WE'VE MOVED!


As part of our big, new redesign of the Alliance for Justice website, the Justice Watch blog has moved. To be sure you're getting all the latest news about the fight for a fairer America, visit us at www.afj.org/blog

Friday, February 29, 2008

The Torture Test

A few months ago, LA Times columnist and Georgetown Law professor Rosa Brooks observed a new trend: ultraconservatives seemingly creating a new litmus test for political candidates and appointees. According to Brooks, “torture is the new abortion”—illustrated by the increasingly high profile nature of the debate over waterboarding and other “enhanced interrogation techniques.” If one had any doubts about the emphasis being placed on a willingness to toe the Bush administration’s line on torture, those doubts were dispelled this week, as three Bush nominees suffered the consequences of their extreme positions on detainee treatment and interrogations.

On Monday, William Haynes II, General Counsel of the Department of Defense and head of the Military Commissions at Guantanamo Bay, abruptly announced his resignation. Haynes was embroiled in controversy last week when, in an interview with The Nation, the military commissions’ former chief prosecutor, Col. Morris Davis, accused Haynes of politicizing the commission trials and interfering with military prosecutors. According to Col. Davis, Haynes (who was charged with overseeing both the prosecution and defense at Gitmo) said, “We can't have acquittals, we have to have convictions…if we've been holding these people for so long, how can we explain letting them get off?”

This recent episode is not the first controversy Mr. Haynes has encountered—he was nominated in 2003 to a seat on the powerful Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, but his confirmation was derailed by bipartisan concerns about his role in the creation and implementation of the Bush administration’s harsh interrogation policies. The New York Times editorialized against the nomination saying:

Mr. Haynes was by many accounts a key player in the administration’s development of its shamefully narrow definition of “torture,” which gave the green light for a wide array of abuses. The decisions made in Washington cleared the way for abusive treatment of the detainees being held in Guantánamo Bay, and created the environment necessary for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal to occur. It is disturbing that while low-level soldiers have been convicted for their actions at the Iraqi prison, Mr. Haynes has been rewarded with a coveted judicial nomination.

Mr. Haynes wasn’t the only one slated for promotion after his invention of legal loopholes for cruel interrogations. Judge Jay Bybee was confirmed to a seat on the Ninth Circuit in 2003—before the public learned of controversial Justice Department memos redefining torture and authorizing waterboarding. Although Judge Bybee escaped Haynes’ fate and nabbed a lifetime appointment because of lucky timing, his luck may have just run out. The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility has confirmed that they have been investigating “whether Bush administration lawyers violated professional standards by issuing legal opinions that authorized the CIA to use waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques.” For Judge Bybee, who signed the discredited 2002 “torture memo” that was later rescinded by the Bush administration, this investigation could prompt sanctions as serious as impeachment and criminal prosecution.

The newly announced investigation also implicates another Bush nominee—Steven Bradbury, the acting head of the Office of Legal Counsel. The Senate has refused to confirm Mr. Bradbury’s pending nomination to that post because of secret memos he wrote authorizing waterboarding and other coercive interrogation techniques—even after the administration had publicly rescinded the Bybee memo.

Mr. Haynes’ resignation, in conjunction with the investigations of Mr. Bradbury and Judge Bybee, reinforces the notion that defense of “enhanced” interrogation is a prerequisite for promotion in the Bush administration. The torture test explains Attorney General Mukasey’s cagey answers at his confirmation hearing, and it casts doubt upon the advisability of confirming any more Bush nominees to the federal courts, where the effects of his lifetime appointments will be felt long after he has left the White House.

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Scott Horton Discusses Siegelman Controversy on MSNBC

Fallout from the "60 Minutes" Siegelman piece continues to spread as cries of foul play grow louder in response to "technical difficulties." These "difficulties" resulted in a blackout of just the Siegelman segment, in just one part of northern Alabama. A part of Alabama covered by a broadcast company with strong ties to the Republican Party. Scott Horton, contributor to Harper's Magazine, was a guest on Live with Dan Abrams last night to discuss the circumstances surrounding the convenient broadcasting disruption as well as the facts surround Siegelman's prosecution. You can watch the video below.



Scott Horton will be the guest in this month's First Monday program LIVE on FireDogLake at 3pm on Monday, March 3rd. To participate in the chat, just register for a free commenter account.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Siegelman Saga Makes Its Way to "60 Minutes"

The controversy surrounding the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman continues to spread as details surrounding his case become public. (What do you bet John Grisham wishes he had come up with this first?!) While the issues pertaining to the former democratic governor's prosecution are extremely complicated, there is a clear appearance of political motivation on behalf of both the District Judge hearing his case and the Justice Department. For example, Bush Circuit Court nominee William Pryor was implicated in the same "dirty lobbyist" scandal as Siegelman, but was never charged. In fact, the allegations of misconduct by Pryor were never even investigated.

In October 2007, the House Judiciary Subcommittees on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security and Commercial and Administrative Law held a joint hearing to examine allegations of wrong-doing by District Judge Fuller (the judge presiding over Siegelman's trial). The hearing also looked into possible selective prosecution by the US Justice Department. Alliance for Justice submitted written testimony to be considered at this hearing, which is available on our website here.

Mainstream media is finally starting to take notice, too. Last Sunday, "60 Minutes" did a segment on the Siegelman prosecution and the controversy surrounding it. You can watch the video below.



Also, Scott Horton of Harper's Magazine will be the guest in this month's First Monday program. Scott has been at the forefront of the investigative journalism surrounding the Siegelman prosecution and will be chatting LIVE about it on FireDogLake at 3pm on Monday, March 3rd. To participate in the chat, just register for a free commenter account.

Monday, February 25, 2008

AFJ Joins GLSEN to Mourn Slain Gay Youth

Alliance for Justice employees will be joining supporters of GLSEN, the Sexual Minorities Youth Assistance League, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and several other local groups in a candle-light vigil tonight to honor the memory of Lawrence King, the young man killed in Oxnard, California this month after informing his classmates that he was gay. The details surrounding his murder are shocking, but they are unfortunately all too familiar to some - particularly those in the LGBT community.

Join us tonight in Dupont Circle at 6pm and demand an end to violence directed at our nation's youth, whether based on their race, religion or sexual orientation. Every student deserves a safe and supportive learning environment. To learn more about tonight's events happening all around the country, click here. To find out more about Lawrence King's story, check out the recent Los Angeles Times article here.

Friday, February 22, 2008

Haynes Nomination Too Risky for Judiciary

Following yesterday's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals nominee Catherina Haynes, Alliance for Justice released a statement arguing that her nomination is too risky for the judiciary and the American public to be allowed to move forward.
Judge Haynes' lack of experience, combined with her failure to provide meaningful answers during today's hearing, makes this nomination too risky for the judiciary and the American people. A nominee for a seat on a federal appeals court must have a record of excellence in the law, impeccable integrity, and a deep commitment to equal justice for all. Judge Haynes does not satisfy this standard.
This circuit has historically been a source of fairness and justice for millions of Americans. But under the court-packing policies of the Bush Administration, the balance of this hugely important court has been tilted to right - a shameful development that will affect the lives of people in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi for decades to come. At the relatively young age of 45, Catherina Haynes could conceivably hold her seat for over 40 years. This risk is simply too great to accept and the Senate should act quickly to ensure that only the most qualified and independent-minded judges are approved for these life-time appointments.

To read AFJ's entire statement, click here. To learn more about Catherina Haynes or other Bush nominees, check out our website at http://www.afj.org/check-the-facts/nominees/.

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Daily Dose

  • "Supreme Court Gives Business 2 Wins" [LATimes]
  • "Justices Rule On Retroactivity of Decisions" [NYT]
  • "Court: Immigrants Suffer Bad Lawyers" [AP]
  • "Hearing is Delayed on Contract for Ashcroft"[NYT]
  • "Fifth Circuit Nominee Holds Her Own" [WashingtonBriefs]

AFJ Reports on Packing of the Fifth Circuit

This week, Alliance for Justice put out a report on efforts by movement conservatives to turn the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, historically a stalwart of fairness and independence into an extension of right-wing authority and ideology.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit was once at the vanguard of protecting the rights of ordinary Americans. Courageous judges, both Republican and Democratic appointees, on the court issued opinions enforcing civil rights protections at great personal risk. They were not driven by personal biases but by an unflinching belief in justice. Ultraconservatives, however, waged an unrelenting courtpacking campaign, and now this court is a bastion of conservative activism.
The report contains information regarding some of President Bush's most controversial appointments including Priscilla Owen and Leslie Southwick as well as his latest nominee, Catherina Haynes, who despite staunch opposition received a special recess hearing today in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

To see AFJ's entire report, click here. If you would like to learn more about all of Bush's judicial nominees, check out our website at http://www.afj.org/check-the-facts/nominees/.

AFJ opposition to Puryear nomination makes the Associated Press

Today the Associated Press published an article covering the stiff opposition facing the nomination of Gustavus A. Puryear IV to a US District Court in Nashville, Tennessee. Mr. Puryear's public comments indicate hostility towards civil rights lawsuits in general and to those brought by prisoners in particular. Since 2001, Mr. Puryear has served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), a position he continues to hold pending the Senate's resolution of his nomination. As the AP article discusses, Puryear's nomination has faced heavy resistance from inmate rights groups as well as other organizations, including the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

To read the entire Associated Press article click here. To learn more about AFJ's opposition to Puryear's nomination, check out our website here.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Daily Dose

  • "Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to Bush's Wiretapping Policy" [LATimes]
  • "U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear Katrina Insurance Lawsuits" [Times-Picayune]
  • "Key Appeals Court Shifts to the Left, Stoking Election-Year Partisan Fight" [The Hill]
  • "Grumpy Young Men: SCOTUS Squints at America's Elderly Federal Employees" [Slate]
  • "Impressions of Terrorism, Drawn from Court Files" [NYT]

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Daily Dose

  • "Just Following Orders? DOJ Opinions and War Crimes Liability" [JURIST]
  • "Justice Official Defends Rough CIA Interrogations" [WP]
  • "Unforgivable Behavior, Inadmissible Evidence" [NYT]
  • "'Rule of law' vulnerability" [WashingtonTimes]
  • "The Freedmen's Remedy: The big discrimination case before the Supreme Court" [Slate]
  • "West Wing Aides Cited for Contempt" [WP]
  • Editorial: Justice at Guantanamo [WP]
  • "Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Warrantless Wiretapping Appeal" [TMPMuckraker]

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Congress Reiterates Waterboarding Ban

The Senate voted yesterday to reaffirm the illegality of waterboarding, closing a loophole that had been seized upon by the Bush administration to defend its use of coercive “enhanced interrogation techniques,” many of which are widely regarded as torture by the international community. In passing the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008 last night, the Senate approved language, agreed to overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives last year, which forbids the CIA from using interrogation techniques not authorized by the Army Field Manual. Congress had passed a similar provision as part of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, but the Bush administration later contended that the restriction applied only to military officers—not the CIA. The bill approved yesterday outlaws waterboarding and many other controversial techniques (like sensory deprivation and stress positions) not authorized for use by the U.S. military. The Senate’s rebuke of coercive interrogations comes on the eve of an Oversight Hearing on the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). Steven Bradbury, the acting head of the OLC and author of controversial secret OLC opinions authorizing waterboarding, will testify this morning in front of the House Judiciary's Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. Click here to watch Mr. Bradbury’s live testimony.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Senate Takes Cue from President Bush, Sides with Phone Companies

This morning, in a vote of 67 to 31, the Senate decided to leave language in its pending surveillance legislation that would provide retroactive immunity for telephone companies who aided the Bush administration in its illegal wiretapping program. The Senate is poised to pass its version of the bill later today. The legislation will then head into conference, where it will need to be reconciled with the version passed by the House of Representatives late last year. The House version, the RESTORE Act, would provide much greater oversight of future wiretapping programs and does not include retroactive immunity. Here's what Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron had to say about the vote.
Warrantless wiretapping undermines the basic privacy rights of all Americans. It is an unacceptable and illegal practice sanctioned by the Bush administration. I am deeply disappointed that the Senate has voted to ratify this outrageous policy by passing legislation that further erodes the protections established by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Today, the Senate voted to give telecommunication corporations that participated in this lawless program immunity from liability – a vote that weakens the role of the judiciary, closes the courthouse doors to ordinary Americans, and insulates the president from oversight of this illegal program. Alliance for Justice urges Congress to abandon this defense of the President’s illegal wiretapping program and its perpetrators. Instead, it should adopt the RESTORE Act as passed by the House of Representatives, legislation that strikes a better balance between national security and civil liberties and refuses to immunize corporations for unlawful acts against
Americans.

Monday, February 11, 2008

Political Pandering with a Pinch of Hypocrisy

This morning, the New York Times published a particularly compelling editorial criticizing President Bush's dismal record when it comes to nominating competent and fair-minded judges as well as high-level government officials.

To hear Mr. Bush tell it, he has been the nation’s meritocrat in chief. The man who brought us Alberto Gonzales to head the Justice Department and Michael Brown to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency said at the Thursday gathering that he had “nominated skilled and faithful public servants to lead federal agencies and sit on the federal bench.”

President Bush has repeatedly put up judges who are hostile to worker, consumer, and minority rights and who support drastic expansions in exectuive power. His claims that his nominees are being unfairly delayed are nothing but a political ploy to distract the public from the truth -- that the many vacancies lingering in our judiciary remain unfilled solely because he refuses to cooperate with Congressional Democrats and put forward reasonable consensus nominees.

To read the entire NY Times op-ed, click here. Also, to see AFJ's press statement on this matter, check out our website here.

Daily Dose

  • What the Wall Street Journal won’t tell you about FISA [GlennGreenwald]
  • Waterboarding: the comeback kid of “enhanced interrogation”? [Slate]
  • Editorial: Because They Said So [NYT]
  • Editorial: Unworthy Nominees [NYT]
  • Durham: Investigation to focus on tapes, not torture [TPMMuckraker]

Friday, February 8, 2008

Californians Take Action: Oppose Honaker Nomination

Yesterday, representatives of Alliance for Justice, CREDO (formerly Working Assets), Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and Equal Justice Society met with staff in Senator Feinstein’s San Francisco office to discuss their opposition to the nomination of Richard Honaker to the federal district court in Wyoming.

Throughout his career, Mr. Honaker has actively worked to undermine a woman's right to reproductive freedom. On behalf of Californians for Fair and Independent Judges and other concerned constituents, they urged Senator Feinstein - who will chair Mr. Honaker’s nomination hearing next Tuesday - to ask tough questions about Mr. Honaker’s extreme record and not be swayed by empty promises to “follow the law.” In order to highlight the importance of the issue to the people of California, the representatives also brought with them almost 6000 letters to Senator Feinstein from constituents imploring her to reject Mr. Honaker’s nomination.

If you are from California and would like to weigh in with Senator Feinstein before the hearing, click here to personalize and send a letter to her office.

Daily Dose

  • Mukasey: DOJ “cannot” probe waterboarding [WP, BostonGlobe]
  • Contrary to AG Mukasey’s testimony, CIA chief admits waterboarding probably illegal [NYT]
  • Cheney: "damn right" I back waterboarding decision [RawStory]
  • Mukasey to Congress: no waterboarding investigation, no warrantless wiretapping investigation, and oh, no enforcing contempt citations either [TPMMuckraker]
  • Sen. Durbin lifts hold on Filip nomination after disappointing letter from Mukasey [ChicagoSunTimes]
  • “Alito is Neato: John McCain gets taken to school on his judicial picks” [Slate]
  • Editorial: A President Who Tortured [WP]

Thursday, February 7, 2008

Update: AG Mukasey's Trip to the Hill

It was more of the same today as Attorney General Mukasey testified before the House Judiciary Committee. As he had before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, Mr. Mukasey spent much of the four-hour hearing refusing to answer questions on just about everything. The answers he did give, however, provided even less comfort.

Mr. Mukasey informed committee members that he would absolutely not launch a criminal investigation into the CIA’s use of waterboarding – despite yesterday’s confirmation by the White House that the CIA had in fact used the technique on three individuals. Rather, he asserted, no investigation was necessary because waterboarding was legal at the time it was used, since it had been authorized by a controversial and secret opinion written by the Office of Legal Counsel. Responding to a stunned Rep. Bill Delahunt's (D-MA) questions on the subject, Mr. Mukasey stated that “[the DOJ] could not investigate or prosecute somebody for acting in reliance on a Justice Department opinion… Justified reliance could not be the subject of a prosecution.” When asked whether he had reviewed the reasoning of the now-infamous opinion purporting to authorize waterboarding, Mr. Mukasey echoed last week's refrain, saying that waterboarding is not now authorized and thus does not require his attention or legal analysis.

Now that Mr. Mukasey has effectively resurrected the Nuremberg defense as a principle of law recognized by the Justice Department, we all have ample cause to feel even more troubled after the oversight hearings than we were when they began.

Daily Dose

  • Good, clean fun: White House defends waterboarding [WP, LATimes]
  • New information in CIA tapes case [NYT, LATimes]
  • Editorial: The CIA’s criminal admission [BostonGlobe]
  • Mukasey to House Judiciary Committee: no intention of investigating waterboarding [TPMMuckraker] or warrentless wiretapping, for that matter [TPMMuckraker]
  • File this one under things you'd rather not hear your attorney general say: Relax! Everything's legal as long as the DOJ says so [TPMMuckraker]

Mukasey at the Bat - Part 2

Today, Attorney General Mukasey will testify before the House Judiciary Committee. In conjunction with that hearing, AFJ has released a report card analyzing the progress, or lack thereof, Mr. Mukasey has made in his first three months at the Department of Justice. Here are some questions we’d like to see posed to Mr. Mukasey after his disappointing performance in the Senate Judiciary Committee last week:

· On FISA: Your opening statement to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary demanded legislation that would immunize telephone companies against liability for cooperation with the Bush administration’s warrantless wiretapping program. Why should we not trust our federal courts to adjudicate the conduct and good (or bad) faith of these companies?
· On Torture: You have refused to state clearly whether waterboarding is torture and hence prohibited by United States law. In part, you have based this refusal on a desire to avoid “tipping off” our enemies. Doesn’t your statement that waterboarding is not “currently authorized for use in the CIA program” tip off our enemies in exactly this way?
· On Politicization: As you know, Inspector General Fine is undertaking an investigation into the dismissal of United States Attorneys and other allegations of politicization in your Department. Are any former or current employees of the Justice Department refusing to cooperate in that investigation and, if so, what are their names?
· On Rebuilding the Department: Can you tell us why there are sixteen districts that have acting or interim United States Attorneys, instead of Senate-confirmed U.S. Attorneys, and still have no nominee from President Bush?

Watch the hearing live or check back later on Justice Watch to see if these questions were answered.

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Daily Dose

  • Sen. Specter takes heat from conservatives on judges [TheHill]
  • Bush threatens veto on FISA fix [AP via WP]
  • Sen. Durbin calls for waterboarding investigation [TPMMuckraker]

Tuesday, February 5, 2008

FISA Update—Don’t Hold Your Breath

After passing a fifteen-day extension of the “Protect America Act” early last week, the Senate finally resumed debate of the replacement surveillance legislation yesterday. Leaders on both sides of the aisle came to an agreement about the process for moving forward, and sponsors of the bill’s dozen pending amendments took to the floor to defend their proposals. Just when it seemed that the Senate was poised to vote on those amendments, some of which would vastly improve the feeble legislation, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) unexpectedly threw sand in the gears.

Following a motion to end debate on the pending economic stimulus package—a motion that passed 80 to 4—Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) was set to proceed on an up-or-down vote on the stimulus package and then turn to the surveillance bill, when Senator McConnell objected. Having voted minutes before to end debate on the stimulus package, Senator McConnell would now “insist on running out the clock on 30 hours of debate.” According to The Las Vegas Sun:

There was no way he could proceed without reading [the two-page stimulus bill]. Under Senate rules, he gets 30 hours to review, and he was going to take them. In the meantime, he would not assent to votes on the wiretapping bill.

Senator McConnell’s surprise announcement drew the immediate ire of Senator Reid, who accused him of attempting to delay votes on the surveillance legislation and force the Senate into a last-minute rubberstamping vote of the Bush Administration’s preferred bill. Visibly frustrated, Senator Reid declared, “I am dismayed that we are going to have to stay in session tonight and do nothing, and stay in session tomorrow and do nothing.”

While the Senate remains paralyzed on the surveillance bill, President Bush has taken this opportunity to renew his veto-threat of any surveillance legislation that does not retroactively immunize telephone companies for their participation in his illegal warrantless wiretapping program.

The Senate will resume consideration of the bill after Senator McConnell’s legislative “time-out” has expired. Tell your Senators to reject immunity, insist on oversight, and rebuff the Bush Administration’s assertion that it can secretly spy on innocent Americans without repercussions.

Daily Dose

  • AG revises DOJ equal-employment opportunity policy [WP]
  • "McCain and the Supreme Court" [WSJ]
  • CIA director confirms use of waterboarding in three cases [REUTERS, TPMMuckraker]
  • McConnell backpedals on waterboarding [TPMMuckraker]

Monday, February 4, 2008

Daily Dose

  • House Judiciary Committee set to grill Mukasey this week; Rep. Conyers already pressing AG for more answers [TPMMuckraker]
  • Sen. Durbin to Mukasey: withhold answers and we’ll withhold deputy nominee [ChicagoTribune, TPMMuckraker]
  • AG still wishy-washy on waterboarding [LATimes]
  • Editorial: Mukasey on Waterboarding [PhiladephiaInquirer]
  • Editorial: It’s torture; it’s illegal [LATimes]
  • "Hide and Seek With the Justice Department" [NoComment]