Nov. 11 USA: Engaged in a Very Civil War----The Federalist Society has reshaped the legal system without ever going to court. It began in 1982 with a handful of law students at Yale and the University of Chicago who saw themselves as minorities. They were conservatives. As a counter to liberal orthodoxy, they formed a legal debating group they called the Federalist Society. And in a hint of things to come, their first faculty advisor at the Chicago chapter was professor Antonin Scalia, soon to be the most influential conservative on the Supreme Court. This week, in a moment of triumph, the Federalist Society - now with 35,000 members and chapters at every major law school in the nation - is holding its annual meeting at the Mayflower Hotel, a few blocks from the White House. Not only are conservative judges no longer a minority, 2 of the society's favorites, new Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Supreme Court nominee Samuel A. Alito Jr., are poised to add their "strict constructionist" voices to the high court. These days, the one-time college debating society is seen by both friends and critics as the legal branch of the "vast right-wing conspiracy." It brings together prominent conservative judges, Bush administration lawyers, Cabinet officers, law professors and roomfuls of young lawyers who hope to assume their places in the future. They share a common concern: that courts and judges have taken on too much power in America's democracy and that this "judicial activism" should be replaced by what Roberts described as a modest and limited role for the judiciary. In fact, in large measure, they have already reshaped the courts. Conservative judges, many of them products of the Federalist Society network, have come to dominate the federal bench. On Thursday, President Bush hosted the group's leaders for an early morning meeting at the White House. As another sign of the society's close ties to the Bush White House, the speaker for Thursday's dinner was Bush's beleaguered political strategist Karl Rove. Many liberal advocates admit they look with envy at what the Federalist Society has achieved. "They have been unbelievably successful in a short time," said Nadine Strossen, president of the American Civil Liberties Union. "They have taken over the courts and the government. If you go to their meetings, you see the attorney general, senators, the solicitor general. I wish we had the same kind of presence." Though the society has sometimes been portrayed as secretive, its debates are not only open but are usually balanced with liberal voices. Strossen, a New York Law School professor, regularly participates in Federalist Society meetings on campuses. "Radicals in Robes," the recent book by University of Chicago Law School professor Cass R. Sunstein, attacks what he sees as a new wave of conservative activism in the federal judiciary. Some conservative judges would like to strengthen property rights and use the courts to roll back federal laws on the environment, civil rights and workers' protections, Sunstein argues. He was invited to this year's meeting to debate his book and its thesis. "I really like them," he said of the Federalist Society. "They talk about ideas in a serious way. And they are genuinely respectful of competing views." In a bow to the society's success, several liberal professors founded the American Constitution Society four years ago as a counter to the Federalist Society. It has organized chapters at 138 law schools and holds an annual meeting that has drawn speakers such as Supreme Court Justices Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.). But Strossen concedes the liberal group has not yet achieved the same presence at law schools. "It still has a way to go," she said. The Federalist Society has managed to influence the law without going to court. Unlike the ACLU, it does not file lawsuits and legal briefs. Nor does it takes stands on legislation in Congress. It does not even officially endorse and lobby for its own members, such as Alito, when they are nominated to the Supreme Court. "When Harriet Miers was nominated, we had vocal members on both sides of that debate," Northwestern University law professor Steven G. Calabresi, one of the four original founders of the group, said of Bush's failed choice for the Supreme Court. He noted that former Judge Robert H. Bork, a hero to many conservatives, said the selection of Miers was a "disaster." True to their roots, Federalist Society members seem most enthralled by debates over legal philosophy. This year's conference is focused on the theme of "originalism," the theory that the Constitution should be interpreted strictly based on its words and 18th century history, not on how concepts such as liberty and equality are seen today. As the Federalists know - and few others would recall - then-Atty. Gen. Edwin Meese III gave a speech in 1985 calling on the Supreme Court to adopt the "jurisprudence of original intention." He faulted the high court that year for decisions that prohibited silent prayer in public schools, restricted the death penalty and limited the questioning of suspects by police. "Far too many of the court opinions were, on the whole, more policy choices than articulations of constitutional principle," he said. Meese argued that the only true sources of a justice's authority are the plain words of the Constitution as they were originally understood. A few months later, Justice William J. Brennan, the court's leading liberal voice, fired back in a speech, saying Meese's view represented "little more than arrogance cloaked as humility." He said justices could not truly discern precisely what the men of 1787 meant when they wrote clauses that, for example, prohibited "cruel and unusual punishments" or "unreasonable searches and seizures." Brennan said the Supreme Court should not be held "captive to the anachronistic views of long-gone generations." Rather, it should interpret the Constitution as setting out a "vision of human dignity [that] continues to evolve," he said. This week, the Federalist Society reprinted both speeches as part of its program and used them as a backdrop for debates on topics such as "originalism and unenumerated rights" and "originalism and precedent." Though they may be abstract, these topics describe the essence of the Senate's debate over Roberts' nomination and the upcoming debate over Alito. As conservatives, will they vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade because the 1973 ruling that legalized abortion was not based on the original intent of the Constitution, or will they uphold it because of its 32-year-old precedent? Conservatives ruefully acknowledge that they have not won many converts to "originalism" on the Supreme Court. Two justices, Scalia and Clarence Thomas, describe themselves as originalists. They have rejected, for example, claims involving gay rights or challenges to the death penalty for mentally retarded defendants by saying such ideas would have violated the original understanding of the Constitution. By contrast, a majority of justices said the death penalty for retarded defendants was cruel and unusual punishment by today's standards. Similarly, state laws that blatantly discriminate against gays, the majority said, violate "equal protection" as it is understood today. Sunstein, who clerked for the late Justice Thurgood Marshall, agreed that the conservative legal movement has won some battles, but not the war over how to interpret the Constitution. "They have won the battle against 'liberal activism,' " he said. "But they have not won the debate over 'originalism.' The American public does not believe the Constitution should mean what it meant at the time it was ratified." (source: Los Angeles Times) OHIO: Death row case old but not forgotten -- 2 decades after his murder conviction, an Ohio inmate is still trying to clear his name and save his life. The governor granted 2 recent reprieves.<> The case that sent John Spirko to Ohio's death row has proved so troubling that, in just the last 10 weeks, Gov. Bob Taft has twice granted Spirko a reprieve so further investigation could be conducted. 3 members of the Parole Board, in a strongly worded dissent from the decision to deny Spirko a recommendation for clemency, signaled their growing unease with the case when they wrote there was "too much residual doubt to execute" Spirko. And this week state Atty. Gen. Jim Petro agreed to support a request from Spirko, who insists he is innocent, for DNA testing of evidence, although in a letter to Spirko's lawyers he said he did not think it would provide proof of Spirko's guilt or innocence. That these developments come more than 2 decades after Spirko was convicted and sentenced to death for the abduction and murder of the postmaster in the northwest Ohio hamlet of Elgin is but one sign that the case is more than a little out of the ordinary. "I think it's a reflection of the considerable doubt that exists," one of Spirko's attorneys, Thomas Hill of Washington, D.C., said of the recent developments. "Here we have a case of actual innocence." Kim Norris, a spokeswoman for the attorney general, said the office remained sure of Spirko's guilt and that he had received a fair trial, and believes he should be put to death. But she said prosecutors wanted to allow Spirko's lawyers to exhaust their legal options before Spirko received a lethal injection. "Jim Petro believes that when it's a capital case every avenue should be explored," Norris said. "So if they are seeking a DNA test, they should be accommodated, though that DNA test may have absolutely nothing to do with this crime." Victim abducted Spirko was convicted of the 1982 death of Betty Jane Mottinger, who was abducted from the one-room rural post office where she worked. Her body, which had been stabbed more than a dozen times, was found 6 weeks later in a soybean field 50 miles away, wrapped in a painter's tarp tied with clothesline. No physical evidence connected Spirko to the murder. He was linked to the crime after he contacted authorities and offered to trade information about the case in exchange for leniency for himself and a girlfriend in an unrelated case. Over the next 2 1/2 months, Spirko offered a dozen stories, none of them tape-recorded, that investigators have admitted were riddled with lies and inconsistencies. But Spirko's stories, authorities said, also had facts about the case that only the killer would know. Spirko's attorneys say he got those facts either from the news or from a postal investigator increasingly desperate to solve a high-profile crime. 2 jailhouse informants--among the least credible witnesses in the criminal justice system--also testified that Spirko had confessed. Spirko also hurt himself. Testifying in his own defense, he said a former cellmate named Delaney Gibson had committed the crime and told him about it. What Spirko did not know, according to the defense, was that investigators had determined that Gibson was likely in North Carolina picking tomatoes when the murder occurred. Spirko's lawyers contend that prosecutors hid that information from them and kept Gibson's capital murder indictment pending for 20 years just to protect their case. They finally dismissed Gibson's indictment last year, on the same day a federal appeals court rebuffed Spirko's appeal. "Their only concern," Hill said during an interview, "was that by dismissing the indictment it would jeopardize their case against Spirko." Indeed, the investigator in charge of the case had concluded that Gibson was not involved in the case. Still, prosecutors convicted Spirko in part by using a woman's claim that she saw Gibson near the Elgin post office to link Spirko to the crime. In addition, Spirko had an alibi--that he had met with his parole officer in Toledo--about 100 miles away from the post office. 'This has been reviewed' Norris, the spokeswoman for the attorney general, said the case has been thoroughly reviewed by the courts, and that the claims made by Spirko's lawyers all have been rebuffed. "None of these are new arguments," Norris said. "This has been reviewed by the courts many times, and they've all come to the same conclusion." Spirko's most recent execution date was Nov. 15, but the DNA testing--on the dropcloth in which Mottinger was wrapped--has delayed it. In addition, Spirko's lawyers want officials to send fingerprints lifted from the safe in the post office to the FBI's database in an effort to identify a suspect. The fingerprints are not Spirko's, they say. Spirko's attorneys also want authorities to investigate claims from a house painter that could buttress Spirko's innocence claims. The house painter, according to the lawyers, says his boss, who owned property near the field where Mottinger's body was found, made incriminating statements about the murder. The house painter also claimed that he recognized the dropcloth that covered Mottinger as one his boss--now in a Louisiana prison--used frequently around the time Mottinger was murdered. Last month, the lawyers said, the house painter passed a lie-detector test on his claims. (source: Chicago Tribune) ******************* Toledo Groups to Protest Approach of 1000th Execution in the US People of faith and others concerned about problems with the legal system in Ohio and the United States will march from the Lucas County Courthouse to One Government Center in Toledo starting at 5pm on Monday, November 14, 2005 to call attention to the approaching 1000th U.S. execution since 1977. Sponsored by St. Rose Peace & Justice, the "March For Life, March Against the Death Penalty" is the first major event of dozens that will take place across the country to protest this historic milestone. The possibility that Ohio's scheduled execution of John Hicks on November 29th could be the 1000th execution makes this event even more timely and urgent. Everyone is welcome. March & Rally Details--- When: Monday, November 14, march starts at 5 PM Where: March from the Lucas County Courthouse to One Government Center in Toledo Who: Speakers at rally at the end of the march will Include: Abraham J. Bonowitz, Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death Penalty<> Larry Clark, Director, Toledo Area Ministries Jeff Gamso, Legal Director, ACLU Ohio Otis Gordon, Pastor, Warren AME Church Sister Sharon Havelak, OSF, Director Interfaith Peace and Justice Center Toby Hoover, Director, Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence (source: Christian Wire Service) FLORIDA: Man convicted in Charlotte prosecutor's slaying dies in prison A former prosecutor who survived a 1988 shooting that claimed the life of a colleague lamented that their attacker wasn't executed long before his death from natural causes in prison last week. Samuel A. Pettit, 43, who suffered from a degenerative brain disorder, died Nov. 4 on Death Row at Union Correctional Institution in Raiford. "I know Pettit's in hell and I feel good about that," former state prosecutor Kathleen Finnegan told the Charlotte Sun. She was wounded when Pettit kidnapped then shot her and co-worker Norman Langston in August 1988. Langston, also a prosecutor, was killed. Pettit was confined to a wheelchair for the last several years and was unable to care for himself. "I hope he suffered greatly," Finnegan said. "I've waited for this day." Finnegan, who was 28 at the time, and Langston, 27, were getting into a car outside a Punta Gorda hotel after a social gathering when Pettit approached with a gun. He forced them to drive to a dam, robbed them and fired his gun four times in the car. Langston covered Finnegan with his body, shielding her from the bullets. "I always knew we would receive justice from God, long before his case made it through the quagmire of the appeals process," Finnegan said. "I'm reflective of Norm's life. Pettit lived 6,286 days longer than Norm....He was a good man and a hero. I know he's smiling in heaven today." Pettit was arrested on a Naples beach the next night and sentenced to death in 1989. He had said he didn't want anyone crying over his death because he was "not crying over anyone else." Pettit had 17 prior arrests and had served only a small portion of his previous sentence before being let out of prison in 1988. He was still on probation when he kidnapped Langston and Finnegan. The crime inspired Finnegan to lead the Stop Turning Out Prisoners initiative to pass legislation forcing prisoners to serve at least 85 percent of their sentence. Pettit's death provided little comfort to Norman Langston's brother, Richard. "You talk about a waste of time, talent, everything," Richard Langston, an attorney in Frankfort, Ind., told the Sun. "Here's a kid who put his life in position to finally reap the harvest, and he was cut down by some idiot with a Saturday Night Special." The justice system failed because Pettit was sentenced to death but was "allowed to deteriorate in jail," Richard Langston said. "He shouldn't have died in prison; he should have been executed in prison." (source: Associated Press) INDIANA: Prosecutor Seeks Death Penalty In Triple-Slaying In Rockville, a Parke County prosecutor will seek the death penalty for Chad A. Cottrell, the western Indiana man charged with murdering his wife and two stepdaughters, crimes that a sheriff said were committed to conceal the man's sexual abuse toward his daughters. Cottrell killed his wife, Trisha Cottrell, 29, and her daughters, 12-year-old Brittany Williams and 10-year-old Victoria Williams, while molesting or trying to molest the girls, Parke County Prosecutor Steven Cvengros alleged in the state's notice of intent to seek the death penalty. The document was filed Thursday in Parke Circuit Court. Cottrell was trying to "hush" the three from reporting the abuse, Parke County Sheriff Charles Bollinger told The Brazil Times for a story Friday. Cottrell has pleaded not guilty and is being held without bond in the Parke County Jail. The phone rang unanswered at Cvengros's office on Friday, which was Veterans Day, a legal holiday. A message was left by The Associated Press with Jessie Cook, Cottrell's attorney. Authorities have not released autopsy results, but Bollinger told The Times that his department's investigation determined that the girls had been molested. During a preliminary court hearing last week, authorities said Cottrell shot the 3 and then told a 6-year-old boy who overheard the noise that he had shot 3 deer. The unidentified boy told police that Brittany and Cottrell were arguing before the shootings, according to a probable cause affidavit signed by Bollinger. The girls' grandmother, Tricia Parker, discovered the bodies Oct. 31 inside bedrooms in the family's rural home about 50 miles outside Indianapolis. The victims were found in each of 3 bedrooms. Cottrell was arrested in central Minnesota Nov. 1 after he failed to pay for fuel at a service station and was chased by police. (source: TheIndyChannel) KENTUCKY: Prosecutors Seek Death Penalty In Double Murder Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for Isiah Fugett, who admitted to police he shot and killed 18-year-old Robert Robbins and 19-year-old Eric Ray in the parking lot of a downtown hotel in January of 2004, but is claiming self defense. WAVE 3 Investigator Eric Flack reports. The teens were shot in the parking lot behind of the old Clarion Hotel and Brook and Jefferson. But as the jury heard Monday, there are 2 very different versions of the events that led to that shooting. Eric Ray and Robert Robbins had been friends since childhood. They were both graduates of Trinity High School, and according to investigators, they were both murdered in a drug deal gone bad. A friend of the two, Adam Abell, told the court that he "was with them many times when we went to the Chevron (near the Clarion Hotel). Sometimes we would come back with marijuana, sometimes we wouldn't." The night of January 26, 2004, police say the teens were hoping to make a pot buy from Fugett in the parking lot of what was then the Clarion Hotel. Police believe the victims knew Fugett, and set up the deal earlier in the night. What happened next depends on who you ask. Fugett allegedly fired multiple shots from a 9mm handgun. He told police he was acting in self defense. The teens, he said, had pulled the shotgun on him. But prosecutors contend the shotgun, which belonged to Ray but was later found on Fugett, was strictly for hunting. The teens, investigators say, were murdered in cold blood. Larry Robbins he had to identify the bodies, starting with his son, Robert. "And I asked Jason to roll him toward me so I could get a better view of his face, and I identified him from his scar. He has a quarter-size scar on his front shoulder." The coroner offered to inform Ray's mother, but Robbins insisted that he do it. "I said, 'RD you're a nice person and everything, but she doesn't need to hear this from a stranger." Kathy Ray told the jury she has been robbed of a son and a friend. "Eric and I talked probably 10 times a day, if not more." Fugett, who has pled not guilty, is charged with robbery, tampering with physical evidence and 2 counts of murder. He could be sentenced to death if convicted. The trial will resume next week, when prosecutors call their star witness, an airline pilot from Pennsylvania who says he watched at least part of what happened from a hotel window right above the parking lot. According to police records, that witness heard a commotion, then saw a white man turn his back and begin to run away from a black man, who raised his hand fired at least 3 shots, then walked away. (source: WAVE News) ******************* Death Penalty Sought In KY Murder Case The Commonwealth's Attorney in Madisonville says he will seek the death penalty against the man accused of stabbing a Dawson Springs woman to death. Billy Roulette is accused of stabbing his neighbor, 72-year-old Billie Cochrane, while trying to rob her in August. Police say they have the murder weapon and 2 confessions. Roulette is being held without bond. The case is set to go to the Grand Jury November 29th. Roulette's girlfriend, Miranda Marts, is also charged in the case. (source: WFIE News)
