Detainee Lawyer's Challenge Government's Guidelines: Jordan Weissmann writes, on Blog of the Legal Times, that the Guantanamo detainees' defense lawyers are challenging the new definition of "enemy combatants" on grounds that it is still too broad and violates traditional laws of war. The detainees' lawyers filed a memorandum on Friday arguing that the president is still overstepping his legal bounds. The document points out that the Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), on which the Administration has based its detention power, says nothing explicit about detention powers, and that the Supreme
Court, in cases such as Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004), has chosen to apply a
narrow reading of the resolution. The detainees lawyers claim that the AUMF was meant to prevent the president's detention power to extend further than it would traditional rules of war.
Prosecuting Teens for "sexting": Doug Berman blogs on Sentencing Law and Policy on the legal and social issues surrounding recent prosecutions for teen "sexting." Berman reports that last week the ACLU filed a complaint against a Pennsylvania district attorney for threatening three high school girls with child porn charges for appearing partially undressed in cell-phone pictures. According to Berman, the complaint asserts the D.A. violated the girls' "First Amendment expression rights and their parents' rights to control their children's upbringing." As Berman notes, this raises some interesting questions as to whether teen "sexting" should draw harsh penalties. Particularly because in some states, such as New Jersey, it has been reported that the only laws applicable to these cases were intended to punish sexual predators and child pornography traffickers.
Prosecuting Teens for "sexting": Doug Berman blogs on Sentencing Law and Policy on the legal and social issues surrounding recent prosecutions for teen "sexting." Berman reports that last week the ACLU filed a complaint against a Pennsylvania district attorney for threatening three high school girls with child porn charges for appearing partially undressed in cell-phone pictures. According to Berman, the complaint asserts the D.A. violated the girls' "First Amendment expression rights and their parents' rights to control their children's upbringing." As Berman notes, this raises some interesting questions as to whether teen "sexting" should draw harsh penalties. Particularly because in some states, such as New Jersey, it has been reported that the only laws applicable to these cases were intended to punish sexual predators and child pornography traffickers.

Leave a comment