WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A federal appeals court panel ruled on Wednesday that crucial parts of an antiterrorism law were unconstitutional because the law, which the Bush administration relies on heavily, risks ensnaring innocent humanitarians.
The ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, throws into doubt reliance on parts of a 1986 law that make it a crime to provide material support to groups designated as terrorist.
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the ban has become a favorite weapon for the Justice Department in a host of cases, including the prosecutions of John Walker Lindh, who fought with the Taliban against the United States in Afghanistan; Lynne F. Stewart, the defense lawyer accused of helping a client who was a terrorist in prison pass messages to terrorist associates; and terror suspects in Detroit, Lackawanna, N.Y., and Portland, Ore.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/04/national/04SUSP.html?ex=1071118800&en=aad5d75c59e427fb&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLEon edit: "The ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, throws into doubt reliance on parts of a 1986 law that make it a crime to provide material support to groups designated as terrorist".... this is interesting. Why are they addressing a law from this long ago? One would think, after 17 years, this would have been adequately addressed by now.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
