Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Supreme Court won't review FBI raid of William Jefferson's office

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 11:41 AM
Original message
Supreme Court won't review FBI raid of William Jefferson's office
I know, I know, half of DU will just say they don't need any court rulings or trial just lock him up in "tha name of ethics!"


Supreme Court stays out of Jefferson search dispute
by Bruce Alpert, The Times-Picayune
Monday March 31, 2008, 10:13 AM

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court today declined to consider an appeal court's ruling that the 2006 FBI raid of Rep. William Jefferson's Capitol Hill office was unconstitutional.

The Court of the Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled last year that FBI agents, who conducted the first-ever search of a congressional office May 20-21, 2006, should have let the New Orleans Democrat review documents before seizing them.

The High Court did not give a reason for refusing to take up the issue. Jefferson has pleaded not guilty to charges of soliciting more than $500,000 in bribes while using his office to broker business deals in Africa.



http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/03/supreme_court_stays_out_of_jef.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 11:43 AM
Response to Original message
1. As much as I think Jefferson is crooked, due process must be followed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wizard777 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
2. This is the equivalent of SCOTUS saying, well DUH.
We don't need to look at this. The lower court got it right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Like hell they got it right. Everything should have been thrown out
Edited on Mon Mar-31-08 11:55 AM by RGBolen
On edit: Wait till an Obama or Clinton FBI searches a republican's office, they actually defend their own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. There was no partisan divide on this issue on
capitol hill. They defend their own: The boundary is congreeman vs everybody else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. This was a no brainer.
You can't have the executive's cops busting up the legislature's offices.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. And the court could have thrown all of it out but chose not to even look
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
5. This guy should have been voted out
Karen Carter sounded like a good person to represent his district.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Jefferson
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. I guess you should have come to Louisiana and told us how we should have voted

maybe the voters of the district just didn't know how you thought they should vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Well how is Jefferson working out for you?
In your world there is no place for constructive criticism?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-31-08 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. yea, the supreme court has local elections to worry about, not that pesky constitution
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC