<< Goldstein's Nomination Speculation | Main | Sins of Omission >>


Blog Scan

| 0 Comments
Supreme Court Hears "Difficult" Antiterrorism Case:  At SCOTUSblog, Lyle Denniston reports on today's oral arguments in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project (08-1498) and Humanitarian Law Project v. Holder (09-89).  The two cases address whether provisions in 18 U.S.C. ยง2339B(a)(1), a 1996 law designed to combat terrorism, are unconstitutional with respect to speech that furthers lawful, nonviolent activities of proscribed organizations.  After today's oral arguments, Denniston was left with the impression that the Supreme Court might be "tempted to conclude that, perhaps, the law may go too far."  The transcript is available here.  Howard Bashman provides links to media coverage of the argument at How Appealing. 

Counsel in Death Penalty Cases:  "Hire a Lawyer, Escape the Death Penalty?" That's what Scott Phillips proposes in his Issue Brief from the American Constitution Society.  A reader tipped us off to the piece. Doug Berman also links to the brief at Sentencing Law and Policy.  The article's summary details a study conducted by Phillips of murder cases in Harris County, Texas, where Phillips compared the outcomes in cases where the defendant hired a lawyer with cases where the defendant had a court-appointed lawyer.  Phillips' study led him to conclude that, "[h]iring counsel for the entire case not only eliminates the chance of death, but also dramatically increases the chance of an acquittal."  One interesting thing to note:  Phillips' examined 504 adults indicted for capital murder in Harris County between 1992 and 1999.  The District Attorney only sought the death penalty in 129 of these cases.  That means the death penalty was sought in approximately 26% of murder cases in Harris County.  While defense counsel may have something to do with who receives the death penalty, the  prosecutor's own evaluation of the case also plays a significant role.

AG Holder Addresses His Critics:  At Blog of Legal Times, Mike Scarcella reports that Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr. has responded to those critical of the use of civilian federal courts to prosecute terror defendants.  In comments made at the Department of Justice's press conference announcing the guilty plea of Najibullah Zazi, Attorney General Holder declared that the denigration of civilian federal courts to prosecute terror defendants "flies in the face of the facts" and is more about politics than the cases.  While Holder believes that "[w]e are at war against a very dangerous, intelligent and adaptable enemy, and we must use every weapon available to us to win that war," he also believes "that our federal civilian criminal justice system has the ability to incapacitate terrorists, has the ability to gain intelligence from those terrorists and is a valuable tool in our fight against terrorism."  Today's News Scan provides a link to the details of Najibullah's plea deal.

Will the Supreme Court Review the Prosecutor/Judge Affair Case?  At Wall Street Journal's Law Blog, Ashby Jones wonders whether the Supreme Court will grant certiorari to convicted murderer Charles Hood, and address whether Hood's due process rights were violated when the judge trying the case had a secret, intimate sexual relationship for years with the prosecuting attorney.  Adam Liptak covers Hood's petition, and an amicus petition from 21 former judges and prosecutors and 30 legal ethics experts, in today's New York Times. Hood's Petition for certiorari is available here

Leave a comment

Monthly Archives