Arguments in Siegelman Case: Criminal Law “Has Real Ramifications for the First Amendment”

By: Thursday January 20, 2011 2:20 pm

On June 29, 2010, the United States Supreme Court vacated the judgment in which former Alabama Governor Donald Siegelmand and former HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy were convicted on multiple counts and remanded the case to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals “for further consideration in light of Skilling v. United States“. Oral arguments relating to this further consideration were held Wednesday in Jacksonville, Florida, in a thirteenth floor courtroom of the Bryan Simpson United States Courthouse there.


Siegelman Arguments: Real Implications for First Amendment

By: Wednesday January 19, 2011 2:15 pm

Oral arguments were heard today in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Jacksonville, Florida in the ongoing Don Siegelman case. As I reported on Tuesday, the arguments today were in response to the Supreme Court vacating the convictions of Don Siegelman and Richard Scrushy and sending the case back to the Eleventh Circuit in light of the Supreme Court decision in Skilling.

The panel of judges was Gerald Tjoflat, J.L. Edmondson and James C. Hill. Arguing for Governor Siegelman was Sam Heldman and arguing for Mr. Scrushy was Bruce Rogow. Arguing for the Justice Department was John-Alex Romano.

Reflecting a concern noted by the judges, Heldman noted to the media after the proceedings that the court seemed very concerned with the concept that what they do with respect to criminal law in this case has real implications for the First Amendment.

Follow Firedoglake
CSM Ads advertisement