Philly.com: Report Calls Pay for Lawyers in Death-Penalty Cases “Grossly Inadequate” A new report, submitted to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court by Court of Common Pleas Judge Benjamin Lerner, concluded that the pay for court-appointed lawyers in Philadelphia death-penalty cases is “grossly inadequate” and “unacceptably increases the risk of ineffective assistance of counsel.” February 22, 2012Washington Post: Death Penalty Legislation Up for Committee Vote This afternoon, Virginia’s General Assembly will consider a bill that would expand Virginia’s death penalty by making the death penalty available against a murderer’s accomplices who share his intent to kill. February 22, 2012AP: Appeals Court Says Gitmo Suicide Suit Not Allowed The D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that the families of two Guantanamo detainees, who allege that the detainees died after being subject to arbitrary detention and unlawfully cruel treatment, cannot sue the federal government for money damages. February 21, 2012CNN: Suits, Spooks and Cyber Space Whether its information manipulation, or information theft, understanding the battlefield in cyberspace is key to safeguarding information, whether it’s the personal information kind, or the broader national security kind, or the kind that has government employees nervous about protecting critical infrastructure, from water filtration systems to air traffic control systems that operate via computers. February 20, 2012
Panel of Experts Discuss Upcoming Cybersecurity Legislation and Civil Liberties
The Senate is about to consider comprehensive cybersecurity legislation to protect our nation from potentially devastating cyber-attacks. On February 9, The Constitution Project, Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) hosted a standing-room-only briefing on Capitol Hill to discuss how legislation can protect the United States from cyber-attacks while preserving Americans' constitutional rights and civil liberties. The panelists concurred that Congress need not, and should not, sacrifice civil liberties to protect the nation from cyber-attacks.
The panelists included two members of TCP’s Liberty and Security Committee – Asa Hutchinson, former Undersecretary for the Department of Homeland Security and former member of Congress (R-Ark.); and Mary O. McCarthy, former Associate Deputy Inspector General for Investigations at the Central Intelligence Agency. Also on the panel were Gregory Nojeim, Senior Counsel and Director for the Project on Freedom, Security & Technology at CDT, Michelle Richardson, Legislative Counsel for the ACLU, and TCP’s Senior Counsel Sharon Bradford Franklin moderated the discussion. To learn more about cybersecurity read our recently released report Recommendations for the Implementation of a Comprehensive and Constitutional Cybersecurity Policy.
Upcoming Event: Location Tracking and Fourth Amendment Concerns
On January 23rd, a unanimous Supreme Court held in United States v. Jones that when the police attach a GPS device to an individual's car and use it to track the vehicle's movements, this constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, unless an exception applies, a warrant is required. However, the Court issued three separate opinions that raised almost as many questions as they answered about the rules going forward for law enforcement use of such technologies. Please join us in New York City on Tuesday, March 6th at 11:45 a.m. for an in-depth discussion of this issue. Panelists include Bob Barr, former Member of Congress (R-GA), Peter Eckersley, Technology Projects Director for Electronic Frontier Foundation, Jeffrey Rosen, Professor of Law at The George Washington University, Jason Weinstein, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, U.S. Department of Justice, and TCP’s Senior Counsel, Sharon Bradford Franklin. Spaces are filling up quickly so reserve your seat today. To learn more about this issue take a look at our recently released statement on location tracking.
Judy Woodruff and Al Hunt Announced as Annual Gala Masters of Ceremonies
Mark your calendars now for our 2012 Constitutional Champions Gala on March 29, 2012 from 6:30 to 9:30 pm. We are excited to present The Constitution Project’s (TCP) annual awards to David Keene, former chairman of the American Conservative Union, and the Digital Due Process Coalition, a diverse coalition of technology companies, privacy advocates, and think tanks. David Keene is being honored for his tireless efforts to preserve individual freedoms by defending the rule of law and reforming the nation’s criminal justice system. TCP is saluting the Digital Due Process Coalition for working together to advance legislation providing fundamental privacy protections for electronic communications and data in a world of rapidly evolving technology. Judy Woodruff, senior correspondent for PBS NewsHour, and Al Hunt, executive editor of Bloomberg News in Washington D.C. and host of Bloomberg Television’s ‘Political Capital with Al Hunt,’ will act as masters of ceremonies. Purchase your tickets online today to reserve your seat at this highly-anticipated event or contact Kelly Davies at 202-580-6942 or kdavies@constitutionproject.org to learn more about sponsorship opportunities and program advertising.
Upcoming Event - The Supreme Court October 2011 Term: Cases and Controversies
On Tuesday, March 6, 2012 from 6-8 pm The Constitution Project is hosting a panel discussion on The Supreme Court October 2011 Term: Cases and Controversies, in New York City. Panelists Linda Greenhouse, Senior Research Scholar in Law at Yale Law School and former New York Times Supreme Court reporter; E. Joshua Rosenkranz, founding President and CEO of Brennan Center for Justice and Partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP; Stephen R. Shapiro, Legal Director for the American Civil Liberties Union; and Paul Saunders, Of Counsel at Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP and TCP Board member, will discuss high-profile cases, including upcoming arguments on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, the Arizona immigration law, and the application of the Eighth Amendment to life imprisonment for minors. RSVP to reserve your seat.
Recent Attacks on Judicial Independence
The Constitution Project (TCP) is alarmed by recent proposals to punish federal judges who author controversial decisions. Recent calls to combat controversial judicial decisions by removing judges from office (through impeachment or abolishing judgeships altogether), requiring them to defend their reasoning before Congress and risk reprimand, or stripping them of life tenure during good behavior amount to judicial intimidation and are deeply troubling. If enacted, these dealings would strike at a bedrock principle of our constitutional democracy: judicial independence. On January 30, TCP’s Board of Directors released a statement defending judicial independence.
Search Warrant Needed for GPS Tracking SCOTUS Decided in US v. Jones
The Supreme Court decided United States v. Jones, unanimously recognizing that when law enforcement agents install a GPS device on an individual’s car and use it to track the car’s movements, they are conducting a search under the Fourth Amendment. As TCP President Virginia Sloan pointed out in a recent statement, “we welcome the Supreme Court’s recognition that the Fourth Amendment must continue to protect against government intrusions even in the face of modern technological surveillance tools.” Last September, TCP released a report on location tracking, arguing that without a warrant, law enforcement could not surveill a person for more than 24 hours or install a surveillance device on the person’s property. Based on the report’s recommendations, TCP filed an amicus brief in Jones. Though the Court declined to decide whether surveillance without a physical intrusion would still trigger Fourth Amendment safeguards, the two concurring opinions suggest that at least five justices are prepared to find that continuous electronic monitoring violates a reasonable expectation of privacy and requires a warrant under the Fourth Amendment.
Eminent Legal Scholars Debate: Are the President's Recent Recess Appointments Constitutional?
President Obama ignited a significant controversy when he used recess appointments on January 4, 2012, to name Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and to fill three vacancies on the National Labor Relations Board. President Obama claimed that he had the power to take these actions under the authority granted to the executive in Article 2, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. Some Republican senators and others strongly objected, saying the Senate was in "pro forma" session so the recess appointment power could not apply. On January 18, TCP hosted a debate on the issue, featuring Professors Peter M. Shane and Michael McConnell. Professor Shane is a Visiting Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, and Professor McConnell is the Richard & Frances Mallery Professor and Director of Stanford Law School Constitutional Law Center. To listen to the debate please click here.
Supreme Court Ruling on Death Row Inmate’s Case Preserves Justice
On January 18, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Maples v Thomas in a 7-2 vote in favor of petitioner Cory Maples, who is on Alabama’s death row. The decision held that a lower federal court could consider Maples’ federal habeas petition despite the fact that he missed a filing deadline in state court, which normally would cause his claims to be procedurally defaulted in federal court. Maples missed the previous filing deadline because his lawyers left their law firm without notifying him or the courts. The Constitution Project has supported Maples since 2009, filing amicus curiae briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court and in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In a recent statement, President of The Constitution Project Virginia Sloan, said, “Certainly, when a death row inmate is completely abandoned by his volunteer, out-of-state counsel like Maples was, justice requires excusing the missed filing deadline,” and lauded the Court for, “...prioritiz[ing] justice over technicalities, fundamental fairness over procedural rules.” Ms. Sloan’s sentiments were noted in a recent article in the Los Angeles Times and the American Constitution Society featured a piece on the case written by TCP Senior Counsel Mary Schmid Mergler.
Obama Nominates Judge Patricia Wald and David Medine to Privacy Board
President Obama has nominated Judge Patricia Wald and David Medine to serve as members of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB). Created by Congress based on the recommendations of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission, the PCLOB is designed to play a vital, independent role in oversight of privacy and civil liberties. The Constitution Project has long urged Congress and the President to create and staff an independent board. Most recently, in August, TCP led a diverse coalition urging the administration to fill the long-standing vacancies on the board. Senior Counsel Sharon Bradford Franklin commented, “We are confident that Wald – a longtime member of TCP’s Liberty and Security Committee, as well as it’s War Powers Committee - and Medine – a reporter for two of the Liberty and Security Committee’s reports – will be exceptionally well suited for these positions and we applaud their nomination.”
Faces of Reform: Esteemed Lawyers, Lawmakers and Judges Discuss Major Reform Issues
Former Republican Congressman, Undersecretary of Homeland Security during the George W. Bush administration, and TCP Board member Asa Hutchinson discusses the challenge of protecting privacy in the digital age.
In late 2010, TCP announced the formation of the bipartisan Task Force on Detainee Treatment as reported by the Associated Press. The 13-member group includes former Republican and Democratic lawmakers, as well as former government officials and judges. Its goal is to bring to the American people a comprehensive understanding of what is known and what may still be unknown about the past and current treatment of detainees by the U.S. government, as part of the counterterrorism policies of the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. The Task Force will help policymakers and the public confront alleged past abuses—including torture and cruel treatment—by following the facts. When it completes its report in January, 2013, the Task Force will pass the baton to the administration, Congress, and ultimately—to the American people—who will determine what steps should be taken next.
In the interim, you will occasionally hear from Task Force members who are asked to provide commentary on related issues, as in the recent Huffington Post story featuring Task Force Co-Chair, Asa Hutchinson. So please check back to read the latest news.
Mark your calendars now for our 