THE FBI ARRIVED at his door carrying pistols and a terse message: Juro, the owner of a small sweater factory and dry goods store in one of Seattle's ethnic neighborhoods, was under arrest. As his bewildered wife and children watched, the agents took Juro away without saying why, where he would be taken, or for how long. He spent the next year being held as an enemy alien in a federal prison nearly 1,000 miles away and died only three years later, never again seeing his home in Seattle.Every year, members of the Japanese-American community pause on February 19 to reflect on the injustices of 1942.Juro was a Japanese-American - and my great-grandfather. In early 1942, after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the FBI arrested many men like him: people whose sole crime was their leadership or prominence within the Japanese-American community. In the eyes of FBI agents searching for traitors, their foreign faces and foreign names made their guilt a presumption and their innocence unprovable....
Though few spoke out against it at the time, the wartime internment of Japanese-Americans is now widely recognized as one of America's grossest violations of civil liberties, forcing an entire race to labor under a collective presumption of guilt."
This February, we do so in an environment that increasingly mirrors that of 1942: when the courts are too timid to challenge the wisdom of military decision making and when free-floating anxiety combines with racial suspicions to embolden those who would conduct witch hunts of the foreign-born and trample over the rights of the accused.... This month, as we remember how America's leaders violated the rights of those of Japanese ancestry, we should recall that the public's failure to dissent - their willingness to turn away in the face of injustice - is what allowed that wrong to be perpetrated. Today, America has a chance to avoid making a similar mistake. This time, let's stand up and stop it from happening again.
A hearing will be held Thursday at 10:00 a.m. in federal court in Boston on the lawsuit filed last week by U.S. soldiers, parents of U.S. soldiers, and Members of Congress, challenging President Bush¹s authority to wage war against Iraq.
The lawsuit seeks to prevent the President from launching a military
invasion of Iraq, absent a congressional declaration of war. U.S.
Representatives John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich are leading the Members of
Congress who are serving as plaintiffs.
The Traprock Peace Center has agreed to publicize all details and events in the case. All case news, and copies of all of the Plaintiff's legal pleadings are available here.
[source: Press release received via email]
The Washington Post gets it right today in its editorial Prison Blues : the problem with bad law in seemingly inconsequential cases is that it becomes precedent and subsequently adversely impacts other cases in which a more significant right is at stake.
The influential D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that prisoners do not have a consitutional right to have electric guitars in prison. (As an aside, Brett C. Kimberlin, the prisoner who sued is the one who accused Dan Quayle of buying pot from him). Represented by the ACLU, Kimberlin contested the consitutionality of a 1996 law forbidding federal money to be spent on "the use or possession of any electric or electronic musical instrument" in prisons. It seems the government construes this law as a flat ban on inmates owning musical instruments, even if they purchased the instruments themselves. Kimberlin argued the ban violates his First Amendment right to free musical expression.
In response, the Bureau of Prisons did not argue that the ban was necessary to control noise or keep order in the prison. Instead, "they asked the court to uphold the rule on the grounds that it made prison life more miserable and therefore advanced the cause of punishment. "
But as the Post correctly points out, "That, of course, is true of any restriction on constitutional rights and would presumably justify banning pens, paper and reading material as well as guitars."
The Court, in ruling against Kimberlin and another inmate, adopted a different but equally disturbing rationale: It upheld the ban on the ground that "the First Amendment is not an entitlement program."But as Judge Tatel argued [in dissent], almost any activity in a prison "requires electricity, guard supervision, or other prison resources," because the entire environment is created and maintained by the government. If Congress can forbid incidental infrastructure expenditures on electric guitars without implicating First Amendment concerns, there is nothing it cannot ban."The Post says, "The law in this circuit now implies that prisoners have no right to read if doing so costs pennies Congress wishes not to spend. The full court, or the Supreme Court, should make sure that this does not remain law."
We can't help but wonder which way Mr. Miguel Estrada would have voted had he been sitting on the Court. There's little way to know for sure since he refuses to release any information about his true position on issues, but we strongly suspect he would have sided with the majority. Just one more reason in our opinion to keep that filibuster going--the devils we know are bad enough, we don't need one we don't know. And if he's not a devil, he should come out and say so.
Update: The D.C. Circuit opinion discussed in the editorial below can be found here.
Say hello to a new law blog (blawg), SOHO. It's for lawyers working out of small offices or home offices.
It will be a resource for students coming out of law school who wonder if there's an alternative to big firm practice as well as for "the new opportunities available to attorneys who have practiced in larger, more conventional firms, and have grown dissatisfied. Not that long ago, many such folks would have to choose between changing practice areas to move to a SOHO practice, and staying unhappily at a big firm. Now they can come over to the light side without the Hobson's choice."
The case offers the first opportunity for the Justices to consider government actions in the wake of September 11 that severely restrict civil liberties in the name of national security.[link via How Appealing]"On behalf of all Americans, we are urging the Supreme Court to reject the extreme notion that Attorney General Ashcroft can suspend the ordinary requirements of the Fourth Amendment to listen in on phone calls, read e-mails, and conduct secret searches of Americans%u2019 homes and offices," said Ann Beeson, Associate Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
The ACLU filed the appeal together with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) and the Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services (ACCESS), a Michigan-based organization.
Attorneys in the case are Beeson, Jameel Jaffer and Steven Shapiro of the ACLU and Joshua L. Dratel, John D. Cline and Tom Goldstein of NACDL, acting on behalf of their organizations and as counsel to ADC and ACCESS.
The case is In Re: Sealed Case Of The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Of Review No. 02-001.
The Motion to Intervene is online here.. The Petition of Certiorari is online here .
Here is the transcript of the Fisa Review court oral argument.
Our multiple prior criticisms of the ruling and the secret FISA review court are here.
In an editorial today, the Austin Statesman calls for the elimination of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. This is the court of last resort in Texas in criminal cases, including death penalty appeals.
The link to the editorial is good today only, so read it now while you still can.
Louis Jones Jr. is scheduled to die by lethal injection March 18 at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Ind. He has exhausted his appeals....After the trial, a Dallas researcher who has studied veterans of the 1991 war against Iraq concluded that Jones suffered from a severe form of Gulf War Syndrome from exposure to sarin nerve gas and other toxins....
Jones' attorney filed a clemency request with Bush in December, seeking a life sentence without. Jones has also written personally to the president, admitting his crime and expressing remorse....
Jones grew up in Chicago and spent 22 years in the military before retiring in 1993 as a master sergeant in the Airborne Rangers. His honors included a meritorious service medal, a Southwest Asia service medal with three bronze service stars, a Kuwait liberation medal, badges for marksmanship and parachuting, and a good-conduct medal, according to his plea for clemency.
But, the petition says, Jones was a changed man after returning from the Gulf in May 1991. "It solves the mystery that was at the heart of the trial: how and why someone with the background and character of Louis Jones could have committed such a horrible crime," the petition says....
A recent study of Gulf War Syndrome indicates that some people's genetic makeup leaves them more vulnerable to even low levels of nerve gas, according to the clemency petition. The research was done by Dr. Rogene Henderson at the University of New Mexico, on a grant from the Pentagon. A blood test done on Jones in January shows he lacks a common enzyme that would have helped his body metabolize nerve gas, said Jones' lawyer, Timothy W. Floyd.
David Neiwert explains why Rep. Howard Coble's remarks attempting to justify Japanese-American internment camps during WWII haven't met with the same outrage as Trent Lott's comments on 1940's racism. The answer: Bigtry against Asians.
Atrios shares David's view, and asks, "Does wartime justify the suspension of the basic American right to a presumption of innocence?" His answer, like our's, is a resounding "no."
Eric Muller at Is That Legal, points out that tomorrow is the anniversay of the FDR Order that authorized the detention camps. Take a minute to read Executive Order 9066 here. Pictures of the detainees and camps are here.
Colorado had an internment camp, and Prof. Mueller links to this excellent article about it. You can listen to audio clips of those with personal memories of the camp by scrolling down the article.
Congressman Mark Honda is trying to get Congress to do something about Coble. We all should join in his effort. Join us in writing your congresspersons and asking them to hold Coble accountable for his remarks and remove him from his leadership position on the House Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security.
Do you have concerns about Ashcroft? You're not alone. Check out Ashcroft's Political Agenda by Michael Hill in the Baltimore Sun, in which critics of the attorney general wonder if his taking away of civil liberties goes beyond countering terrorism.
The major media will talk about holes in the Administration case on Iraq, weaknesses in the accusations about Halabja, and even occasionally an article about sufferings of Iraqi civilians. What they won't talk about is the huge number of U.S. casualties from our first Gulf War. In two articles in the Washington Post in mid-January David Brown said that 1600,000 Gulf War veterans may be in "less than optimal health since the war". He talked about "muscle aches" and "stress". He could not bring himself to mention the "D" word, as in "Disabled". The VA officially reports that 159,238 soldiers who were in the Gulf in 90'-91' are disabled. Of that number over 111,000 are 10% or more disabled. According to the report 8,000 Gulf War vets have died. The report that mentions all this came out in September, but I don't know of one U.S. newspaper that has mentioned it.The scary thing is no one is talking about the contamination still present in the region, and more troops are being dispatched there as we write.
We’re led to believe that Gulf War casualties were minimal. At the close of the fighting in 1991 less than 800 were killed and wounded. But first a trickle and then a river of American soldiers have gotten sick. The enormous numbers of casualties is not confined to soldiers who fought in the Gulf War. The V.A. has awarded disability to another 60,000 soldiers who went into the Gulf countries after the war was over. These are considered "theater" veterans. 2,000 of Gulf War "theater" veterans have died. This is very alarming. It means that the Gulf area (Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia) is still highly contaminated. The chief suspect is DU, "depleted uranium".After describing "depleted uranium," Mr. Heller closes with this:
DU isn't the only culprit suspected in Gulf War illnesses. There's also the PB pills that were supposed to ward off some effects of sarin gas. There's the anti-anthrax shots that soldiers were forced to take. These "medicines" that got many GI's sick immediately and are thought to be part of the toxic mix that disabled so many soldiers. Obsessed with a quick triumph and low body counts the U.S. military fought the Gulf War without calculating the long term effects on its soldiers of its hi-tech weapons and "miracle" pharmaceuticals. Now the politicians are again sending the troops in harms way. U.S. parents will be gambling that the military brass that failed so wretchedly in Desert Storm will this time protect the health of their sons and daughters. The odds are poor. If the war starts Iraqi soldiers and civilians will be the main casualties, but U.S. soldiers will likely also pay a steep price for "victory".This whole article leaves us pretty speechless. Suffice it to say, we are one parent who's not about to take the gamble.
Via Hamster, we find this commentary on Patriot Act II by Anita Ramasastry. She says the sequel is even scarier than the original.
Patriot II, as drafted by the Attorney General and his staff, would begin to make TIA [the Total Information Awareness Project] the law.
For instance, under Patriot II, federal agents would not need a subpoena or obtain a court order to access our consumer credit reports. This provision would open the wedge for TIA to be implemented through a huge database. Our credit reports are repositories of a great deal of sensitive information - from our employment history to where we shop, borrow and transact.
To see the information, the feds would only have to certify that they will use the information "in connection with their duties to enforce federal law." Note that they would not have to certify that the person whose information was accessed was suspected of terrorism, or indeed, any other crime. And no one would be notified that their records had been accessed. When a commercial entity requests a consumer's credit report, a note is made in the consumer's file alerting him to this fact.
Patriot Act I was passed in haste, without adequate opportunity for review by Congress. It seems Ashcroft now is trying to pull the wool over Congress' eyes the same way--he sent a copy of his draft legislaiton to Speaker Hastert, but not to the members of Congress. Listen to Ms. Ramasastry when she says:
If the introduction of Patriot II in Congress coincides with the Iraq war, it may well be because the Administration has planned it that way, to take advantage of circumstances to ram the bill through both Houses quickly.
Even if Patriot II does end up being introduced in wartime, citizens and their representatives should fight this legislation tooth and nail, for it threatens to take even more of our liberties away. It is a wholesale assault on privacy, free speech, and freedom of information.
We've added a newsection to our blogroll called "Government Watchers"--click on Patriot Watch often-- he promises to stay on top of this new legislation. We'll do our best as well. You can find our Patriot Act critiques here.
They cover the appointment and performance of lawyers. Defendants in capital cases should be represented by two or more qualified lawyers, augmented by an investigator, a mitigation specialist and, in some instances, an expert to help with jury selection, the guidelines state. At least one member of the team should be qualified to screen defendants for mental or psychological disorders or impairments.The Guidelines also call for adequate pay for lawyers defending capital cases. The federal system pays $125.00 per hour in death cases, but most states lag woefully behind that amount.Further, an ABA report issued along with the guidelines recommended that an independent agency -- not courts or elected officials -- appoint counsel in capital cases to ensure the integrity of the process. In the past, critics say, judges have appointed lawyers whose primary skill seemed to be processing cases rapidly rather than providing vigorous representation....
"Under these guidelines, a court would not be involved in selecting counsel for any phase of the proceedings. Moreover, courts -- when seeing inadequate performance -- are urged by the guidelines to take remedial action rather than sitting and defaulting the ignorant defendant's claims" because an inept lawyer has not raised issues in a timely fashion, he added.
The report accompanying the guidelines places emphasis on the importance of a mitigation specialist, who researches the client's background so the defense team is prepared to effectively argue for a life sentence in the event of conviction. Too often, defense lawyers "think they'll win and don't prepare mitigation testimony," said Eric M. Freedman, a Hofstra University law professor who edited the final draft of the guidelines.
The report notes that "mitigation specialists possess clinical and information-gathering skills that most lawyers simply do not have." Consequently, they can recognize how mental or neurological problems may have affected the defendant's actions.
| << Previous 12 | Next 12 >> |
