Posted on 12/03/2003 9:08:17 PM PST by TaxPayer2000
SAN FRANCISCO, Dec 3 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Wednesday struck down part of a 1996 federal anti-terrorism law, saying the government's definition of what constituted "material support" to foreign terror groups was too vague.
At issue is a statute that was the first to criminalize offering "material support" to foreign terror groups. That law was the precursor to the controversial 2001 Patriot Act which expanded the government's intelligence-gathering powers and increased penalties for activities classified as terrorist.
In their decision, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an earlier preliminary ruling that prohibited the provision of "personnel" and "training" to groups designated by the United States as "terrorist organizations."
The court also ruled that before applying the law the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a donor to a group branded as a "foreign terrorist organization" knew of its unlawful activities.
"The prohibition on providing "training" and "personnel" is impermissibly overbroad and thus void for vagueness under the First and Fifth Amendments," the court ruled.
That "personnel" provision was used to indict "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh and six people in Buffalo, New York knows as the "Lackawanna Six," said David Cole, a lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights which brought the case.
He added the ruling that covers the Western states in the 9th Circuit could make it tougher for the Bush administration to prosecute individuals charged with aiding designated terrorist groups.
"Virtually all of the terrorism criminal prosecutions since 9/11 have relied on this material support statute and many of them have relied on the provision regarding 'personnel." Cole said.
U.S. Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo said the decision was being reviewed.
The case stemmed from a lawsuit brought by a human rights group and two individuals who sought to provide "material support" to the nonviolent humanitarian and political activities of Kurdish and Tamil groups designated as "foreign terrorist organizations" by the U.S. Secretary of State.
That lawsuit challenged the 1996 law which made it a criminal offense punishable by 10 years in jail to train representatives of "terrorist" organizations in the United States to lobby peacefully for their cause.
The quote is from an this AP story. The law is from 1996 so the quote shows the agenda of Mr. Cole and the 9th circut are anti Bush. Suprise suprise.
How about saying Federal Judges can serve 20-25-30 years before they need to be renominated by the president and re-approved by the Senate?
That way Schumer, Kennedy, and their cohorts can't keep saying "These judicial appointments are lifetime positions."
I would like the process for judicial appointments to remain the way it was, but Democrats are obviously "very concerned" about the fact that the positions are held for life and they have changed the process.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.