If the states will continue to define benefits for gay couples (which may include marital benefits), then why amend the constitution solely to define a term?


Reuters.com: Proposed Amendment to Ban Gay Marriage Revised:

"'The new language makes the intent of the legislation even clearer -- to protect marriage in this country as the union between a man and a woman, and to reinforce the authority of state legislatures to determine benefits issues related to civil unions or domestic partnerships,' Allard said."

Supreme Court Hears Case of Man Who Withheld ID: "Supreme Court Hears Case of Man Who Withheld ID
By LINDA GREENHOUSE

Published: March 23, 2004


ASHINGTON, March 22 � A Nevada rancher's refusal four years ago to tell a deputy sheriff his name led to a Supreme Court argument on Monday on a question that, surprisingly, the justices have never resolved: whether people can be required to identify themselves when the police have some basis for suspicion but lack the probable cause necessary for an arrest.
Advertisement


The answer, in a case that has drawn intense interest from those who fear increased government intrusion on personal privacy, appeared elusive.
'A name itself is a neutral fact' that is neither incriminating nor an undue invasion of privacy, Conrad Hafen, Nevada's senior deputy attorney general, told the court in defense of a state statute that requires people to identify themselves to the police if stopped 'under circumstances which reasonably indicate that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime.'
'It's a neutral fact that I'm wearing a pinstripe suit,' Justice David H. Souter told Mr. Hafen. But if someone who had just robbed a bank was reported to be wearing a pinstripe suit, that fact if reported to the police might no longer be so neutral, Justice Souter added.
The Bush administration joined the state in defending the statute.
Lawyers for Larry D. Hiibel, who is appealing his conviction for violating the Nevada law, raised two constitutional challenges to the identification requirement: that it amounts to an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment and that it compels self-incrimination in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
The Nevada Supreme Court upheld Mr. Hiibel's conviction, a misdemeanor, and rejected hihis constitutional challenge to the state law"

Separating Church and State: "The Supreme Court ruled wisely yesterday when it said that states have leeway in choosing not to finance religious education. For a court that has allowed a weakening of separation between church and state, this was a significant clarification."

The state has no right to decide what grants recipients may or may not study. . .


Court Says States Need Not Finance Divinity Studies: "ASHINGTON, Feb. 25 � The Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that states that subsidize secular study at the college level may withhold the scholarships from students preparing for the ministry.
The 7-to-2 decision, upholding the eligibility requirements of the Promise Scholarship program in Washington State, was a setback for advocates of using publicly financed vouchers to pay for religious school tuition. Joined by the Bush administration, advocates of 'school choice' programs sought to use this case to establish a broad principle that an institution's religious affiliation should not make it ineligible to participate in general programs of government aid."

WSJ.com - U.S.-Born Taliban Detainee To Meet His Attorney:

"A U.S.-born man captured in Afghanistan and held by the military for more than two years will meet with an attorney for the first time on Tuesday, a federal public defender said.
Frank Dunham, the federal public defender in Alexandria, Va., said he would meet Yaser Hamdi at the military brig in Charleston, S.C., on 8 a.m. Tuesday. But the meeting will take place under conditions Mr. Dunham called onerous. A military officer will be present, the meeting will be recorded and Mr. Hamdi will be barred from discussing the conditions of his confinement, Mr. Dunham said.
'For all those reasons, the meeting will be very short and lacking much substance,' Mr. Dunham said. But despite those restrictions, 'it would be inhumane not to go down there and tell him what's going on.' The public defender said that since the government considers anything Mr. Hamdi or others held as enemy combatants to be classified, he would not be able to discuss anything Mr. Hamdi might tell him."

BBC NEWS | Technology | Bombay plans cyber cafe controls:

"Internet cafe owners in India's commercial and entertainment capital, Bombay, are angry at plans to regulate the city's cyber centres.
They object to plans which would force them to keep records of people using their internet facilities.
The proposals will be put to the state legislature next month.
Police say they need new powers to prevent the misuse of the web by what they call terrorists, hackers, paedophiles and users of adult sites. "

Citing Free Speech, Judge Voids Part of Antiterror Act

"The USA Patriot Act places no limitation on the type of expert advice and assistance which is prohibited, and instead bans the provision of all expert advice and assistance regardless of its nature," Judge Collins wrote in a ruling issued late Friday.

As a result, the law could be construed to include "unequivocally pure speech and advocacy protected by the First Amendment," wrote the judge, who was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton.

Supreme Court to Review Using Execution in Juvenile Cases:

"The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether the Constitution prohibits the death penalty for crimes committed at the age of 16 or 17."

The Politics of Security:

"A federal judge has just struck down, as unconstitutionally vague, the act's ban on giving advice and assistance to groups designated as foreign terrorist organizations. But the act is not merely constitutionally suspect. There are better ways to make the country safe: inspect more of the shipping containers coming into United States ports, increase security around nuclear and chemical plants, and buy up enriched uranium before it falls into the wrong hands. But the money to do such things is in short supply after the president's tax cuts. Taking away civil liberties may not expand Mr. Bush's gaping budget deficit, but its price in lost freedom is more than we can afford."

WSJ.com - Justices Agree to Hear Case Of U.S.-Born Terror Suspect:

"WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court expanded its review of government antiterrorism measures Friday, agreeing to hear the case of a U.S.-born man captured during the fighting in Afghanistan and held incommunicado and without charges.

Justices also said Friday they will consider whether companies can be forced to pay to clean up polluted property after they have sold the land, even if the government doesn't demand it.

In the terrorism case, the high court said it will consider the appeal from Yaser Esam Hamdi, whom the government has labeled an enemy combatant ineligible for ordinary legal protections and a danger to the U.S.

Mr. Hamdi's case tests the legal and constitutional rights of U.S. citizens captured in the war on terrorism, and raises wider questions about the balance between security and liberty. It is the second major terrorism-related case the high court will hear this term.

The court will probably hear the Hamdi case in April, with a ruling expected by July.

The high court's decision to review the case is another in a recent series of legal setbacks for the Bush administration in terrorism cases. The administration had strongly urged the high court to stay out of the Hamdi case, or to shelve it for now, pending an appeal in a similar case of another U.S.-born terrorism suspect.

The administration won its argument in a lower court that Mr. Hamdi may be held indefinitely and without the usual legal rights due to U.S. citizens, and wanted that ruling to stand.

Mr. Hamdi's father filed a civil-liberties challenge on his son's behalf, and a lawyer who has never met Mr. Hamdi is pressing the case at the Supreme Court.

The Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond wrongly bowed to government arguments about security, lawyer Frank Dunham told the high court in a legal filing.

The lower federal appeals court not only "embraced an unchecked executive power to indefinitely detain American citizens suspected of being affiliated with enemies, but it also abandoned procedural safeguards designed to promote truth and fairness."

In response, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer called Mr. Hamdi a prime example of a dangerous terror suspect who should be locked up. "Hamdi is a classic battlefield detainee -- captured in Afghanistan, an area of active combat, with an enemy unit," Solicitor General Theodore Olson told the court.

Despite that argument, the government recently agreed to allow Mr. Dunham to visit his would-be client. The government still contends Mr. Hamdi isn't constitutionally entitled to a lawyer, and that question will still be a part of the Supreme Court case.

Officials decided to grant the access to a lawyer because Mr. Hamdi is a U.S. citizen and the military has finished interrogating him, the Pentagon said last month. Mr. Hamdi hasn't been charged with any crime.

The move was seen at the time as an attempt to blunt criticism of government antiterror tactics, and as a way to improve the government's legal standing at the Supreme Court. The meeting hasn't yet taken place.

Earlier this week, Mr. Olson asked the justices to put off consideration of the Hamdi case, at least until the government finishes a hurry-up appeal in the similar case of Jose Padilla, a former gang member seized in Chicago in an alleged plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb." Mr. Padilla was declared an enemy combatant and, like Mr. Hamdi, eventually transferred to the South Carolina naval brig.

The administration plans an appeal in the Padilla case by Jan. 20, and had suggested that the justices consider the two cases together.

The court didn't address that request in its brief order granting review in the Hamdi case. It isn't clear now whether the court will also agree to hear the Padilla appeal when it comes. The two cases raise slightly different constitutional issues because Mr. Hamdi was captured abroad and Mr. Padilla was picked up on U.S. soil."

Guantanamo Bay Detainee Is First to Be Given a Lawyer (washingtonpost.com): "An Australian detainee at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba last night became the first prisoner there to be given a lawyer, a strong indication that he is on track to be the first alleged al Qaeda fighter in detention to go before a military tribunal, according to informed sources. "

"There is a windowless room on the seventh floor of the US Department of Justice building in Washington. Few people know what happens within its walls. This is the home of America's most secretive court: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court (FISAC). We need to know about it because what it does or doesn't do has a great impact on the "war against terror" and American civil liberties.
Congress established FISAC in 1978 as a Cold War tool to conduct secret domestic investigations of alleged enemy agents. In those days it had little to do, but today it is one of the principal centers for the government's counter-terrorist efforts. It is where the Justice Department requests "warrantless warrants," authorizing the FBI to conduct secret domestic wiretaps and other snooping. Justice obtained 113 secret emergency search or electronic-surveillance authorizations from FISAC in the year after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, compared to 47 in the 23 years since the court's founding. "

Read on here

Arab Waiter Ousted From Fundraiser Claims Bias (washingtonpost.com): "An Arab American waiter who has worked for seven years at the Hyatt Regency in Baltimore said he was sent home yesterday prior to a presidential fundraiser by a manager who asked him just one question: 'Is your name Mohamad?' "

Yahoo! News - Two youths charged in beating death of Vancouver teen as mourners gather: "VANCOUVER (CP) - As mourners gathered for the funeral of a Filipino teenager, two Indo-Canadian teenagers were being charged Friday with second-degree murder in his death.


The two friends, aged 16 and 17, were picked up hours apart Friday afternoon and police said they continued to search for three suspects and had executed several search warrants.
'We think the two key players have been charged today,' Const. Anne Drennan told reporters.
Police also issued a call for peace among certain groups in 'some schools.'
'We are aware of some tension that has developed since (the victim's) death,' said Acting Chief Const. Dan Dureau. 'We would ask that everyone stay peaceful.'
The youth passed away last Saturday after a savage beating, shocking Vancouver residents and prompting long discussions about racism in the city's schools.
Police have said the Filipino boy was with three other Filipino friends when they were attacked by a group of as many as five Indo-Canadian youths.
The two groups exchanged racial slurs, police said."