My very first Lawfare post, back in December 2011, focused on the messy constitutional question raised by United States v. Ali—a case then pending before the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces that raised the constitutionality of subjecting civilian military contractors to military, rather than civilian, trials.
Latest in Criminal Law: Procedural
In yesterday’s New York Times, Ben Weiser reported that Abu Ghaith’s case has renewed the “debate” over civilian terrorism trials.
Speaking of the Sulaiman Abu Gayth case in Judge Lewis Kaplan's courtroom in New York, check out this briefing.
Ordinarily, on a day like today, yours truly would remind the Interwebs’ military commission-watchers of a pretrial hearing, next week, in the 9/11 case. Usually I would make a plug for Lawfare’s coverage. I might also preview the legal issues to be addressed at length, or do so only in scant fashion, with only reference to the list of motions scheduled for argument. But one way or another, I would try to give folks some flavor of what’s in store.
But today is a little differen
That's the gist of today's ruling in this terrorism case, which is now pending in the Northern District of Illinois. The order opens as follows:Defendant Adel Daoud is charged with attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction in violation of 18 U.S.C.
From the defense's standpoint, which are more onerous: restrictions on lawyers in civilian terrorism cases or restrictions used in military commissions?
Accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is currently challenging Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) imposed on him and his attorneys; Judge George O'Toole of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts heard argument on Tsarnaev's bid to vacate the measures last month but has yet decide the matter.
On Monday, accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev filed his reply to the government's response to his motion to vacate special administrative measures (SAMs) imposed on him and his attorneys.
Last Monday, the government filed its response to accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's motion to vacate the special administrative measures (SAMs) imposed on him and his attorneys.
Last Wednesday, accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev filed a motion to vacate special administrative measures (SAMs) imposed on him and his attorneys. In his motion, Tsarnaev argues that the government has not alleged facts sufficient to justify the measures---essentially a package of additional security restrictions---and that the measures violate the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.
Lawfare will cover the defense challenge, any response by the government, an
Al Nusrah/Al Shabaab Supporters Brought to the US for Prosecution, and other Terrorism Prosecution News
Some interesting terrorism-prosecution developments over the past few days that are worth noting.
United States v. Mohammed (S.D. Fla.) First, a pair of men (one leaving in Kenya, and the other--who happens to be a naturalized US citizen--living in Saudi Arabia) are in custody in the US facing material support charges based on their efforts to raise funds for al Shabaab and al Nusrah/AQI. Details are sketchy as yet, but it appears the men were arrested abroad--not sure where or by whom--and then turned over to US authorities and rendered back to the U.S.