Leahy: Bybee refused to appear before Judiciary subcommittee hearing on torture memos.
Leahy: Bybee refused to appear before Judiciary subcommittee hearing on torture memos.
Last month, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) invited Judge Jay Bybee to testify in front of a subcommittee about his “views” regarding torture and his “role” in drafting the torture memos. The Los Angeles Times subsequently reported that Bybee had chosen to ignore Leahy’s request. Today, however, in a statement during the hearing, Leahy said that Bybee had specifically refused to appear:
Since Judge Bybee, through his lawyers, has declined to testify before the Committee at this time about his role in the drafting and authorization of memoranda from the Office of Legal Counsel that permitted torture, I can only presume that he has no exonerating information to provide. Judge Bybee must know that the presumption in our civil law is that when a person fails to come forward with information in his possession that is relevant to a matter, it is presumed to be because the information is negative and not helpful to his cause.
Testifying voluntary before the Judiciary Committee about these now-public memoranda is one way in which Judge Bybee could have helped complete the record of what happened and why but he refused. This is especially inappropriate given that Judge Bybee has hardly maintained silence about these matters.
ThinkProgress asked Leahy’s office if Bybee’s lawyers informed the committee of his decision after the Times’s report. “I have to be vague,” an aide said, declining to give any specifics as to when Bybee refused the request.
- Comments
- 67
Conservatives Set To Block Dawn Johnsen’s Nomination
Conservatives Set To Block Dawn Johnsen’s Nomination
Roll Call reports that conservatives look poised to successfully block the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to head the White House Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) declared that his hands were tied without the assistance of a few Republican votes:
“Right now we’re finding out when to do that,” Reid said, responding to a question about the status of Indiana University law professor Dawn Johnsen’s nomination to the Justice post. “We need a couple Republican votes until we can get to 60.”
It’s unclear why 60 votes are needed to confirm Johnsen, considering her predecessor, Jay Bybee — who went on to authorize illegal torture — won easy confirmation in 2001 through a simple voice vote. Bybee’s successor, Jack Goldsmith, was also approved by a voice vote. Steven Bradbury served for three years as an acting OLC head, and so did not have to come up for a vote. Having a full — and filibuster-proof — Senate vote on Johnsen would be an unusual break with recent precedent.
Senators opposing Johnsen include new Democrat Arlen Specter (PA), who announced his opposition to Johnsen on the day he decided to switch parties, though he has yet to explain why he opposes her. Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) has said he “is concerned about her outspoken pro-choice views on abortion.” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) insists that Johnsen “has not demonstrated the seriousness and necessary resolve to address the national security challenges we face.”
Johnsen is eminently qualified to head the OLC. She has been an outspoken critic of Bush’s torture and eavesdropping programs, argues persuasively for accountability for wrongdoing, and has written passionately in support of checks and balances and against executive branch power grabs. She is a strong progressive candidate who could restore the tainted OLC to a place of legal professionalism and pride. And, like the majority of Americans, Johnsen thinks abortions should be safe and legal in most cases.
Specter and Nelson can find little in Johnsen’s sterling record to substantively critique, and Reid shouldn’t let them stand in the way. Indeed, their opposition to her breaks their track record for supporting previous OLC heads like Bybee. Remember, when Bush nominated Bybee for a federal judgeship, Specter, Nelson, Cornyn, and Reid all voted to confirm him.
Bybee lobbies Nevada congressional delegation ‘to tell his side of the story.’
Bybee lobbies Nevada congressional delegation ‘to tell his side of the story.’
The Las Vegas Sun reports that torture architect — and 9th Circuit appellate judge — Jay Bybee has reached out to members of Nevada’s congressional delegation “to tell his side of the story.” Reps. Dina Titus (D-NV) and Shelley Berkley (D-NV) have both been contacted by representatives of Bybee:
“I’d like to hear from him if he thinks he made the right decision interpreting the law and doing the job as he saw it defined,” Titus said Wednesday. “But I also will not hesitate to make it clear to him that I absolutely disagree with his interpretation. The United States is not a country of torture.” […]
Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley’s office was also contacted by Bybee’s representative in April. Berkley’s spokesman said the two have not met, and he was unsure whether they would.
“This was torture, in her mind,” spokesman David Cherry said. “I don’t know if there’s anything he could say to her at this point that would change her thinking.”
While Bybee is interested in talking to Nevada’s delegation, he refuses to respond to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) invitation to give testimony before the committee. A New York Times editorial today again calls for the impeachment of Bybee. “The memos he wrote or signed made it clear that he was not fit to make judgments about the law and the Constitution,” the NYT writes. “Congress should remove him.”
Bybee refuses to respond to Leahy’s testimony invitation.
Bybee refuses to respond to Leahy’s testimony invitation.
On Wednesday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) sent a letter to Judge Jay Bybee inviting him to testify about his “views” about torture and his “role” in drafting the torture memos. In the letter, Leahy wrote, “I look forward to your cooperation and your testimony.” But the Los Angeles Times reports today that Bybee has “declined to respond” to Leahy’s letter. Bybee’s law clerks initially gave contradictory messages about how the judge would respond, but law clerk Keith Woffinden tried to clean up the confusion, telling the paper, “my impression is that there won’t be any further statements” beyond Bybee’s comments to the New York Times.
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
MoveOn calls for Bybee impeachment.
MoveOn calls for Bybee impeachment.
MoveOn released a video today calling for the impeachment of Jay Bybee. Watch it:
Since ThinkProgress launched our Bybee impeachment campaign 10 days ago, a few lawmakers have indicated support for such action. More support is needed, however. Last Sunday, CAPAF President and CEO John Podesta called for Bybee’s impeachment on CNN, arguing, “If he would do the right thing, he should just simply resign. If he doesn’t…I think a simple matter would be to remove him from office.”
Obama Hits Back Against Bybee’s Defense: ‘Legal Rationales’ For Torture Memos Were ‘A Mistake’
Obama Hits Back Against Bybee’s Defense: ‘Legal Rationales’ For Torture Memos Were ‘A Mistake’
In tonight’s press conference, ABC’s Jake Tapper asked President Obama if he believes “that the previous administration sanctioned torture,” in light of Obama’s recent release of Bush-era torture memos. Obama refrained from saying the Bush administration committed criminal acts, but he said, “I do believe that it [waterboarding] is torture.” The President added that the legal guidance that Bush lawyers provided were a “mistake”:
QUESTION: Do you believe the previous administration sanctioned torture?
OBAMA: I believe that waterboarding was torture. And I think that the — whatever legal rationales were used, it was a mistake.
Watch it:
Although Obama has repeatedly said that waterboarding is torture, his response saying that the “legal rationales” were “a mistake” is important because it discredits 9th Circuit Court Judge Jay Bybee’s recent claim that his flawed OLC memos were legally sound.
Yesterday, Bybee “broke his silence” and talked to the New York Times about his torture memos. While anonymous friends of Bybee said that the former OLC head regretted signing off on the torture memos, Bybee defended his memos as legally “correct“:
[H]e said: “The central question for lawyers was a narrow one; locate, under the statutory definition, the thin line between harsh treatment of a high-ranking Al Qaeda terrorist that is not torture and harsh treatment that is. I believed at the time, and continue to believe today, that the conclusions were legally correct.” [...]
“The legal question was and is difficult,” he said. “And the stakes for the country were significant no matter what our opinion. In that context, we gave our best, honest advice, based on our good-faith analysis of the law.”
Obama’s belief that the notorious memoranda written by Judge Bybee were legally flawed add further justification to the need for Bybee to resign his seat on the federal court.
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Sands: Bybee should resign to maintain international credibility of U.S. federal courts.
Sands: Bybee should resign to maintain international credibility of U.S. federal courts.
The Washington Post reported over the weekend that anonymous friends of Judge Jay Bybee said that he had been apologetic for authoring Bush-era memos that legally justified torture. However, The New York Times reports today that Bybee contradicted the Post’s report. “I believed at the time, and continue to believe today, that the conclusions were legally correct,” Bybee said. NPR’s Fresh Air interviewed international lawyer Philippe Sands and asked him to respond to Bybee’s most recent defense. Sands said that the American federal courts, where Bybee currently sits, “are immensely respected institutions” internationally and that Bybee should resign to preserve their credibility:
SANDS: I think the braver and more honorable thing to do would have been to recognize that he fell into error and I have to say, reading that [New York Times] interview, for the first time I felt really very strongly that this is not a gentleman who really ought to be sitting on the bench of a U.S. federal court.
I mean, sitting here in London, I have to tell you; U.S. federal courts are immensely respected institutions. It’s not a political thing it’s not a left, right thing. These are hugely important courts that our English courts look to, that foreign courts look to and the idea that a lawyer who signed off on waterbording and still thinks today that it is not torture should sit on such a court is frankly distressing and I would say even shocking.
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Leahy invites Bybee to testify before Senate Judiciary Committee.
Leahy invites Bybee to testify before Senate Judiciary Committee.
Today, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) sent a letter to Judge Jay Bybee inviting him to testify about his “views” about torture and his “role” in drafting the torture memos. “There is significant concern about the legal advice provided by OLC while you were in charge, how that advice came to be generated, the considerations that went into it, and the role played by the White House,” Leahy wrote. “I look forward to your cooperation and your testimony.” Read Leahy’s letter (pdf) here.
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Bybee defends his torture memos as ‘legally correct’ and ‘a good-faith analysis of the law.’
Bybee defends his torture memos as ‘legally correct’ and ‘a good-faith analysis of the law.’
Judge Jay Bybee finally “broke his silence” and talked to the New York Times about his legal memos which authorized torture. This past weekend, the Washington Post quoted anonymous friends of Bybee claiming that Bybee was apologetic for authoring the memos. Speaking for himself, Bybee said that’s not the case:
Other administration lawyers agreed with those conclusions, Judge Bybee said.
“The legal question was and is difficult,” he said. “And the stakes for the country were significant no matter what our opinion. In that context, we gave our best, honest advice, based on our good-faith analysis of the law.”
Bybee, “the man behind waterboarding,” once said that he would like his “headstone to read, ‘He always tried to do the right thing.’” The right thing would be for him to resign. If he does not do so, Congress should impeach him.
One thing could change that dynamic, however. The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility has been investigating the work of lawyers who signed off on the interrogation policy, and is believed to have obtained archived e-mail messages from the time when the memorandums were being drafted. If it turned out that the lawyers initially concluded that aspects of the proposed program would be illegal, then reversed that conclusion at the request of policy makers, then prosecutors could make a case that the officials knowingly broke the law.
Bybee’s ‘remoteness from the actual torturers’ increases his ‘degree of responsibility.’
Bybee’s ‘remoteness from the actual torturers’ increases his ‘degree of responsibility.’
Jon Eisenberg, one of the lawyers who is representing the plaintiffs in a case challenging Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program, writes in the Philadephia Inquirer today that Jay Bybee’s “remoteness from the actual torturers increases his degree of responsibility”:
Far from absolving him of guilt, his remoteness from the actual torturers – his thoughtlessness – increases the degree of his responsibility. His is a special kind of evil – the evil of nonchalance where there should be outrage. […]
I wonder whether Bybee feels guilty before God. He certainly has no business being a federal judge. His presence on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals brings disgrace to that court. He should resign.
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
McCain: Bybee Violated The Law, But It Was Just ‘Very Bad Advice’
McCain: Bybee Violated The Law, But It Was Just ‘Very Bad Advice’
Last week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) repeated his view that the United States had conducted torture by authorizing waterboarding. Saying the waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 183 times was “unacceptable,” McCain declared, “One is too much. Waterboarding is torture, period.”
However, discussing torture on CBS’s Face the Nation today, McCain insisted, “We’ve got to move on” and ignore the Bush administration’s torture program. Indeed, McCain refused to support the impeachment of Judge Jay Bybee — even as he acknowledged that Bybee had broken both U.S. and international law in authorizing torture:
MCCAIN: He falls into the same category as everybody else as far as giving very bad advice and misinterpreting, fundamentally, what the United States is all about, much less things like the Geneva Conventions. Look, under President Reagan we signed an agreement against torture. We were in violation of that.
McCain claimed that “no one has alleged, quote, wrongdoing” on the part of Bush administration lawyers, only that they had given “bad advice.” And yet minutes later McCain himself acknowledged that Bybee’s advice led the U.S. to be “in violation” of both U.S. and international law. Watch it:
Later on Face the Nation, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who supports holding broad investigations about torture, pointed out that McCain supports a commission to investigate the causes of the financial crisis. “But just as important as losing our money, what happens when we lose our national honor? That’s what we should look at,” Leahy said.
Yesterday, the blogger dday asked Sen Barbara Boxer (D-CA) whether she would support a Congressional inquiry into Bybee, including the possibility of impeachment. “I’m very open to that,” Boxer said. “There is an ongoing investigation at the Justice Department into his work, and we’ll see how that goes. But I’m very open to that. And I’ll remind everyone that I didn’t vote for him when his nomination came up. I was one of 19 to do so.”
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Podesta Calls For Bybee Impeachment On CNN, Delivers Your Petitions To Congress
Podesta Calls For Bybee Impeachment On CNN, Delivers Your Petitions To Congress
Appearing on CNN’s State of the Union this morning, Center for American Progress Action Fund President and CEO John Podesta called on Congress to commence impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee, should he decide not to voluntarily resign his seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Podesta said:
The one thing I disagree with you and David [Gergen] about is I do think there’s a distinction between going back and prosecuting in criminal courts the actors who were involved in these memos and letting Judge Bybee continue to sit on a court one step removed from the Supreme Court. He’s acting and listening to cases, making judgments of others, and we know he authorized things that were illegal under U.S. law and violated the U.S. obligations under international treaties.
If he would do the right thing, he should just simply resign. If he doesn’t, I think this is one matter where he continues to sit — he doesn’t have the moral or legal authority to continue to do that. And I think a simple matter would be to remove him from office.
Podesta added that he suspects the White House doesn’t agree with the call for impeaching Bybee. The other panelists — David Gergen and former Reagan chief of staff Ken Duberstein — disagreed with the call for impeachment. Watch it:
Also, Podesta delivered a letter this morning to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI), laying out the case for impeaching Bybee.
The letter (pdf) informed Conyers that ThinkProgress has collected nearly 20,000 signatures from concerned citizens “who have expressed their deep-felt and sincere desire to see that Judge Bybee is held to account for authorizing torture.” Podesta’s letter affixed the names of everyone who signed our petition calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Bybee. (It required 71 three-column double-sided pages.)
Thanks for all your help! This could not have been possible without the support of all of you who signed the petition. If you have not already done so, please consider joining the effort by clicking here.
Read Podesta’s full letter below: More »
Jay Bybee’s anonymous friends claim Bybee regrets his role in approving torture.
Jay Bybee’s anonymous friends claim Bybee regrets his role in approving torture.
The Washington Post interviews a number of friends and colleagues of Jay Bybee, who anonymously tell the paper that the judge regrets writing the torture memos:
“I’ve heard him express regret at the contents of the memo,” said a fellow legal scholar and longtime friend, who spoke on the condition of anonymity while offering remarks that might appear as “piling on.” “I’ve heard him express regret that the memo was misused. I’ve heard him express regret at the lack of context — of the enormous pressure and the enormous time pressure that he was under. And anyone would have regrets simply because of the notoriety.”
“On the primary memo, that legitimated and defined torture, he just felt it got away from him,” said the scholar. “I got the impression that he was not pleased with that bit of scholarship,” said an associate who asked not be identified sharing private conversations. “I don’t know that he ‘owned it.’ … The way he put it was: He was head of the OLC, and it was written, and he was not pleased with it.”
FLASHBACK: Powell’s U.N. Speech On Iraq Took Senate’s Attention Away From Bybee Confirmation Hearings
FLASHBACK: Powell’s U.N. Speech On Iraq Took Senate’s Attention Away From Bybee Confirmation Hearings
In a new video titled “The Problem of Jay Bybee,” American News Project’s David Murdoch asks how Bybee could have been confirmed by the U.S. Senate in Feb. 2003 for a lifetime appointment as a federal judge despite authoring memos justifying the legality of torture.
The answer is partly due to the fact that the Senate had no knowledge of Bybee’s role in the Bush administration’s authorization of torture because no secret memos on the subject had yet to be released. “Had the Senate known about these memos, there’s simply no way Bybee ever would have been confirmed as a federal judge to begin with,” Harpers editor Scott Horton noted.
Another reason the Senate let Bybee’s nomination fly through unchallenged was perhaps due to the fact that on the same day as his hearing, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell was delivering a speech to the United Nations making the case for invading Iraq. “Bybee was greatly advantaged by an accident,” Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman noted:
ACKERMAN: So almost all the Senators were watching the TV outside the hearing room. All the Democrats were. This was of central importance for the Democratic senators in particular to define their position, one could appreciate why they were watching the tube than questioning Judge Bybee. So there was no critical questioning at all at the hearing room and that does not normally happen.
Indeed, near the conclusion of the February 5, 2003 hearing, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) heaped praise on Bybee: “I don’t know of anybody who has any more qualification or any greater ability in the law than you have and that’s counting some pretty exceptional people.” Watch ANP’s video:
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Rep. King: Jay Bybee ’should be given a medal for what he did.’
Rep. King: Jay Bybee ’should be given a medal for what he did.’
This afternoon on Fox News, correspondent Brian Wilson reported that “left leaning groups and some Democrats” believe torture architect Judge Jay Bybee should be impeached. Responding to a question from Wilson, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said, “I think someone who writes a how-to memo on how to break the law should not be a federal judge.” The ultra conservative Rep. Peter King (R-NY) took the polar opposite view, telling Wilson that Bybee should be “given a medal” for authorizing torture:
KING: I think that Judge Bybee should be given a medal for what he did. But even if I disagreed with those memos, these are memos written in good faith. These well written, well reasoned memos. People may disagree with them, but he belongs on the bench. He should stay on the bench. And I think talk of impeaching him or going after him is again the worst type of political vindictiveness.
Watch it:
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Rep. Schiff: Leahy was right, Bybee ‘ought to consider resigning from the bench.’
Rep. Schiff: Leahy was right, Bybee ‘ought to consider resigning from the bench.’
Last night on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) joined Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy’s (D-VT) recent call for torture architect Judge Jay Bybee to do the “decent and honorable thing” and step down from the bench. While believing it likely that Bybee ought to resign, Schiff urged some caution saying there “should be a complete investigation” before Congress considers what he called the “extreme remedy” of impeachment proceedings:
SCHIFF: Well I think there should be a complete investigation. … When OPR finishes its report I think the Judiciary Committee ought to have hearings on it. … At this point I am inclined to think that maybe Sen. Leahy made a good suggestion when he said the judge ought to consider resigning from the bench. … I don’t think we should rule anything out, but I also think that impeachment is a word we should use very carefully and very reluctantly.
Later Schiff remarked that it “may be” that the torture memo authors knew that their justifications were “legal gibberish and only sought to provide a patina of respectability to torture.” Watch it:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Alter: Bybee ‘pretty clearly, by some lights,’ violated his oath to uphold the Constitution.
Alter: Bybee ‘pretty clearly, by some lights,’ violated his oath to uphold the Constitution.
This afternoon on MSNBC, host David Shuster spoke with Newsweek columnist Jonathan Alter, who explained that while the popular political discourse has focused on one of two possible courses to resolve the Bush administration’s illegal acts of torture (a congressional or independent truth commission or criminal prosecutions), a third option also exists: impeachment. Alter noted that Federal Judge Jay Bybee is the only Bush administration torture architect still in public office and can be held to account through impeachment proceedings for his failing to “uphold the constitution”:
ALTER: There’s also a third route which would focus on the only one of these folks from the Bush White House who’s in public office now and that’s Federal Judge Jay Bybee. You could see, conceivably, a movement to impeach Judge Bybee. These other folks, there’s no indication that they violated an oath to uphold the constitution in the way he did, or if they have, they are no longer in a position of public trust, the way he is.
Watch it:
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Wasserman Schultz on Bybee’s future: ‘It doesn’t look good.’
Wasserman Schultz on Bybee’s future: ‘It doesn’t look good.’
This afternoon on MSNBC’s Hardball, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) endorsed House Judiciary Committee Chariman John Conyers’ pledge to hold hearings into the torture techniques authorized by the Bush administration’s Office of Legal Counsel. Asked by host Chris Matthews if she believed Judge Jay Bybee “should go” because of his role in authoring the OLC torture memos, Wasserman Shultz said that she believed the government needed to take a “first things first approach,” but said “it doesn’t look very good”:
MATTHEWS: Should we ask Jay Bybee to retire form the court out at the 9th circuit? He’s one of the ones who approved it and sits on the federal bench. Should he go?
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Well, I think we need to take a first things first approach, taking a look at who exactly was responsible for these memos. Where was it initiated. We need to go through the process. And you’re still innocent until proven guilty in America, but it doesn’t look very good.
Wasserman Schultz also said she would not rule out prosecuting former President Bush or Vice President Cheney. Watch it:
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Feingold: ‘Grounds for impeachment can be made’ against Bybee.
Feingold: ‘Grounds for impeachment can be made’ against Bybee.
In 2003, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) voted against confirming OLC torture memo author Jay Bybee to the 9th Circuit Court, one of only 19 Democrats to do so. At the time, Feingold noted “the failure of the administration to provide any of his numerous OLC opinions to the Judiciary Committee for review.” Today, in the wake of the release of Bybee’s torture memos, Feingold said that there are certainly “grounds for impeachment” against Bybee:
The idea that one of the architects of this perversion of the law is now sitting on the federal bench is very troubling. The memos offer some of the most explicit evidence yet that Mr. Bybee and others authorized torture and they suggest that grounds for impeachment can be made. Clearly, the Justice Department has the responsibility to investigate this matter further. As a Senator, I would be a juror in any impeachment trial so I don’t want to reach a conclusion until all the evidence is before me.
Please join our campaign calling on Congress to begin impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky endorses Bybee impeachment hearings: ‘I think that is a proper response.’
Rep. Jan Schakowsky endorses Bybee impeachment hearings: ‘I think that is a proper response.’
Over 5,000 of you have taken action in calling for Congress to commence impeachment hearings against Jay Bybee. This afternoon, ThinkProgress spoke with Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) about the campaign. She told us:
I would support impeachment hearings for Judge Bybee. … We’ve already seen that he’s willing to interpret the laws in ways that are counter to the fundamental values of our country. I think that is a proper response.
We also asked Schakowsky, who is Chairwoman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, for her reaction to Obama’s suggestion that he would be open to a bipartisan truth commission. She told us that she is currently in conversations this week with her staff about how to proceed, but emphasized that her interest would be in holding “open public hearings” on the issue.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll