Ashcroft may be sued in 9/11 case, court rules

[joeybee12]

Source: MSNBC

BOISE, Idaho - A federal appeals court has ruled that former Attorney General John Ashcroft may be held liable for people who were wrongfully detained as material witnesses after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

In a harshly worded ruling handed down Friday, a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called the government's use of material witnesses after Sept. 11 "repugnant to the Constitution and a painful reminder of some of the most ignominious chapters of our national history."

The court found that a man who was detained as a witness in a federal terrorism case can sue Ashcroft for allegedly violating his constitutional rights. Abdullah Al-Kidd, a U.S. citizen and former University of Idaho student, filed the lawsuit in 2005, claiming his civil rights were violated when he was detained as a material witness for two weeks after 9/11.



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32695249/ns/us_news-security/

---

woo-hoo!

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

[Piewhacket]

17. Here's a cite to the case decision at www.ca9.uscourts.gov.

this link downloads a PDF file of the decision.
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/09/04/06-36059.pdf

Of interest:

Part A describing fraudulent affidavits (omission of material facts) used
by government agents to secure Al-Kidd's detention AS A MATERIAL WITNESS ,
the indignities and severe condition of confinement indistinguishable
from punitive high security confinement, and substantial personal and
economic damages caused by the government action and at the direction
of John Ashcroft.

from the opinion:

Confinement of criminals is a punishment, and, within the limits of the
Fifth and Eighth Amendments, it is supposed to be unpleasant. However,
when, as here, the government is empowered to detain those
who are not charged with crimes, it is under an obligation not
to treat them like criminals. See Youngsberg v. Romeo, 457
U.S. 307, 321-22 (1982) (“Persons who have been involuntarily
committed are entitled to more considerate treatment and
conditions of confinement than criminals whose conditions of
confinement are designed to punish.”).

More more and more.... this is our law. go read it!
enjoy

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DUlover2909]

3. Let the eagle soooooaaaar

Ha ha numb-nuts gonna have to pay $

:popcorn:

[bluesmail]

4. So these alleged $'s will count against the Obama Administration

If so it doesn't change my disgust for Dick & George. I'm learning more about devious behavior of the neo-cons. It's as if they were Nazi's...well we know that isn't true.:sarcasm:

[joeybee12]

5. Well, we should stay way from Nazi and Hitler, but fascism certainly is ok...

...that doesn't solely pertain to Germany, and inside every republican beats the heart of a fascist.

[Violet_Crumble]

6. Good n/t

[flyarm]

7. Excellent! eom

[Rosa Luxemburg]

8. Cheney and Bush should held liable ashcroft was the 'yes man'

[RoccoR5955]

9. That's okay, but when do the war crimes trials begin? n/t

[rfranklin]

10. Nail him to the wall! Then go after all the other fuckers...

The U.S.A. has basically been lawless during the last eight years. (Actually, in terms of human rights we have been lawless for most of our history.) It would be so beneficial to try and convict the latest law breakers who used the excuse of 9/11 to disregard laws, treaties and human decency to indulge their sadistic impulses.

[No Elephants]

25. You are talking to the ACLU, which brought this suit and is funded by donations. (Hint.)

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

11. Whoops

Guess you're not above the law Johnny Boy.

:applause:

[bemildred]

12. Time to "Let the Eagle soar" I guess. nt

[aquart]

13. My friend's husband was picked up in that dragnet.

FBI grabbed him, apologetically, in front of his kids. They had to scrounge for the $5,000 in bail money.

[elleng]

14. "We find this to be repugnant

to the Constitution, and a painful reminder of some of the most ignominious chapters of our national history,” said the opinion, written by Judge Milan D. Smith Jr.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/us/politics/05witness.html?_r=1&hp

[Gothmog]

15. I want to read this opinion

Is a link to the opinion up yet?

[No Elephants]

26. See Reply 26.

[FirstLight]

16. ...and this is where it really begins...

I have a feeling that the courts, AG and Justice Dept are all working on OTS of cases... from this one to the justice firings, to bush & cheny & all the rest that we don;t even know about...

The Obama Admin IS cleaning house, people... just because it hasn't happened in the form of a public circus doesn't mean it isn't happening. A shift in paradigm and a true change of a realistic nature must require ferreting out your information, who you can trust, etc. You don't get a warrant without having your evidence...and the folks behind the scenes gathering info and scouring docs are making sure that the cases are airtight

then...

BLAM!


Yes, I truly believe that this is how it is going to go down, we are only 8 mos in, watch as it unfolds...

[defendandprotect]

21. We're all hoping -- we're also still hoping that 2 years 8 months later, Dems will end the wars!!!

[No Elephants]

24. How do you figure this story is about the Obama administration's beginning something?

A detainee sued Ashcroft. The American Civil Liberties Union, which exists on donatons, represented the detainee. The Bush, and then the Obama, administrations both defended Ashcroft against the detainee. The story linked in the OP says the Obama administration has not even changed the Bush administration policy under which the detainee was wrongfully arrested.


Obama's Department of Justice may or may not ask for a rehearing of this carse or appeal the decision to the SCOTUS. And Obama may or may not at some point change the policy under which this detainee got arrested. But the story in the OP does not provide any legal or factual reason to assume this case so far is about the Obama Administration beginning anything. To the contrary, every time the Obama administration has gone to court, it has taken the same position taken by the Bush Administration.

Please see also Reply 37.

[defendandprotect]

18. And wouldn't that be great news -- !!!!

[Mind_your_head]

19. Ashcroft should be sued just for covering up lady liberty's breasts

and the cover over Guernica at the UN? Where was glen beck and his "art-farty-ass" opinions back then? "he's such s (t)wit"....:rofl:

[defendandprotect]

22. An obvious sign of a perverted mind --

whoever said religion is good for mental health???

:evilgrin:

[Ikonoklast]

20. Love to be a fly on the wall at that deposition.

Hoo boy.

[Piewhacket]

23. Sued? Its a Federal crime. He needs to be prosecuted! (18 USC 242).

[No Elephants]

27. I would not get too gleeful about this story just yet. Let's see if it gets

appealed and, if so, what the law and order Justices of the SCOTUS (Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia and Sotomayor) say about it. Then, and only then, will we know if we have occasion to rejoice.

Meanwhile, please support the ACLU, which can function solely because of our donations and which represented, and probably will continue to represent the detainee in this case.

The ACLU represented the detainee in this case against our government, which we support with our tax dollars. Sucks that we have to support both sides of cases like this, or just sit by and watch our tax dollars fund shredding of our Constitution, but that is the only choice we seem to have been given.

You can donate any amount you wish or become a "card carrying member" for any amount you wish.

https://secure.aclu.org/site/Donation2?df_id=2125&2125.donation=form1&s_src=UNW090001C00&s_subsrc=donationpage&JServSessionIdr001=j14k8eue61.app26a

[T_i_B]

28. K&R

[winyanstaz]

29. Good! and lets try the rest of the bastards that let this happen too.

[Vidar]

30. Good.

[Alcibiades]

31. When folks wanted to impeach Bush

we were told it wasn't politically feasible, and that it was more important to focus on getting a Democrat in the White House. Similarly, the folks who want to keep our powder dry have blocked any investigation of the Bush regime, because we want to focus on enacting the agenda of this President and the Democratic Congress.

Today, though, it's clear that folks are compromising their compromises, and that there's little stomach for Democrats actually getting anything done in Washington. Given that, though, there's no longer ANY REASON WHATSOEVER NOT TO RESTORE THE RULE OF LAW AND PUNISH THOSE WHO ILLEGALLY WIRETAPPED AMERICANS, CONDUCTED TORTURE, DETAINED PEOPLE WITHOUT DUE PROCESS, DID ILLEGAL EXPERIMENTS ON PRISONERS OF WAR and all the rest.

If we cannot get social justice, perhaps it's time to at least restore justice. Perhaps then a few more Republicans might be willing to get the hell out of the way.

[No Elephants]

32. Republicrats are not about governing or about justice. They are about getting

rich and getting re-elected. JMO.