|
This article originally provided by
The New York Times
October 31, 2005
The House's Abuse of Patriotism
In the national anguish after the terrorist attacks of
Sept. 11, 2001, Congress rushed to enact a formidable
antiterrorism law - the Patriot Act - that significantly
crimped civil liberties by expanding law enforcement's power
to use wiretaps, search warrants and other surveillance
techniques, often under the cloak of secrecy. There was
virtually no public debate before these major changes to the
nation's legal system were put into effect.
Now, with some of the act's most sweeping powers set to
expire at the end of the year, the two houses of Congress
face crucial negotiations, which will also take place out of
public view, on their differences over how to extend and
amend the law. That's controversy enough. But the
increasingly out-of-control House of Representatives has
made the threat to our system of justice even greater by
inserting a raft of provisions to enlarge the scope of the
federal death penalty.
In a breathtaking afterthought at the close of debate,
the House voted to triple the number of terrorism-related
crimes carrying the death penalty. The House also voted to
allow judges to reduce the size of juries that decide on
executions, and even to permit prosecutors to try repeatedly
for a death sentence when a hung jury fails to vote for
death.
The radical amendment was slapped through by the
Republican leadership without serious debate. The Justice
Department has endorsed the House measure, and
Representative James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Judiciary
Committee chairman, who is ever on the side of more
government power over the individual, is promising to fight
hard for the death penalty provisions.
There are now 20 terrorism-related crimes eligible for
capital punishment, and the House measure would add 41 more.
These would make it easier for prosecutors to win a death
sentence in cases where a defendant had no intent to kill -
for example, if a defendant gave financial support to an
umbrella organization without realizing that some of its
adherents might eventually commit violence.
Any move to weaken the American jury system in the name
of fighting terrorism is particularly egregious. But the
House voted to allow a federal trial to have fewer than 12
jurors if the judge finds "good cause" to do so, even if the
defense objects. Under current law, a life sentence is
automatically ordered when juries become hung on deciding
the capital punishment question. But the House would have a
prosecutor try again - a license for jury-shopping for death
- even though federal juries already exclude opponents of
capital punishment.
The House's simplistic vote for another "crackdown"
gesture can only further sully the notion of patriotism in a
renewed Patriot Act.
|