What’s Next After Boumediene?

Last week’s Boumediene decision has left a natural question: What happens next?

U.S. District Chief Judge Royce Lamberth announced that lawyers will meet with judges to determine how to handle nearly 200 pending Guantanamo cases.

Human Rights First, reviewing over 100 terrorism cases in federal court, reported that “the justice system has capably handled these cases, and continues to evolve to meet the challenge terrorism cases pose.”

But Andrew McCarthy, Director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, argues that few detainees have been successfully tried in federal courts and military tribunals. He urges creation of a national security court overseen by Article III federal judges under strict congressional scrutiny.

Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) has sponsored the Boumediene Jurisdictional Correction Act, which would give military courts exclusive jurisdiction to hear detainees’ petitions.

For more on responses to Boumediene, listen to a discussion on NPR’s “Diane Rehm Show.”

Also, Rita Aguilar of Justice at Stake has posted compelling quotes from the Supreme Court opinion in our Gavel Grab blog. Rita’s posting also includes links to Justice at Stake’s statement on the Boumediene decision, and Justice at Stake’s report, Courting Danger: How the War on Terror has Sapped the Power of Our Courts to Protect Our Constitutional Liberties.

Joysticks for Justice

Wii not? The Sandra Day O’Connor Project on the State of the Judiciary is attacking public ignorance about the court system by turning civics into a video game, aptly titled "Our Courts."

The game, which is being jointly developed by Arizona State University and Georgetown Law School, will help students learn the inner workings of court—while maintaining their well-honed joystick skills. It eventually will be posted at www.ourcourts.org.

Students will start by solving a First Amendment issue. Eventually, the project hopes to expand into other issues.

Two media reports discuss the former Justice’s initiative. Information also is available at the O’Connor project web page.

A New York Times online article talks about “Our Courts.” O’Connor also discusses it in a Fox News interview. Not internet-savvy herself, O’Connor says, I don't know how long we can survive as a nation if we don't teach every generation how our government is structured and works.”

Governor Revives Merit Debate in Tennessee

Tennessee’s governor is now voicing doubts on whether his state should elect judges, saying it might be better advised to reform its existing merit selection system. That system appeared all but dead last month when the legislature rejected a senior lawmaker’s plea to renew it.

Gov. Phil Bredesen said that while he has some issues with the current “Tennessee Plan,” he thinks statewide election of appellate judges would be a “… vastly worse system than [Tennessee] has today.”

Bredesen especially cited the influence of special interest money on judicial elections. An online report of a public radio interview gives further detail.

The plan, which was adopted in 1994, will sunset without legislative action to renew it in the coming session.  If no such action takes place, the state will revert to statewide election of appellate judges starting in 2010.

Read the American Judicature Society’s model judicial selection provisions here.

W. Va. Legislators Seek to Fix Disclosure Law

West Virginia lawmakers are seeking to restore a law that brought sunshine on statewide campaign contributions, including judicial races, until a federal court struck it down as unconstitutionally vague.

The effort, endorsed by an editorial in the Intermountain newspaper, would empower voters by letting them know which groups are paying for “issue ads” that refer to clearly identified candidates.

As the Intermountain editorial says, “West Virginia legislators had the right idea in 2005 when they approved a measure that does not curb anyone’s right to speak out in regard to politics — but does insist on the public’s right to know who’s paying for such ‘speech.’ ”

The chairs of the state House and Senate Judiciary Committees are asking Gov. Joe Manchin to put the matter on his agenda for a special session of the Legislature that is being considered for this summer.

Potpourri

• After nine years, the venerable NPR show “Justice Talking” will say farewell June 30. According to their blog, the show could not get a grant to continue broadcasting.
  
  “Justice Talking” had extraordinary breadth—recent programs cover free speech in the military, recycling and neurolaw. The “Justice Talking” website keeps an archive of every episode.
  
  
• Professor Charlie Geyh of the University of Indiana, has re-released his 2006 book, When Courts and Congress Collide: The Struggle for Control of America's Judicial System. The Harvard Law Review has positively reviewed the book and Justice at Stake Executive Director Bert Brandenburg calls it “a good read and a very good reference.” To order it, click here.
  
  
• Gavel Grab Has Made the Top 100! After only six months of existence, Justice at Stake’s blog, Gavel Grab, has made the top 100 Criminal Justice Blogs list. The list was compiled by the Criminal Justice Degrees Guide website. We’ll keep you posted if we make the Sweet Sixteen, the Fortune 500 or American Top 40.
  
  
• This issue of Eyes on Justice also marks the editorial debut of Charlie Hall, Justice at Stake’s new Director of Communications. Charlie is a former Washington Post reporter and ABA communications executive, and can be reached at 202-588-9454.