Dec. 27, 2008
The Legal Year In Review
CBS News Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen Says Thank Goodness For Rudyard Rod
-
It was not a good year for politicians, especially governors and U.S. senators. New York Governor Eliot Spitzer lost his job and all of his credibility as a tough-on-crime reformer when he involved himself with a call girl, says Andrew Cohen. (AP Photo/Stephen Chernin)
-
Blog Court Watch CBSNews.com Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen's new blog on the big issues and analyzes important cases of the day.
Unless you discovered that the feds were monitoring your domestic email and phone calls without a warrant, or you were swindled out of millions by a con man so smooth he had a waiting list of victims, or you were a same-sex couple valiantly trying to get married, chances are you didn’t pay very much attention to the world of the law in 2008. If you tuned out the legal scene this year consider yourself blessed: you didn’t miss very much.
While the nation’s attention was riveted by the transcendental presidential campaign and then the fierce economic crisis the law crept quietly along. Ten years removed from the Starr Report and the start of the Clinton impeachment proceedings, we have just endured (or enjoyed, depending upon your point of view) one of the least demagogic in the law since O.J. Simpson got into his white Ford Bronco and forever changed the way we absorb news from the courts. No mountains moved. No seas changed. Only a few tides turned.
But lest my wonderful bosses at CBS News think my beat is all wrapped up and doesn’t need any further analysis or perspective let me quickly add this: even a relatively boring year in the law still offers a righteous blend of mischief and karma, incompetence and evil. And the lull of the legal year gone by may be gone by January 20, 2009, the day a new administration takes over America’s legal war on terrorism. That’s a development that promises not just significant policy changes but also new information and insight about how the Bush Administration got us from September 11, 2001 to where we are today.
Not being able to predict precisely what will occur during the new and exciting (and busy, dear bosses, busy!) year, I am left instead at this time to sift through the events and issues that marked the annals of the law in 2008. The Supreme Court, for example, made its biggest news of the year when it finally decided a case that defines the contours of the Second Amendment. Along ideological lines, in a 5-4 decision authored by Justice-hunter Antonin Scalia, the Court ruled that there is, indeed, an individual, constitutional right to bear arms. But the Justices also declared that there may be certain lawful restrictions placed upon gun rights. This means more Second Amendment cases all over the country in the months and years to come.
The Justices also did in 2008 what they had done three times previously during the Bush Administration; they blocked the White House and the Congress and the Pentagon from fully implementing a set of stark (and in some cases senseless) military tribunal rules that gave terror suspects (at Guantanamo Bay, mostly) almost no shot at a reasonably fair trial. How the Obama Administration finally deals with these detainees-there is talk now of sending some to Europe-will be a big story in 2009. And so will the results of the first federal appeals from the detainees which are only now wending their way through the court system.
The current Attorney General, meanwhile, was precisely the sort of decent caretaker needed to help begin to restore the credibility of a Justice Department soiled by the ruinous tenure of Alberto Gonzales. Michael B. Mukasey will perhaps best be known as the Attorney General who fainted on camera during a speech in November to the Federalist Society in which he was making the same, tired arguments about terror law that got us into this mess in the first place. He was back at work the very next day his tribunes were quick to tell us. Alas, reports The New York Times, federal stock fraud prosecutions dropped sharply in the eight years of the Bush Administration.
2008 was the year in which the law finally caught up to O.J. Simpson after he was convicted of a “robbery” that read more like a really good Marx Bros. skit. It was the year in which a sitting vice president, Dick Cheney, admitted to authorizing the crime of torture (in the form of water-boarding). And if you are looking for crossover themes between this year and next look here, to the issue of torture, and whether the new administration intends to do anything about the growing call for some sort of inquiry into what top Bush officials knew and when they knew it.
2008 was a year in which authorities in West Texas, acting on a dubious tip that was probably a hoax, swooped in on the Yearning for Zion Ranch and removed 439 children before being forced to return many of them back to family and sect leaders. It was a year in which the California Supreme Court declared same-sex marriage constitutional, a ruling which prompted a state-wide vote to outlaw the practice (and another round of lawsuits). And it was a year in which answers finally came to poor John and Reve Walsh, who lost their son, Adam, 27 years ago in a murder that spawned “America’s Most Wanted” television show which in turn helped solve hundreds of crimes.
It was a year which saw some relief come to Charles Dean Hood, a death-row inmate whose lawyers finally convinced the courts in Texas to look into allegations that their client’s judge and prosecutor were sleeping together during his trial. And it was a year in which Americans once more proclaimed their support for the death penalty and a concomitant reluctance to actually choose it (or enforce it) as a sentencing option. “Only” 111 capital murderers were sentenced to death in 2008, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, and that’s the lowest number since capital punishment was reinstated by the Supreme Court in 1976.
It was not a good year for politicians, especially governors and U.S. senators. New York Governor Eliot Spitzer lost his job and all of his credibility as a tough-on-crime reformer when he involved himself with a call girl. For Spitzer, the only good news is that he likely won’t face charges for his crimes. The same cannot be said for “Rudyard Rod” Blagojevich, the odd and embattled governor of Illinois, who would have tons of time to bone up on his Kipling poetry if he’s convicted of the bribery and corruption charges just laid against him by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald.
Unseemly greed and illegal sex were not limited to New York and Chicago, however. It rocked and roiled the nation’s capital and then gusted over to the Upper Midwest. In Washington, D.C., Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) was convicted of making false statements on a financial form and then promptly lost his reelection bid. Meanwhile, Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) spent most of the year trying to weasel out of a guilty plea he made in connection with allegations that he solicited gay sex in a public bathroom at Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. And former White House press secretary Scott McClellan shocked no one when he confesses that he helped his bosses lie to the American people about certain vital policy decisions. Nice.
So I say: Good Riddance to 2008. Once Team Obama gets settled in the White House, and once the markets are off the front pages every day, it will be nice to see blanket coverage again of good old-fashioned legal events, issues and scandals. Thanks to our seemingly endless supply of creepy politicians and zapped out celebrities I am quite confident you’ll be hearing more from me in 2009 than you have these past 12 months. Whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing, I suppose, is entirely up to you. Happy holidays.
By Andrew Cohen
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
More From CourtWatch
Add a Comment See all 15 Comments
- Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, Committee on the Judiciary
Greetings,
As a citizen and Nam Vet who took an oath 44 years ago to protect the Constitution, I write to you to be permitted to testify and present evidence to the Committee on the Judiciary in opposition to the confirmation of Eric Holder (%u201CHolder%u201D), to be Attorney General of the U. S. Department of Justice ("DOJ"), at the hearing currently scheduled for January 15, 2008.
First, I oppose the confirmation of Holder because the evidence confirms that Holder%u2019s support of the pardon of Marc Rich from accountability for his alleged criminal acts was not an anomaly, but in fact a pattern and practice of Holder in his capacity as both a Beltway attorney/lobbyist and a former official in DOJ. Holder has repeatedly violated his oath as an attorney to "serve the American public," by his use of his positions as legal advisor to prevent accountability for bad acts.
Second, as explained in my letters to all the members of both the Senate and House, on the Web at, http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12313551&r=1 ; and,
http://capwiz.com/congressorg/sbx/f/?aid=12332481&r=1, I oppose the confirmation of Holder because will be sued in a civil action under the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq., for the following criminal acts obstructing and retaliating for litigating to enforce the statutory rights of a father (http://www.liamsdad.org/others/isidoro.shtml). - Reply to this comment
- Legal year in review? What was legal about it? There''s no fair justice anymore! Its become a big joke from the "Supreme" Court (well they think they''re supreme beings) all the way down to the local courts!
- Reply to this comment
- People, Obama has released a valid birth certificate, which had the raised state seal and was declared genuine by third-party entities including FactCheck.org. But there''s also a political reality here: The Supreme Court wouldn''t overrule the results of an election on this basis even if it were true. It''s not that Obama would be "above the Constitution," as you say, but that the will of the people has to be weighed against a requirement that was designed to keep a British Royal Governor from taking charge and reversing the results of the Revolution. All you conservatives who insist on the letter of the law at all costs, where were you when Bush was blatently violating the laws against torturing prisoners? Why aren''t you calling for the prosecution of Cheney? Is it because they are "above the law?" Please. You''re just a bunch of sour-grapes babies who can''t take it that a political philosophy you don''t even understand proved itself to be bad for the country, for reasons you obviously never will understand. If you''re a Republican who makes less than $250k per year, you''re either completely ignorant of American political and economic philosophy, or just plain s*t*u*p*i*d. The opionions of i*d*i*o*t*s mean nothing to us reasonable people, so go away, please.
- Reply to this comment
- For those who complain about Obama not being a legal citizen, why don''t you file a lawsuit yourself at the the nearest federal court instead of whining incessantly about it, probably for the next 4 years at least?
- Reply to this comment
- In the cincinnati enquires legal year in reveiw a black male acused of rape of a teenager was facing life in prison (if he''s guilty that would be a fair sentence) while on the same page it was reported that a middle age attractive woman convicted of raping a teenager violated her parole and was given an additional 40 hours of community service. Her original sentence was 60 days in jail! Its why Ralph Nader calls it the injustice system and people snap and dress in santa clause suits and murder inocent people.
- Reply to this comment
- Mr. Cohen,
You left out the seventeen (give or take a couple) lawsuits wending their way through the courts seeking to require the President-elect to prove to the American people that he is eligible for the office to which he has been "elected" by providing us with a copy of his vault birth certificate. Evidently it doesn''''''''t matter that all other candidates have produced theirs. Neither the law nor the Constitution seem to apply to Mr. Obama.
Posted by creeper00
careful there creeps, yer dirty drawers of racism are showing their stains and skidmarks.
Posted by messiahx4eve at 04:04 PM : Dec 29, 2008
Why are you saying creeps is showing racism? The other candidates had to prove they were natural-born citizens, why should Obama be an exception?
He admitted in his book he has a copy of his birth certificate, so what is the issue? He is either a natural born citizen or he isn''t. Messiah, do you think because he is half black, he is above the law?
I am not a Republican voter, but John McCain had to go before Congress to be approved to run for the Presidency because he was born at a military hospital outside of this country.
Are you afraid, something is not right with Mr. Obama''s win. If the man is a natural-born citizen, he should not be afraid to show the proof, that is if he is even an American citizen, natural born or otherwise.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Reply to this comment
- Mr. Cohen,
You left out the seventeen (give or take a couple) lawsuits wending their way through the courts seeking to require the President-elect to prove to the American people that he is eligible for the office to which he has been "elected" by providing us with a copy of his vault birth certificate. Evidently it doesn''''t matter that all other candidates have produced theirs. Neither the law nor the Constitution seem to apply to Mr. Obama.
Posted by creeper00
careful there creeps, yer dirty drawers of racism are showing their stains and skidmarks. - Reply to this comment
- This is the year the Rule of Law went out the window for the United States of Corporations. We were finally told once and for all the law only applies to the poor and middle class. But that is what is expected in corrupt fascist countries like the United States.
- Reply to this comment
- For a look behind the scenes of the 1995 Simpson trial and the dynamics at play that led to the not-guilty verdicts, and the profound long-term impact that trial has had and continues to have on judges, the media and public understanding of the courts, please read Jerrianne Hayslett%u2019s new book, "Anatomy of a Trial: Public Loss, Lessons Learned from The People vs. O. J. Simpson" (www.anatomyofatrial.com ), just released by the University of Missouri Press.
- Reply to this comment
- Eliot Spitzer was known as "The Sheriff of Wall Street". He was the first public official to question business ethics at AIG. Spitzer paid a prostitute and AIG screwed all of us. And yet Bush apologists are concerned about a valid and legal birth certificate and ignore two wars and a depression.
I hope Obama gets some aggressive regulators to police what is left of Wall Street. Now we know that the real enemies, the real terrorists of this country are these thieving, incompetent and greedy corporate executives. Meanwhile Bush apologists obsess about legal birth certificates, gay marriages and tasteless parodies. - Reply to this comment
- Even after electing a minority to the highest office there are many examples of how blacks and whites are treated differently by our injustice system. The cinti. enqire published its own legal year in review. It updated a story about a black male being charged with child rape and the prosecutors were pushing for life a prison term while the article underneath stated that the blond middleaged woman convicted of child rape violated her probation and recieved an additional 40 hrs of commuinty service. Her original sentence was 60 days in jail. With this type of "justice" we will continue to have people snap and do things like dress up as santa and kill inocent poeple. There is a special place in hell for judges and prosicutors in our country.
- Reply to this comment
- Wow! That creeper00 guy really just hangs onto his thing, doesn''t he? The State of Hawaii certified that Obama was born there so it does not matter anymore if Obama factually was or not because legally Hawaii made it so. Plus, he actually was born there as ALL birth certificate copies issued today look like they are new, even if they are a hundred years old. I hunt these records for a living, so I know these lawsuits don''t amount to anything since these people don''t have a leg to stand on. But it is amusing to see how gullible and willfully ignorant some people are!
- Reply to this comment
- Mr. Cohen,
You left out the seventeen (give or take a couple) lawsuits wending their way through the courts seeking to require the President-elect to prove to the American people that he is eligible for the office to which he has been "elected" by providing us with a copy of his vault birth certificate. Evidently it doesn''t matter that all other candidates have produced theirs. Neither the law nor the Constitution seem to apply to Mr. Obama.
Posted by creeper00 at 12:56 PM : Dec 27, 2008
"As I reported earlier, the McCain campaign has declined to publicly release the senator''s birth certificate. But a senior campaign official showed me a copy of his birth certificate issued by the "family hospital" in the Coco Solo submarine base."
http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=1006421
Both of McCain''s parents are American which makes him an American citizen.
And Obama''s mother is an American which would make him an American citizen. - Reply to this comment
- New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was impressive in the way he handled his personal problem, he stared his problem directly in the face, owned up to it, took the blame, stepped down from office and was prepared to take his punishment. Night and Day difference compared to how Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich decided to handle his personal problem!
- Reply to this comment
- Mr. Cohen,
You left out the seventeen (give or take a couple) lawsuits wending their way through the courts seeking to require the President-elect to prove to the American people that he is eligible for the office to which he has been "elected" by providing us with a copy of his vault birth certificate. Evidently it doesn''t matter that all other candidates have produced theirs. Neither the law nor the Constitution seem to apply to Mr. Obama. - Reply to this comment
