Obama legal team wants to limit defendants' rights
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration is asking the Supreme
Court to overrule long-standing law that stops police from
initiating questions unless a defendant's lawyer is present,
another stark example of the White House seeking to limit rather
than expand rights.
The administration's action - and several others - have
disappointed civil rights and civil liberties groups that expected
President Barack Obama to reverse the policies of his Republican
predecessor, George W. Bush, after the Democrat's call for change
during the 2008 campaign.
Since taking office, Obama has drawn criticism for backing the
continued imprisonment of enemy combatants in Afghanistan without
trial, invoking the "state secrets" privilege to avoid releasing
information in lawsuits and limiting the rights of prisoners to
test genetic evidence used to convict them.
The case at issue is Michigan v. Jackson, in which the Supreme
Court said in 1986 that police may not initiate questioning of a
defendant who has a lawyer or has asked for one, unless the
attorney is present. The decision applies even to defendants who
agree to talk to the authorities without their lawyers.
Anything police learn through such questioning cannot be used
against the defendant at trial. The opinion was written by Justice
John Paul Stevens, the only current justice who was on the court at
the time.
The justices could decide as early as Friday whether they want
to hear arguments on the issue as they wrestle with an ongoing case
from Louisiana that involves police questioning of an indigent
defendant that led to a murder confession and a death sentence.
The Justice Department, in a brief signed by Solicitor General
Elena Kagan, said the 1986 decision "serves no real purpose" and
offers only "meager benefits." The government said defendants who
don't wish to talk to police don't have to and that officers must
respect that decision. But it said there is no reason a defendant
who wants to should not be able to respond to officers' questions.
At the same time, the administration acknowledges that the
decision "only occasionally prevents federal prosecutors from
obtaining appropriate convictions."
The administration's legal move is a reminder that Obama, who
has moved from campaigning to governing, now speaks for federal
prosecutors.
The administration's position assumes a level playing field,
with equally savvy police and criminal suspects, lawyers on the
other side of the case said. But the protection offered by the
court in Stevens' 1986 opinion is especially important for
vulnerable defendants, including the mentally and developmentally
disabled, addicts, juveniles and the poor, the lawyers said.
"Your right to assistance of counsel can be undermined if
somebody on the other side who is much more sophisticated than you
are comes and talks to you and asks for information," said Sidney
Rosdeitcher, a New York lawyer who advises the Brennan Center for
Justice at New York University.
Stephen B. Bright, a lawyer who works with poor defendants at
the Southern Center for Human Rights in Atlanta, said the
administration's position "is disappointing, no question."
Bright said that poor defendants' constitutional right to a
lawyer, spelled out by the high court in 1965, has been neglected
in recent years. "I would hope that this administration would be
doing things to shore up the right to counsel for poor people
accused of crimes," said Bright, whose group joined with the
Brennan Center and other rights organizations in a court filing
opposing the administration's position.
Former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson and former FBI
Director William Sessions are among 19 one-time judges and
prosecutors urging the court to leave the decision in place because
it has been incorporated into routine police practice and
establishes a rule on interrogations that is easy to follow.
Eleven states also are echoing the administration's call to
overrule the 1986 case.
Justice Samuel Alito first raised the prospect of overruling the
decision at arguments in January over the rights of Jesse Montejo,
the Louisiana death row inmate.
Montejo's lawyer, Donald Verrilli, urged the court not to do it.
Since then, Verrilli has joined the Justice Department, but played
no role in the department's brief.
Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
In a previous blog, “A Runners Wife” I spoke about my husband training for the NYC marathon. All I have to say is that the months of training all came together of an amazing race. Race day is a grueling day for runners, and the family. But a miracle happened...
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder testified before the senate judiciary committee and basically shrugged when asked if any other enemy combatant captured overseas had ever been brought to civilian criminal court to face justice. Talk about an incompetent boob, not to mention a disgrace.
Here is a list of wines all from Spain, and menus from restaurants in Brooklyn where a crew of us did a food / wine crawl through Carrol Gardens and Williamsburg recently
E-Mail Story
Print Story
