| Balkinization   |
|
Balkinization
|
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
How To Get Tough With Civil Liberties. Oops, I Meant Terrorists
JB
David Cole reports that although Attorney General John Ashcroft has detained over 5000 persons since 9/11 as suspected terrorists, he has not obtained a single conviction. (via Talkleft):
The Detroit case was extremely weak from the outset. The government could never specify exactly what terrorist activity was allegedly being planned and never offered any evidence linking the defendants to al Qaeda. Its case consisted almost entirely of a pair of sketches and a videotape, described by an FBI agent as "casing materials" for a terrorist plot, and the testimony of a witness of highly dubious reliability seeking a generous plea deal. It now turns out that the prosecution failed to disclose to the defense evidence that other government experts did not consider the sketches and videotape to be terrorist casing materials at all and that the government's key witness had admitted to lying.
Until that reversal, the Detroit case had marked the only terrorist conviction obtained from the Justice Department's detention of more than 5,000 foreign nationals in anti-terrorism sweeps since 9/11. So Ashcroft's record is 0 for 5,000. When the attorney general was locking these men up in the immediate wake of the attacks, he held almost daily press conferences to announce how many "suspected terrorists" had been detained. No press conference has been forthcoming to announce that exactly none of them have turned out to be actual terrorists.
Comments:
How many of the 19 hijackers could have been convicted of anything had they been detained on September 10? And if they had been detained on September 10, wouldn't we be reading the same outraged articles denouncing Ashcroft for unfairly detaining innocent people who had simply intended to take a vacation, etc.?
Prior to 9/11/01, what did AG Ashcroft (including the Justice Department, FBI and other Bush Administration departments) know or should have known about the 19 hijackers that would have been cause to detain them? The 9/11 Commission did not specifically address this, despite evidence that there was information within the Bush Administration that al Queda had intentions to do harm in the U.S. Perhaps there would have been immigration violations addressed. Perhaps information could have been obtained from their detention (without torture, of course) that might have prevented terrorist acts. We don't know.
But the 5,000 detentions referenced in JB's post were supposed to be supported by evidence of some sort that apparently has not panned out, at least as yet. Stuart Buck's comment regarding the 19 hijackers would apply to anyone who may have been detained, with or without cause or evidence, who may have later committed a heinous crime. But does this mean it is appropriate for the Justice Department to preemptively and without cause detain persons? Of course, there is the small matter of the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution. The criticism in JB's post has to do with the rule of law. In addition to Ashcroft and the White House, I guess there is yet another place where the Buck does not stop. Of course, if there are errors in JB's post, commenters should point them out; but specious arguments are inappropriate. Now perhaps there should be a focus upon whether Ashcroft et al had been derelict in their sworn duties prior to 9/11/01.
Prior to 9/11/01, what did AG Ashcroft (including the Justice Department, FBI and other Bush Administration departments) know or should have known about the 19 hijackers that would have been cause to detain them? The 9/11 Commission did not specifically address this, despite evidence that there was information within the Bush Administration that al Queda had intentions to do harm in the U.S. Perhaps there would have been immigration violations addressed. Perhaps information could have been obtained from their detention (without torture, of course) that might have prevented terrorist acts. We don't know.
But the 5,000 detentions referenced in JB's post were supposed to be supported by evidence of some sort that apparently has not panned out, at least as yet. Stuart Buck's comment regarding the 19 hijackers would apply to anyone who may have been detained, with or without cause or evidence, who may have later committed a heinous crime. But does this mean it is appropriate for the Justice Department to preemptively and without cause detain persons? Of course, there is the small matter of the Bill of Rights and the rest of the Constitution. The criticism in JB's post has to do with the rule of law. In addition to Ashcroft and the White House, I guess there is yet another place where the Buck does not stop. Of course, if there are errors in JB's post, commenters should point them out; but specious arguments are inappropriate. Now perhaps there should be a focus upon whether Ashcroft et al had been derelict in their sworn duties prior to 9/11/01.
Great Blog! Ilike it.I have Free dating site for singlesTake a look if you have a minute. Thanks and have a good one!
RSS Blast instantly and automatically submits your RSS feeds to all of the major RSS feed directories on the Web. Click here: rss directories.
Great Blog! Ilike it.I have Totally Free dating site for singlesTake a look if you have a minute. Thanks and have a good one!
Post a Comment
|
Books by Balkinization Bloggers Andrew Koppelman, The Tough Luck Constitution and the Assault on Health Care Reform (Oxford University Press, 2013)
James E. Fleming and Linda C. McClain, Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues (Harvard University Press, 2013) Balkinization Symposium on Ordered Liberty: Rights, Responsibilities, and Virtues
Andrew Koppelman, Defending American Religious Neutrality (Harvard University Press, 2013)
Brian Z. Tamanaha, Failing Law Schools (University of Chicago Press, 2012)
Sanford Levinson, Framed: America's 51 Constitutions and the Crisis of Governance (Oxford University Press, 2012)
Linda C. McClain and Joanna L. Grossman, Gender Equality: Dimensions of Women's Equal Citizenship (Cambridge University Press, 2012)
Mary Dudziak, War Time: An Idea, Its History, Its Consequences (Oxford University Press, 2012)
Jack M. Balkin, Living Originalism (Harvard University Press, 2011)
Jason Mazzone, Copyfraud and Other Abuses of Intellectual Property Law (Stanford University Press, 2011)
Richard W. Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, First Amendment Stories, (Foundation Press 2011)
Jack M. Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faith in an Unjust World (Harvard University Press, 2011)
Gerard Magliocca, The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash (Yale University Press, 2011)
Bernard Harcourt, The Illusion of Free Markets: Punishment and the Myth of Natural Order (Harvard University Press, 2010)
Bruce Ackerman, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic (Harvard University Press, 2010) Balkinization Symposium on The Decline and Fall of the American Republic
Ian Ayres. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done (Bantam Books, 2010)
Mark Tushnet, Why the Constitution Matters (Yale University Press 2010)
Ian Ayres and Barry Nalebuff: Lifecycle Investing: A New, Safe, and Audacious Way to Improve the Performance of Your Retirement Portfolio (Basic Books, 2010)
Jack M. Balkin, The Laws of Change: I Ching and the Philosophy of Life (2d Edition, Sybil Creek Press 2009)
Brian Z. Tamanaha, Beyond the Formalist-Realist Divide: The Role of Politics in Judging (Princeton University Press 2009)
Andrew Koppelman and Tobias Barrington Wolff, A Right to Discriminate?: How the Case of Boy Scouts of America v. James Dale Warped the Law of Free Association (Yale University Press 2009)
Jack M. Balkin and Reva B. Siegel, The Constitution in 2020 (Oxford University Press 2009)
Heather K. Gerken, The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System Is Failing and How to Fix It (Princeton University Press 2009)
Mary Dudziak, Exporting American Dreams: Thurgood Marshall's African Journey (Oxford University Press 2008)
David Luban, Legal Ethics and Human Dignity (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007)
Ian Ayres, Super Crunchers: Why Thinking-By-Numbers is the New Way to be Smart (Bantam 2007)
Jack M. Balkin, James Grimmelmann, Eddan Katz, Nimrod Kozlovski, Shlomit Wagman and Tal Zarsky, eds., Cybercrime: Digital Cops in a Networked Environment (N.Y.U. Press 2007)
Jack M. Balkin and Beth Simone Noveck, The State of Play: Law, Games, and Virtual Worlds (N.Y.U. Press 2006)
Andrew Koppelman, Same Sex, Different States: When Same-Sex Marriages Cross State Lines (Yale University Press 2006)
Brian Tamanaha, Law as a Means to an End (Cambridge University Press 2006)
Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution (Oxford University Press 2006)
Mark Graber, Dred Scott and the Problem of Constitutional Evil (Cambridge University Press 2006)
Jack M. Balkin, ed., What Roe v. Wade Should Have Said (N.Y.U. Press 2005)
Sanford Levinson, ed., Torture: A Collection (Oxford University Press 2004) Balkin.com homepage Bibliography Conlaw.net Cultural Software Writings Opeds The Information Society Project BrownvBoard.com Useful Links Syllabi and Exams |