President Bush has nominated Edward C. Prado, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Western District of Texas, for a seat on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

We are pleased. Judge Prado opposes mandatory minimum sentences. In 1996, on behalf of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), I invited Judge Prado to Washington, DC, to serve on a panel of experts opposing mandatory minimum sentences, as part of our then-annual Legislative Fly-in. The panel was entitled, Sentencing: The Miscarriage of Mandatory Minimums. Other members of the panel included U.S. District Court Judge Terry Hatter (C.D.C.A.) and Julie Stewart of Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM).

Judge Prado was appointed to the federal bench by President Reagan in 1984. Prior to that he had been both a prosecutor and a public defender and a state court judge.

Here are Judge Prado's remarks:

Kevin Drum, also known as CalPundit has a new photograph of himself up on his weblog. This one is the best yet. His eyes are open and he's smiling. Wearing jeans with a button down collared t-shirt. no socks (we hope) and mocassins. Direct look in his eye. Ready for fun or adventure, take your pick. The young, preppy law-school look is gone. If we had to guess his occupation, we'd say....private investigator, former cop. Decent guy who can deal with the low-down without sinking into it himself. He sure is tall though, we'd guess 6/4. The kind of guy you'd want around if you were walking around too late at night and were about to get mugged and needed a savior. Kevin, I think this photo is a keeper. You even look smart.

The New York Times sharply rebukes John Ashcroft today for his decision to seek the death penalty in a dozen cases, contrary to the recommendations of his local prosecutors.

Mr. Ashcroft's decisions appear to be driven by a desire to see the death penalty used more. His aggressive promotion of capital punishment is not only wrong, it is badly timed. Popular support for the death penalty is declining, due in large part to the growing number of cases in which DNA evidence is exonerating death row inmates.... Mr. Ashcroft also seems to have a regional agenda. The reversals in New York and Connecticut are nearly half of all cases nationwide in which he has overruled decisions not to seek the death penalty. Mr. Ashcroft's drive to increase the use of capital punishment here flies in the face of the administration's oft-repeated commitment to allowing states and localities more control over policy issues.

We've been covering this story for a week now, here is our latest post, which contains links to our earlier ones.

Terrance Kindlon is a criminal defense lawyer from Albany, N.Y., who as a Marine, received a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart for his service in Vietnam. Don't miss his op-ed piece in the Houston Chronicle opposing the War with Iraq--titled A Marine remembers the past and its lessons. It is poignant and personal, with a universal message.

Colorado's Republican Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell is not doing too well in the fund-raising department for another Senate run. He could decide not to run at all. If he runs, he likely will face some formidable Democratic opposition:

Among the most frequently mentioned are Rep. Mark Udall, Denver Mayor Wellington Webb and state Attorney General Ken Salazar. Some are even touting the name of former Sen. Gary Hart (D-Colo.), who is currently exploring a presidential run. Outgoing District Attorney Bill Ritter and bureaucrat Mike Miles are also reported to be interested in the race."

We're for Mark Udall, big-time. We also like Denver DA Bill Ritter, who got sidelined in the last election by newly enacted term limits. Why not Hart? If Gary Hart doesn't run for President, he should be Secretary of State.

Two jurors in the Ed Rosenthal trial were on Connie Chung tonight. They were mad. Connie asked one, "Who's the culprit?" The very articulate female juror replied, "The system, the federal government, the DEA." She added that Ed should get a new trial and that the jury should be presented with all of the evidence as well as their options. She said they thought they had no option but to consider only the Judge's instructions and evidence presented. We think she was talking about jury nullification--the principle that the jury has the right to vote not guilty if they disagree with the law.

The male juror, who served as foreman, said he was "angry beyond belief" when he found out that Ed had been licensed by the City of Oakland to grow the marijuana and that it was for medical use. He said he was "embarassed, humiliated" that his name appears at the bottom of the verdict form.

Another criticism of the Rosenthal case is at GlennReynolds.com:

Meanwhile, the Ashcroft Justice Department — which I thought was supposed to be protecting federalism, and chasing terrorists — needs to explain why it’s wasting time and tax dollars chasing people who are no threat to anyone, and who are doing things that are legal under their own state’s laws. I’m waiting. . . .

The San Francisco Chronicle on what you can do if you are upset about the verdict:

Contact your elected representatives in Sacramento and Washington and encourage them to reconcile this conflict in state and federal drug laws -- and in the meantime, to find a structured way for the desperately ill to obtain medical marijuana with a doctor's prescription.

Update: The transcript of the CNN interview is available here.

News coverage has frequently emphasized that if confirmed, Judicial nominee Miguel Estrada will be sitting on the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the nation's "second most important court." What exactly does that mean? And why is it so troubling that Bush wants to pack the DC Circuit with conservative judges? Chris Mooney explains both in Circuit Breaker, in the new issue of American Prospect.

Fax your senators and tell them to filibuster against the Estrada confirmation. The form is here, courtesy of People for the American Way.

[links via Smythes World]

Received from NORML for those who want to keep track of or lobby their elected officials on marijuana legislation:

This has been one of the busiest years for marijuana related legislative activity in recent memory. After only one month, medical marijuana, decriminalization and industrial hemp bills have been introduced in ten states, and NORML has information that legislation will soon be introduced in at least five additional states. To keep track of all marijuana related legislation, please visit here.

To make it easy for constituents to write their legislators, NORML has created pre-written letters that visitors to our website can send free of charge to their legislators. It is crucial that concerned citizens contact their elected officials, as far too often legislators justify their lack of support for marijuana legislation by saying that their constituents do not support it.

In order to maximize the number of people who have access to these letters,
NORML has created customized webstickers, complete with marijuana leaves and the NORML logo, for all of our affiliates and supporters to feature on their websites. Website visitors can enter their zip codes directly into the websticker and they will be instantly appraised of any pending marijuana related legislation in their state legislature or Congress. For those of you who wish to take a more conservative approach, we also have webstickers emblazoned with images of flags and monuments.

An Illinois State's Attorney has sued to overturn some of the clemencies granted by former Governor George Ryan.

We think it's a bogus move, and columnist Eric Zorn tells you why in today's Chicago Tribune.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley can afford Soldier's Field and other expensive projects, but he says Chicago can't afford justice. We expect more from the mayor under whose watch police-tortured confessions occurred.

An ordinance was introduced before the Chicago City Council Wednesday to require videotaping of interrogation, the best means of detecting and preventing false and coerced confession. "They would be sealed, preserved for at least 10 years and made available only when needed for trial, for "evidentiary purposes," or upon request by the suspect."

Alderman Richard Burke pointed out,

...Chicago can no longer afford not to videotape interrogations and that the courts or the Legislature could impose it. In the meantime, suspects who claim their confessions were coerced will sue the city and win multimillion-dollar settlements. That could make the cost of setting up one or more interview rooms in all six police areas--at a cost of $25,000 per room--then training officers to run and staff the equipment seem small, the alderman said."

Here's one of our prior posts explaining why videotaping interrogations, contrary to Daley's claims, would further both justice and police investigations .

The New York Times has a third article today on Ashcroft's demand for the death penalty against the advice of his local prosecutors.

Attorney General John Ashcroft has ordered United States attorneys in New York and Connecticut to seek the death penalty for a dozen defendants in cases in which prosecutors had recommended against or did not ask for capital punishment, according to lawyers who follow the issue. Those are nearly half of all the cases nationwide in which Mr. Ashcroft has rejected prosecutors' recommendations in a death penalty case....

Mr. Ashcroft's aggressive approach in the New York region was criticized yesterday by lawyers who said the best way to eliminate geographic disparities in capital punishment was not to increase its use but to reduce it. No federal court jury in New York City has yet returned a verdict for the death penalty since the revised federal capital punishment laws were passed more than a decade ago.

"They want to set a consistent national standard for these cases," said David A. Ruhnke, who represents a defendant in the new Manhattan case, "but the standards they're using are the standards used by Texas district attorneys running for re-election."

We've been particularly interested in this controversy because one of the cases is in Denver (as of this writing no decision by Ashcroft has been announced). Here is our post from last week on the controversy.

Former prosecutors and defense lawyers interviewed by the Times explain here why Ashcroft's interference threatens the independence of prosecutors and could lead to the undermining of the entire system. The federal system is based on cooperation deals--on defendants ratting off their associates in exchange for promises of leniency by prosecutors. Its the only way to get out from under the draconian sentencing guidelines, particularly in drug cases. And now it's turning out that the prosecutors can't deliver because the Almighty has come down and said at the last minute and in his infinite wisdom, "Deal's off. That one dies." This will be the death-knell for cooperation agreements. What defendant is going to take a deal knowing that the Prosecutor who's offering it to him may not be able to live up to it?

On the one hand, there's nothing we'd like to see fail more than the morally bankrupt system of purchased testimony that has become the very foundation of the federal criminal justice system. On the other hand, we are far more distrurbed that this Attorney General is being allowed to run amuck and make life or death decisions all by himself, against the advice of his career prosecutors. And that at a time it has become abundantly, if not crystal clear, that the death penalty system in this country is broken, he elects to put more people to death. Someone needs to tell him two wrongs don't make it right.