A lawsuit that could determine whether Muslims, Jews and other non-Christians can use the holy texts of their faith to affirm courtroom testimony can move forward, the N.C. Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.

The decision means the controversy that started three years ago when a Guilford County Muslim was not allowed to use a Quran will likely go to trial.

"I'm just excited that we're going to be back in court," said Syidah Mateen, who sparked the debate. "We got over one hurdle."

State law describes laying one's hand on "Holy Scriptures" to take an oath — and it's that phrase that is at issue. The American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina argues it is broad enough to include the holy texts of Islam, Judaism and other faiths.

"All we want is people to be allowed to use the holy book of their faith," said Seth Cohen, lead attorney for the ACLU of North Carolina, which initially filed the lawsuit against the state.

Some judges in the state have allowed people to take their oaths on the Quran, but that is rare. State law also allows people to affirm their testimony by raising their right hand without using the Bible.

In August 2003, Mateen asked to take her oath on a Quran in a Guilford County court during a domestic-violence hearing. The 42-year-old Browns Summit woman was told she couldn't because the court didn't have any.

Believing she had the approval of the judge, Mateen shared her experience with other members of Greensboro's Al-Ummil Ummat Islamic Center, which then raised money to buy and donate at least eight Qurans to the Guilford County courts.

But when the Islamic center tried to deliver the holy books in 2005, the offer was rejected by the county's two top judges, who contended that state law only allows for oaths on the Bible.

When the Administrative Office of the Courts did not intervene, the ACLU of North Carolina filed a lawsuit in Wake County Superior Court on behalf of its 8,000 members, some of whom are Jewish and Muslim. Mateen was later added as a plaintiff.

In December 2005, Judge Donald L. Smith tossed the case out, ruling that both the ACLU and Mateen failed to show a legal controversy existed with the state. A three-judge panel of the appeals court disagreed.

"We conclude the complaint is sufficient to entitle both plaintiffs to litigate their claims," Chief Judge John Martin wrote in the unanimous opinion.

Cohen said the ACLU's position is that if the "Holy Scriptures" phrase in state law is not broad enough to include texts other than the Christian Bible, then it is unconstitutional and should be struck down under the First Amendment's establishment clause. But the ACLU thinks there is room under the existing law to include the Hebrew Bible, the Quran and other sacred books.

Noelle Talley, a spokeswoman for the Attorney General's Office, said lawyers with the state were reviewing the appeals court decision and had not yet decided whether to ask the N.C. Supreme Court to take up the matter. The state has 30 days to appeal the decision.

Without an appeal, a trial would likely be several months away, Cohen said.

The CIA and the American military have been accessing the banking and credit records of hundreds of American citizens suspected of ties to terror groups, the New York Times reported Sunday. Since 9/11, the two US government arms have been using little-known provisions of the Right to Financial Privacy Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the National Security Act  to issue a version of a "national security letter" to domestic banks, credit companies, and other financial corporations. The letters request certain financial information but are generally "noncompulsory" as the CIA and the military have no domestic enforcement authority. The FBI has also issued thousands of similar letters since Sept. 11. All three groups claim increased powers to probe the banking records of American citizens under the Patriot Act, passed in the wake of 9/11.

Democrats and civil liberties groups like the ACLU have expressed serious concern over these and other domestic spying techniques, especially as exercised by government agencies focused abroad. The military and the CIA contend that such intelligence is invaluable in finding leads and strengthening other operations. The ACLU has won two suits against the FBI  related to national security letters.

The 2006 budget shows that last year the FBI received $5.7 billion in federal funding while the DEA received $2.4 billion. The DEA said it would be unable to sustain employment at its current level if Congress does not allot an additional $95 million, and ATF officials say they need $71 million more in order to maintain its 4,900 employees. Observers say that the failure to approve 2007 budgets for the DOJ agencies could impede efforts to counter both violent crime and terrorism. While other agencies are feeling the burden of the lack of budget approval, Congress has already approved budgets for the military and for homeland security.

A federal grand jury in the Western District of Texas has returned a seven-count indictment charging Luis Posada Carriles with one count of naturalization fraud and six counts of making false statements in a naturalization proceeding, the Department of Justice announced today.

The indictment alleges that Posada, 78, a native of Cuba, knowingly attempted to obtain naturalization as a U.S. citizen unlawfully by making false statements on his application for naturalization on or about Sept. 10, 2005. The indictment also alleges that he knowingly made false statements under oath during his naturalization interview with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials on April 25 and 26, 2006.

In his naturalization interview, Posada allegedly made several false statements regarding his March 2005 entry into the United States, including statements about the transportation routes and methods used, as well as individuals who accompanied him. For example, he stated that he traveled from Honduras through Belize and entered the United States over land near Matamoros, Mexico, and Brownsville, Texas, with the assistance of an unidentified alien smuggler. In fact, Posada entered the United States by sea aboard the motor vessel “Santrina” accompanied by four individuals, the indictment alleges.

Posada further stated in his naturalization interview that he had never had any type of documentation, passport or identification from the Republic of Guatemala, when, in fact, he had a fraudulent passport issued by that nation bearing his photograph in the name of “Manuel Enrique Castillo Lopez,” the indictment alleges.

Posada is currently detained by DHS’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on administrative immigration violations. His initial court appearance in connection with the criminal charges is expected to take place early next week before a U.S. magistrate judge in the Western District of Texas.

If convicted, the defendant faces a maximum sentence of ten years imprisonment for the naturalization fraud count and five years imprisonment for each of the false statement counts.

This case was investigated by ICE. The prosecution is being handled by David B. Deitch and Paul Ahern, Trial Attorneys with the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

The federal investigation of Posada continues.

An indictment is merely a formal allegation that a defendant has committed a violation of federal criminal laws. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

The first US execution of 2007 took place Tuesday, when the state of Oklahoma executed a man by lethal injection for the 1992 murders of four people. The US Supreme Court denied Corey Duane Hamilton's request for a stay of execution and certiorari review on Monday, with Justices Souter and Stevens voting to grant the request. The Death Penalty Information Center said Hamilton is one of thirty people in the US scheduled to be executed in 2007. Death sentencing in the US hit a 30-year low in 2006.

Earlier this month, a New Jersey State commission recommended abolishing capital punishment in that state altogether, replacing it with a life sentence without the possibility of parole. If the commission's report makes its way into law New Jersey will become the first US jurisdiction to ban capital punishment in over 35 years. In December, Florida Governor Jeb Bush suspended all executions in that state after a lethal injection execution there was botched, and a federal judge effectively suspended capital punishment in California by ruling that that state's lethal injection procedure creates "an undue and unnecessary risk" of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution.

The US House of Representatives passed its first piece of legislation for the 110th Congress late Tuesday, a bill to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission remaining after the enactment of the Intelligence Reform bill in 2004. The bill provides for additional intelligence oversight and sets out an ambitious screening program for shipping cargo coming into the US. HR 1 passed with bipartisan support by a vote of 299-128, though several Congressional Republicans assailed the bill's passage as a Democratic effort to appear tough on terrorism without considering the financial implications.

Tuesday's passage of HR 1 marks the first of several key votes scheduled by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) to occur during the Democrats first 100 hours in office. Later this week the House will vote on legislation to raise the federal minimum wage and expand embryonic stem cell research.