Author Archive

Greenwald on the Arrar Ruling

Glenn Greenwald has a good post about Arrar v. Ashcroft, an appeals court ruling that came down the other day.  Here’s an excerpt:

Maher Arar is both a Canadian and Syrian citizen of Syrian descent.  A telecommunications engineer and graduate of Montreal’s McGill University, he has lived in Canada since he’s 17 years old.  In 2002, he was returning home to Canada from vacation when, on a stopover at JFK Airport, he was (a) detained by U.S. officials, (b) accused of being a Terrorist, (c) held for two weeks incommunicado and without access to counsel while he was abusively interrogated, and then (d) was “rendered” – despite his pleas that he would be tortured — to Syria, to be interrogated and tortured.  He remained in Syria for the next 10 months under the most brutal and inhumane conditions imaginable, where he was repeatedly tortured.  Everyone acknowledges that Arar was never involved with Terrorism and was guilty of nothing.  I’ve appended to the end of this post the graphic description from a dissenting judge of what was done to Arar while in American custody and then in Syria.

Read the whole thing.   Also, the ACLU has put together a short film about the experiences of some prisoners released from Guantanamo.

Tim Lynch • November 4, 2009 @ 4:36 pm
Filed under: Foreign Policy and National Security; General; Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

CBS News Reports on Prospects for Drug Policy Reform

CBS News has a good report out on recent developments in drug policy, including extensive coverage of the Cato report, Drug Decriminalization in Portugal. Here’s an excerpt:

Portugal’s case is important, Greenwald says, because it provides hard evidence that removes the debate from the realm of speculation.

“If you’re the first state to do it, there’s really no way you can point to evidence of what will or will not happen. … It’s just theory and it’s very abstract,” he said. “The more examples that arise and the more that you can prove that the sky doesn’t fall in,” he said, the more politically feasible drug liberalization will become in the U.S.

So far, Portugal has largely flown under the radar, even in drug policy circles. But Greenwald says that, six months after his paper was released, he’s getting more invitations than ever to present it. In August, New York Times columnist Nick Kristof cited it in a column praising Webb’s reform push.

Read the whole thing.  For more Cato scholarship on drug policy, go here.

Tim Lynch • November 4, 2009 @ 1:09 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Obama, International Law, and Free Speech

Stuart Taylor has a very good article this week about the Obama administration, international law, and free speech.  This excerpt begins with a quote from Harold Koh, Obama’s top lawyer at the State Department:

“Our exceptional free-speech tradition can cause problems abroad, as, for example, may occur when hate speech is disseminated over the Internet.” The Supreme Court, suggested Koh — then a professor at Yale Law School — “can moderate these conflicts by applying more consistently the transnationalist approach to judicial interpretation” that he espouses.

Translation: Transnational law may sometimes trump the established interpretation of the First Amendment. This is the clear meaning of Koh’s writings, although he implied otherwise during his Senate confirmation hearing.

In my view, Obama should not take even a small step down the road toward bartering away our free-speech rights for the sake of international consensus. “Criticism of religion is the very measure of the guarantee of free speech,” as Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University Law School, wrote in an October 19 USA Today op-ed.

Even European nations with much weaker free-speech traditions than ours were reportedly dismayed by the American cave-in to Islamic nations on “racial and religious stereotyping” and the rest.

Read the whole thing.

Tim Lynch • November 3, 2009 @ 5:42 pm
Filed under: General; Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

More on ‘Hate Crimes’

Law professors James Jacobs and Kimberly Potter make an interesting point:

Laws do not spring forth from a groundswell of public opinion, but rather are the product of lobbying by interested (”interest”) groups that must mobilize support among politicians.  The hate crime laws are passed because of the lobbying efforts of organizations that advocate on behalf of blacks, Jews, gays, and lesbians, a few other ethnic and nationality groups, and in some cases, women. …Regardless of what it accomplishes, the passage of legislation boosts morale and the status of the organizations and their constituencies.

That’s from their excellent book on the subject, Hate Crimes: Criminal Law and Identity Politics (Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 66. 

If liberals write laws to “send messages,” can social conservatives do the same thing if they control the legislative assembly?  Perhaps enact a criminal law against, say, adultery.  Note that the point is not necessarily that the law be actually enforced or have any impact as far as reducing adultery in the jurisdiction.  If the point is simply to “send a message,” liberals are going to be hard-pressed to lodge objections to conservative  symbolic lawmaking.

For more on hate crimes, go here and here.

Tim Lynch • October 30, 2009 @ 4:01 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

George Will and Drug Decriminalization

George Will’s latest column takes a look a drug policy and the views of the new drug czar, Gil Kerlikowski.  Notably, Will mentions Portugal’s experience with decriminalization of all drugs since 2001 and says Kerlikowski is aware of the Portuguese policy as well.  Cato published a report on Portugal’s drug policy in April and the author, Glenn Greenwald, discussed his findings at a Cato policy forum here.  George Will’s shifting views on drug policy (toward liberalization) reflect the shifting views of other conservative pundits and the public more generally.

Will appeared on ABC on Sunday, and discussed his views on drug policy. Watch:

For more Cato work on drug policy, go here, here, and here.

Tim Lynch • October 29, 2009 @ 10:44 am
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Fact-checking Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey

I appeared on the CNN program Lou Dobbs Tonight last Thursday (Oct. 22) to discuss the medical marijuana issue and the drug war in general.  There were two other guests: Peter Moskos from John Jay College and the organization Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) and Barry McCaffrey, retired General of the U.S. Army and former “Drug Czar” under President Bill Clinton.

I was really astonished by the doubletalk coming from McCaffrey.  Watch the clip below and then I’ll explain two of the worst examples so you can come to your own conclusions about this guy.

Doubletalk: Example One:

Tim Lynch: “Some states have changed their marijuana laws to allow patients who are suffering from cancer and AIDS–people who want to use marijuana for medical reasons–they’re exempt from the law. But there’s a clash between the laws of the state governments and the federal government. The federal government has come in and said, ‘We’re going to threaten people with federal prosecution, bring them into federal court.’ And what the [new memo from the Obama Justice Department] does this week is change federal policy. Basically, Attorney General Eric Holder is saying, ‘Look, for people, genuine patients–people suffering from cancer, people suffering from AIDS–these people are now off limits to federal prosecutors.’ It’s a very small step in the direction of reform.”

Now comes Barry McCaffrey: “There is zero truth to the fact that the Drug Enforcement Administration or any other federal law enforcement ever threatened care-givers or individual patients. That’s fantasy!”

Zero truth? Fantasy?  This report from USA Today tells the story of several patients who were harassed and threatened by federal agents. Excerpt:  ”In August 2002, federal agents seized six plants from [Diane] Monson’s home and destroyed them.”

This report from the San Francisco Chronicle tells the story of Bryan Epis and Ed Rosenthal.  Both men, in separate incidents, were raided, arrested, and prosecuted by federal officials.  The feds called them “drug dealers.”  When the cases came to trial, both men were eager to inform their juries about the actual circumstances surrounding their cases–but they were not allowed to convey those circumstances to jurors.  Federal prosecutors insisted that information concerning the medical aspect of marijuana was “irrelevant.”   Both men were convicted and jailed.

This report from the New York Times tells readers about the death of Peter McWilliams.  The feds said he was a “drug dealer.”  McWilliams also wanted to tell his story to a jury, but pled guilty when the judge told him he would not be allowed to inform the jury of his medical condition.  Excerpt:  “At his death, Mr. McWilliams was waiting to be sentenced in federal court after being convicted of having conspired to possess, manufacture and sell marijuana…. They pleaded guilty to the charge last year after United States District Judge George H. King ruled that they could not use California’s medical marijuana initiative, Proposition 215, as a defense, or even tell the jury of the initiative’s existence and their own medical conditions.”  The late William F. Buckley wrote about McWilliams’ case here.

Imagine what Diane Monson, Bryan Epis, Ed Rosenthal, and Peter McWilliams (and others) would have thought had they seen a former top official claim that federal officials never threatened patients or caregivers?!

Read the rest of this post »

Tim Lynch • October 26, 2009 @ 10:32 am
Filed under: General; Government and Politics; Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

‘Reefer Sanity’

Kathleen Parker in the Washington Post:

Arguments for and against decriminalization of some or all drugs are familiar by now. Distilled to the basics, the drug war has empowered criminals while criminalizing otherwise law-abiding citizens and wasted billions that could have been better spent on education and rehabilitation.

By ever-greater numbers, Americans support decriminalizing at least marijuana, which millions admit to having used, including a couple of presidents and a Supreme Court justice. A recent Gallup poll found that 44 percent of Americans favor legalization for any purpose, not just medical, up from 31 percent in 2000.

Read the whole thing.  For more Cato work, go here.

Tim Lynch • October 21, 2009 @ 12:19 pm
Filed under: General; Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Drug War Insanity Goes Up in Smoke

As my colleague David Rittgers notes below, the announcement by the Department of Justice that it will no longer seek to arrest medical marijuana users is a breakthrough for common sense in federal drug policy.

It is bizarre that it takes a major policy announcement to spell out what a waste of police and court time it is to investigate the ill people who use medical marijuana. Historians will surely look back on this period and ponder how our government could have seriously embraced the opposite policy, in the same way we look back at the strange days of alcohol prohibition.

The Obama administration should be taking much bolder steps to stop the criminalization of drug use more generally. More and more people have come to recognize that the drug war has been given a fair chance to work, but it has proved to be a grand failure.

Tim Lynch • October 19, 2009 @ 11:52 am
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Do We Need a Law against Texting While Driving?

Radley Balko exposes the politicians who play the game of enacting laws for symbolic purposes.  In this game, whether the proposed law has any actual impact on the supposed problem seems entirely beside the point.  Excerpt:

Maryland just passed a texting ban, but state officials are flummoxed over how to enforce it. The law bans texting while driving but allows for reading texts, for precisely the reasons just mentioned. But how can a police officer positioned at the side of a highway tell if the driver of the car that just flew by was actually pushing buttons on his cellphone and not merely reading the display screen? Unless a motorist is blatantly typing away at eye level, a car would need to be moving slowly enough for an officer to see inside, focus on the phone, and observe the driver manipulating the buttons. Which is to say the car would probably need to be stopped—at which point it ceases to be a safety hazard.

Read the whole thing. Until this feel-good-gesture-legislation game is broken up, the number of laws will continue to multiply.  And that means the sphere of government expands while the sphere of liberty recedes.

Tim Lynch • October 14, 2009 @ 1:30 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Felony Franks

The Wall Street Journal has an article today about a small businessman in Chicago, James Andrews.  Mr. Andrews started a hot-dog stand and hired ex-convicts as employees.  The name “Felony Franks,” came to him and he thought it was catchy.  Since it was his business, Mr. Andrews didn’t think twice about the name.  Enter Chicago Alderman Robert Fioretti.  The alderman doesn’t like the name and will not “permit” Mr. Andrews to set up signs to attract more customers.  (Btw, How  many people like the name Robert Fioretti anyway?  Maybe it should be changed to …  eh, never mind)  Neighborhood “activists” are also setting up meetings to discuss the hot-dog business and the “exploitation” of the workers.  Kevin Jones, 42, an employee at Felony Franks, tells the reporter he does not feel exploited, “Working here allows me to provide for myself and my family.”

What a farcical situation.  First, the politicians manufacture scores of felons.  Next, the pols have their own ideas on how to “help” the ex-cons return to civil society.  Those ideas entail spending taxpayer money.

Tim Lynch • October 13, 2009 @ 1:50 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

The Constitution Is a Bestseller

According to today’s Washington Post, the Cato pocket Declaration of Independence and Constitution have made the bestseller list!

This is going to make establishment Washington nervous — with good reason.

Order your copy here. More here and here (pdf).

Tim Lynch • October 12, 2009 @ 8:33 am
Filed under: Cato Publications; Law and Civil Liberties; Political Philosophy

  Print This Post

House Approves Hate Crimes Measure

Last night, the House of Representatives approved a defense spending measure that included a totally unrelated bill that would ban so-called “hate crimes.” 

I’ve testified twice against federal hate crimes proposals.  Here’s the case against the law (in brief):

First, the federal hate crime law is unconstitutional because it is beyond the powers of Congress. 

Second, the law will not prevent violent crime.  Anyone already inclined to kill or beat up another human being is not going to reverse course because Congress passes a new law against violence motivated by bias. 

Third, the law does take the state too close to the realm of thought crimes.  In order for a prosecutor to prove the “hate” aspect, detectives have to dig into a person’s life, thoughts, writings, conversations, etc., to gather the “evidence.”  There’s no good reason to go there because — let’s remember — violent acts are already against the law!

Tim Lynch • October 9, 2009 @ 10:44 am
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Obama, Chicago and the Olympics

The decision to hold the Olympics in Rio may be bad news for Chicago, but it may be great news for the country!

For more about Mr. Obama’s wrongheaded policies, go here and here (pdf).

Tim Lynch • October 2, 2009 @ 9:53 pm
Filed under: Government and Politics

  Print This Post

Cheye Calvo Reflects on SWAT Shooting

Cheye Calvo is the DC-area small-town mayor who had his two pet dogs shot and killed by a botched drug raid about a year ago.  In an article to be published in this Sunday’s Washington Post, Calvo reflects upon his experience — not just the raid itself, but on the actions of the police department afterward.  Excerpt:

I remain captured by the broader implications of the incident. Namely, that my initial take was wrong: It was no accident but rather business as usual that brought the police to — and through — our front door.

In the words of Prince George’s County Sheriff Michael Jackson, whose deputies carried out the assault, “the guys did what they were supposed to do” — acknowledging, almost as an afterthought, that terrorizing innocent citizens in Prince George’s [County] is standard fare. The only difference this time seems to be that the victim was a clean-cut white mayor with community support, resources, and a story to tell the media.

What confounds me is the unmitigated refusal of county leaders to challenge law enforcement and to demand better — as if civil rights are somehow rendered secondary by the war on drugs.

Mr. Calvo has been a super advocate for reform — he has given up countless hours of his spare time to study and speak on this subject so that fewer people will be victimized the same way his family was.  He spoke at a Cato Hill Briefing over the summer.

Calvo told his story at Cato last year.

For related Cato research, go here and here.

Tim Lynch • September 18, 2009 @ 3:16 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Obama: I Want Those Patriot Act Powers

Yesterday, President Obama’s lawyers informed members of Congress that the president does not want any provision of the  Patriot Act to expire.  Turns out that  Obama wants to have the sweeping powers.  This is just the latest example of the cacophony that pervades Washington.  When Bush was in the White House, the Dems postured against his runaway spending, his military quagmires, and his constitutional violations.  With Obama in the White House, Bush’s most misguided policies either continue or worsen.

Obama is in the news today for his “off-the-record” comment about Kanye West.  It would have been better had a reporter overheard Obama saying something like, “John Ashcroft was a terrific Attorney General, but  I’ll never admit that publicly.”

For related Cato work, go here and here.

Tim Lynch • September 16, 2009 @ 9:44 am
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Some Good Spending For a Change

Cato analysts regularly identify areas where the government is either wasting money or spending money on unconstitutional or inappropriate matters. There are a few areas, however, where the state does not spend money where it ought to. 

A case in point is where the state has mistakenly locked up an innocent person.  Believe it or not, in some jurisdictions no compensation is offered to the victims.  Zero! 

The Associated Press has a story today about a new Texas law that will pay about $80,000 in compensation to victims for each year they were wrongly incarcerated.  Other states should follow suit.  Inaction is inexcusable. 

(H/T:  Grits for Breakfast)

Tim Lynch • September 4, 2009 @ 2:04 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties; Tax and Budget Policy

  Print This Post

DC Gun Regulations

A Washington Post reporter describes the rigmarole Washington D.C. residents must endure to purchase a gun and keep it in one’s home for purposes of self-defense. Snippet:

It took $833.69, a total of 15 hours 50 minutes, four trips to the Metropolitan Police Department, two background checks, a set of fingerprints, a five-hour class and a 20-question multiple-choice exam.

It’s a fair-minded article–not only about the government regulations, but also the factors that play into the decision to keep a gun–risk of crime, risk of accident, the personal willingness to use deadly force (not to mention getting approval from the spouse!)

Cato Chairman Bob Levy, the prime mover of the landmark Heller ruling, discusses the next legal fight: Whether one can carry a firearm outside of the home for purposes of self-defense. Tom Palmer is suing the DC government on this. For more on the Second Amendment and gun control, check out the new Cato book, Gun Control on Trial, by Brian Doherty.

Tim Lynch • September 2, 2009 @ 1:13 pm
Filed under: General; Government and Politics; Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Kristof on the Drug War

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof cites the Cato report about Decriminalization of Drugs in Portugal by Glenn Greenwald.  Here’s an excerpt:

Above all, it’s time for a rethink of our drug policy. The point is not to surrender to narcotics, but to learn from our approach to both tobacco and alcohol. Over time, we have developed public health strategies that have been quite successful in reducing the harm from smoking and drinking.

If we want to try a public health approach to drugs, we could learn from Portugal. In 2001, it decriminalized the possession of all drugs for personal use. Ordinary drug users can still be required to participate in a treatment program, but they are no longer dispatched to jail.

“Decriminalization has had no adverse effect on drug usage rates in Portugal,” notes a report this year from the Cato Institute. It notes that drug use appears to be lower in Portugal than in most other European countries, and that Portuguese public opinion is strongly behind this approach.

A new United Nations study, World Drug Report 2009, commends the Portuguese experiment and urges countries to continue to pursue traffickers while largely avoiding imprisoning users. Instead, it suggests that users, particularly addicts, should get treatment.

Senator Webb has introduced legislation that would create a national commission to investigate criminal justice issues — for such a commission may be the best way to depoliticize the issue and give feckless politicians the cover they need to institute changes.

Good stuff.  Read the whole thing.

Tim Lynch • August 20, 2009 @ 4:34 pm
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

Arrogant Judges

Item:  Judge sends a man to jail for yawning in court.   A six month jail sentence, if you can believe it.  The Cambridge arrest of the Harvard professor was an example of how the police can abuse their power by arresting people for annoying or obnoxious conduct (not real crimes!). 

This is an example of how judges abuse their power in a similar fashion.  Judges do need to maintain order in court, but this judge did not order the man to leave and did not mete out a fine.  If judges are  going to go so far as to jail a spectator, the prisoner ought to be released (in almost all cases) on his/her own recognizance, and the case should be decided by a jury, not the judge (who is now a witness). 

Item:  Judge says his conduct — deflating the tires of someone’s vehicle — wasn’t a “big deal.”  Compared to what sir?  A person who smokes a  marijuana cigarette in her home to alleviate back pain?  Seems to me that we’re lucky this judge was found out on this.  Not the type of thing we should expect or tolerate from a judge (to say the least).

But there is some good news today: When a local cop was speeding through stop signs and red lights without using a siren or flashing lights, and then broadsided a car,  killing Ashley McIntosh, the officer tried to argue that she was immune from a lawsuit because she was on official state business.  Judge Terrence Ney ruled that the cop’s belief that she was acting under special emergency circumstances did not make it so.   This judge understands that in a free society, state agents do not have carte blanche.  Good judging in action.

Tim Lynch • August 13, 2009 @ 11:34 am
Filed under: Law and Civil Liberties

  Print This Post

The Government Habit

Someone once observed that the problem with conservatives is that they want to ban anything that they don’t like and the problem with liberals is that they think anything good ought to be subsidized by taxpayer dollars.  And so it goes with needle exchanges.  Too many jurisdictions ban needles from stores.  And then the liberals who fight the bans want to leap over to government funding for needle exchanges.  It is as if no one has considered the idea that the government should just stay out of it altogether.

Tim Lynch • August 12, 2009 @ 10:47 pm
Filed under: General; Government and Politics; Health, Welfare & Entitlements

  Print This Post