FEDERAL JUDGE RULES PARTS OF PATRIOT ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL

MSNBC ^ | 1/26/04

[areafiftyone]

Federal Judge Rules Part of Patriot Act Unconstitutional. Just breaking on the ticker. Looking for more info!

[areafiftyone]

Ticker on top.

[Old Sarge]

Well Said.

The news blurb is what's "deliberately vague". What was this "Humanitarian Law Project" doing? What were they advising to be done? And how did it violate the law in the first place?

Not enough data yet.

[FairOpinion]

"About time."

==

Sure is, after all, we haven't had a good terrorist attack in over two years.

(/sarcasm)

[JohnnyZ]

Upshot: you can help terrorists all you want to, tell them how to make chemical weapons, advise them which targets they should bomb, etc, etc.

[Jaxter]

Just out of curiosity, which part of this takes away your freedom the most, providing expert advice to foreign terrorist organizations or providing assistance to them?

[Mr. Bird]

The judge's ruling said the law, as written, does not differentiate between impermissible advice on violence and encouraging the use of peaceful, nonviolent means to achieve goals.

I thought it was already constitutional to forbid individuals or organizations to conduct foreign policy contradictory to that of the U.S. government. The case in question appears to pertain to activities in Turkey, which in my book translates as "conducting foreign policy".

I suppose if we took a little time travel back to 1943, we could find a judge that would forbid restrictions on assistance to the Nazis? I find it hard to believe that our constitution was designed to enable its own destruction.

[cynicom]

I like an argument that is better than yours, used by many here on FR. "If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about". That one really is a winner.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

And they didn't even have to use the Chewbacca defense.

[Young Rhino]

It is time for the executive branch to suggest that the legislative branch removes funding for the lower courts in the federal judiciary until the no-talent @ss clowns appointed by Clinton and Carter decide to quit legislating from the bench. While we're at it, the executive branch shouldn't invite left-wing members of the Supreme Court to any function whatsoever...stop propping up these crackpots with an air of respectability on the Washington cocktail circuit.

[FairOpinion]

Audrey B. Collins

United States District Court for the Central District of California, Los Angeles, California

Judge Collins was appointed to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on May 9, 1994 by President Clinton.

Born: Chester, Pennsylvania-June 12, 1945 Education: Howard University (B.A. 1967); American University (M.A. 1969); University of California at Los Angeles (J.D. 1977).

[Sgt_Schultze]

Thanks for the clarification...The judge's ruling said the law, as written, does not differentiate between impermissible advice on violence and encouraging the use of peaceful, nonviolent means to achieve goals.

"The USA Patriot Act places no limitation on the type of expert advice and assistance which is prohibited and instead bans the provision of all expert advice and assistance regardless of its nature," the judge said.

Perhaps Congress decided to make no distinction and wanted to outlaw any and all help to such organizations. After all, that concept seems to mirror the one used by the founders in the First Amendment where they prohibited any limitation on the right of free speech, without defining whether they meant the audible type of speech, or the behavior, flag-burning type or the defiant sit-in style. Perhaps Judge Audrey should look at the First Amendment with the same vigor she used on the Patriot Act.

[Solson]

Yeah...about time they create loopholes in a pretty good, and often misunderstood law....

[KantianBurke]

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

I see my subversive plot to hijack this thread has already taken root. Over under on South Park/Chewbacca images is 11.

[not-alone]

no wonder MSNBC etc are not explaining this -just PATRIOT ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL

[Young Rhino]

And they didn't even have to use the Chewbacca defense.

Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee - an eight foot tall Wookiee - want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! What does that have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! None of this makes sense. If Chewbacca lives on Endor, then you must find the Patriot Act unconstitutional! The defense rests. :-)

[mabelkitty]

One question - would this legal advice extend to Treasonous activities? Fine. Let's just go straight to a firing squad.

Or, is this extra protection for folks who broke immigration rules and other illegals who otherwise would have been deported but now face treason charges?

Either way, looks like activist judges for sure....

[B Knotts]

Nah. I think what is going on here is simply that any restriction on speech is going to have to be "narrowly drawn." What this judge is saying is that by not making a distinction between aid or advice to terrorist organizations in the furtherance of violent actions, as defined by the government, and aid or advice in an effort to get such organizations to turn to peaceful methods, the government is failing to "narrowly draw" the restriction.

Probably just an oversight, that I don't imagine will raise a great deal of objection, and it will be rewritten/refined.

[Don Joe]

Upshot: you can help terrorists all you want to, tell them how to make chemical weapons, advise them which targets they should bomb, etc, etc.

Well, no. Try this:

Upshot: you can no longer be prosecuted for saying, "Fries with that, sir?" when it's Abdulla talking into the happy clown face at the drive-through, or saying, "Here's the change for your fill-up" at the gas station, or saying, "That'll be eleven fifty two for your groceries, m'am."

I believe it's already illegal to give aid and comfort to the enemy. This law, as it reads, would appear to give a free pass to go after anyone who's engaged in even the most casual of transactions. They could probably even go after the State of New York for accepting toll fees from Moustafa if he drives over the Tappan Zee Bridge.

[oceanview]

exactly right. they will have to appeal this, or tighten up the law.

the judiciary is the most corrupt branch of government we have, accountable to no onw, often with lifetime appointment. to entrust any aspect of the war on terror to them, is to surrender. the left owns the judiciary.