Judicial

That is an interesting argument raised by Michael Froomkin about the Wikileaks case:

This isn’t a classic prior restraint on speech since it reaches the registrar not the speaker — but it’s close enough to stopping the delivery trucks on a newspaper that I think this aspect of the decision is a cause for some First Amendment concern. The IP numbers for the site still work, though. Try 88.80.13.160.

Of course this ruling also makes us look more like China. Hopefully an upper court judge will overturn this poor decision.

That's right, we have self proclaimed lawyers on the right, and they are not happy with a judge's decision yesterday to allow Dennis Kucinich in tonight's MSNBC debate:

However, the judgement is absurd on its face. In the first place, the state courts wouldn't have jurisdiction for a national broadcast. Constitutionally, this case belonged in federal court, which has jurisdiction on any interstate commerce complaints. Kucinich filed his tort in state court hoping to find a sympathetic, activist judge who didn't know much about the law, and apparently succeeded.

More offensively, the courts don't have any business telling NBC or any other network that they have to include certain individuals in a debate. It may be a poor decision to exclude certain candidates, but the broadcast is the property of the network and it's their decision to make. The court apparently has no respect for private property in that sense.

Wow Bush sure does know how to pick them:

Key Democrats denounced Terrence Boyle on Capitol Hill Monday and Tuesday, after a Salon report revealed that the controversial judge, nominated to one of the nation's highest courts by President Bush, violated federal law on conflicts of interest. As the debate over Boyle heated up, the White House acknowledged that Boyle should have recused himself in cases involving companies in which he owned stock -- but continued its support of the nominee.

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat of the Judiciary Committee, blasted Boyle on the floor of the Senate Monday, calling him "somebody who has violated every judicial ethic you can think of."

Leahy called it "chutzpah beyond all understanding" that Boyle, in one case, bought stock in General Electric while presiding over a lawsuit against the company -- and just two months later threw out most of a disability claim against the company. "Now, in the first year of law school you might get an example like this because it is so clear-cut and easy to understand," Leahy said. "This is amazing -- amazing -- notwithstanding all the other conflicts of interest he had in other cases. Whether or not it turns out that Judge Boyle broke federal law or canons of judicial ethics, these types of conflicts of interest have no place on the federal bench."

What amazes me is that Boyle in fact did this, the White House has admitted that he did it and should have recused himself from the case, yet they continue to support him. The Republicans will not be happy until they have every single branch of our government as corrupt as they are. Once that happens then America as we know it is gone.

The Judge in the Moussaoui case has accepted a compromise with prosecutors:

The federal judge in the death penalty trial of al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui accepted a government compromise Friday that will allow prosecutors to present new witnesses about aviation security

Judge Leonie Brinkema in a written order said prosecutors could present exhibits and a witness or witnesses if they are untainted by contact with Transportation Security Administration lawyer Carla J. Martin, cited by Brinkema for misconduct earlier this week when the judge decided to exclude all aviation security evidence

Now that that is about over, there is a new scandal emerging in 9/11 cases.

Lawyers for two airlines being sued by 9/11 victims prompted a federal attorney to coach witnesses in the Zacarias Moussaoui death penalty trial so the government's case against the al-Qaida conspirator would not undercut their defense, victims' lawyers allege.

A United Airlines lawyer received a transcript of the first day of the Moussaoui trial from an American Airlines lawyer and forwarded it to Carla J. Martin, a Transportation Security Administration lawyer, the victims' lawyers, Robert Clifford and Gregory Joseph, claim.

Martin forwarded that day's transcript to seven federal aviation officials scheduled to testify later in the sentencing trial of the 37-year-old Frenchman, in violation of an order by Moussaoui trial judge Leonie Brinkema.

This was just released by the Department of Justice in order to reaffirm claims by Alberto Gonzalez that electronic surveillance has been critical throughout history. This evidence should provide a harsh blow to Democrats trying to say the domestic spying is illegal.