"Starr Emerges as Key Lawyer for N.Y. Times" That was the report today in The New York Sun. It begins:
As the New York Times gears up for what it argues is a First Amendment fight to stop federal prosecutors from learning the identities of two reporters' confidential sources, the paper is enlisting a surprising ally.(Thanks to How Appealing for the link).The Times, which is suing Attorney General Ashcroft in federal court in Manhattan, has retained Kenneth Starr, the former special prosecutor who, in years past, was a darling of the right and felt the sting of the paper's editorials.
Mr. Starr is teamed up with the New York lawyer Floyd Abrams, a veteran First Amendment lawyer, to block a federal prosecutor at Chicago from obtaining phone records of reporters Philip Shenon and Judith Miller. The two reporters covered national-security issues following the September 11 terrorist attacks.
The other is this report from Duke University News, quoting law professor Erwin Chemerinsky as urging that "U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer should recuse himself from ruling on two cases that will decide the constitutionality of federal sentencing guidelines." More quotes:
"There's no doubt that Stephen Breyer is one of the 'parents' of the federal sentencing guidelines," said Chemerinsky, Alston & Bird Professor of Law at the Duke University School of Law and a noted constitutional scholar and Supreme Court advocate. "When he was the Chief Counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he played a key role with regard to the Sentencing Reform Act [passed in 1984], which created the Sentencing Commission that created the guidelines. Justice Breyer was also on the first Sentencing Commission that created the guidelines in the very structure at issue in these cases, though by that time he was a First Circuit judge. Should a justice who played such a key role in developing the sentencing guidelines now participate in considering their constitutionality?Thanks to Sentencing Law & Policy Blog for the link.) Posted by Marcia Oddi at September 30, 2004 09:52 PM"My own opinion is that he should recuse himself," said Chemerinksy, who has two cases currently on the Court's docket, as counsel and co-counsel. "I don't think a member of Congress who participated in sponsoring a bill or drafting legislation should then, on the federal court, rule on the constitutionality of that, and I think Justice Breyer is in the same position." * * *
"If there's any group in our profession or in society that we want to have impeccable ethics -- to follow ethical principles without question -- it's judges. That's most important for the Justices of the Supreme Court -- they are the most visible judges we have in the country. They are the model for all other judges."