High Court Won't Hear Moussaoui's Appeal

AP ^ | 3-21-2005 | Hope Yen

[Cagey]

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear the appeal of terrorism suspect Zacarias Moussaoui, rejecting a challenge to the Bush administration's power to bar potentially key witnesses from the only U.S. defendant charged in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Justices let stand a lower court ruling that allowed the government to pursue the death penalty while restricting Moussaoui's direct access to three al-Qaida terror captives. The lower court, citing national security concerns, said Moussaoui could use government-prepared summaries from the captives but not interview them.

The Supreme Court's move Monday now shifts the case back to trial court, where U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Va., must oversee the crafting of summaries and other classified information. A trial could begin as early as September.

Moussaoui, a French citizen who was indicted in December 2001, remains the only person charged in an al-Qaida conspiracy that includes the Sept. 11 attacks. The defendant has acknowledged his loyalty to Osama bin Laden but denies he was to have any role in the 2001 airplane hijackings that led to attacks on New York and Washington. A third plane destined for terror attack crashed in rural western Pennsylvania.

His court-appointed attorneys argue in filings that forcing Moussaoui to rely on summaries violate his 6th Amendment right to a fair trial because the classified documents contain information "from unnamed, unsworn government agents purporting to report unsworn, incomplete, nonverbatim accounts" of witness statements.

But the Bush administration countered that high court review at this point was premature because government attorneys were working to put together summaries under Brinkema's direction. An appeal challenging the death penalty and use of summaries, if one is necessary, would be more appropriate after trial, it said.

"The challenged substitutions have not yet been crafted and thus their adequacy and admissibility cannot be examined in a concrete factual context," writes acting Solicitor General Paul Clement.

Legal wrangling over witness access and the death penalty have stalled a trial for Moussaoui, a case of heavy legal and symbolic importance for the Justice Department in its post-9-11 prosecutions in civil court.

Moussaoui asserts that al-Qaida captives such as Ramzi Binalshibh, the self-described planner of the Sept. 11 attacks, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the former al Qaida operations chief, could testify he did not have a role in the conspiracy, although he was to participate in a subsequent al-Qaida operation.

Brinkema initially ordered that Moussaoui have access to the captives by a remote video hookup. When government lawyers refused to obey, she punished them by barring the death penalty in the case and banning any government evidence related to the Sept. 11 attacks.

A three-judge panel of the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. In ruling Brinkema went too far, it restored the government's full case and the death penalty.

Still, while the 4th Circuit denied the direct interview, it also agreed with Moussaoui that he had the constitutional right to potentially favorable information, and ordered the trial judge to craft written summaries of statements the prisoners made to interrogators.

"We emphasize that no punitive sanction is warranted here because the government has rightfully exercised its prerogative to protect national security interests by refusing to provide the witnesses," the court said.

Brinkema has said that even if the Supreme Court did not intervene, she would need to reevaluate the handling of classified material. She also wants more information about the conditions under which the interrogations were conducted and how the responses from numerous sessions were compiled, inquiries that could push back a trial date until next year.

The case is Moussaoui v. U.S., 04-8385.

In other action Monday, the Supreme Court declined to consider whether a 5-year-old law requiring federal parolees to give blood samples for the FBI's DNA database is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.

Justices let stand a bitterly divided 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that upheld the law. The San Francisco-based court had reasoned that parolees give up some of their rights to be free from an unreasonable search and seizure as a condition of being released from prison early.

Convicted bank robber Thomas Kincade challenged the constitutionality of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000, saying the government had no right to collect genetic material if it had no particular reason to suspect a criminal offense.

The case is Kincade v. U.S., 04-7253.

[jriemer]

Justices let stand a lower court ruling that allowed the government to pursue the death penalty while restricting Moussaoui's direct access to three al-Qaida terror captives.

Moussaoui is older than 18 so he's free game. [/sarc]

[OXENinFLA]

[Trust but Verify]

This will make the libs' heads spin.......

[COBOL2Java]

This will make the libs' heads spin.......

More than usual?

[CFC__VRWC]

Legal wrangling over witness access and the death penalty have stalled a trial for Moussaoui, a case of heavy legal and symbolic importance for the Justice Department in its post-9-11 prosecutions in civil court.

Which is why President Bush wanted to use military tribunals to adjudicate these cases. He knew that the ACLU terror appeasers and the far-left federal judges would turn the criminal cases against every one of these terrorist vermin into a giant cluster**** in their eagerness to set them free so the NYT and the European elites would say nice things about them.

Well, now we all know what happens. And the libs are going to go stark, staring bonkers over this. Even as I post this, the hysterical screeching about how the "ultra-right Bush Supreme Court" is opening up the kangaroo courts and the death camps for innocent, peace-loving Muslims and antiwar activists is being prepared for our reading and viewing "pleasure."

[COEXERJ145]

Guess they couldn't find any "international law" to use in favor of Moussaoui.

[GOP_Proud]

Finally, some GOOD news. Now that's a plug that does need to be pulled.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

More evidence that the libs are anti - american as described in this book:

**********************************

Unholy Alliance
by David Horowitz
Regnery Publishing, Inc.; ISBN: 089526076X
Hardcover - 256 pages (September 2004)

In this tour de force on the most important issue of our time, David Horowitz, confronts the paradox of how so many Americans, including the leadership of the Democratic Party, could turn against the War on Terror. He finds an answer in a political Left that shares a view of America as the “Great Satan” with America’s radical Islamic enemies. This Left, which once made common cause with Communists, has now joined forces with radical Islam in attacking America’s defenses at home and its policies abroad. From their positions of influence in the university and media culture, leftists have defined America as the “root cause” of the attacks against it. In a remarkable exploration of the “Mind of the Left,” Horowitz traces the evolution of American radicalism from its Communist past to its “anti-war” present. He then shows how this Left was able to turn the Democratic Party presidential campaign around and reshape its views on the War on Terror.

Horowitz’s Unholy Alliance, writes John Haynes, the noted historian of American Communism, “is an insightful, brilliant examination of the mental world of the radical left. Horowitz shows how today’s radicals, unwilling to reflect on the internal flaws that destroyed Marxism-Leninism from within, have embraced an all-consuming nihilism in its place. This has led them to a hatred of American institutions and a solidarity with Islamic terrorists that makes the radical left more properly regarded as dangerous than loony.”

Unholy Alliance is an eye-opening book that should unsettle conventional assumptions and reveals why intellectuals and political leaders who applaud Michael Moore are no laughing matter. As Harvey Klehr, author of Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America, writes, “The world Communist movement may be moribund, but its habits of mind and ideological fantasies have not disappeared. This is a fascinating and depressing account.”

Price: $19.01 - Click here to order:

[GretchenM]

At least there is some good judicial / governmental news today.

[SunkenCiv]

http://www.jacquedee63.com/dang_me_r1_rt.mid