Mukasey's Confirmation Will be a Disaster
Martin Garbus
Huffington Post
Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein's endorsement of Michael Mukasey is stunning.
There are more reasons to reject Michael Mukasey's nomination than his evasive answers on waterboarding and unconstitutional expansive views of federal power. Years ago, Michael Mukasey defended the indefensible when his friend, Rudolph Giuliani, then a prosecutor, began subpoenaing defense lawyers before grand juries.
It was one of the more substantial overreaches of the Giuliani years. And it is of particular relevance in today's criminal cases that bear the terrorism label -- a brand of cases where the government's failure rate today is very high. It can be aimed at the country's best defense lawyers and those lawyers that defend detainee, rendition and terrorism cases.
Giuliani attempted, and Mukasey defended, the subpoenaing of defense lawyers to learn about the relationships between defense lawyers and their clients, between defense lawyers and the payer of the defendants' fees -- a move that certainly would discourage most third parties from contributing to a defendant's fee fund.
Giuliani attempted, and Mukasey defended, subpoenaing the attorneys' work records that would show confidential communication between attorney and client.
As a result of the New York State bar's concern over Mr. Giuliani's activities, on the same day that Mr. Mukasey's article appeared, the New York State Bar Association issued a report designed to curb the freedom of federal prosecutors to subpoena attorneys.
Mukasey's defense came three days after the Massachusetts Bar Association roundly condemned issuing such subpoenas as unethical, improper and unconstitutional.
(Continued here.)
Huffington Post
Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein's endorsement of Michael Mukasey is stunning.
There are more reasons to reject Michael Mukasey's nomination than his evasive answers on waterboarding and unconstitutional expansive views of federal power. Years ago, Michael Mukasey defended the indefensible when his friend, Rudolph Giuliani, then a prosecutor, began subpoenaing defense lawyers before grand juries.
It was one of the more substantial overreaches of the Giuliani years. And it is of particular relevance in today's criminal cases that bear the terrorism label -- a brand of cases where the government's failure rate today is very high. It can be aimed at the country's best defense lawyers and those lawyers that defend detainee, rendition and terrorism cases.
Giuliani attempted, and Mukasey defended, the subpoenaing of defense lawyers to learn about the relationships between defense lawyers and their clients, between defense lawyers and the payer of the defendants' fees -- a move that certainly would discourage most third parties from contributing to a defendant's fee fund.
Giuliani attempted, and Mukasey defended, subpoenaing the attorneys' work records that would show confidential communication between attorney and client.
As a result of the New York State bar's concern over Mr. Giuliani's activities, on the same day that Mr. Mukasey's article appeared, the New York State Bar Association issued a report designed to curb the freedom of federal prosecutors to subpoena attorneys.
Mukasey's defense came three days after the Massachusetts Bar Association roundly condemned issuing such subpoenas as unethical, improper and unconstitutional.
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home