 |
|

Legal news from Thursday, July 31, 2008 |
 |
|


Federal judge rejects White House privilege claims in Miers subpoena case
Mike Rosen-Molina on July 31, 2008 1:31 PM ET

[JURIST] A judge in the US District Court for the District of Columbia Thursday rejected arguments [opinion, PDF; CREW press release] that senior White House officials are protected from congressional subpoena by executive privilege, ruling that former White House legal counsel Harriet Miers [official profile] must testify before a House committee regarding the US Attorneys firing scandal [JURIST news archive]. Judge John Bates did find that Miers may claim executive privilege in response to certain questions, but he ordered Miers and White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten [official profile] to turn over all documents requested by the subpoena and a list of any documents withheld under executive privilege. Bates wrote: [E]xecutive privilege is not absolute even when Congress -- rather than a grand jury -- is the party requesting the information. And a claim of absolute immunity from compulsory process cannot be erected by the Executive as a surrogate for the claim of absolute executive privilege already firmly rejected by the courts. Presidential autonomy, such as it is, cannot mean that the Executives actions are totally insulated from scrutiny by Congress. That would eviscerate Congresss historical oversight function. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) said [press release] in response to the opinion that the Bush administration's use of executive privilege has only allowed it to hide its "inappropriate and illegal actions," and US House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) also lauded the decision, saying [press release] that the ruling is a reaffirmation the governmental system of checks and balances. Reuters has more. AP has additional coverage.
In February, members of the House voted [JURIST report] to hold Miers in contempt of Congress [Cornell Law backgrounder] for failing to testify and both Miers and Bolten in contempt for refusing to produce documents related to the 2006-2007 firings. The White House has said that the information sought in the inquiry is protected by executive privilege [press briefing transcript] and that both Miers and Bolten are immune from prosecution. In March, the House Judiciary Committee filed a lawsuit [complaint, PDF; press release] to enforce subpoenas seeking information from Miers and Bolten regarding the US Attorneys firing scandal. On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee voted to hold Karl Rove in contempt [Reuters report] for defying a subpoena to testify about the alleged politicization of the Department of Justice.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

South Africa court rejects Zuma bid to exclude evidence in corruption case
Mike Rosen-Molina on July 31, 2008 11:40 AM ET

[JURIST] The South African Constitutional Court [official website] on Thursday rejected a motion [opinion, PDF; opinion summary] by politician Jacob Zuma [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] to exclude evidence from his upcoming corruption trial. Zuma had argued [JURIST report] that evidence seized in 2005 raids by the Directorate of Special Investigations [official backgrounder; BBC report] should be thrown out because the raids violated his rights to privacy and a fair trial. The court upheld the validity of the warrants used in the raids, confirming a November 2007 decision [JURIST report] by the South African Supreme Court of Appeal, explaining: [T]he application for the warrants, the terms of the warrants themselves, and their subsequent execution were lawful, in view of the applicable common-law, statutory and constitutional principles. For that reason, although the applications for leave to appeal are granted, the appeals themselves are refused and the judgments of the Supreme Court of Appeal appealed against are confirmed. The court also held [opinion, PDF; summary] that papers obtained by the Mauritius government [JURIST report] believed to document meetings between Zuma and arms manufacturer Thint were also admissible. Reuters has more. The Mail and Guardian has local coverage.
Zuma has been facing corruption allegations [BBC timeline] and other charges for several years. He was first charged with corruption in 2005, but those charges were later dismissed [JURIST report] because prosecutors failed to follow proper procedures. In December 2007, South Africa's National Prosecuting Authority [official website] served an indictment [JURIST report] on Zuma, charging him with corruption, fraud, money laundering and racketeering related to alleged bribes received from Thint, a subsidiary of the France-based Thales Group [corporate website]. His trial is scheduled to begin in August. Zuma has said that the charges against him are part of a politically motivated effort by outgoing President Thabo Mbeki [official profile] to upset his plans to run in the 2009 presidential election.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Alabama Supreme Court stays execution after DNA evidence questioned
Devin Montgomery on July 31, 2008 11:00 AM ET

[JURIST] The Alabama Supreme Court [official website] voted 5-4 on Wednesday to indefinitely stay the execution [order, PDF] of Thomas Arthur [advocacy website], who had been sentenced to death by lethal injection for a 1982 contract killing. Arthur would have been executed on Thursday. The court did not disclose its reason for the stay, but the decision comes after lawyers for Arthur filed an affidavit in which another prisoner, Bobby Ray Gilbert, confessed to the murder [Times Daily report], and an assistant attorney general said the state could not find evidence that the defense had petitioned to test for DNA. The Innocence Project has petitioned [advocacy website] Alabama Governor Bob Riley to order DNA testing of the evidence, if found, in order to potentially clear Arthur of the charges. The New York Times has more. The Birmingham News has local coverage.
Arthur's execution would have been Alabama's first since the end of the national de-facto moratorium [JURIST report] on the death penalty, during which states ceased executions while the US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] considered Baze v. Rees [Duke law case backgrounder; JURIST report], a case which challenged the legality of Kentucky's lethal injection protocol. The Court upheld the procedure, ruling that it did not violate the Constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. In January, the Court stayed the execution [order, PDF; JURIST report] of another Alabama death row inmate as it considered the case and a circuit court stayed the sentence [JURIST report] of a third in October 2007 for the same reason.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

California threatens to sue EPA over creation of emissions regulations
Mike Rosen-Molina on July 31, 2008 10:40 AM ET

[JURIST] California Attorney General Jerry Brown [official website] formally notified [letter, PDF; press release] the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] Thursday that the state would file a lawsuit against the agency if it refused to issue rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions from ships, aircraft, industrial and agricultural machinery, and other vehicles. Brown said that California had petitioned the EPA three times seeking a regulatory ruling, but that the EPA had disregarded the requests other than to issue an "Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (ANPR) [EPA materials] on July 11. The letter notes: Describing the petitions and soliciting comments does not suffice as a response to petitioners' requests. Moreover, although the ANPR includes various feasible mechanisms for reducing emissions from marine vessels, aircraft and nonroad vehicles and engines, the recommendations are inadequate responses to our petitions. EPA suggests only that these tools are available, but does not recommend that any of the measures be adopted. EPAs unresponsive actions evade the rendering of a judicially reviewable final action on the petitions simply to avoid accusations of delay. [Citations omitted] Brown said that if the EPA does not issue greenhouse restrictions within 180 days as required under the Clean Air Act (CAA) [text], California will file a complaint for unreasonable delay. Reuters has more. AP has additional coverage.
Last year the EPA denied a request for a waiver [JURIST report] that would have allowed California and 16 other states to impose stricter greenhouse gas emissions standards on cars and light trucks. That was the first time that the EPA had denied California a waiver since Congress established the state's right to seek CAA waivers in 1967. In January, California filed suit to appeal the denial [JURIST report]. In May, a report by the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that the White House had influenced the EPA decision [JURIST report]. Last month, the Bush administration refused to turn over requested documents [JURIST report] concerning the decision to the committee, citing executive privilege.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Prisoner settles eagle feather case against Wyoming prison system
Deirdre Jurand on July 31, 2008 8:32 AM ET

[JURIST] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced Wednesday that a Native American prisoner in Wyoming had settled his lawsuit [ACLU press release] against the Wyoming Department of Corrections after Department officials agreed to allow the man to keep up to four eagle feathers in his cell for religious purposes. Andrew John Yellowbear, a member of the Northern Arapaho Tribe, was incarcerated in the Wyoming State Penitentiary (WSP) [official website] in 2006 after receiving a life sentence [Star-Tribune report] for the murder of his daughter. He alleged in his suit [docket] that he was only allowed one eagle feather in his cell even though Department policy [text, PDF] allows for more, and that WSP officials confiscated that one feather after he filed the lawsuit, all in violation of the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) [texts]. The ACLU agreed to represent him [press release] earlier this month, and ACLU staff attorney Stephen Pevar said of the settlement: The fact that officials at WSP will now ensure that American Indian prisoners have access to eagle feathers is a great victory for religious freedom. The feathers are used to communicate prayers to the Creator and to receive answers to prayers. Denying Mr. Yellowbear these highly spiritual feathers was akin to denying Catholics access to a rosary or crucifix. The Casper Star-Tribune has more.
Yellowbear had initially petitioned the US Fish and Wildlife Service's National Eagle Repository [official website] for 10 feathers, the most allowed under law. Under US law [16 USC s. 668 text], only the National Eagle Repository may distribute bald and golden eagle feathers, and petitioners for the feathers must be enrolled members of a federally recognized tribe seeking them for religious purposes.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Thailand court convicts wife of ex-PM Thaksin for tax evasion
Devin Montgomery on July 31, 2008 8:26 AM ET

[JURIST] A Thai court on Thursday convicted Pojamarn Shinawatra [JURIST news archive], the wife of former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra [BBC profile; JURIST news archive], of tax evasion for transferring $16.3 million worth of stock to her step-brother and secretary, who were also convicted. Pojamarn and step-brother Bannapot Damapong were each sentenced to three years and her secretary was sentenced to two years imprisonment for the crime. Pojamarn has said the transfer was exempt from taxation as a gift, and all three have been released on bail while they appeal the ruling. Pojamarn also faces a number of corruption charges made by the country's Assets Examination Commission. In April, she pleaded not guilty to charges [JURIST reports] of conflict of interest and malfeasance stemming from a 2003 agreement with the government-directed Financial Institutions Development Fund [official website] to purchase land said to be worth three times more than the $26 million she paid for it. AFP has more. The Bangkok Post has local coverage.
On Tuesday, the government brought its latest charges [JURIST report] against Thaksin, alleging that he and 47 others were involved in misconduct related to the country's lottery system. Earlier this month, the Thai Attorney General's Office filed other corruption charges [JURIST report] against Thaksin relating to a 2003 resolution that reduced fees paid by mobile phone companies to state telecommunications agencies. Lawyers for Thaksin have been jailed [JURIST report] for attempting to bribe court officials in one of Thaksin's cases, and current Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej [BBC profile] is facing possible impeachment proceedings [JURIST report] due in part to his party's close association with Thaksin . Thaksin and Pojamarn had been in self-imposed exile from Thailand after Thaksin was ousted in a military coup in 2006, but returned to the country earlier this year [JURIST reports].


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|
| For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...
|
|
|