ThinkProgress Logo

Justice

NEWS FLASH

Jury Selection Begins In Jamie Leigh Jones Rape Case | Six years ago, Jamie Leigh Jones was gang raped by her co-workers and then imprisoned in a shipping container without food or water while working for Halliburton in Iraq. Yet when Jones sought to hold Halliburton accountable in court, she was told that her employment contract contained a forced arbitration clause, which required any dispute between her and Halliburton to be handled in privatized, corporate-owned arbitration. Today, thanks to a law spearheaded by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN), Jones finally will get a jury trial. Jury selection began today.

Security

NRA Shrugs Off Private Sale Gun Show Loophole Dangers After Al Qaeda Urged Its Supporters To Exploit It

Days after an al Qaeda spokesman in a YouTube video urged the terrorist group’s sympathizers in the U.S. to exploit the private sale gun show loophole in order to purchase weapons to use against Americans, ThinkProgress repeatedly asked the National Rifle Association for comment. However, the powerful gun lobby wouldn’t talk.

But on Friday, the NRA broke its silence. In a post on the website of the group’s legislative action arm, the NRA downplayed the video, saying that closing the loophole will have no effect on “committed terrorists.” To back up their point, the NRA says the Pakistani terrorists behind the Mumbai attacks were able to obtain firearms, despite India’s strict gun laws (although it’s unclear what Pakistan or India has to do with terrorists getting guns in America). Here’s the rest of the argument:

  • Even if private gun sales in the U.S. were banned, terrorists — like common domestic criminals — could simply use straw purchasers who can pass background checks, or could rely on stolen guns and other black market sources.
  • Legislation to arbitrarily deny sales to persons on the “terrorist watchlist” would be useless against Gadahn’s target audience of “lone wolf” attackers with no previous ties to terrorist organizations.
  • Fully automatic “assault weapons” cannot be purchased over the counter.

First, no one is saying that private sales should be banned. Gun safety advocates simply promote having private sellers at gun shows follow the same regulations as licensed dealers: that buyers should be subjected to a federal criminal background check.

Second, individuals on the terrorist watch list can currently purchase firearms anywhere in America, from either private or licensed dealers, because they will not show up on the federal government’s gun control database. While it also makes sense to close this so-called “terror gap,” this isn’t the issue, as Media Matters’ Chris Brown pointed out: “Terrorists that are currently prohibited from purchasing guns can buy guns at gun shows from private sellers because the sellers don’t have to run background checks.”

And whether terrorists can buy fully automatic weapons or semi automatic weapons isn’t at issue either. The fact that terrorists or terrorist sympathizers can purchase any type of firearm without any legal scrutiny is what’s alarming.

Yes, terrorists, just like average domestic criminals, will most likely be able to obtain firearms illegally in this country. But doesn’t it make sense to prevent them from doing so legally?

NEWS FLASH

Three Wavering Democrats To Back Marriage Equality In New York | Via NYT: Three wavering Democratic lawmakers in the State Senate — Joseph P. Addabbo, Jr. and Shirley L. Huntley of Queens, along with Carl Kruger of Brooklyn — “have agreed to support legislation legalizing same-sex marriage in New York, several people with knowledge of the negotiations said on Monday, marking a potential turning point for the long-debated measure.”

LGBT

Prop 8 Trial Update: Videos Won’t Be Collected Or Destroyed

This post was generated based on liveblogging from the Prop 8 Trial Tracker and various live Tweets from the courtroom.

Rallying for equality outside the courthouse this morning. (Photo credit: Urvi Nagrani)

The first of two motions in today’s Proposition 8 proceedings has already been decided against those attempting to maintain inequality. Defendants of Prop 8 argued that all the videos of the trial from last year should be kept from public consumption, a concern they raised after now-retired Judge Vaughn Walker used one of the videos in a lecture he gave a few months ago. Though Walker returned all the videos, attorney Charles Cooper argued that all the videos should not only be recollected, but destroyed.

The new judge presiding over the trial, Judge James Ware, pointed out that he was the one who gave Judge Walker the tapes at Walker’s retirement ceremony. Perhaps foreshadowing how he will rule in the other motion — about whether Judge Walker should have recused himself because he is in a same-sex relationship — Ware asked Cooper if he, too, should consider recusing himself because of his connection to the videos. When Cooper did not respond (perhaps because of the laughter in the gallery), Ware added, “I don’t need an answer now.”

Theodore Boutrous, arguing for the plaintiffs, pointed out that the videos document a public record, not a “radioactive state secret.” The plaintiffs have copies of the video, and they intend to use them in preparation for their appeal of the case. Therese Stewart, who represents the city of San Francisco, pointed out the irony of the defendants’ attempts to question Judge Walker’s fairness while at the same time stifle the videos showing his fairness.

After hearing both sides, Judge Ware ruled that he would deny the motion to have the videos returned.

NEWS FLASH

Virginia Can’t Fill Two State Supreme Court Seats | The Commonwealth of Virginia has achieved the seemingly impossible task of creating a judicial selection system that is even more dysfunctional than the broken U.S. Senate. Under Virginia law, the state legislature must select new judges, but control of the Virginia House and Senate is split for the first time since reconstruction. As a result, only five of the state’s seven supreme court seats are filled, with no end to the stalemate in sight.

Texas Nullificationists Secede From Federal Light Bulb Standards

Nineteenth century nullificationist Senator John C. Calhoun

In 2007, President George W. Bush signed a law that would gradually phase out older light bulbs that are both more inefficient and more expensive in the long run. Once President Obama moved into the White House, however, conservatives suddenly decided that it was their fundamental right as an American to waste their money on expensive and outdated light bulbs. The latest entrant into this war on lower electric bills is an unconstitutional nullification bill that just passed the Texas Legislature:

State lawmakers have passed a bill that allows Texans to skirt federal efforts to promote more efficient light bulbs, which ultimately pushes the swirled, compact fluorescent bulbs over the 100-watt incandescent bulbs many grew up with.

The measure, sent to Gov. Rick Perry for consideration, lets any incandescent light bulb manufactured in Texas — and sold in this state — avoid the authority of the federal government or the repeal of the 2007 energy independence act that starts phasing out some incandescent light bulbs next year.

As ThinkProgress has previously explained, nullification — the theory that states can invalidate federal laws that they don’t like — is nothing less than a direct assault on the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution expressly states that acts of Congress “shall be the supreme law of the land…anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding,” thus expressly establishing that states do not have a veto power over federal laws. Thus, even if Gov. Perry does sign this attack on affordable energy, the attack is  clearly unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, this direct attack on the nation’s founding document would also give Perry an opportunity to tout his tenther credentials in advance of a possible presidential run. Indeed, given Perry’s past support for secession and his claims that the Constitution is flawed because it is too democratic, Perry could cement himself as the tenther candidate of choice simply by signing this wildly unconstitutional law.

In other words, Perry has a simple choice to make. He can pander to the most radical elements of the GOP base, or he can veto the law and actually uphold his oath to “protect and defend the Constitution and Laws of the United States.”

NEWS FLASH

Supreme Court Upholds Nevada Ethics Law | The justices voted unanimously to uphold a Nevada law requiring state lawmakers to recuse from votes “when their judgment could be affected by a relationship to someone in their household, a relative, business partner, or a person ‘substantially similar’ to those specified.”

Maine GOP Chair: We Must Make It Harder To Vote Because ‘Democrats Intentionally Steal Elections’

For nearly four decades, Maine has been one of eight states which provides same-day voter registration to voters at the polls. This policy of enfranchising the greatest number of Maine voters is likely to end, however, now that the GOP-controlled state legislature has passed a bill ending same-day registration and Tea Party Gov. Paul LePage is expected to sign it. Worse, state GOP Chairman Charlie Webster explained it was necessary to disenfranchise the thousands of Maine voters who take advantage of same-day registration every election year in order to save Maine from one of his paranoid fantasies:

“If you want to get really honest, this is about how the Democrats have managed to steal elections from Maine people,Webster told a columnist for the Portland Press Herald in a piece published Friday. “Many of us believe that the Democrats intentionally steal elections.”

Sadly, Maine’s voter disenfranchisement bill is only the latest example of the Republican war on voting that began almost immediately after the GOP took over several statehouses this year. Numerous GOP state legislatures have rammed through “voter ID” laws which disenfranchise thousands of elderly, disabled, and low-income voters. Republicans typically justify these voter disenfranchisement laws by claiming that they are necessary to combat voter fraud at the polls, but in-person voter fraud is only slightly more common than unicorns. A recent Supreme Court decision upholding a voter ID law was only able to cite one example of in-person voter fraud in the last 143 years.

Nor are voter ID laws the only front in the GOP’s war on voting. As Jonathan Chait explains, their efforts also include measures “restricting early voting, shortening poll hours, [and] clamping down on students voting at their campus.” And in Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker (R) even plans to  gut his state’s public financing program — a program designed to make candidates less dependent on wealth donors — in order to pay for a voter disenfranchisement law.

Yet, while the Maine GOP may have won a skirmish in the war on voting with their repeal of same day registration, it is anything but certain that they will win this war. The state’s Democrats hope to invoke Maine’s “people’s veto” process, which allows the voters to repeal a newly enacted state law by referendum. To invoke this procedure, they must collect just over 57,000 signatures before a 90-day window closes.

Justiceline: June 13, 2011

Welcome to Justiceline, ThinkProgress Justice’s morning round-up of the latest legal news and developments. Remember to follow us on Twitter at @TPJustice.

  • Supporters of California’s anti-gay Proposition 8 will ask a judge today to vacate Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision striking down the ban on marriage equality because Walker is gay.
  • Former Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray (D) has landed on his feet at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after narrowly losing his reelection bid in 2010.
  • And, finally, if you get pulled over for running a red light, hope that you get this judge.

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up