War on Terror

And Then It Was 9/12

By

Image via Getty

Yesterday, we (and every other media outlet) ran our solemn 9/11 remembrance post. In general, I thought the media handled the day fine. I thought the NFL handled it in an unseemly “Are we not RESPECTFUL” fashion, and don’t even get me started on the companies who used 9/11 to push their products. I thought it was assumed that most companies were against global terrorism but until the Budweiser Clydesdales bowed, I wasn’t sure. I guess I should be happy that they didn’t have the Miller High Life guy busting into a cave and taking away a case of non-alcoholic beer from a terrorist.

In any event, today will be the predictable day where the media now takes a closer look at the aftermath of 9/11. And by “closer look,” I mean “report on everything that’s gone horribly wrong since 9/11.”

Gawker already got that ball rolling. I’ve got a really heartwarming story from a law firm that I want to share before I “take a closer look” at the week after 9/11….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “And Then It Was 9/12″

96 Comments

Remembering 9/11: Open Thread

By

Today marks the tenth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Throughout today, people have been looking back and reflecting on the tragic events of 9/11, as well as remembering and praying for the thousands who perished on that day.

Scanning the Twitter and Facebook feeds of my friends, I’ve seen competing impulses. Most people’s posts have been somber and sad. Some have taken the opportunity to reaffirm America’s greatness; others have used the occasion to criticize U.S. foreign policy, especially in the Middle East. Now that the day is coming to an end, some have expressed 9/11 fatigue.

If you have 9/11 fatigue, you can stop reading here. But if not, please continue….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Remembering 9/11: Open Thread”

28 Comments

Quote of the Day: Well, cherries are delicious….

By

The [Ninth Circuit] seems to have cherry-picked the aspects of our opinions that gave colorable support to the proposition that the un-constitutionality of the action here was clearly established.

Qualified immunity gives government officials breathing room to make reasonable but mistaken judgments about open legal questions. When properly applied, it protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.’ [Former Attorney General John] Ashcroft deserves neither label, not least because eight Court of Appeals judges agreed with his judgment in a case of first impression.

– Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the Court in Ashcroft v. al-Kidd (via Josh Blackman). (The eight Court of Appeals judges are those who joined Judge O’Scannlain’s dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc.)

10 Comments

Quote of the Day: Something (Some) Conservatives and JPS Can Agree Upon

By

I have not the slightest doubt that it was entirely appropriate for U.S. forces to [take out Osama bin Laden]…. I must say I was proud of the SEALs.

– Justice John Paul Stevens, in remarks made yesterday at a dinner in Chicago. (Recall that Justice Stevens served in the Navy during World War II.)

54 Comments

Want Osama Pictures? Better Ask A Lawyer.

By

Where's the BLOOD?

Everybody has an opinion on whether or not the Obama administration should release kill shots of Osama bin Laden. It’s a tough question. And there are intelligent ways to disagree with the president’s opinion (see Jon Stewart’s impassioned plea). Or you could just call the president a pussy accuse the president of “pussyfooting” on Twitter, because that shows real leadership.

Those are fine responses for former half-term governors and pundits in the public eye. But lawyers are going about the picture issue in a much more interesting manner. Before asking if Obama “should” release the Osama photos, lawyers are wondering “does he have to,” if served with a FOIA request.

It depends, but the question itself is a helpful reminder that we are a nation of laws…

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Want Osama Pictures? Better Ask A Lawyer.”

70 Comments

Morning Docket: 05.05.11

By

Kid who didn't do as well as his parents.

* DOMA dude Paul Clement filed his first brief as lead counsel for 26 states seeking to nullify Obamacare. In a land of socialist, freeloading, hippie queers, one man stands alone. [Atlanta Journal Constitution]

* Actually, that’s not true — The Cooch has Clement’s back (twhs), Tweeting all the misspelled and hilarious punchlines that are fit to print. [The Virginian-Pilot]

* Eric Holder defended the legality of the Osama killing on Capitol Hill yesterday. In prepared remarks, he said, “If history has taught us anything, it’s that you can kill anyone.” [CNN]

* I don’t want to intrude on Lat’s beat here, but Ponzi schemer Scott Rothstein’s pad sounds pretty nice. Bet it even has a foyer, whatever the hell that is. [WSJ Law Blog]

* Irving Picard has asked a judge to allow him to start making disbursements to Madoff’s victims. Victims stand to receive a coupon book valued at over 200 dollars, a free subscription to Cat Fancy, and a lifetime’s supply of Spanx for Men. [Reuters]

* Chris Simms, guilty of poor quarterbackery, was found not guilty of smoking drugs and driving. [New York Post]

11 Comments

Quotes of the Day: Did ‘Torture’ Contribute to the Finding of Osama Bin Laden?

By

Imagine what would have happened if the Obama administration had been running things immediately following 9/11. After their “arrest,” we would have read [Khalid Sheikh Mohammed] and [Abu Faraj al-Libi] their Miranda rights, provided them legal counsel, sent them to the U.S. for detention, and granted them all the rights provided a U.S. citizen in criminal proceedings.

If this had happened, the CIA could not have built the intelligence mosaic that pinpointed bin Laden’s location. Without the intelligence produced by Bush policies, the SEAL helicopters would be idling their engines at their Afghanistan base even now. In the war on terror, it is easy to pull the trigger — it is hard to figure out where to aim.

– Professor John Yoo, in an opinion piece in today’s Wall Street Journal. While serving as a Justice Department official in the Bush Administration, Professor Yoo provided legal analysis supporting the application of enhanced interrogation techniques to terror detainees — techniques that may have yielded information used in locating Osama bin Laden.

(A counterpoint to Professor Yoo — we believe in presenting both sides here at Above the Law — appears after the jump.)

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “Quotes of the Day: Did ‘Torture’ Contribute to the Finding of Osama Bin Laden?”

142 Comments

No Trial For Osama Bin Laden A Gift For All Americans

By

I don't think anybody needed to hear testimony from this guy.

As you might have heard, United States special forces killed Osama Bin Laden. Let’s take a moment to be happy about that, but also to remember Bin Laden’s many, many victims.

Thank God he was killed, not “captured.” If he had been captured, there would have been some kind of trial. Some kind of fake, orchestrated, television show of a trial. Lawyers, judges, and others would have danced around trying to give Osama bin Laden the appearance of a fair hearing before his inevitable execution. It would have been a farce — a farce that our military and/or civilian courts are not equipped to handle.

Better for Bin Laden to meet his end as he did: via a double tap from a Navy Seal….

double red triangle arrows Continue reading “No Trial For Osama Bin Laden A Gift For All Americans”

138 Comments

Breaking: We Got The Bastard

By

Osama Bin Laden is dead!

The television people are reminding us that today is the eighth anniversary of “Mission Accomplished.” Which is kind of awesome. Because now it is.

Not only has he been killed, but the U.S. has his body.

God bless America. God bless the memories of the many victims of 9/11.

Let us celebrate in the comments.

UPDATE: Should there have been a trial for Osama Bin Laden? Read more here.

Official: Osama bin Laden is dead [MSNBC.com]

128 Comments

Morning Docket: 04.05.11

By

Kaga, L., dissenting

* Did Malcolm Gladwell’s endorsement lead to an increase in Colorado Law applicants? Malcolm Gladwell, a man whose book Blink was described by Richard Posner as “written like a book intended for people who do not read books.” [Law Week Colorado]

* A litany of legal challenges faces the Obama administration now that they’ve backtracked on Khalid Sheikh and the boys. [msnbc.com]

* The Supremes ruled against Arizona taxpayers who claimed a tax credit for religious school donations was unconstitutional. Justice Kagan popped her dissent cherry on this one. [NPR]

* Connecticut looks to “add teeth” to a law that attempts to determine whether racial profiling exists in the state. Sorry, I don’t find anything funny about racism. Unless, of course, we’re talking about the basketball scene in Soul Man. [Hartford Courant]

* Google has bid $900 million on a whole bunch of patents. Meanwhile, the patent to Google Wave is being peddled for two dollars and a box of envelopes. [Financial Times]

* “Police have nabbed the second prepubescent punk wanted for trying to rip off the religious headdress of a Muslim schoolgirl on Staten Island.” [New York Post]

19 Comments
Page 2 of 3123