Saturday, July 03, 2004

The administration initially opposed court challenges on Padilla’s behalf, arguing that since Padilla had no lawyer — and they knew he had no lawyer, because they wouldn’t let him get one — no one was authorized to bring a case for him. They later relented and allowed a lawyer to confer with the accused. Or rather, the enemy, since he has not been accused. But only while the government recorded all conversations.

A federal appeals court in New York rejected the government’s broad claims of executive power, and the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Padilla’s case in April. But the justices finally ducked the hard questions by ruling that the case was improperly filed. Padilla’s lawyers must now try again.

http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/32/features-greene.php
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/32/features-greene.php

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nice Blog!!! It looks like you have spent a fair amount of time setting it up and keeping the content fresh. Congratulations. I'll be sure to come back later again.

I have a SEO tips site. It pretty much covers right to link popularity
related stuff.

Thanks again and keep up the good work.

Greg
theseo-rank.com

Anonymous said...

Nice job on your blog! I am book marking your site for future reference.

I have recently created a investing value
site. It pretty much covers investing value
related stuff.

Stop by and check it out if you have time.

Anonymous said...

I have a [free ads online] ** 0.35 classified ad. It pretty much covers ##KEYWORD## related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)

Anonymous said...

I have a [free classified advertising] ** 0.4free advertisement. It pretty much covers ##KEYWORD## related stuff.

Come and check it out if you get time :-)