saddam will turn up. Ideas?