Attorney General Eric Holder gave a speech today at the American Bar Association convention. He acknowledged we cannot jail ourselves out of our crime problems.

“We will not focus exclusively on incarceration as the most effective means of protecting public safety,” Holder told the American Bar Association delegates meeting here for their annual convention. “Since 2003, spending on incarceration has continued to rise, but crime rates have flattened.”

“Today, one out of every 100 adults in America is incarcerated — the highest incarceration rate in the world,” he said. But the country has reached a point of diminishing returns at which putting even greater percentages of America’s citizens behind bars won’t cut the crime rate.

Prison terms result in increased recidivism. And, he said, drug treatment works: [More...]

The great historian Sean Wilentz:

When [Franklin] Pierce ran for president in 1852, Lincoln, naturally, campaigned against him. . . . Lincoln limited himself to a long speech in Springfield . . . The speech did nothing to affect the outcome of the election, in Illinois or in the country at large. But it deserves to be remembered in these days of Lincoln idolatry, because it can be disturbing reading to anyone inclined to worship Father Abraham.

[MORE . . .]

Former New York Giants receiver Plaxico Burress was indicted today on state charges of possession of a loaded pistol and reckless endangerment as a result of an incident in which he shot himself in the leg at a Manhattan nightclub. He faces a mandatory minimum sentence if convicted on two of the counts.

The grand jury rejected an indictment of Antonio Pierce, who according to police, took the gun back to his home in New Jersey and then arranged for it to be returned to Burress. The gun and an empty magazine were ultimately recovered at Burress' home.

The New York County Grand Jury heard from twenty-two witnesses, including PLAXICO BURRESS and Antonio Pierce, and considered 16 exhibits. BURRESS is charged with two counts of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree, one for possession of a loaded firearm not in his home or place of business, and one for possession of a loaded firearm with intent to use it unlawfully against another.

[More...]

I have generally avoided the birther issue because it is so monumentally stupid. I know it helps Democrats in painting the GOP as extreme (and thus understand why Democratic blogs are pushing the story), but I think it actually provides great insight into how uninformed the American People are in general. Consider this blog post from PPP on its preliminary polling on the birther question in Virginia:

In a result making me want to bang my head against the table, the first round of calls for our Virginia poll this afternoon founds voters in the state almost evenly split on whether they thought the President was born in the US. We're polling North Carolina next week, and I am almost definitely going to throw a question on there asking people whether they think Hawaii is a state or not.

(Emphasis supplied.) I would also throw in a question asking whether they believe John McCain was born in the US. Because he wasn't. Now, I know the birther legal theory posits that US law makes the question relevant for Obama but not for McCain, but the reality is the Constitutional question makes this less than clear (Congressional law can not conflict with the Constitution.)

In the end, neither McCain nor Obama are naturalized citizens so the entire question is supremely stupid. But it does provide a window into the ignorance of the American People.

Speaking for me only

Mustafa Setmariam Nassar, a Spanish citizen, has been reported by the media to have been forcibly seized in Pakistan in 2005 and turned over to U.S. Custody. He hasn't been heard from since.

The ACLU and other human rights groups are asking two U.N. Special Rapporteurs and the U.N. Working Group on Involuntary or Enforced Disappearances to investigate as their attempts have resulted in dead ends.

In June 2009, in response to an American Civil Liberties Union request for information about Nassar's whereabouts, the CIA stated that it could "neither confirm nor deny the existence or nonexistence of records" responsive to the request.

Although information about Nassar's disappearance is scarce, the known details suggest he was a victim of the unlawful "extraordinary rendition" program, which enabled the U.S., with the assistance of other governments, to kidnap and transport foreign nationals suspected of terrorism to secret overseas detention facilities for interrogation and torture.

Dr. Steven Hayne was removed from the list of approved coroners in Mississippi. Now, coroners there are trying to rewrite the rules to bring him back. Radly Balko reports:

But now a sizable number of Mississippi's elected county coroners are plotting to bring Hayne back by redrawing law-enforcement boundaries to sidestep state law.

The background to Dr. Hayne:

Hayne had come under heavy criticism in the preceding months, including an October 2007 investigation and series of follow-up stories in Reason; the DNA exonerations of two men wrongly convicted of rape and murder due largely to testimony from Hayne and his frequent collaborator, the disgraced bite mark expert Dr. Michael West; and the Mississippi State Supreme Court's dismissal of Hayne's dubious testimony [PDF] in the murder trial of then-13-year-old Tyler Edmonds. Hayne, who is not board-certified in forensic pathology, had been performing 1,200 to 1,800 autopsies per year, several times the maximum number allowed by his field's certifying organization.

One of our prior posts on Hayne is here. Reaction from Innocence Projects: [More...]

AdamB at Daily Kos has an interesting post up about a lawsuit in Washington state seeking to keep the identity of persons who sign a petition for a referendum private. Adam writes:

[L]awyers on behalf of the petition-gatherers have sued the WA Secretary of State to block the public release of the signatures, arguing that the opponents' efforts "chill[] free speech ... particularly when it is reasonably probable that those exercising their First Amendment rights would be subjected to threats and harassment." Among other facts, they cited a stalker photographing of a petition organizer's house while his daughter played outside; late-night obscene and threatening phone calls; car windows broken; a house egged and floured repeatedly; a stairway at another supporter's house doused in urine.

A federal judge yesterday granted their motion for a temporary restraining order, blocking for now the release of the signatures citing the irreparable harm which could result, a sign that he sees the balance of the equities and constitutional values supporting individual privacy over mass disclosure.

While Adam focuses on the balancing of disclosure vs. privacy, I am more intrigued by the question of the petitioners seeking "judicial activism." I'll explain my thinking on the flip.

Is rehiring Daniel Bogden, one of the fired U.S. Attorneys, really a good idea? Some think not. From the Las Vegas Sun:

President Barack Obama’s nomination of Daniel Bogden as U.S. attorney for Nevada was met Friday with initial disappointment from defense attorneys and prosecutors who had questioned his leadership abilities.

....“Many people within the U.S. attorney’s office do not see Bogden’s appointment as the type of ‘change you can believe in’ that Obama promised,” one prosecutor said. “But we’re hoping that Bogden has changed as a result of his experience under the Bush administration and will demonstrate a greater commitment to diversity in hiring and promoting within the office.”

Other complaints by Nevada attorneys about Bodgen included his reputation for lack of cordiality when dealing with defense attorneys and the media.

The U.S. Attorney's job has always been a political plum, almost always reserved for people within the President's party. Obama has been slow to replace Bush's appointments, and now, he's appointed one who is a Republican. I don't call this progress or change.

The AP reports President Obama is considering moving detainees at Guantanamo to a maximum security prison in Michigan that state officials are planning to close or to Ft. Levenworth in Ks.

The facility would include both a courtroom for military tribunal trials and federal criminal court trials and a prison. But, the details also include:

Providing long-term holding cells for a small but still undetermined number of detainees who will not face trial because intelligence and counterterror officials conclude they are too dangerous to risk being freed.

Building immigration detention cells for detainees ordered released by courts but still behind bars because countries are unwilling to take them.

So there are two classes of detainees the Administration plans to keep detained without charges or trial or after acquittal or a court-ordered release. [More...]

We've heard lots of times that members of Congress have a great health care plan. The LA Times has an article today describing its benefits and how it differs from the private insurer plans the rest of us are offered.

We're paying for Congress' plan -- as well as the plans of other federal workers:

In all, taxpayers spent about $15 billion last year to insure 8.5 million federal workers and their dependents, including postal service employees, according to the Office of Personnel Management.

....The plan most favored by federal workers is Blue Cross Blue Shield, which covers a family for about $1,030 a month. Taxpayers kick in $700, and employees pay the rest. Seeing a doctor costs $20. Generic prescriptions cost $10. Immunizations are free. There is no coverage limit.

As to why we all can't have that plan: [More...]

The Nevada Supreme Court will hold oral arguments tomorrow on O.J. Simpson's request for bail pending appeal of his 2008 armed robbery conviction. He was sentenced to 9 to 33 years in prison and bail pending appeal was denied. His lawyers appealed.

The Court spokesperson says no national networks have requested parking space for satellite trucks at the hearing. O.J. will not be there.

If you are interested, the court will be live-casting the argument at 10:00 a.m. PT. It won't be archiving the hearing so you can only watch at that time.

The link to watch live will be here.

Robert Luskin, best known on the blogs for his representation of Karl Rove, is taking over the defense of financier Allen Stanford in his criminal case in Houston. Dick DeGuerin has moved to withdraw, citing lack of assurances the court or receivers will authorize the release of necessary funds for his representation.

Stanford is being held in what DeGuerin called "oppressive conditons" in a private jail (The Joe Corley Detention Facility in Conroe, Texas). His motion to have Stanford moved said Stanford is in a single cell with 8 to 10 other inmates, the temperature is over 100 degrees, and sometimes they have been held for hours in total darkness due to electricity going out. He asked that Stanford be moved to a BOP facility but the Judge denied the request.