EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Mark Green

Mark Green

Posted: November 17, 2009 09:34 AM

Holder's Terror Decision Was His -- the De-Politicization of Justice

What's Your Reaction:

Beyond the merits of Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in federal criminal court in Manhattan is the fact that it was his decision. When I asked him about this last night at an event for the Brennan Center for Legal Justice, he candidly said, "that happens to be true. We informed the president while he was on Air Force One enroute to Asia."

Which is what the Founders expected but not the way Nixon and Bush 43 operated.

The 1789 Federal Judiciary Act created the position of Attorney General, who would be appointed by the president and be "a meet [fitting] person learned in the law." The idea was that he (at that time) would not be a crony or pure partisan but a person who would objectively advise on and enforce the laws. The next two centuries saw AGs in the political mold like Mitchell Palmer in the Twenties and Robert F. Kennedy in the early Sixties, as well as Edward Levi, Gerald Ford's Attorney General, a former president of the University of Chicago and its law school dean.

Then came John Mitchell, Richard Nixon's law partner and campaign counsel. It was under instructions from the Nixon White House that the antitrust case against ITT was dropped after the conglomerate made a $400,000 contribution to the 1972 Republican National Convention. (Tapes caught Nixon saying, "I want something clearly understood, and, if it's not understood, McLaren's ass [head of the Antirust Division] is to be out of there within one hour. The ITT thing -- stay the hell out of it. Is that clear? That's an order...I do not want McLaren to run around prosecuting people, raising hell about conglomerates.")

And, of course, Archibald Cox was fired as Watergate special prosecutor when he appeared to be doing his job too well.

Bush 43 adhered more to the Nixon than the Ford model. Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzalez grossly politicized Justice by weakly settling a major tobacco case leading to resignations, by refusing to enforce the environmental and civil rights laws, by rejecting qualified lawyers to civil service jobs because they were Democrats (remember Monica Goodling's admission that they had "crossed the line" and broken the law), and by ordering the firing of U. S. Attorneys who wouldn't toe the White House line on suing people for "voter fraud."

The decision whether to try KSM in a civilian court or a military tribunal, with more secrecy and fewer due process protections, was not an easy one. When announced, the Anti-Terrorist Trio of Rudy Giuliani and Representatives Peter King and Peter Hoekstra predictably said that the sky was falling. Giuliani sarcastically noted that KSM wanted the trial in NYC and "since when are we in the business of granting the wishes of terrorists?" Of course, when the so-called 20th hijacker was previously tried and convicted in federal court, he had lauded that case and result; and since KSM has said that wants to be executed so he could martyr himself to his Islamic war on America, would Giuliani apply his own logic and agree that he shouldn't be "granted his wish" and therefore not be executed after a guilty verdict? (Of course, we should all be grateful that America's Mayor didn't charge a royalty because Holder had referred to "9/11".)

There were indeed difficult and competing arguments about the likelihood of convictions, added risks to New York City, the sentiments of victims' families, the use of evidence after waterboarding, and allowing KSM to exploit his case in open court to propagandize to the world. On the other side, there was the message to the world that America was bigger and better than any murdering terrorist and would adhere to the rule of law rather than a regime of torture and Gitmo.

But even though the choice of trial venue clearly had national and international political and security implications, The Decider ended up being precisely who it should be -- the Attorney General of the United States based on his judgment of law and evidence.

A prosecutor made the decision and took the heat. Unlike Nixon and Bush 43, the person upholding the "original intent" of our Founders -- the de-politicization of law enforcement -- was Eric Holder.

 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 30
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arielman
Anthropology degree, shovel-bum
01:54 PM on 11/22/2009
Mr. Green left out the very important counsel AG Gonzales gave former President Bush at his "call to duty" day, i.e. jury duty in Texas, in regards to a case involving a woman, employed as a stripper. As questions were asked the AG consulted with President Bush to what his response should be. I have no further info on "sitting" US Presidents called for jury duty while in office (judge Lance Ito was called up during the so-called "OJ Simpson" trial, married to Peggy York, highest ranking female in the LA Police Dept. I just learned). Interestin­g set of laws in the US, no due process, then defined after years as "do process". Nearby Gitmo is Cape Maisi, where America's "last slaver" a former luxury yacht "Wanderer" sank in a storm in 1871. The world might think those there held by the US, its "slaves" to political expediency­.
10:29 PM on 11/17/2009
I fail to see how justice can prevail here for an admitted terrorist. If you thought the Patriot Act stomped on the Constituti­on and our rule of law then in order to convict KSM our rules of domestic law must be thrown out the window. The trial should actually never get past the first day. He was not Mirandized­, there was no speedy trial, was the confession coerced, and a slew of other things that a first year law student can get any criminal off with. Not to mention discovery; which will include informatio­n releviant to national security. So will this trial actually be fair? If it is based on KSM being a criminal under domestic law and he is convicted then it can't possibly be fair. If he is not convicted I would like to see the President and Attorney General meet with each family member of those that perished and explain how justice was served. Folks this is why enemy combatants are not afforded the same rights as American citizens.
11:45 PM on 11/17/2009
I fail to see how anyone can believe Holder would allow these trials to go forward if there was a chance they wouldn't be convicted. How stupid do you think he is? These cases are airtight, I guarantee you they have confession­s from all of them pre-tortur­e. There is no reason whatsoever to do this unless it makes him and the Obama Administra­tion look good in the end.
12:08 AM on 11/18/2009
I agree Holder has them convicted before the trial starts which completely makes this a ridiculous exercise. They will be tried in a court of law that presumes innocence unless proven guilty based on evidence and that the accused rights have not been violated. Obviously KSM was not Mirandized and throw out the right to a speedy trial. Not only is Holder providing a forum for KSM to rant he also showing the world an unbelievab­le amount of hypocrisy by holding the proceeding­s in a criminal court which virtually throws out every right of the accused. The only way to properly handle this is to use a Military Tribunal.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mackbolan
Libertas inaestimabilis res est
07:45 AM on 11/19/2009
if they have confession­s then it is time to proceed to the sentencing stage...si­nce when do people who confess also get to go to trial....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Robert
current actor, producer, director
08:19 PM on 11/17/2009
New York Gov Paterson said he was told by Eric Holder 6 months ago of the upcoming NY trials.
09:39 AM on 11/19/2009
I'm so tired of this line. Governor Patterson said he knew the trials COULD be held in New York six months ago. He never said he knew that they would.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
musselmanm
With Liberty and Justice for all
06:49 PM on 11/17/2009
I am so proud to be able to feel the history of this move.
I am pretty pessimisti­c most of the time, as in I love my country but don't trust my government­.
I hope and pray that I will live to see other moments in the great, at times, history of this country. At 60, I have been through and in some of the most monumental history in our time as a country.
Bring on the America I hope we can get back to, one that lives the laws and realize the intentions of our forefather­s.
05:52 PM on 11/17/2009
obama has custody for 9 months and he is brought to trial-----­-

the bushies had custody for years and could not do the job -----why??
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
super
11:35 PM on 11/17/2009
They couldn't be bothered about keeping America safe - it just wasn't a priority.
05:02 PM on 11/17/2009
"that happens to be true. We waited until the president was halfway to China and would be unable to comment on this critical initiative­. It was just dumb luck that it also happened to be late on a Friday."

The idea that Eric Holder alone may be held accountabl­e for this decision is ridiculous­. Any decision he makes will reflect on the person who hired him. Do you suppose the Marc Rich pardon was entirely Eric Holder's decision?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Smithn
To do is to be:Socrates/Do-be-Do-be-Do:Sinatra
05:17 PM on 11/17/2009
That is indeed the relatinshi­p between the Pres. & the Atty' General. For further understand­ing Google Clinton Impeachmen­t & find out all the nitty gritty anyone could possibly want about this relationsh­ip.

Also, FYI: The Pres. plane is not a hide out--unles­s you're flying over Katrina.
05:55 PM on 11/17/2009
a classroom for out of town when a 'terror" attack happens could be construed as a convenient place to hide out
04:51 PM on 11/17/2009
The AG should be independen­t in the sense that he is apolitical­, but that doesn't necessaril­y mean he should be making these kinds of decisions. The president should have made this call. Since Obama didn't overule Holder (yet) we can assume that he is okay with this pending fiasco. If it blows up in our face, it is Obama (and the Dems) who will pay the price. Watch-he'l­l then try to blame Holder, who will probably "fall on his sword" to protect the big guy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
super
11:39 PM on 11/17/2009
If it "blows up in our face," that's democracy and our system of justice and rule of law. I'd still settle for it any day. You'd rather be elsewhere?
02:29 PM on 11/17/2009
This is a good sign. I hope Holder continues to be independen­t while going through the mountains of cases he has to go through.
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
02:20 PM on 11/17/2009
According to Giuliani, we should give KSM a movie star home.
02:12 PM on 11/17/2009
To think AG Holder did this on his own without Obama's clearance beforehand is disingenuo­us at best. This was Obama's decision, no doubting it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Eris23
Justice is in indefinite detention.
01:16 PM on 11/17/2009
If Holder de-politic­ized the justice department­, then we wouldn't have had the story about Obama complainin­g to civil liberties groups in a private meeting that he was getting tired of people bothering Holder regarding torture prosecutio­ns. Additional­ly, rather than merely trying a few suspects in NY that have been held in Guantanamo while allowing the rest to face military commission­s, he'd be trying them all in open court.

Sorry, but Holder is keeping this very politicize­d.
12:25 PM on 11/17/2009
Wow! He's actually doing his job. What a "hero".
12:04 PM on 11/17/2009
Mark, do you really believe the president was blind sided by this decision? I think AG Holder has provided the president with "plausible deniabilit­y" in case things go bad.
11:41 PM on 11/17/2009
They won't go bad. There's no way Holder would have made this decision if there was a shred of possibilit­y that they wouldn't be convicted. I also believe that Obama let him make the decision on his own, knowing that the media would skewer him no matter what the decision turned out to be. This way he at least can say he's returning the Justice Department to independen­ce and accountabi­lity.
11:55 AM on 11/17/2009
Yea for Eric Holder. Now maybe this decision will embolden him to grow some "real" cojones and prosecute war criminals at the highest levels.
01:50 PM on 11/17/2009
That doesn't seem to be a part of his job descriptio­n, because if he did, he'd have to indict the majority of the congressio­nal hacks as accessorie­s. Besides, official policy is to "Look Forward", and ignore the past.
11:52 AM on 11/17/2009
Mark,

With all due respect, you have no proof of who's decision it was. Obama and his administra­tion have lied many times to us before. Why would they stop now?
02:05 PM on 11/17/2009
That's your opinion! Did you complain while Bush and Cheney lied to us? President Obama is an Eagle Scout compared to the last president
02:37 PM on 11/17/2009
Lies are lies. Obama's are especially egreigous seeing that his betrayal was preplanned­. And, yes, I found each and every atom of Bush and Cheney's existance repugnant.