Appeals court rules against Ashcroft in 9/11 case

Associated Press | Sep. 4, 2009 (News Report)

A federal appeals court delivered a stinging rebuke Friday to the Bush administration's post-Sept. 11 detention policies, ruling that former Attorney General John Ashcroft can be held liable for people who were wrongfully detained as material witnesses after 9/11.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the government's improper use of material witnesses after Sept. 11 was "repugnant to the Constitution and a painful ... Full Story »

Posted by Glenn LaBauve

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: U.S., Politics, World
Topics: Bush Administration, Law, Law Enforcement, Terrorism, War, War in Iraq, Human Rights, Torture, Middle East, Civil Liberties, U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Constitution
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Glenn LaBauve - Sep 4, 2009 - 7:11 PM PDT
Reviewed by: Glenn LaBauve (review), Sara Peters (review)
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Glenn LaBauve - Sep 4, 2009 - 7:11 PM PDT
Like | | | Comments

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Dscf2146_thumb
4.2
 by Glenn LaBauve - Sep. 4, 2009

Covers the subject without bias, which in this emotionally charged area is a tough job. The rights of habeas corpus have only been part of the body of laws since the 1200s, 500 years before we declared ourselves a nation.

It has always been left to the courts to lead when mo one else will do what is morally right.

Glenn posted this story.
See Full Review » (13 answers)
Silhouette_sml
4.0
 by Sara Peters - Sep. 28, 2009

This is quality factual journalism. I say that because this is not an opinion piece. This article is strictly factual. There are no speculations abouts Ashcroft's involvement or Al-Kidd's ties to terrorism; rather, reporting how Ashcroft will be prosecuted. The piece is well sourced and nicely written. The quote from the judge bolsters its credibility.

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

4.1

not enough reviews
from 2 reviews (18% confidence)
Quality
4.1
Facts
5.0
Fairness
4.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
4.0
Context
3.5
Depth
3.5
Enterprise
4.0
Relevance
4.0
Popularity
4.2
Recommendation
4.0
Credibility
4.5
# Reviews
1.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!