August 2009

  • August 10, 2009

    Debate continues over whether to prosecute people for torture, and how wide a net prosecutors should cast.

    The L.A. Times reports that former ACS Board Member "U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. is poised to appoint a criminal prosecutor to investigate alleged CIA abuses committed during the interrogation of terrorism suspects." The piece goes on to recite a list of incidents at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, the detention facility at Bagram Air Base north of Kabul, some of which may be the subject of such probes.

    Some, including current and former Justice Department and CIA officials quoted anonymously in the L.A. Times piece, are critical of the potential prosecutions. "[I]f they appoint a special prosecutor, it would ultimately be unsuccessful, and it would go on forever and cause enormous collateral damage on the way to getting that unsuccessful result," said one former Justice Department official.

    Others are critical of the likely probe for other reasons. "An investigation that focuses only on low-ranking operators would be, I think, worse than doing nothing at all," said Human Rights Watch's Tom Malinowski.

    The point is underscored by Spencer Ackerman:

  • August 7, 2009

    Professor Sherrilyn Ifill, following the ACS panel discussion on diversity and the federal courts, talked with ACSblog about why diverse backgrounds are important to judicial decision-making. Beyond keeping public confidence in the courts, Ifill, a professor at the University of Maryland School of Law, said judicial decision-making as a whole is improved by judges "who represent and are reflective of the larger society...."

    Watch her interview below or download a podcast here.

     

  • August 7, 2009

    Following her participation in an ACS panel discussion on the importance of judicial diversity, Professor Sylvia Lazos talked with ACSblog about the potential impact of Judge Sonia Sotomayor on the Supreme Court. Lazos, a University of Nevada, Las Vegas law school professor, said that Sotomayor's "unique Latina perspective is going to be very important for the Supreme Court." Watch the interview below or download a podcast here.

     

     

     

  • August 7, 2009
    In a recent decision, Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit offered thoughts on the reach of Supreme Court rulings on standards for filing civil lawsuits. The high court has issued recent rulings, Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, which according to some makes it much easier for judges to quickly dismiss civil lawsuits. In its 2009 decision in Iqbal, the Supreme Court said judges must draw on their "judicial experience and common sense" when deciding whether a plaintiff's complaint advances a plausible claim for relief. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who dissented in the case, later said that the majority opinion "messed up the federal rules" on civil litigation.

    In a case before the Seventh Circuit, Judge Posner included dicta (language not pertinent to the holding) that Twombly and Iqbal may be limited, only applying to complex or potentially expensive litigation.

    Posner wrote:

    In our initial thinking about the case, however, we were reluctant to endorse the district court's citation of the Supreme Court's decision in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), fast becoming the citation du jour in Rule 12(b)(6) cases, as authority for the dismissal of this suit. The Court held that in complex litigation (the case itself was an antitrust suit) the defendant is not to be put to the cost of pretrial discovery - a cost that in complex litigation can be so steep as to coerce a settlement on terms favorable to the plaintiff even when his claim is very weak - unless the complaint says enough about the case to permit an inference that it may well have real merit. The present case, however, is not complex.

  • August 6, 2009
    Earlier this week, ACS hosted a panel discussion regarding judicial diversity. YouTube clips of comments from the "Diversifying Our Courts," panelists are now available. Video of the entire event is available here.

    Sherrilyn Ifill, Professor of Law, University of Maryland School of Law, discussed how recent Supreme Court nominees address, and are questioned about, their backgrounds.

    Sylvia Lazos, Professor of Law, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, addressed the belief in judicial diversity, saying supporters of it are "convinced and committed to this idea that you come up with better decisions when you have a diverse judiciary."

    Judge Theodore A. McKee, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, suggested that it is naïve to belive that judges are not influenced by their experiences and backgrounds.

    Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Counsel, Brennan Center for Justice, cited her research showing that biases persist in keeping women and minorities off the federal bench.