{"id":3143,"date":"2010-10-19T01:24:57","date_gmt":"2010-10-19T08:24:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=3143"},"modified":"2010-10-19T01:54:16","modified_gmt":"2010-10-19T08:54:16","slug":"what-is-holder-thinking","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2010\/10\/19\/what-is-holder-thinking\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Holder Thinking?!!?"},"content":{"rendered":"

I supported Holder\u2019s decision to appeal over DADT, because the Attorney General in required to defend the law of the land, however disagreeable that may be.\u00a0 In the case of Kidd v Ashcroft<\/em>, this issue does not apply.\u00a0 Holder\u2019s decision to appeal the decision from the Ninth is thoroughly reprehensible.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"19kidd\" The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether former Attorney General John Ashcroft may be sued by an American detained for 16 days. It\u2019s a case that a lower court judge said tests \u201cthe excesses of a powerful national government<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n

The lawsuit the justices decided to hear concerns whether Ashcroft could be held personally liable for the 2005 detention of an American Islamic convert who was never charged.<\/p>\n

Kansas native Abdullah al-Kidd was detained in 2003 at Dulles International Airport near Washington, D.C., as he headed to Saudi Arabia to embark on an Islamic studies program. Detained on a \u201cmaterial witness\u201d statute, he said he was housed naked and \u201cwas treated worse than murderers.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThe facts alleged in al-Kidd\u2019s complaint are chilling, and serve as a cautionary tale to law-abiding citizens of the United States who fear the excesses of a powerful national government as did many members of the Founding Generation,\u201d Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. wrote<\/a> (.pdf) in March, when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to rehear its 2009 ruling in favor of al-Kidd<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

The material-witness statute, which has increasingly been invoked following the 2001 terror attacks, is designed to allow the government to hold somebody to testify at trial if the government believes the witness may flee. Al-Kidd was never called to testify.<\/p>\n

When released from prison, al-Kidd\u2019s travel was restricted, his passport was taken, and he was required to report to probation officers for more than a year<\/strong>. He sued.<\/p>\n

Last year, the San Francisco-based appeals court ruled in favor of al-Kidd, saying the material-witness statute at issue could not be used to investigate or detain individuals without probable cause<\/a> (.pdf)\u2026 [emphasis added<\/em>]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <Wired<\/a>><\/p>\n

This case is not about defending the law of the land.\u00a0 It\u2019s about protecting a war criminal from liability for his abuse of his power against a US citizen.\u00a0 In fact, Ashcroft lied to the courts to obtain the material witness warrant.\u00a0 The effect of overturning the Ninth\u2019s correct decision could be catastrophic for civil liberties, because it would give government the effective right to detain and abuse any citizen at any time, with or without cause.<\/span><\/p>\n

The best we can hope for is a draw.\u00a0 Elena Kagan must recuse herself, because had input on the case as Solicitor General.\u00a0 The fascist four will goose step behind Ashcroft.\u00a0 If the other four disagree the decision will be a 4-4 tie.\u00a0 In that case SCOTUS would uphold the decision from the Ninth in a per curiam<\/em> decision, one that sets no precedent.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I supported Holder\u2019s decision to appeal over DADT, because the Attorney General in required to defend the law of the land, however disagreeable that may be.\u00a0 In the case of Kidd v Ashcroft, this issue does not apply.\u00a0 Holder\u2019s decision to appeal the decision from the Ninth is thoroughly reprehensible. The Supreme Court agreed Monday […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3143","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","category-5-id","post-seq-1","post-parity-odd","meta-position-corners","fix"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3143","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3143"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3143\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3143"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3143"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3143"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}