SCOTUS has just ruled unanimously that John Ashcroft can’t be sued by Abdullah al-Kidd for using a material witness warrant to incarcerate him. The eight justices (Elena Kagan recused herself) all agree there was no law explicitly prohibiting this kind of abuse of material witness warrants, so Ashcroft has immunity from suit.
|By: emptywheel Tuesday May 31, 2011 11:44 am|
|By: Teddy Partridge Friday November 12, 2010 2:45 pm|
Surprising no one, the Supreme Court left intact (without comment) the ban on open service in our military by gays and lesbians while the Appeals Court determines its constitutionality.
|By: emptywheel Tuesday September 28, 2010 3:15 pm|
I have no idea what Kagan thinks about this raid. But even during the argument, she sustained a fiction that the Court’s interpretation of material support to include peace efforts would be an unlikely use of prosecutorial discretion.
|By: David Dayen Friday August 6, 2010 9:35 am|
There’s no question that Judge Walker, like any other judge, I’d imagine, likes his rulings to hold up on appeal. That’s why he did two very specific things with the Prop 8 ruling. He established a rigorous fact pattern, because the appellate courts will have to deal with those facts in their opinions. And, he basically tailored his ruling with respect to precedent on cases decided by the one man who will determine whether his ruling will stand.
|By: emptywheel Friday May 14, 2010 2:50 pm|
Hamdan attorney and now Acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal says that the issue is not Arar’s torture, but narrow questions of whether Arar can even ask for some relief in the US Courts.