Ashcroft Can Be Held Accountable for Post-9/11 Wrongful Detention

[kpete]

Source: Common Dreams/ACLU

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 18, 2010
8:48 PM


CONTACT: ACLU
Maria Archuleta, [phone] or 549-2666; [e-mail]
Ashcroft Can Be Held Accountable for Post-9/11 Wrongful Detention
Federal Appellate Court Denies Former Attorney General's Request for Full Court Review

SEATTLE - March 18 - The American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit charging that former Attorney General John Ashcroft is personally responsible for the wrongful detention of an innocent American, Abdullah al-Kidd, can go forward, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled today. The ruling denies Ashcroft's request that his appeal be heard by the entire court and upheld the court's September 2009 decision that the federal material witness law cannot be used to detain or investigate suspects where no probable cause exists for criminal charges. The ruling also held that Ashcroft does not have immunity in this case and can be held personally liable for the wrongful detention of al-Kidd.

"In this country, we don't believe in arresting and imprisoning people who haven't been charged with any crime," said ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project Deputy Director Lee Gelernt. "Former Attorney General Ashcroft deliberately distorted the federal material witness law to allow the detention of innocent people. As the primary architect and overseer of this policy that so clearly circumvented the Constitution, he should be held personally liable."

Prior to 9/11, the federal material witness law was used sparingly - especially with U.S. citizens - to ensure that witnesses would be available to testify in criminal cases. Arrests under the statute took place in rare cases to secure testimony where there was hard evidence that an individual had material information but would not testify voluntarily. After 9/11, Ashcroft retooled the law into an investigative detention statute, allowing the government to arrest and detain individuals for whom the government lacked probable cause to charge with criminal violations.

Today's ruling affirms the court's September 2009 ruling that found that the material witness law may only be used when an individual is genuinely sought as a witness and where there is a real risk of flight. The court ruled that the law does not allow an end-run around the constitutional requirements for arresting someone suspected of a crime. Ashcroft had appealed the ruling.

Read more: http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/03/18-14

[rfranklin]

1. Okay, so when will they arrest and detain Ashcroft?

Cue the crickets!

[davidhilton]

26. I'm not holding my breath on this one.

[UpInArms]

31. ...

[No Elephants]

33. Hint: "Can be" and "will be" don't mean the same thing..

[90-percent]

2. Perp Walk

I'd pay $1,000 to be an eye witness to the Ashcroft PERP WALK!

And maybe $20 if they best I can do is pay-per-view.

Someday, somewhere, hopefully very soon, the first of these traitors will have to answer in Court for their treason. I don't think they can contain this forever! Once the first big fish does time, the others will be going down with them. Rats deserting a sinking ship.

I want these fuckers doing their book tours while under indictment!

-90% Jimmy

[24601]

19. This is a ruling about a civil suit - not a criminal case. When Smith

sues Jones, the Sheriff doesn't go arrest Jones and book him. There is no indictment. Instead, Jones gets a summons to appear because he is being sued.

You probably should review the definition of Treason, the only crime actually defined by the Constitution. "Doing shit I disagree with" just doesn't make the cut. Misusing the material witness law in no way shape or form resembles waging war against the US or aiding its enemies.

This isn't over until the USSC either declines the case or takes it and makes a decision whether the USAG is or isn't personally liable.

[No Elephants]

35. It could be about a criminal case, though, if anyone cared to bring one.

Not treason, even though the Constitutional definition has a lot of room in it.

[mcollins]

3. They should all be in jail. /NT

[bondwooley]

4. It's about time Ashcroft was held accountable for *something* ...

... hopefully it's the tip of the iceberg.

[Mira]

7. I am excercising and eating right to live long enough to see it. N/T

[No Elephants]

34. So, six hours of exercise a day and nothing but mung bean sprouts and celery?

[mcollins]

41. Think positive thoughts and positive things will happen.

I think we'll see them before too long.

[whatacountry09]

5. YES... he "can be"...

but I bet he "won't be"!!!!

[Melusine]

8. I'm with you . . .

I'm not holding my breath for it to actually happen.

[Soylent Brice]

6. can we prosecute now?

[Divine Discontent]

27. can we? yes. will the Obama WH? ....... what do you think based on past statements of

"moving forward".

Meaning, all crimes will be ignored. That's sure what that sounds like, and has been shown to be so far!

LET THE MIGHTY EAGLE SOAR!!!

[pundaint]

9. Prove my vanishingly low expectations wrong, for once. Justice for all, hell justice for any.

[midnight]

10. I wonder how many laws have been retooled via the patriot act?

[Blue Owl]

11. Don't fret, Ashcroft...

The Money Party will keep you nice and safe above the law.

Let the eagle soar, you rotten fucker.

[Grassy Knoll]

14. + 1000 n/t

[Divine Discontent]

12. so, the WH just gonna ignore this because they worried it'll appear theyre all Muslimfied by helping

the guy with the "funny" Arabic sounding name? And Faux News will run hourly comments about the Obama White House is going after B*sh officials who tried to stop terrorists, and are defending Al-Kidd?

I hope we're all proven wrong by their lack of action so far, and that they will hold at least one of them accountable.

[Demeter]

13. OOOH, Yeah!

Now we're talking!

[Javaman]

15. Meh, that's nice, but the real question is: WILL he be held accountable?

I doubt it.

More scraps for the masses that hope for the slightest shred of accountability.

Why set yourselves up for a big disappointment? Why get all hopeful? Show me an example of why I should be?

We are the poor and middle class without a voice. Unless we have corp. or inc. after our names, they pay us not a whit.

Just more kabuki theater.

This will vanish like a fart in the wind.

[freethinker2]

16. Will anyone ever be charged

for any of the 1,000s of rules and ethics violations committed by the Bush administration? I voted for Obama in the hope we could get some accountability from the last administration. It looks like they will getaway with all of it! As much as I was on the side of Obama and the Dems. they have turned out to be cowards!
Its sickening.

[grahamhgreen]

17. Let's hope the administration does not interfere....!

[Ozymanithrax]

18. This is not a criminal investigation. Hopefully, he will lose a lot of money.

[jtrockville]

29. Any chance a civil victory would lead to criminal prosecution?

[Ozymanithrax]

30. Civil matters do not require the same level of proof...

But it could bring things to light that people want to remain hidden.

[No Elephants]

38. Level of proof is not the reason the U.S. chose not to prosecute, though.

[No Elephants]

36. Get with the program and look forward.

[L. Coyote]

20. I agree, and we need to add his superiors to the ever-growing list of

anti-Constitutional mis-creants known as the Bush Junta.

[No Elephants]

39. What were you planning to do with the list, given we're not prosecuting?

[frylock]

21. he can be held accountable, but he won't..

need to look forward, hope n change, blahblahblah...

[Drops_not_Dope]

22. I'll wager Crisco Guy

will slip right out of this.

[Deep13]

23. Can he be held accountable for that fucking eagle song?

Just wondering.

[Divine Discontent]

25. hey you keep that tone up, mister, and he's gonna let the eagle soar all over your ass!

thank God above that he had 20 cups of coffee before singing it here (haha)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZZgdzBm2R8

[alp227]

24. Thank you, ACLU!

America is slowly becoming a police state not just because of the Bush admin's policy of indefinitely imprisoning terror suspects without charge. Don't forget the racial profiling by American police too. In my hometown of San Jose, some police officers on street patrol approached a man named Richard Lua, who later ran away. The officers chased the man and Tased him; he later died. The officers never produced a compelling reason why they approached Lua in the first place. The county medical examiner concluded that Lua died because he was high on meth and did not connect the Tasers to Lua's death. I thought America could do better than this.

[jtrockville]

28. Any chance Ashcroft will squeal like the pig that he is?

Well, I can hope, eh?

[troubledamerican]

32. DON'T arrest Ashcroft. Make him flip & turn states' evidence on Cheney.

[No Elephants]

40. Why? Obama decided not to prosecute any of them.

[Lil Missy]

37. Day late and a dollar short. n/t