THE BLUEST COURT HANDS BUSH A VICTORY
By malkin
A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals--yes, that one--gave President Bush an important win in the War on Terror today by reinstating indictments against seven defendants accused of raising money for a terror organization with links to ousted Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein. USA Today reports:
In a victory for the Bush administration's war on terror, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a Los Angeles federal judge who declared the 1996 terror financing law unconstitutional. The law makes it illegal to funnel money - "material support" - to organizations the State Department says are linked to terrorism, about 30 groups in all. Before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the government rarely used the terror law. The administration has since used it to win dozens of terror convictions nationwide, from Lackawanna, N.Y., to Seattle and Portland, Ore...
...The case stems from a 2001 indictment against the seven Los Angeles defendants for allegedly providing several hundred thousand dollars to the Mujahedin-e Khalq, which the appeals court said "participated in various terrorist activities against the Iranian regime" and "carried out terrorist activities with the support" of Saddam's regime. U.S. District Judge Robert Takasugi invalidated the law, saying it did not provide the groups a proper forum to contest their terror designations. His ruling had no immediate effect beyond the Los Angeles case.
On Monday, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based federal appeals court overruled the judge - and went a step further, saying individuals accused of supporting the listed groups cannot challenge whether the groups should be listed.
The government, the court said, must prove only "that a particular organization was designated at the time the material support was given, not whether the government made a correct designation."
Liberals had little problem with the material support provisions--signed into law by former President Clinton--until President Bush actually started to use them in wartime. Since 9/11, civil liberties absolutists and human rights activists have sought to sabotage the statute in the name of terrorist free speech.
It's nice to see at least three jurists in blue America who have woken up to post-Sept. 11 reality |
