Topic: Law and Civil Liberties

Great Moments in Local Government

This story probably has a deeper meaning for those concerned about a hyper-sensitive society. It also probably raises the hackles of those trying to protect 2nd Amendment rights. But my immediate reaction was that only government could do something as stupid as arrest a 10-year old boy for having a toy cap gun:

The latest case of zero-tolerance at the public schools has a 10-year-old student sadder and wiser, and facing expulsion and long-term juvenile detention. And it has his mother worried that his punishment has already been harsher than the offense demands. “I think I shouldn’t have brought a gun to school in the first place,” said the student, Alandis Ford, sitting at home Thursday night with his mother, Tosha Ford, at his side. Alandis’ gun was a “cap gun,” a toy cowboy six-shooter that his mother bought for him. “We got it from Wal-Mart for $5.96,” Tosha Ford said, “in the toy section right next to the cowboy hats. That’s what he wanted because it was just like the ones he was studying for the Civil War” in his fifth-grade class at Fairview Elementary School. …Tosha said that Wednesday afternoon, after school, “six police officers actually rushed into the door” of their home. “He [Alandis] opened the door because they’re police. And then they just kind of pushed him out of the way, and asked him, ‘Well where’s the gun, where’s the real gun?’ And they called him a liar… they booked him, and they fingerprinted him.” …Alandis was charged with possessing a weapon on school property and with terroristic acts and threats. …Sherri Viniard, the Director of Public Relations for the Newton County School System, emailed a statement to 11Alive News Thursday that reads, in part: “Student safety is our primary concern, and although this was a toy gun, it is still a very serious offense and it is a violation of school rules. We will not tolerate weapons of any kind on school property.” Alandis had his first hearing in juvenile court on Thursday. Tosha said the case worker assigned to Alandis will recommend a period of probation, rather than juvenile detention. The judge will make the final decision. Tosha said Alandis is not allowed back in school for now. She has a meeting scheduled with school administrators. She does not know if he will be expelled, and is hoping for no more than a ten-day suspension.

David Spade versus the Mexican Cartels

News outlets are reporting that actor David Spade donated $100,000 to the Phoenix Police Department to purchase AR-15 rifles for patrol officers. 

If the police officers in the Southwest are outgunned, it is likely because former Mexican soldiers have been recruited by the drug cartels.  As the War on Drugs has ballooned north from Colombia to Mexico, military incursions on American soil are becoming more common, Mexican soldiers are being killed and beheaded, and police officers are being assassinated (warning: violent content). 

This is one more way that the War on Drugs is nonsensical policy.  For more on this topic, click here, here, or here.

Fallows on Security

On the Atlantic blog, James Fallows has a few thoughts about security.

In sharing them, he compliments Cato’s own “precocious” Ben Friedman, and endorses our January counterterrorism conference: “I hope that everyone who can possibly be in Washington on Jan 12-13, including [DHS Secretary-designee Janet] Napolitano, will attend this conference, at Cato, about rational and non-hysteric ways to keep America secure.”

You can learn more and register here.

Pols Target Jury Trials for Budget Savings

Pols in New Hampshire are under pressure to cut state spending so they are now proposing to, of all things, stop jury trials.   Where to begin? They would have us believe that there is no fat left in the budget?  Not credible.  Are the pols looking for the path of least resistance?  No special interest group in the capital looking out for jurors–so go there?  Whatever happened to the Constitution?  When an institution is put into the Constitution itself, it is no longer a  discretionary spending matter.  The pols are not free to do a cost-benefit analysis of the Bill of Rights and then reinterpret those provisions so that they comport with the accountant’s findings.  Pols that don’t get this need to be shown the door–before they start talking about postponing elections, which are also expensive.

TSA Screening as ‘Security Theater’

Yesterday, 60 Minutes interviewed Security Expert Bruce Schneier about Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screening practices at airports.  A timely report as the travel crush gets underway.

Bruce Schneier will be speaking at Cato’s Counterterrorism conference next month.  Also, check out today’s podcast with another conference speaker, former FBI agent, Mike German.  The conference is part of a three-year Cato initiative on counterterrorism and civil liberties.

Inside the Dept. of Homeland Security

Jeffrey Rosen has an article up at The New Republic criticizing the Department of Homeland Security as a bipartisan effort to be seen doing something about terrorism.  Unfortunately, that something fails any rational cost-benefit analysis:  “Both parties seem incapable of acknowledging an uncomfortable but increasingly obvious truth: that the Department of Homeland Security was a bureaucratic and philosophical mistake.”  Go read the whole thing

Rosen cites security expert Bruce Schneier on the misallocation of funds to security cameras.  These cameras proved ineffective in preventing the 7/7 bombings in London, and the capture of the bombers was due largely to good intelligence and police work, not camera systems.  New York City immediately jumped on the camera bandwagon in spite of their dubious utility in terrorism and crime prevention.  As Schneier puts it, “[t]he question isn’t whether the cameras are useful; the question is whether they’re essential–or would it be better to spend that money on the policeman on the beat?”  Check out Schneier’s blog here.

Schneier’s excellent book, Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly about Security in an Uncertain World, is required reading for any serious discussion about national security.  Schneier will be a panelist at Cato’s conference on national security on January 12th and 13th.  Information about the conference is available here.  This conference is part of Cato’s three-year initiative on issues relating to civil liberties and counterterrorism.

Emoluments! Get Yer Red Hot Emoluments Here!

A few weeks ago, while attending the Federalist Society’s annual lawyers convention, I got to chatting with UCLA law professor (and former member of the Cato Supreme Court Review editorial board) Eugene Volokh about something that a commenter to his well-known Volokh Conspiracy blog had queried: might Hillary Clinton, then just-announced as “on track” to become the next secretary of state, be constitutionally disqualified from that job?  I quickly turned to Article I, section 6, clause 2 of my handy Cato pocket Constitution (I carry one in every suit jacket and can attest that they make great stocking-stuffers) to look at the source of the problem: the Emoluments Clause.  Nothing against her in particular but indeed, it seemed that Sen. Clinton’s appointment — or that of any member of Congress whose term coincides with a cabinet pay raise — would violate the clear constitutional text.

I won’t rehash the arguments here, especially because both Eugene and I (and many others, including   venerable Supreme-Court-justice-in-waiting-of-Obama’s-first-male-appointment Laurence Tribe) blogged about it.

I thought that would be the end of it, but they keep pulling me back in.  Today, for example, I have an elaborated version of my earlier blog post in the American Spectator.  And tomorrow I’ll be appearing at a Judicial Watch forum discussing the issue along with John O’Connor, author of “The Emoluments Clause: An Anti-Federalist Intruder in a Federalist Constitution.”  (The panel is at the National Press Club, 529 14th St. NW in Washington, runs 1:30–3:00pm, and is open to the public.)

Interestingly, though Congress last week passed a “Saxbe Fix” for Sen. Clinton, we now have another emoluments problem, with Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO), whom President-elect Obama has just nominated to be his Interior Secretary.

Leaving aside the constitutional issue, that makes four senatorial vacancies (and two gubernatorial vacancies) created by the victory of the Obama-Biden ticket, including, of course, the Rod Blagojevich mess in Illinois.  That has to be some sort of record, but I fear it’s the only way the incoming administration will reduce the size of government (and only temporarily at that).