|
|
|
Democrats Continue Push for Iraq Troop Withdrawal
Law & Politics |
2007/07/21 22:53
|
Sen. Harry Reid offered his cooperation in December when the Iraq Study Group unveiled its recommendations with a plaintive call for a bipartisan effort to change the course of the war. "Democrats will work with our Republican colleagues," promised the Nevada Democrat and soon-to-be majority leader, just weeks after an election that swept Democrats into the congressional majority on a wave of public frustration over Iraq. Eight bitter months and nine major Iraq-related votes later, the meaning of Reid's pledge has come into sharp focus: Democrats will work with any GOP lawmaker willing to vote for a mandatory troop withdrawal; other Republicans need not apply.
This bellicose, uncompromising legislative strategy — on display again this week as Reid refused to allow votes on nonbinding GOP-backed Iraq proposals — has been an obstacle to any real bipartisan compromise on the war all year. And it effectively ended any chance that a significant number of Republican lawmakers critical of the war would join with Democrats this summer on any Iraq-related legislation.
The Democratic strategy has yet to yield many tangible results. Just eight of the 250 Republicans in the House and Senate have joined with Democrats calling for a withdrawal.
And President Bush has shown no sign of retreating from his troop buildup, which has boosted the U.S. force in Iraq to 158,000.
But Reid's approach reflects a simple calculation by senior Democrats about how to force a president they see as stubborn to begin winding down U.S. military involvement in Iraq.
Reid and his allies, enraged by years of being brushed off and belittled by the White House, do not believe the president will respond to legislation that merely urges, rather than orders, a new course, even if it is backed by substantial numbers of congressional Republicans.
"The president doesn't take advice," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee and an architect of the current strategy.
Instead, in the face of continued defiance from the White House, Democrats in the House and Senate are focusing their efforts on making their Republican colleagues as uncomfortable as possible in the belief that that is the only way to get through to the president.
All year, Democrats have forced GOP lawmakers to vote on withdrawal proposals, betting that with each vote Republicans who back the president will feel the renewed rage of voters at home.
Democrats hope that, in turn, will drive Republicans to pressure the president to abandon his Iraq strategy or risk ruining the party's election prospects in 2008.
Since January, Senate Democrats have orchestrated nine major votes on measures designed to change course in Iraq; House Democrats have arranged for four.
Every proposal but one has died in the Senate, where Republicans have used that chamber's rules to block the measures.
(An emergency war spending bill with a withdrawal timeline passed but was vetoed by the president in May.)
This week, the latest proposal, which would have required that most troops be out of Iraq by April 30, died as Democrats failed to reach the 60-vote supermajority needed to cut off debate.
At the same time, Reid stunned Republicans when he shut down votes on alternatives that would have given them opportunities to back less forceful measures. The move locked a political escape hatch for GOP lawmakers, denying them opportunities to tell their constituents that they voted for legislation calling on the president to change course.
One measure — backed by Republican Sens. John W. Warner of Virginia and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, both widely respected experts on national security — would have required the president to plan for a withdrawal, but would not have required the Bush administration to implement the plan.
A second proposal, which had collected six Republican and eight Democratic co-sponsors, would have called on the president to implement the 79 recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, including a new diplomatic initiative in the Middle East. However, it too would not have required a change in course. |
|
|
|
|
|
Court grants evidence to Guantanamo lawyers
Lawyer Blog News |
2007/07/21 18:53
|
A federal appeals court on Friday ruled lawyers for Guantanamo prisoners should have access to nearly all government evidence so they can challenge detainees' designation as "unlawful enemy combatants." The unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington was a blow to the Bush administration's attempt to limit the lawyers' access to only the evidence presented to a U.S. military tribunal that made the determinations. The ruling came on the same day President George W. Bush ordered the CIA to comply with Geneva Conventions against torture in dealing with detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and secret CIA prisons elsewhere. "Contrary to the position of the government, the record on review consists of all the information a tribunal is authorized to obtain and consider," the court ruling stated. The court also ruled that detainees' lawyers should have access to classified information relating to clients' cases. "Certain highly sensitive information" may be withheld from the lawyers, but not from the court, the judges ruled. Lawyers for the detainees argued in mid-May that being able to review all documents compiled by the U.S. government, not just those presented to the military tribunal, could help them clear the detainees, some of whom have been jailed for more than five years. There are about 385 detainees at Guantanamo, which was set up to handle prisoners captured by the United States following the September 11 attacks. U.S. government attorneys have argued that any evidence that could help clear prisoners would have been turned over to the military tribunal that made the "unlawful enemy combatant" determination. In rejecting that argument, the court ruled that an adequate review of the tribunal's determination cannot be made "without seeing all the evidence, any more than one can tell whether a fraction is more or less than one-half by looking only at the numerator and not at the denominator." The court also rejected the government's position that lawyers should only have one eight-hour visit to Guantanamo to obtain approval from a prisoner to represent him.
The judges said a second visit would allow the lawyer "time to earn the detainee's trust." Democrats in Congress are considering legislation calling for closing the Guantanamo prison, arguing indefinite detentions and allegations of prisoner mistreatment, which the military denies, is hurting the United States' reputation abroad and stoking potential acts of terrorism. |
|
|
|
|
|
Ga. top court finishes hearing Wilson's appeal
Lawyer Blog News |
2007/07/21 17:55
|
The Georgia Supreme Court heard arguments Friday morning on a pair of appeals in the closely watched Genarlow Wilson case, though no ruling was expected immediately. The courtroom was packed for the hearing, and arguments were broadcast live over the Internet. The hearing came after justices decided earlier this month to speed up the process in the case of Wilson, the Douglas County man imprisoned for receiving oral sex from a 15-year-old girl when he was 17. Wilson's attorneys argue his 10-year prison sentence is cruel and unusual punishment. The justices are considering two appeals in the case. Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker is appealing a Monroe County Superior Court judge's decision to reduce Wilson's felony conviction to a misdemeanor and free him from prison. Baker said the judge overstepped his authority when he granted Wilson's motion last month. Following the Monroe County judge's decision, Wilson's attorneys requested he be released on bond pending Baker's appeal, but on June 27, the trial court in Douglas County denied the request. Wilson's attorneys have appealed that decision. B.J. Bernstein, Wilson's attorney, addressed the bond issue first at Friday's hearing, arguing for 10 minutes that her client should be granted bond while his case is under appeal. "Every day that a defendant spends in jail is a precious day in their life," Bernstein told the justices. Bernstein said that in the past 10 days, "two clients of mine died in prison." Bernstein argued that the trial court, in refusing bond, improperly applied the criminal appeal bond statute when it should have applied the habeas bond statute, since the Monroe County judge had ruled on a writ of habeas corpus, determining that Wilson had the right to make a claim of cruel and unusual punishment. However, Douglas County District Attorney David McDade, the original prosecutor on Wilson's case, countered in his time before the justices that state law is clear that "no appeal bond shall be granted to any person who is convicted of a list of crimes, and aggravated child molestation is included in that list." "It's not vague. It's not gray. It's not subject to interpretation," McDade said. "It is the plain letter of the law that applies in this case." In its appeal of the reduction of the felony conviction to a misdemeanor, the state has argued that the ruling could open the door for many other sexual criminals to have their sentences reduced. Wilson's attorneys argued that such fears are invalid and do not justify maintaining such a harsh sentence for consensual teen sex. Video cameras and still photographers lined the walls well before the arguments began. Outside, satellite trucks and Georgia State Patrol cars were parked all along the street, and security was high. Officers were posted all around the building and on the floor where the Supreme Court meets. Former state Rep. Matthew Towery, the author of the 1995 law Wilson was charged with violating, submitted a friend of the court brief supporting his release. "The General Assembly never intended for the Child Protection Act's harsh felony sentences designed to punish adults who prey on children to be used to punish consensual sexual acts between teenagers close in age," Towery's brief said. The state Legislature in 2006 changed the law, making oral sex between teens close in age a misdemeanor. The state Court of Appeals ruled that the new lasaveClicked(kSaveBtn,null,true)w could not be applied retroactively and the state Supreme Court upheld that ruling. Bernstein argued in her legal brief that the move by state lawmakers to change the law marked a "tectonic shift in how Georgia views voluntary consensual teen sex and its punishment." "The new reality is that teen sexual experimentation is commonplace in an era where the media bombards teens with sexual imagery," she wrote. Bernstein said it is extremely rare in Georgia for lawmakers to pass legislation softening punishment, especially for an emotionally charged crime like child molestation. But the state countered that it is well established that criminals are subject to the penalty that is in place when they violate the law. To begin to apply legislative changes retroactively would invite chaos and have a far-reaching effect throughout the criminal justice system, Baker argued. "The decision in this case not only affects Petitioner, but it potentially affects countless others who may be in the prison system or on probation or who have completed their sentences," he wrote. |
|
|
|
|
|
EMU's law firm bill to total almost $450,000
Headline News |
2007/07/21 12:59
|
The total bill for an independent investigation into a campus cover-up of a student's murder at Eastern Michigan University is nearly $450,000, the lead investigator confirmed Thursday. The financial fallout of the botched handling of information in the dorm room rape and slaying of 22-year-old Laura Dickinson could hit nearly $1.5 million when the costs of the independent probe, severance agreements and anticipated federal fines are totaled. EMU officials have not said how the those costs could affect the university's budget. But Regent Jim Stapleton said Thursday that the cost of the law firm's report was justified. "I really don't know how you can put a pricetag on the safety of students," Stapleton said. "The report has shown where we need to improve and how we can go about the business of making our campus safer." The Board of Regents commissioned the Butzel Long law firm to investigate what occurred in the wake of student Laura Dickinson's death last December. In a nearly 600-page report, Butzel Long laid blame on several administrators for failing to warn the public about the suspicious nature of Dickinson's death, despite significant evidence that pointed to homicide. That report, and a U.S. Department of Education investigation, led to the firing this week of EMU President John Fallon and the forced retirements of Vice President for Student Affairs Jim Vick and Public Safety Director Cindy Hall. EMU has agreed to pay out about $542,000 in severance and contract agreements with Fallon, Vick and Hall. The Department of Education cited EMU for seven Clery Act violations - which one expert said could lead to as much as $412,500 in fines - but a decision on the penalties isn't expected for nearly 60 days. Rich Hewlett, a partner in Detroit-based Butzel Long, said the probe involved 1,831 total hours work, amounting to about $430,000 in attorney fees and $19,000 in administrative and clerical costs. The law firm's report, released June 8, faulted EMU for a variety of systemic administrative failures - including lax reporting of crime statistics, inadequate disclosure of campus security policies and failure to update its daily crime log.
Despite the probe's findings, Butzel Long said it could not conclude that EMU officials were acting out a desire to protect the university's reputation. The firm's team of four lawyers conducted 80 interviews and reviewed more than 1,000 pages of documents, Hewlett said. Butzel Long investigators also worked on EMU's behalf during the Department of Education probe, Hewlett said. Hewlett would not say if it was the largest probe the firm had done, but said the public nature of the case and the level of detail in the report were noteworthy.
Stapleton said EMU interviewed three law firms before selecting Butzel Long for the job. Stapleton said the law firm will help EMU analyze new policies as they are developed, and will also review the university's response to the government's report, which is due by Aug. 3. |
|
|
|
|
|
Blagojevich campaign fund pays $1.1 million to law firm
Headline News |
2007/07/21 12:58
|
A Chicago law firm has received more than $1.1 million in legal fees from Governor Rod Blagojevich's (bluh-GOY'-uh-vitchz) campaign fund since 2006. So far this year, the governor's campaign has paid Winston and Strawn more than $163,000. The campaign reported raising 374,000 & $352 in the first six months of this year, while spending $767,000 & $551. That left 283,000 & $782 in cash. Blagojevich campaign spokesman Doug Scofield declined to release details about the legal work performed by Winston and Strawn but said the campaign uses the firm for all its legal work. The campaign has paid legal fees to Winston and Strawn since 2003. The amounts increased significantly after a federal investigation was launched into administration hiring practices. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sony Wants Class Action in Federal Courts
Class Action News |
2007/07/20 23:04
|
The Sony Electronics Corporation "removed" a class action lawsuit from California state court to federal district court on Tuesday. The lawsuit concerns defects to Sony's "Trinitron" televisions. Sony refuted the complaint but admitted that the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million. "Removal" is a legal term allowing a defendant to move a case from state court to federal court if it believes (and defends a challenge from the plaintiff) that federal court is the correct venue in which to try the suit. The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 requires that all class actions involving damages exceeding $5 million be brought in federal district courts rather than state courts. In this case, Sony is arguing that because the damages sought will likely exceed $5 million dollars, federal court, rather than state court, is the proper venue.
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|