Sunday, September 06, 2009
John Ashcroft
While former Attorney General John Ashcroft has insisted he had no personal involvement, or liability, in the matter, a federal appeals court in San Francisco thought otherwise in an anger-tinged ruling announced on Friday. Two members of the three-judge panel—all of whom are Republican appointees—ruled that a lawsuit brought by an American Muslim detained without probable cause can proceed against President George W. Bush’s first attorney general.
Abdullah al-Kidd, a U.S. citizen born Levoni T. Kidd who converted to Islam while at the University of Idaho, was arrested in 2003 at Washington Dulles International Airport while trying to fly to Saudi Arabia to study Islamic law and the Arabic language. He was held for 16 days under a law that allows the indefinite detention of material witnesses to a crime, even though federal authorities had no evidence against al-Kidd. During this time, he was transported in shackles from Virginia to Oklahoma to Idaho. After his release, al-Kidd was ordered to stay with his in-laws in Las Vegas, and his travel was restricted for more than 15 months. He was never charged with a crime and never even called as a witness.
Judge Milan D. Smith Jr., appointed by President George W. Bush to the 9th Circuit, wrote in the majority opinion that rejected Ashcroft’s bid for absolute immunity: “We find this [al-Kidd’s detention] to be repugnant to the Constitution, and a painful reminder of some of the most ignominious chapters of our national history.” Smith was joined in the majority opinion by an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, Judge David R. Thompson.
-Noel Brinkerhoff
Court Allows Lawsuit Against Ashcroft (by Carrie Johnson, Washington Post)
Panel Rules Against Ashcroft in Detention Case (by John Schwartz, New York Times)
Abdullah Al-Kidd v. John Ashcroft (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit) (PDF)
Comments