I think the courts will invalidate it,” Specter told me. “They’re not going to give up authority to decide habeas-corpus cases, not a chance.” Others are less sure.
“It’s a pretty odd position for Specter to take,” Amar, of Yale Law School, said. “He trusts the courts to take care of a problem when he’s voting for something that strips them of their jurisdiction to do it. It’s like saying, ‘I shot at her, but I knew I was going to miss.’”
This is a good overview of the politics behing the MCA. As for Specter's "odd" position, shit ain't checkers man, its chess.
Al Qaeda gloats over U.S. election - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper
Topic: Miscellaneous
1:25 pm EST, Nov 11, 2006
The head of al Qaeda's Iraq operations yesterday gloated in a new audio tape over the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and praised U.S. voters for punishing President Bush and the Republicans in Tuesday's midterm elections.
OK, nearly every newspaper has reported on this tape from Al'Queda. The right is busy trumpetting terrorist propaganda after spending all their energy two weeks ago slamming CNN for playing terrorist propaganda. My question, where is the transcript? Why can't I read the statements myself instead of reading the parts that some reporter has decided to extract. Some of us like to think for ourselves, please.
WASHINGTON, DC—After months of aggressive campaigning and with nearly 99 percent of ballots counted, politicians were the big winners in Tuesday's midterm election, taking all 435 seats in the House of Representatives, retaining a majority with 100 out of 100 seats in the Senate, and pushing political candidates to victory in each of the 36 gubernatorial races up for grabs.
Congressman Edward Markey - October 29, 2006 - MARKEY: DON'T ARREST STUDENT, USE HIM TO FIX LOOPHOLES
Topic: Miscellaneous
2:01 pm EST, Oct 29, 2006
Under the circumstances, any legal consequences for this student must take into account his intent to perform a public service, to publicize a problem as a way of getting it fixed. He picked a lousy way of doing it, but he should not go to jail for his bad judgment.
Thank you Ed Markey! I'm sure that everyone who wrote you appreciates the fact that you are listening and that you took the time to take a closer look at this case.
Update: Ed Markey put out a press release today softening his stance on this.
Congressman Markey,
While I'm not one of your constituents, your statements and actions often have an impact that reaches beyond your district. Yesterday you were quoted in several news media outlets as having called for the arrest of Christopher Soghoian, a PHD candidate at the University of Indiana Bloomington, because he created a web page that generates phoney airline boarding passes. As you are likely aware, your call was answered by the FBI who reportedly broke into Soghoian's house last night and seized all of his computer equipment.
I am a professional computer security researcher. I work for one of the worlds largest IT companies. My job involves finding vulnerabilities in software systems and getting them fixed. Responsible vendors are usually very responsive and willing to work with my team when we contact them with information about problems with their products. Through this process we are able to locate and repair vulnerabilities in IT infrastructure before the bad guys can find them and exploit them. However, there are always a few unsophisticated people who seek to shoot the messenger instead of dealing with the flaw.
Christopher Soghoian is one of the good guys. He is not a criminal and he is not enabling criminals. He did not create the vulnerability in the boarding pass screening process. This problem has existed for years, and it has been noted in other quarters, most recently by Sen. Chuck Schumer. However, the problem hasn't been fixed. Soghoian's website was intended to demonstrate how simple this is, and he has clearly and repeatedly stated that his intent in creating the site was to raise awareness about the problem so that it will be fixed. His website does not make this much easier than standard desktop publishing software available on anyone's personal computer.
Your call for his arrest, and the subsiquent events that have unfolded over the past 24 hours, have done serious harm to the national security of the United States. You could have simply contacted him, informed him of the legal problems that one could face for operating such a website, and discussed shutting it down. By choosing instead to prosecute him you are sending a message to security professionals in this country that if you observe a problem with national security policies or practices and make people aware of those problems in good faith so that they might be fixed, the government will treat you as an enemy and will prosecute you if possible. The inevitable result will be that people will hold their tongues, and problems will persist until they are discovered by someone who has malicious intent.
I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on this matter. The current course of action is not in the best interests of this country.
I didn't sleep at home last night. It's fair to say I was rather shaken up.I came back today, to find the glass on the front door smashed.Inside, is a rather ransacked home, a search warrant taped to my kitchen table, a total absence of computers - and various other important things.
So, they go to his house yesterday, talk to him, and then leave... And then they return in the middle of the night, break in, and take his stuff?! Why didn't they just seize stuff when he was there in the afternoon?
"ACLU State of Civil Liberties: Scalia & Strossen." C-SPAN has posted online at this link (RealPlayer required) archived video of this evening's discussion.
C-SPAN's website is architected in such a way that it is almost impossible to easily link to individual videos on their site. Fortunately, this blog links the debate between Scalia and Strossen, which is worth a look.
I think Scalia comes off very well here. I agree that loose interpretation of the Constitution leads as often to the death of liberty as to it's defense. The problem is that I disagree with his conclusion that the American people are tolerant. Brown vs. Board, which he shows a lot of chutzpa in admitting may be in error under his conception of the law, is a perfect example of a large portion of this society being dragged kicking and screaming into a more tolerant world by judicial fiat, if you will. The right wing commentators blasting at me from nearly every station on the AM dial don't seem the epitome of tolerance, and they like Scalia not because he is defending freedom, but because he offers them hope that they might take freedoms away. I might feel a lot better if I need only convince them to change their policies, but the sort of open dialog among critically minded people that would be required simply does not exist.
