Editor Matthew Rothschild – An Outrageous Ruling

On January 8, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth District placed the imprimatur of legality upon one of the most egregious moves by Bush, Ashcroft, and Rumsfeld: the holding of American citizens as “enemy combatants” in military brigs without charging them with a crime and without giving them access to a lawyer or other standard due process protections…
A lower court judge, Robert Doumar, did not cotton to the Administration’s treatment. “This case appears to be the first in American jurisprudence where an American citizen has been held incommunicado and subjected to an indefinite detention in the continental United States without charges, without any findings by a military tribunal, and without access to a lawyer,” he wrote.
When the government tried to assert a right to keep Hamdi in the brig, the judge asked one of Ashcroft’s lawyers: “So, the Constitution doesn’t apply to Mr. Hamdi?”
Incredibly, the Fourth Circuit basically said it doesn’t. The President has “extraordinary broad authority as Commander in Chief,” the court said, and this “compels courts to assume a deferential posture in reviewing exercises of this authority.”
But the Fifth Amendment states that “no person” shall be “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” Throw that one out the window.

Continue reading →

Whitewashing A Mississippi Judge
By George E. Curry, NNPA Editor-in-Chief

Significantly, it is Pickering, not his opponents, who keeps bringing up his decision to testify against the Klan. When Pickering was first considered for a federal judgeship in 1990, he cited that act to counter the NAACP

Bush Wants To Elevate Judge With Suspect Past
By Cynthia Tucker.

After all, President Bush has always claimed to be interested in a racially diverse Republican Party.
But he isn’t serious. If he were, he would not insist on sending U.S. District Judge Charles Pickering, a close associate of Lott’s, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit (Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana). Pickering’s political and judicial record on issues of race is troubling, at best.
Early in his career, Pickering established a record of staunch support for segregationist views. But his many friends and supporters — not just Lott, but also well-known activists such as James Charles Evers, brother of slain civil rights leader Medgar Evers — claim he has long since renounced those views and worked to eliminate racial disparities in Mississippi.
That may be true. But Pickering’s recent record still suggests a glaring racial insensitivity — a callousness that ought to give the White House pause. Just one example is Pickering’s handling of a 1994 cross-burning case over which he presided as a federal judge.
Pickering was upset because Daniel Swan, one of three white men convicted, was sentenced to 7 1/2 years under strict federal guidelines. Two co-defendants had received lighter sentences because they pled guilty. (There is nothing unusual about prosecutors offering lesser sentences in exchange for guilty pleas.)
Pickering called prosecutors into his chambers to insist that they reduce the sentence against Swan, calling his actions a “drunken prank.” He threatened to order a new trial if they didn’t comply. (The men not only burned a cross in the yard of an interracial couple, but they also fired shots into the house, which just missed the couple’s baby. I can’t imagine Pickering demanding a lesser sentence for a black man convicted of a similar crime.)
Pickering also called the U.S. Justice Department (news – web sites) to complain about federal sentencing guidelines, even suggesting that U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno (news – web sites) intervene. Eventually, prosecutors caved in and dropped one of the charges against Swan — although he had already been convicted. As a result, Pickering was able to sentence Swan to 27 months.
Not only did Pickering’s handling of the case raise questions of racial insensitivity, but his lobbying on behalf of a convicted criminal was also shamefully unethical.
So were Pickering’s answers to questions about his record during an earlier confirmation process, in 1990. Asked about his relationship with the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission, a staunchly anti-black group formed in the 1950s to resist the civil rights movement, Pickering said: “I never had any contact with the Sovereignty Commission.” But the record shows Pickering was an ally, voting to give the group state funds when he was a Mississippi state senator in the 1970s.

Continue reading →

Bush Sets Rules to Speed Logging in U.S. Forests
By Mike Allen and Eric Pianin for the Washington Post.

President Bush announced plans yesterday to speed up the cutting of trees and brush in national forests by curtailing environmental reviews and judicial oversight, with the aim of reducing wildfires fueled by overgrowth.
Bush acted after both houses of Congress rejected the proposed changes when he asked for them last summer. The new rules will decrease, from 200 pages to perhaps only one page, the amount of environmental impact information needed to approve clear-cutting projects in some areas…
“This plan is nothing more than a payback to the timber industry, allowing it to remove trees far from where people live,” said Amy Mall, a forest specialist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The administration proposals will be issued in a final version after a 30-day public comment period, and then will take effect. Bush was able to make the changes without congressional approval by acting under an exemption in administrative regulations for projects that do not have a significant impact on the human environment.
The plan applies to 10 national forests, most of them in mountain and western states, and the administration wants to have it in effect before the next fire season. The new rules will fundamentally change the way federal agencies manage millions of acres of forest, dramatically speeding up thinning and restoration projects by eliminating the need for full environmental impact assessments. The rules will sharply reduce the ability of opponents to delay new projects until a court has ruled, and reviews mandated by the Endangered Species Act will be quicker.
The announcement was the latest example of Bush using executive powers to accomplish aims he could not win in Congress. Last month the administration announced plans to streamline the process of conducting environmental reviews before allowing drilling, logging and other activities in national forests. Yesterday’s announcement offers new fodder to critics who say his changes in environmental policy consistently benefit executives and industries that are major Republican donors.

Continue reading →