This just in via e-mail from Legal Aid Attorneys:

Support your right to participate in lawful political and First Amendment activity -- attend an important court hearing on Wednesday, January 29th at 3:00 p.m.

The New York City Police Department has asked a federal judge to virtually eliminate court-ordered protections for citizens and organizations who engage in lawful political acitvity in New York City. The court order they seek to overturn prevents the police from spying on first amendment activities unless a targeted person or group engages in criminal activity.

Oral arguments on the police department's motion in the case, "Handschu v. Special Services Division," will be held on Wednesday, January 29th at 3:00 p.m.

Courtroom 17-C
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street (east of Foley Square)
New York, NY
(4, 5 & 6 Train to Brooklyn Bridge;
J, M, Z, A, C and E to Chambers St.)

Citing the events of September 11, 2001, David Cohen, Deputy Police Commissioner for Intelligence and a 35-year veteran of the CIA, has told the court in the Police Department's motion papers that continuing to require a "criminal predicate" to conduct political investigations hampers intelligence collection on potential terrorists.

The "Handschu" case was filed in 1971 shortly after it came to light that police had for decades spied on lawful activities of social and racial justice advocates. A front-page article by Chisun Lee in the December 18th Village Voice presents a history of the "Handschu" decree, and what is at stake for New Yorkers. Click here to read the article.

The San Francisco Chronicle has a welcome editorial today criticizing the feds for putting noted marijuana expert, activist and author Ed Rosenthal on trial for growing pot. Some quotes:

... Ed Rosenthal agreed to grow Oakland's medical marijuana -- in compliance with city law and with the blessing of local officials -- But in a trial now under way in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, the 58-year-old Rosenthal has become a focal point for the federal government's "war on drugs." He is charged with felony marijuana cultivation and conspiracy, which could bring him 10 years-to-life imprisonment if convicted.

Rosenthal had been deputized by the city of Oakland as "an officer" in the city's program to distribute medical marijuana. Proposition 215, passed by California voters in Nov. 1996, was designed to allow patients -- with a doctor's approval -- to grow and use marijuana to, among other things, relieve the effects of cancer, AIDS and glaucoma.

The trouble is, despite substantial anecdotal evidence, the federal government never has recognized the medicinal potential of marijuana. Drug Enforcement Administration official Asa Hutchinson points out that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not approve "medicine by popular referendum. " He made that comment in response to a letter by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer calling for "a proper sense of balance, proportion and respect for states' rights."

WHEN Ed Rosenthal agreed to grow Oakland's medical marijuana -- in compliance with city law and with the blessing of local officials -- he had no idea he was about to become the target of federal authorities who would try to send him to prison.

The war on drugs should not be about Rosenthal. He represents one city's noble effort to distribute medical marijuana in a controlled, responsible way. Without Rosenthal, many patients would be forced to turn to dealers in the streets, enriching the enterprises that should be the real focus of a war on drugs.

There's more so go read the whole thing.

Last week the federal court refused to gag Rosenthal during the trial. For updates, go to NORML.

Regina McKnight is a young African-American woman who was convicted of killing her stillborn baby by using crack cocaine and sentenced to twelve years in jail. Her sentence was upheld by the South Carolina appeals court yesterday.

For some sociological and medical reasons why her sentence is unfair, please read this by the National Advocates for Pregnant Women.

This has been a high-profile case, particularly in South Carolina. Here's some background, as sent to us by those in the know:

McKnight was charged with homicide by child abuse. This crime carries a penalty of up to life in prison and requires proof of "extreme indifference" to life. The state blamed the stillbirth on Ms. McKnight's use of cocaine although, in fact, there was no evidence that the cocaine did - or even could have caused this stillbirth. Nevertheless in the second trial, (the first ended in a mistrial) a jury convicted Ms. McKnight in less than 15 minutes of deliberation.

The state supreme court took the case on direct appeal. Her team of lawyers and amici were all optimistic about a victory after a compelling oral argument in the case and an extraordinary DPA and other amicus from a unanimous medical and public health community. (Not to mention clear law on our side) Here is a woman the State admits had no intention of harming her fetus -- yet the court has upheld her conviction for homicide by child abuse -- 20-years to life. Had she intended to kill the fetus she would have gotten 2 years in jail.

The primary evidence in the case was a doctor who said that one time use of cocaine was known to cause death. His only support for this was popular press about the Len Bias case. Apparently that was enough for this court too as they stated: "Given the fact that it is public knowledge that usage of cocaine is potentially fatal, we find the fact that McKnight took cocaine knowing she was pregnant was sufficient evidence to submit to the jury on whether she acted with extreme indifference to her child’s life."

You can read the full text of the opinion here.

Her defense team is asking people to write Regina words of support, a postcard or letter, at the jail. If you are interested in doing so, post a comment with your email address and we will email you Regina's address. We don't want to post it here because we don't want people writing her hate letters, and we are well aware that there are people out there who can't understand why this is unfair.

Update: Here is an excellent article outlining the support of the medical community for Regina Mcknight , and includes this list of organizations that joined in the Amicus effort on her behalf.

Briefs amici curiae in support of appellant, Regina McKnight were submitted on behalf of:

South Carolina Medical Association
South Carolina Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors
American Nurses Association
National Association of Social Workers
Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs
Institute For Health and Recovery
The South Carolina Nurses Association
The American Society of Addiction Medicine
The American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry
The Association of Reproductive Health Professionals

More information on the case is available here.

Via How Appealing, who got it from Law.Com reporter Tony Mauro, we learn there's a new blog by the Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press. It's called Behind the Homefront, and is "a daily chronicle of news in homeland security and military operations affecting newsgathering, access to information and the public's right to know."

Here's an entry from January 24th we are interested in: (links omitted here, but contained in original):

THE STAGE HAS BEEN SET FOR SUPREME COURT ACTION on the question of whether the public has a right of access to the terrorism-related immigration proceedings, most of which, of course, are long over. On Wednesday, the Sixth Circuit rejected a government request for rehearing by the entire court, letting stand a decision holding that automatic closure of all post-September 11th immigration proceedings was unconstitutional. The Third Circuit last month decided not to rehear a case that reached the opposite conclusion, that the First Amendment does not guarantee a presumptive right of access. The split in the circuits can only be resolved by Supreme Court review. News coverage: Detroit Free Press; News Media Update (3rd Cir.); News Media Update (6rd Cir.)

A detailed article about Gary Condit's libel suit against author Dominick Dunne, A Horse-Whisperer's Tale Trails Dominick Dunne, appears in today's New York Times' book section. The article sets out the details of Dunne's tall tale. The lawsuit is over Dunne's retelling of it on radio and television talk shows.

Here's part of what Dunne said on the radio:

"Now some of this I can't explain, and I don't want to get into any trouble saying. But according to what the procurer told the horse whisperer who told me, is that Gary Condit was often a guest at some of the Middle Eastern embassies in Washington — where all these ladies were.

"And that he had let it be known that he was in a relationship with a woman that was over. But she was a clinger. He couldn't get rid of her. And he had made promises to her that he couldn't keep. And apparently she knew things about him and had threatened to go public. And at one point he said, `This woman is driving me crazy,' or words to that effect.

"And I wrote all this down at the time, and what the horse whisperer said that the procurer said is, by saying that, he created the environment that led to her disappearance. And she shortly thereafter vanished." Reminding his audience that "I can't vouch for any of this," Mr. Dunne added that he was told that a semi-conscious Ms. Levy had been hustled aboard a private plane. The procurer, Mr. Dunne said, speculated that "she was dropped at sea."

Dunne repeated his remarks in a shorter fashion on Larry King Live. The issue in the lawsuit, according to the Times, is "...whether and when journalists can traffic publicly in rank rumor."

When the Times reporter telephoned Dunne for his comments on the lawsuit, "Mr. Dunne said, "How did you get my number?" He added: "I just am not going to talk. This is a very bad time in my life." Laura Ingraham, the conservative radio host on whose show Dunne told the story, did not return repeated calls to her.

Lin Wood, the excellent Atlanta libel attorney who has obtained libel settlements for John and Patsy Ramsey and Richard Jewell, is representing Condit. Wood argues that "Mr. Dunne knew the story was "nothing more than unverified and unsubstantiated rumor and gossip."

Wood, who said this was the first defamation suit filed by the former Congressman but may not be the last, expects the case to be "a close call." He added: "Does our legal system sanction a society that basically approves of rumor-mongering on national television and national radio stations? Can you simply go on the air and make any accusation you choose?" Journalists do not operate by written rules, but disseminating rumors is not a generally accepted practice in mainstream media.

The suit is considered a long-shot, but not out of the ballpark. Dunne is the sole defendant, so there may not be any deep pockets to fund a large settlement.

Denise Brown, sister of OJ's murdered wife Nicole Brown Simpson, has announced she may run for the U.S. Senate the next time there's an open seat.

"Brown has never run for office but said she developed an interest in national politics while lobbying in Washington for victims' rights in the wake of her sister's 1994 death and the sensational O.J. Simpson murder trial...."I think it's just the next step to where I've been the last eight years," Brown said. I don't know, I just like Washington D.C., I think Washington D.C. and I get along, I think it's a good mix there," she said."

Dream on, Denise.

The New York Times reports today that infections in newly released inmates are a rising concern.

....jails and prisons have become giant incubators for some of the worst infectious diseases.

According to a study released today at a conference sponsored by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at least 1.3 million inmates released from jail or prison in 1996 were infected with hepatitis C. That was 29 percent of the 4.5 million cases nationwide.

Similarly, newly released inmates accounted for 35 percent of the 34,000 Americans with tuberculosis in 1996, the study found. And newly released inmates accounted for 13 to 17 percent of Americans infected with H.I.V. or AIDS, the study estimated.

The problem has become so acute that health care officials and prisoner rights groups are calling for widespread testing of prison populations for hepatitis C and faster treatment of prisoners.

This is a problem for everyone. Most inmates are not serving life sentences for murder. Most will be released at some point.

...experts say the high rate of communicable diseases among inmates is a critical issue for two reasons: the danger inmates pose of infecting others when they are released, and the opportunity to treat them that is largely being wasted. Dr. Greifinger said that Americans tended to forget that most inmates eventually return home. In 2000, about nine million people were released from jail and prison, according to Allen J. Beck, of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the statistical arm of the Justice Department.

Bumped with Update:

On Christmas Eve in Uniontown, PA, near Pittsburgh, 12 year old Michael Ellerbe, an African American boy, was shot in the back by police and killed during a police chase. Prominent lawyer Jeffrey Feiger is representing the family and has promised a federal civil rights lawsuit.

Ellerbe "was shot through the heart from behind while being pursued on foot by two state troopers. He was allegedly running from a stolen, wrecked sport-utility vehicle. "To shoot someone in the back requires as deliberate an act as I can possibly imagine," said Fieger, who has also represented Jack Kevorkian. "There is no excuse for shooting a 12-year-old in the back...."

Ellerbe's family has said that the boy was neither armed nor driving the vehicle.

The inquest hearing was today. Our source tells us there appears to be a "white-washing" of the incident. We don't know, but we're bringing it up in case someone wants to look into it further.

Update: The coronor's inquest jury has ruled that the police shooting was justified. One of Ellerbe's lawyers, Joel Sansone, says there's a coverup and that a ten year old witness said three shots were fired, not two--and that both troopers fired at Ellerbe. However, during the inquest, the youth was not asked about how many shots were fired.

Update: More news coverage, including CNN:

And the Guardian:

Here and here are some local reports, and not press pool clippings:

And this perhaps telling quote :
No cameras or recording equipment will be permitted into a Monday inquest set to investigate the death of 12-year-old Michael Ellerbe.

The NAACP is also speaking up, see here and here.

"If his office's budget is cut again, Kentucky's top public defender plans to tell his lawyers to refuse to take new cases of poor people charged with crimes. "I think innocent people will end up being convicted of crimes," said Ernie Lewis, head of the Public Advocacy Department."

"His decision means impoverished criminal defendants might go to trial, and face potentially lengthy terms in prison, with no attorney -- or they could be released without their case being heard, Lewis said. Without lawyers, some defendants might feel pressured to plead guilty, he said."

[link via Instapundit]

Tune in Monday, January 27th, 7 PM eastern standard time, as Gary Hart joins hosts Paul Begala and Robert Novak on CNN's Crossfire.

Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley took President Bush and the Republican Party to task Saturday for failing to provide cities with funds to protect against terrorist attacks.

"Your neglect of homeland defense funding has relegated 'the common defense' to yet another unfunded federal mandate for already cash-strapped cities cities that are still reeling from federal and state tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy," O'Malley said in the Democrats' weekly radio address.

O'Malley, who was chosen by Senate minority leader Tom Daschle to give the Democratic rebuttal, said Baltimore, "like every city and town in America, has been left virtually defenseless by a federal government's failure to fund homeland defense."

Fire, police and health workers are the "front-line soldiers of our homeland defense," yet they are still "without the necessary equipment, training and communication systems that they need," he said.

The mayor urged Bush, as he prepares for next week's State of the Union address, not to make "teary tributes to our fallen police and fire heroes until you back up our living first responders with the tools and equipment they need to protect our nation."

Via Atrios, Hillary Clinton spoke at a national security conference at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan. She blasted Bush on national security.

"We have relied on a myth of homeland security - a myth written in rhetoric, inadequate resources and a new bureaucracy instead of relying on good, old-fashioned American ingenuity, might and muscle," Clinton said. "The truth is we are not prepared, we are not supporting our first responders, and our approach to securing our nation is haphazard at best," Clinton said. "Somewhere along the line, we lost our edge. We let our guard down."

We're struck by the similarity between her comments and those of Gary Hart in his recent national security speech.

As recently as three months ago the Council on Foreign Relations task force that I co-chaired reported that we are woefully unprepared for, and still at risk of, future terrorist attacks. It is imprudent in the extreme to attack a nation in a region seething with hostile suicidal forces when we are vulnerable to their retaliation."

Hillary promoted her "Provide for the Common Defense Act," "which she argues will force the federal government to give much-needed assistance to states and cities to protect citizens from terror threats. Her legislation calls for spending to develop anti-terror technologies, to create a task force to set minimum security standards, and to add federal security personnel in areas with large populations, including New York City."

Hart also spoke at the John Jay conference, but we haven't seen a news account of his speech yet. Like Atrios, we find the Republican criticism of her speech as "inviting" terrorist attacks to be baseless political rhetoric. We believe, like Clinton and Hart, this nation is not prepared for the consequences that a premptive war in Iraq will have here in the United States.