<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1515" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If the USA survived Lincoln and the civil war we
can survive anything today. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Stealth Habeas
Amendments</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bruce et. al.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It occurred to me that habeas corpus is perhaps the most important legal
principle in the human rights debate regarding methods of pursuing the war on
terror. Maybe I am off the mark here, so consider this speculation from
someone not an expert on human rights and law. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Of course the Geneva convention and laws against cruel and unusual
punishment are very important, but if those detained in the war on terror
have access to lawyers and courts who monitor the detainees cases, cruel
treatment or torture will be difficult to pursue without objection.
Hiding detainees away in secret prisons is a gross violation of habeas corpus,
is it not, even if they are not tortured? And one of the main reasons to
have strong habeas corpus law is exactly to prevent cruelty and abuse of those
detained, cruelty that happens much more easily when law enforcement (or
military) conduct is not monitored, beyond the reach of lawyers and
courts. And indefinite detainment even without torture would be
difficult if habeas corpus was applied aggressively. The Canadian man
sent to Syria, even if he was treated well in Syria, was still denied his
rights under US law as it applies to US citizens. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There is a legal debate on what rights the USA must grant to
non-citizens detained in the war on terror that seems to muddy the
waters.<BR> </DIV>
<DIV>I am speculating that the focus on whether or not torture will be used,
or how far torture can go, in pursuing the war on terror, is distracting
people from the basic fact that indefinite detainment without being charged
with a crime, or not being given a trial in an expeditious manner,
even without torture, if allowed, is a serious violation of one of the
fundamental protections (habeas corpus) that assures the freedom of
individuals from the abuses of state power. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The human rights debate on torture thus might be being used as a
smokescreen to sneak in a weakening of habeas corpus.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>What do you think?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ted Moffett<BR> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 9/23/06, <B class=gmail_sendername>Bruce and
Jean Livingston</B> <<A
href="mailto:jeanlivingston@turbonet.com">jeanlivingston@turbonet.com</A>>
wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>If habeas corpus issues interest you, this will make
you realize just how much the "Great Writ" is under attack...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:33 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Stealth Habeas Amendments</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV align=left>from the Justice Project:<BR> </DIV>
<H2 style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN></SPAN></H2>
<H2 style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN>Habeas Under Attack Again</SPAN></H2>
<P><SPAN>
<P><FONT size=2>Last week, criminal justice advocates mobilized against a
potentially devastating blow to <EM>habeas corpus</EM> rights. Despite
widespread opposition to the Streamlined Procedures Act and other
legislation that would effectively repeal the "Great Writ" of <EM>habeas
corpus</EM>, members of the House and Senate Judiciary committees worked
behind closed doors last week to attach such measures to a Department of
Defense (DOD) Authorization Bill. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>Some 300 pages of non-germane language, including
<EM>habeas</EM> repeal measures, could be tacked on to the DOD bill -- the
primary purpose of which is to provide resources for troops in Afghanistan
and Iraq. Much of this maneuvering has been taking place though back door
channels, and regular order, which assures that both chambers of Congress
have a fair opportunity to consider the legislation, has been skirted.
Alarmingly, the texts of some of the measures have not been seen by many
members and their staff nor by the public. This method of passing unpopular
measures has, unfortunately, worked in the past. Last year, during eleventh
hour Patriot Act reauthorization discussions, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Arizona)
inserted two provisions that significantly limit the ability of the Great
Writ to enforce important Bill of Rights protections. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>In recent years, thanks in part to the work of The Justice
Project and our supporters and allies, Congress overwhelmingly supported the
passage of the bipartisan </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/ipa/" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>Innocence Protection Act</FONT></A><FONT size=2> to correct some of
the problems in the criminal justice system that lead to wrongful
convictions. The <EM>habeas</EM> repeal provisions worked on this
week would undercut much of that progress and increase the risk that
innocent people will remain in prison or even be executed. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2><EM>Habeas</EM> repeal provisions have been <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/organizations-opposed4-06-02-06.pdf"
target=_blank>opposed</A> (pdf) by the Conference of Chief Justices,
which includes the highest judicial officers from each of the fifty states
and all US territories, the Judicial Conference of the United States (the
principal policymaking body with regard to the US Courts), over thirty
former judges, and more than sixty former prosecutors from across the
political spectrum, because there is no evidence that this legislation is
needed. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>The Justice Project and our allies remain on the offensive;
<EM>habeas</EM> repeal language could easily be attached to a number of
pieces of legislation in these final few days before Congress recesses for
the midterm elections or in a potential lame duck session later this
fall. </FONT><FONT size=2>Residents of the following states can
contact their Congressional representatives (who hold leadership
positions or sit on committees considering these measures) through our
website and encourage them to oppose changes that limit our <EM>habeas</EM>
protections: </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_senate" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>CA</FONT></A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_senate" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>DE</FONT></A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_senate" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>MA</FONT></A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_senate" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>MI</FONT></A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_leadership" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>PA</FONT></A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_leadership" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>TN</FONT></A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_senate" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>WI</FONT></A><FONT size=2> and </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_Warner" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>VA</FONT></A><FONT size=2>. Also, some districts
in </FONT><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_leadership" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>IL</FONT> </A><FONT size=2>, </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_leadership" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>OH</FONT></A><FONT size=2> and </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/campaign/habeas_conf" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>NC</FONT></A><FONT size=2>. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>Our <EM>habeas</EM> </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>webpage</FONT></A><FONT size=2> will be updated with the latest
information.<BR></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2><BR></FONT></P></SPAN>
<P></P>
<H2 style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><SPAN>Habeas Protection
Campaign</SPAN></H2><SPAN><FONT face="arial, helvetica" size=-2>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><FONT face=Verdana>[</FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/#about"
target=_blank><FONT face=Verdana>About the Legislation </FONT></A><FONT
face=Verdana>][</FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/#opposing"
target=_blank><FONT face=Verdana>Letters, Testimony and Editorials Opposing
the Legislation </FONT></A><FONT face=Verdana>]<BR>[</FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/tjp/home.html?source=habeas_action" target=_blank><FONT
face=Verdana>Take Action!</FONT></A><FONT face=Verdana> ]</FONT></P></FONT>
<H3 style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><EM>Habeas</EM> Repeal Measures Increase
Threat of Wrongful Convictions</H3>
<P><FONT size=2>Although there is widespread opposition to the Streamlined
Procedures Act and other legislation that would effectively repeal the
"Great Writ" of <EM>habeas corpus</EM>, members of the House and Senate
Judiciary committees continue to work behind closed doors to pass these
reforms. Efforts are currently afoot to attach widely criticized
<EM>habeas</EM> measures and 300 pages of other non-germane matters to a
Department of Defense Authorization bill that is presently in conference and
will be finalized in the coming days. This closed-door strategy is nothing
new: in the past, Congress permitted widely opposed <EM>habeas</EM>
legislation to bypass normal review. During eleventh hour Patriot Act
reauthorization discussions, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Arizona) inserted two
provisions that significantly limit the ability of the Great Writ to enforce
important Bill of Rights protections. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>Now, the DOD Authorization bill -- the purpose of which
is to provide resources for forces in Afghanistan and Iraq -- is being
weighed down and slowed by controversial and wrong-headed crime legislation
that has otherwise been unable to garner majority support in both houses of
Congress. Members of both parties who have fought on principle to resist
these regressive changes to habeas should continue to do so and not be made
to appear anti-patriotic when they rightfully object to this unnecessarily
bloated DOD bill. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>Regular order -- which assures that both Chambers of
Congress have a fair opportunity to consider the legislation -- has been
skirted; indeed, the texts of some of the added measures has not been seen
by many members and their staff nor by the public -- there is only one
proper course of action -- remove the non-germane matters from the bill.
</FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>In recent years, Congress overwhelmingly supported the
passage of the bipartisan </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/ipa/" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>Innocence Protection Act</FONT></A><FONT size=2> to correct some of
the problems in the criminal justice system that led to wrongful
convictions. The <EM>habeas</EM> repeal provisions would undercut much of
that progress, and increase the risk that innocent people will remain in
prison or even be executed. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>On June 12, 2006, the United States Supreme Court's 5-3
decision in <EM><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/ipa/" target=_blank>House v.
Bell </A></EM>reaffirmed how critically important it is that access to
habeas corpus remain available to state prisoners in this country. Indeed,
if <EM>habeas</EM> "reforms" that have been introduced in Congress were the
law, Mr. House almost certainly would have been out of court without anyone
considering the merits of his arguments. Errors routinely occur during the
trial phase and state courts often fall short in their responsibility to
correct these errors; by cutting federal courts out of the review process,
as Congress is attempting to do, these errors will go uncorrected,
increasing the likelihood that innocent people will languish in prison, or
even be executed. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>The Streamlined Procedures Act and the <EM>habeas</EM>
provisions found in the Patriot Act and other drastic <EM>habeas</EM> repeal
measures are opposed by a </FONT><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/organizations-opposed4-06-02-06.pdf"
target=_blank><FONT size=2>broad array</FONT></A><FONT size=2> of groups and
individuals including the Conference of Chief Justices, the Judicial
Conference of the United States, more than 60 former prosecutors, 30 current
and former judges, and a number of leading conservatives. In the past
months, the U.S. Conference of State Chief Justices passed a resolution
opposing the legislation and urging that additional study and analysis of
current laws governing <EM>habeas corpus</EM> petitions be undertaken. In
September, the Judicial Conference of the United States -- an entity created
by Congress in 1922 to "serve as the principal policy making body concerned
with the administration of the United States Courts" -- similarly urged
further study before any changes are made to the writ of <EM>habeas
corpus</EM>. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2>The Streamlined Procedures Act: </FONT></P>
<UL>
<LI><FONT size=2><EM>Is opposed by a broad array of groups and
individuals,</EM> including the Conference of Chief Justices, the Judicial
Conference of the United States, more than 60 former prosecutors, 30
current and former judges, and a number of leading conservatives. In the
past months, the US Conference of State Chief Justices passed a resolution
opposing the legislation introduced by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Rep. Dan
Lungren (R-CA) and urging that additional study and analysis of current
laws governing <EM>habeas corpus</EM> petitions be undertaken. In
September, the Judicial Conference of the United States -- an entity
created by Congress in 1922 to "serve as the principal policy making body
concerned with the administration of the United States Courts" --
similarly urged further study before any further changes to
<EM>habeas</EM> are made. <BR><BR></FONT>
<LI><FONT size=2><EM>Would generate numerous complicated legal issues and
years of litigation and delay.</EM> Contrary to the title of the
legislation, the Streamlined Procedures Act would generate years of delay
in the resolution of prisoner appeals because it would overturn a series
of Supreme Court decisions, disregard long-established principles of
federalism, and invite constitutional challenges on the theory that it
impairs the independence of the federal courts. In 1996, Congress amended
the <EM>habeas corpus</EM> statute by enacting the Anti-Terrorism and
Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The AEDPA contained numerous
provisions that have required years of review by the Supreme Court and the
lower federal courts to authoritatively interpret. If passed, the
Streamlined Procedures Act would pose similar problems for the courts.
<BR><BR></FONT>
<LI><FONT size=2><EM>Would lead to more errors and unfairness in the
justice system.</EM> The current system of indigent defense in the United
States -- in which defenders are chronically underfunded and
have far too many clients -- often fails to guarantee defendants a fair
trial and state courts fall short in their responsibility to correct the
errors that occur during the trial phase. By cutting federal courts out of
the review process, these errors will go uncorrected, calling into
question the integrity of the criminal justice system. Additionally, while
finality is important to the victims of crime and to the public in
general, no one wants an innocent person to be convicted of a crime,
especially when the punishment is death, and when it may well mean that
the real perpetrator remains free to commit more crimes. <BR><BR></FONT>
<LI><FONT size=2><EM>Would increase the likelihood that an innocent person
will be executed.</EM> The rising number of innocent prisoners being freed
from jails around the US in recent years has revealed serious flaws in our
criminal justice system. Congress has worked to correct some of these
problems with last year's enactment of the Innocence Protection Act, but
the Streamlined Procedures Act would undercut much of that progress. When
an innocent person is convicted of a crime it is most often because the
defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel or an act of police
or prosecutorial misconduct occurred in the case. Innocent prisoners need
to be able to challenge their cases by filing <EM>habeas corpus</EM>
petitions that can then clear the way for them to prove their innocence.
</FONT></LI></UL>
<P><FONT size=2>Despite this widespread opposition, <EM>habeas</EM> repeal
measures are being attached to other bills making their way through
Congress, including the Patriot Act and the Omnibus Crime Bill. You can help
by </FONT><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/tjp/home.html?source=habeas_action" target=_blank><FONT
size=2>taking action</FONT></A><FONT size=2> today!</FONT></P>
<P><EM><FONT size=2>Status of the Legislation in the Senate:</FONT></EM></P>
<P><FONT size=-1><FONT size=-1>The Senate Judiciary Committee held its
second hearing on the bill on Wednesday, November 16th. A hearing on the
legislation took place on July 13 featuring witnesses including former US
Solicitor General Seth Waxman, innocence expert Barry Scheck and death
penalty attorney and law professor Bryan A. Stevenson arguing that the bill
would increase the likelihood of innocent people being executed. The
witnesses also noted how the legislation undermines recent bipartisan action
by Congress to address inaccuracy in the criminal justice system, through
the Innocence Protection Act, and conflicts with the Anti-Terrorism and
Effective Death Penalty Act. </FONT></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=-1><FONT size=-1>Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa. has
amended the legislation twice addressing some of the concerns about the
original bill; however, the amended version remains a serious threat to
fairness and accuracy in the criminal justice system. </FONT></FONT></P>
<P><STRONG><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/tjp/home.html" target=_blank>Take action</A></STRONG>
today to stop this legislation in the Senate!</P>
<P><EM>Status of the Legislation in the House:</EM></P>
<P>The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland
Security held its second hearing on the House version of the bill, HR 3035,
on Thursday, November 10th. At the hearing, Washington, DC attorney Ruth E.
Friedman, a former senior counsel at the Equal Justice Initiative, commented
that the legislation was written based largely on anecdotal information
about cases in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Friedman noted, "Unlike any
prior reform or revision, this legislation would strip the federal judiciary
of jurisdiction to consider claims of serious constitutional error arising
from state court convictions. In so doing, it would dismantle years of
Supreme Court jurisprudence and wreak havoc on the administration of
criminal justice. HR 3035 would deal this crippling blow to <EM>habeas
corpus</EM> without any evidence of a need for such extreme measures." Read
Friedman's <A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17364.pdf"
target=_blank>full testimony</A> (pdf).</P>
<P><STRONG><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://ga3.org/tjp/home.html" target=_blank>Take action</A></STRONG>
today to stop this legislation in the House!</P>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"></P>
<HR width="60%">
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><STRONG><A
name=10ddc4a8a4589d9c_about></A>About the Legislation</STRONG> </P>
<UL>
<LI>Full Text of <A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17342.pdf"
target=_blank>S 1088</A>, including Sen. Specter's substitute language
<LI>Full Text of <A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17315.pdf"
target=_blank>HR 3035</A> </LI></UL>
<P><STRONG>Lives at Stake</STRONG> </P>
<UL>
<LI>Here is a sampling of the <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/lives-at-stake-innocent.html"
target=_blank>innocent people</A> who might have been executed or left to
languish in prison if the Streamlined Procedures Act were law while their
cases were under review.
<LI>Here are more <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/lives-at-stake-injustices.html"
target=_blank>examples of cases</A> involving egregious prosecutorial
misconduct and other injustices that the Streamlined Procedures Act would
leave untouched. </LI></UL>
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"></P>
<HR width="60%">
<P style="TEXT-ALIGN: center"><STRONG><A
name=10ddc4a8a4589d9c_opposing></A>Opposing the Streamlined Procedures
Act</STRONG></P>
<UL>
<LI>View a list of <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/organizations-opposed4-06-02-06.pdf"
target=_blank>organizations and individuals</A> opposing the legislation.
</LI></UL>
<P><STRONG>Letters and Statements</STRONG></P>
<UL>
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17312.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from the Judicial Conference of the United States
to Sen. Specter. The Judicial Conference is comprised of Senior Circuit
Court Judges and District Judges.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17309.pdf"
target=_blank>Joint Resolution</A> on S 1088 from the Conference of Chief
Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17343.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace
Jefferson to the National Conference of Chief Justices.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17318.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from 31 current and former federal and state
judges to Sen. Specter and Sen. Leahy.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17311.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from California Supreme Court Chief Justice
Ronald M. George to Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17319.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from 71 current and former federal and state
prosecutors to leadership of House and Senate Judiciary committees.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17340.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from former FBI directors William H. Webster and
William S. Sessions to Sen. Specter and Sen. Leahy.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17313.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter and memo</A> from the Rutherford Institute, a
non-profit conservative legal organization dedicated to the defense of
civil liberties and human rights.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17307.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from the American Conservative Union to senators.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17360.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from the American Association of Jewish Lawyers
and Jurists to Senator Specter.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17305.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from former Georgia Congressman and prosecutor
Bob Barr to Sen. Specter.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17308.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from Most Reverend Nicholas DiMarzio, Chairman of
the Domestic Policy Committee of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, to
senators.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17325.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from the American Bar Association to Sen. Specter
and Sen. Leahy.
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17317.pdf"
target=_blank>Letter</A> from the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund
to Sen. Specter. </LI></UL>
<P><STRONG>Testimony</STRONG></P>
<P><EM>Testimony before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary - November 16,
2005</EM> </P>
<UL>
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/statements/statement-of-seth-p-waxman-on.html"
target=_blank>Seth Waxman</A>, Former US Solicitor General
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/statements/statement-of-judge-howard-d.html"
target=_blank>Judge Howard D. McKibben</A>, United States district court
judge from the District of Nevada and Chair of the Judicial Conference
Committee on Federal-State Jurisdiction </LI></UL>
<P><EM>Testimony before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary - July 13,
2005</EM> </P>
<UL>
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/statements/statement-of-seth-waxman-on.html"
target=_blank>Seth Waxman</A>, Former US Solicitor General
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/statements/statement-of-barry-c-scheck.html"
target=_blank>Barry Scheck</A>, Co-Director, Innocence Project and Prof.
Of Law, Cardozo Law School, Yeshiva University
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/statements/statement-of-bryan-a-on-the.html"
target=_blank>Bryan A. Stevenson</A>, Director, Equal Justice Initiative
of Alabama and Prof. Of Clinical Law, NYU School of Law </LI></UL>
<P><EM>Testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security - November 10, 2005</EM> </P>
<UL>
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/pdfs/17364.pdf"
target=_blank>Ruth E. Friedman</A>, Attorney, Washington, DC </LI></UL>
<P><EM>Testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security - June 30, 2005</EM> </P>
<UL>
<LI><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/statements/statement-of-bernard-e-on-the.html"
target=_blank>Bernard E. Harcourt</A>, Professor of Law, University of
Chicago </LI></UL>
<P><STRONG>Editorials and Op-Eds</STRONG></P>
<UL>
<LI>Read <A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/national/habeas/sample-editorials-against-the.html"
target=_blank>quotes</A> from select newspaper editorials regarding the
Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005.
<LI>Editorial: "<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/articles/the-erosion-of-the-great-writ.html"
target=_blank>The erosion of the Great Writ</A>" from the American
Judicature Society. October 25, 2005.
<LI>Op-Ed: "<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.thejusticeproject.org/press/articles/baich-stones-in-the-pathway.html"
target=_blank>Stones in the pathway of justice</A>" by Dale A. Baich as
published in the <EM>Arizona Republic</EM> on September 18, 2005. Baich is
an assistant federal public defender who handles death penalty appeals and
adjunct professor of law at Arizona State University College of Law.
</LI></UL></SPAN>
<P><SPAN>
<P><BR></P></SPAN>
<P></P>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>____________________________________________________________<BR><BR>Habeas
- CAUTION: The foregoing transmission is provided only for the confidential
use of its addressees in the defense of capital cases, and may be legally
privileged against disclosure. If you are not an authorized recipient, it is
important that you effectually delete your copy and notify the sender. Thank
you. To unsubscribe send a blank email to <A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:habeas-l-leave@ruckus.law.cornell.edu"
target=_blank>habeas-l-leave@ruckus.law.cornell.edu</A><BR>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P>
<P></P></DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>
<A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>
mailto:<A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
http://www.fsr.net
<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>