The San Franciso Chronicle calls on Diane Feinstein, who may have the tie-breaking vote today on Priscilla Owen's nomination to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, to vote against her. See, Feinstein's decisive moment

INS says foreigners must report changing their address within ten days or risk fines, jail and deportation.

It's a 50 year old law that has rarely been enforced but applies to all residents here legally who are not citizens--all ten million plus of them over the age of 14.

Considering the INS has routinely been accused of losing paperwork, we wonder who is going to process all these change of address forms.

It's an oppressive requirement likely to tear more families apart, like that of Thar Abdeljabera who we told you about in Fairness Be Damned

Denyse Sabagh, an immigration lawyer in Washington, says it best in an LA Times article today: "To put somebody in deportation proceedings for failing to report a change of address is like using a nuclear bomb to kill a fly."

Moussaoui Friend Pleads Guilty to Lying (washingtonpost.com) But he has never been charged with a terrorism crime, and his expected sentence of six months is already served. He has agreed to remain in detention as a material witness in the Moussaoui trial until Dec. 31. If Moussaoui is not tried by then, he can seek release. If you can call probable deportation to Saudi Arabia a release. Our July 10 post Descent Into Detention has many more details on Mr. Al-Atta's case.

At the annual meeting of La Raza in Florida today, Rep. Richard Gephardt announced a plan to grant permanent residency status to illegal immigrants.

The plan would require five years of actual residency in the U.S., employment history for two years, and a criminal backgrounds check.

Opponents of the plan claim it is a poltical move to curry favor with ethnic voters in the upcoming elections. Gephardt says the intent is to "recognize the hard work of immigrants who have contributed to the economy and have not run afoul of the law."

Whatever the motive (and let's not forget Bush was planning to do the same thing before September 11 came along) it's a sound and just measure and we support it. In fact, it's long overdue.

Judge Declares Moussaoui Competent In a two page Order today, the Judge presiding over the case of Zacharias Mossaoui ruled there is no new evidence to question her previous ruling that Moussaoui is competent to act as his own lawyer.

"Although the rhetoric in the defendant's ... pleadings has become increasingly confrontational, the court is not aware of any new evidence that would support a claim that the defendant is not mentally competent to proceed ... at this time."

While the Judge could change her mind Thursday at Moussaoui's next court appearance if his court-appointed standby lawyers present a new report in support of their assertion Moussaoui is mentally ill, that appears unlikely since Moussaoui refused to meet with the defense experts. and Judge Brinkema ruled he didn't have to. She said the visits "would deprive him of the limited privacy upon which he has insisted and to which we believe he has a legitimate claim."

Once again we question how, as a civilized society, we can make someone face the death penalty without benefit of a workable attorney-client relationship--especially when the accused has requested to meet with a competent attorney of his choice who is willing to advise him without charge.

It should also be noted that Moussaoui did not confess last week to any of the charges against him that pertain to the September 11 attacks. He said he was a member of Al Qaeda and he knew who planned the attacks. He did not say he participated in or planned them. He was arrested and incarcerated almost a month before the attacks. Does the Government have even a single witness who will link Moussaoui to the September 11 attacks--as opposed to merely being a member of Al Qaeda and supporter of its beliefs. This is hardly just a technicality.

United We Stand, but We'll Snoop Divided by Cato Institute Senior Fellow Robert A. Levy in today's Los Angeles Times is another in a growing list of op-eds and editorials criticizing Bush and Ashcroft's "Operation Tips."

According to Mark Allenbaugh in Why The American Taliban May Only Serve 13, Not 20 Years, In Prison, a former Staff Attorney for the United States Sentencing Commission assigned to the Commission's Terrorism Team. the Government has miscalculated the sentencing guidelines in the case of John Walker Lindh.

Allenbaugh says the terrorism adjustment for the count pertaining to supplying services to the Taliban may not apply.

If the terrorism adjustment doesn't apply, Lindh would be out in under 12 years.

For more on the terrorism adjustment and an explanation of guideline calculations used in the plea agreement, see TalkLeft's recent breakdown.

Hamdi, Lindh, Terrorism And The Courts by Joanne Mariner discusses the difference in treatment afforded Lindh and the Detainees. It's time to turn our attention to the detainees, none of whom have been charged with a crime.

Chief counsel for John Walker Lindh James Brosnahan sheds some light on his client's views of September 11 and Bin Laden.

On his client's view of Bin Laden: "He doesn’t have a high opinion of bin Laden. He views bin Laden as a false prophet, as someone who violates the Qur’an by attacking civilians. It’s not what John had in mind at all."

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 bars the military from making arrests, conducting searches or engaging in other police activity on US soil. Only the Coast Guard and the National Guard are exempt from the law.

The origin of The Posse Comitatus Act was the Civil War, during which civilians were tried and sometimes executed by military courts. US troops occupied the defeated southern states for several years after the war.

In 1981, Congress modified the act by authroizing the use of military troops and equipment to prevent the importation of illegal drugs.

Now President Bush, Homeland Security Chief Tom Ridge and Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del) are discussing changes to the law to allow the military a greater role in law enforcement when it comes to fighting terrorism.

We don't think the law should be weakened any further. For some reasons why, check out "The Posse Comitatus Act: A Principle in Need of Renewal "(Washington Universitys Law Quarterly)

Received from Judge Jim Gray....

an ABC News Special on the War on Drugs with John Stossel will be broadcast nationwide on Tuesday, July 30. In most parts of the country, the broadcast time will be 10 pm, and the rest will be 9 pm.

This should be an accurate and hard-hitting show.

In putting together this special, Stossel and his crew have traveled to England, Holland, Detroit, the Bronx and Colombia. They really have a story to tell, and it should be heard.

Please help spread the word to people who would be interested. As most of you know, all that people involved in the drug policy movement feel is necessary to change away from our failed system is to legitimize the discussion and let people know that it is OK to discuss this subject. Exposing people to what is really happening is the way to do it.

The Denver Post earns high praise today. Three opinion pieces explore our ever-increasing lust for vengence over rational and just crime policy.

In One Size Fits All Justice Doesn't Work Peter Chronis of the Post's Editorial Board and former long time crime reporter examines the evolution of murder statutes through interviews with judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys.

Mandatory Madness Grips Our System by Denver Post Deputy Editorial Board Editor Bob Ewegen takes on mandatory minimum sentences. "As Pete Chronis' thoughtful article on this page makes clear, Colorado lawmakers have painted themselves into a corner where a single sentence - life without possibility of - is applied to a bafflingly wide variety of criminal offenses."

Ewegen quotes Eric Sterling, president of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, a private non-profit educational organization promoting solutions to criminal justice problems, in a Frontline show on the topic, "There have been literally thousands of instances of injustice where minor co-conspirators in cases, the lowest-level participants, have been given the sentences that Congress intended for the highest kingpins. Families are wrecked, children are orphaned, the taxpayers are paying a fortune for excessive punishment."

Ewegen discusses the Lisl Auman case, one that our sister site CrimeLynx has been featuring for some time, and concludes, "The U.S. Congress and the Colorado legislature both need to replace the runaway system of mandatory minimum sentences with laws that once again give trial judges the discretion they need to make the punishment fit the crime."

Last but not least, in an editorial Bring Back Justice the Post opines: "Those who champion iron-fisted laws might consider that more than seven decades of autocratic rule failed utterly to eliminate crime in the former Soviet Union. Somewhere along the way, Americans seem to have forgotten that laws exist to foster justice - not to satisfy the blood lust of victims' kin."