Contact: red_ankle@mac.com

WWW Mac-a-ro-nies

Contribute:

Law: Decisions erode barrier between church and state

The Supreme Court of the United States has issued two rulings that erode the barrier between church and state. Though I try not to read politics into court decisions, but instead interpret them based on the constitution, statutes and case law, I do see overt political maneuvering in regard to these decisions. The religious Right has been involved in a crusade to impose versions of the Ten Commandments on government property for nearly a decade. Its most famous battle involved the installment of a monolithic granite sculpture of the Biblical document in the Alabama justice building in 2003. Though former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore ultimately lost that fight in federal court, his supporters and other evangelical Christians did not give up. I believe the pressure they have brought influenced the Supreme Court.

The Kansas City Star reports.

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Monday that displaying the Ten Commandments on government property is constitutionally permissible in some cases but not in others. A pair of 5-4 decisions left future disputes on the contentious church-state issue to be settled case-by-case.

"The court has found no single mechanical formula that can accurately draw the constitutional line in every case," wrote Justice Stephen G. Breyer.

Breyer was the only justice to vote with the majority in both cases: One that struck down Ten Commandments displays inside two Kentucky courthouses and a second that allowed a 6-foot granite monument to remain on the grounds of the Texas Capitol.

The court said the key to whether a display is constitutional hinges on whether there is a religious purpose behind it. But the justices acknowledged that question would often be controversial.

It is already clear that the standard SCOTUS set will be unworkable much of the time. That is because groups and politicians wishing to place religious symbols on public property will use pretexts to do so. Indeed, throughout the country, the favored pretext has become a claim that the religious symbols are merely parts of historical displays. In reality, there usually was no historical display before the desire to place the religious emblems on government property arose. Then, a few pieces of memorabilia were located to display with the religious material in order to justify the display. However, the focus remains on the real message, and, that message is religious.

The display the high court approved of is troubling partly because of its site. A religious display in a seat of government can't help but suggest the government itself is approving of religion, eroding the Establishment Clause. Allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed on the grounds of the Texas capitol is very close to allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed in government buildings, including courthouses, in Kentucky or elsewhere.

The close votes in these cases mean this area of constitutional law will be revisited by SCOTUS. However, unless the justices hearing future cases both resist political pressure, and, think more clearly about how the current standard can be abused, the erosion of the constitutional barrier between church and state will continue.

Reasonably related

The cases are McCreary County v. ACLU, 03-1693, and Van Orden v. Perry, 03-1500.

News: Times blasts Jeb Bush

I was relieved by the release of Terri Schiavo's autopsy Wednesday. I hoped confirmation that prolonging her life would have been futile would end the bitter reaction to her death of some Americans. Unfortunately, Right to Life organizations have simply chosen to deny reality. The most extreme of them claim there is a conspiracy to falsify the true state of Ms. Schiavo's health, and, are recycling claims that she responded to stimuli and tried to talk. The autopsy says otherwise. Her brain had atrophied and shrank, and, that she was blind. Other members of the Right to Life movement are somewhat less strident, but still wrong. They claim it doesn't matter that Ms. Schiavo was in a permanent vegetative state -- that her life should have been extended by life support regardlessly. But, the response of these people was not the most absurd. That dishonor was left to a politician, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. The governor, long at the forefront of those seeking political capital through the exploitation of the Schiavo situation, responded to the autopsy by mounting a new attack on Michael Schiavo.

The Miami Herald reports.

One day after an exhaustive autopsy sought to end much of the controversy over Terri Schiavo's life, and eventual death, Gov. Jeb Bush said he plans to ask prosecutors to investigate whether her husband took too long to call for help on the night she collapsed in 1990.

A lawyer for Michael Schiavo called the governor's comments ''disgusting'' and said there was no delay in the husband's call for help.

Bush said Thursday that he had talked to Dr. Jon Thogmartin, the Pinellas-Pasco medical examiner, a day before Thogmartin publicly released the results of his autopsy on Terri Schiavo, who died on March 31 after a protracted legal and political battle.

Bush said Thogmartin told him he had gained access to information suggesting that there was a 70-minute delay between when Michael Schiavo first heard a ''bump'' in the early morning hours of Feb. 25, 1990 and when he eventually called 911.

''I have not seen or heard of this information before that there's some doubt about when she did collapse and how long it took for a phone call to be made,'' Bush told reporters. ``That is I think, worthy of some investigation.''

George Felos, an attorney for Michael Schiavo, attacked Bush and said that while his client was not able to remember exact times of what happened that tragic morning, he immediately called for help after his wife collapsed.

''It's really unfortunate and disgusting that the governor who had meddled beyond his powers in this case is joining that same bandwagon,'' Felos said. ``The fact is, there was no gap.''

The effect of Gov. Bush's response was to urge people to ignore the findings of the autopsy and shift their attention to continued persecution of Schiavo by the Right to Life Movement. Michael Schiavo waged a seven-year battle to withdraw life support from his wife, more or less alone. There was no political movement he could call on to orchestrate a public relations campaign on his behalf and pay his lawyers' fees. However, this time around Schiavo is not standing alone. Media across the country, fed up with the poisonous atmosphere Schiavo has been forced to live in because of attacks by conservative politicians and the Right to Life Movement, are speaking up. Among them is the New York Times, which has published two editorials supporting Schiavo, so far. Jeb Bush responded to the first with an attack on the paper, as well as Schiavo.

But, the editorial writers at the Times were not scared away from the topic. The came back with a stronger piece Friday.

Politics and Terri Schiavo

After Terri Schiavo was finally allowed to rest in peace on March 31, we hoped she would also have been granted in death what she surely would have wanted - an end to the bitterness that divided her family and made her private suffering a public spectacle. For the American people, the episode was a terrible lesson in what government should and should not do, in what is properly within the scope of our political leaders and what is not.

And so it was heartbreaking yesterday to see Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida thrust himself back into this tragedy just two days after the results of Ms. Schiavo's autopsy showed that her condition had been beyond hope and beyond therapy, that she most likely had been in a persistent vegetative state and that her relatives' allegations that she had been abused by her husband were false.

For most of the nation, that news provided closure on a wrenching episode. But not for Mr. Bush, who asked a state prosecutor to investigate Michael Schiavo, Ms. Schiavo's husband. Mr. Bush said he wanted to clear up discrepancies in Mr. Schiavo's statements over the last 15 years about the time that elapsed between his finding his wife on the floor and his 911 call. If such discrepancies existed, Mr. Bush surely knew of them long before yesterday. To seek an investigation now seems tactical, an attempt to deflect attention from the autopsy report.

Of all the politicians who tragically failed to understand and respect the sanctity and privacy of family life in this case, only Mr. Bush seems determined to save face by disturbing the family's peace further and berating those who had been saying all along that he was going down a terrible road.

The attacks on Michael Schiavo probably are not over. As a public figure, he would face an incredible burden if he tried to respond through the legal system. Though most of what his detractors have said about him is false, the requirement of proving malicious intent is a difficult one. In addition, politicians who have attacked him might claim immunity from lawsuits. So, he is forced to be a vulnerable individual subjected to abuse by the powerful. It is heartening to see that Schiavo no longer stands alone.

News: Quran abuses at Guantánamo proven

'Jaded' doesn't capture it. I'm beyond that. While other people were engaging in "did/didn't" conversations about the first reports of American personnel at our Guantánamo Bay concentration camp abusing the Quran, my response was 'What else is new?" After the revelations about prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, why would anyone doubt that similar things were occurring at an even more secretive facility? Or, just consider human nature. Given the opportunity to wrong others, with little possibility of being penalized themselves, many people will. The shrieks and screams over Newsweek's publication of the original allegations struck me as little more than efforts to drown out thoughtfulness with noise. As for Newsweek's apology, the fit throwers misinterpreted it. The editors said they had published their articles without adequate confirmation. They did not say there was no basis for the stories. Now, we know that the revelations in Newsweek were not all that far afield.

The New York Times reports that the Pentagon has confirmed the Quran has been abused at Guantánamo Bay.

WASHINGTON, June 3 - A military inquiry has found that guards or interrogators at the Guantánamo Bay detention center in Cuba kicked, stepped on and splashed urine on the Koran, in some cases intentionally but in others by accident, the Pentagon said on Friday.

The splashing of urine was among the cases described as inadvertent. It was said to have occurred when a guard urinated near an air vent and the wind blew his urine through the vent into a detainee's cell. The detainee was given a fresh uniform and a new Koran, and the guard was reprimanded and assigned to guard duty that kept him from contact with detainees for the remainder of his time at Guantánamo, according to the military inquiry.

The other examples of damage to Qurans offered in the report fall short of the claim Newsweek reported three weeks ago: that the holy book of Islam has been flushed down a toilet at the prison. There are also efforts to minimize the incidents by referring to them as inadvertent or uncertain. Still, considering the source of this information, the Pentagon, any admission suggests that there is more going on than is being said. Perhaps, eventually, it will be proven that there was contact between a toilet and a Quran. Perhaps not. But, the attitudes of American personnel toward the prisoners at Guantánamo are likely to have led to acts of psychological and physical abuse. Indeed, the prisoners may have been given Qurans so that they would have something to fear loss or abuse of.

Though I generally find Sen. Joseph Biden irritating, an example of spineless leadership by Democrats, I agree with him about the overall remedy for problems at Guantánamo. Close it. Biden's remarks to the Times consider what the Bush administration doesn't in regard to Guantanamo -- international opinion.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A leading Senate Democrat said Sunday the United States needs to move toward shutting down the military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

''This has become the greatest propaganda tool that exists for recruiting of terrorists around the world. And it is unnecessary to be in that position,'' said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del.

A Pentagon report released Friday detailed incidents in which U.S. guards at Guantanamo desecrated the Quran. Last month, Amnesty International called the detention center for alleged terrorists ''the gulag of our time,'' a charge Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld dismissed as ''reprehensible.''

The purpose for which the prison exists -- to provide a place where people can be detained and interrogated not on U.S. soil -- is, in itself, suspect. It allows the government to avoid the protections the Geneva Conventions give detainees. That flouting of the rules provides ample opportunity for mistreatment to flourish. Most of the more than 500 persons held at Guantánamo, captured in 2001 and 2002, have never even been charged with crimes. It is also unlikely, that they, low level recruits to militant Islamic groups, have any significant information about al Qaida or the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. The main purpose the prison is serving at this point is providing a focal point for anger at the U.S. in Muslim countries. The reasons for closing the increasingly infamous facility far outweigh any for keeping it open.

Analysis: Post, Spokesman-Review show need for anonymous sources

Another week has passed, and Jim West is still mayor of Spokane. His attorney, inadvertently explained why in remarks he thought were a good defense of West. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports he said West remains in office to defend himself. Therein lies the rub. Throughout this drama, and perhaps throughout his life, West's focus his been on pleasing himself, whether that meant offensive behavior toward other politicians, or, apparently, one night stands with barely legal teens he met on the Internet. His attitude says: Who cares about the city? I'm the important entity here. This evening, West held a press conference, billed for weeks as an event in which he would exonerate himself from allegations of abuse of office and pedophilia. He did not. Instead, Jim West threatened to sue the Spokesman-Review for its continuing investigative series about him.

The paper covered the event.

The mayor said he believes he can still lead the city, and he'll eventually be exonerated of abuse of office charges and of accusations that he sodomized two boys in the 1970s while a Spokane County sheriff's deputy and Boy Scout leader.

Friday's press conference, arranged by West's legal defense team, was tightly scripted to be aired live at 5 p.m. on local television stations. City officials, including Councilwoman Cherie Rodgers and Deputy Mayor Jack Lynch were barred from the room. Television remote trucks clustered in the driveway outside the Doubletree Hotel downtown.

"There should be no shouting!" stated the lawyers' advisory announcing the press conference and detailing the ground rules for the media. Reporters were limited to two questions each and told to raise their hands to be recognized by the mayor.

. . .West said he and his lawyers are "in discussions" about possibly filing a lawsuit against the Spokesman-Reviewfor its investigative articles.

Which brings us to another news story receiving national attention. This week we learned a secret three decades old, the identity of Deep Throat. Without the input of the second in command at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Americans might never have known just how corrupt the administration of President Richard M. Nixon was. W. Mark Felt -- the anonymous source for the investigation by the Washington Post that led to the resignation of Nixon -- finally claimed the spotlight. The New York Times reports that the investigation would have stalled but for his contributions. Felt's reasons for becoming the most important source for the probe were mixed. Despite his own conservative beliefs, he deeply objected to the paranoid atmosphere Nixon and his cronies were creating in federal government. He also resented efforts of the Nixon administration to control and dictate to the FBI. Given a choice between keeping mum and telling the truth to the Fourth Estate, often considered an enemy by the FBI, Felt spoke.

The Spokesman-Review's investigative reporting about Jim West also relied on anonymous source. The newspaper was contacted by at least one teenager who had been solicited for sex at Gay.com by West. It hired a forensic computer expert to confirm the mayor's identity and document his behavior on the site, known as a place where older men go to arrange dates with young males, some still in high school. The investigator, who used the screen name 'Moto-Brock,' confirmed that the man seeking teens in Spokane for sex was West. Some commentators have attempted to discredit the newspaper's investigation because of its use of an unnamed person to produce information. However, as in the Watergate investigation, it was necessary to use an anonymous source if the the probe was to succeed. There were no officials that Mark Felt could have gone to with his allegations of illegal activity by the highest ranking people in the executive branch. The powerful were either beholden to or afraid of Nixon. His only option for making the information public was to pass it to the press.

It would have been irresponsible for the Spokesman-Review to report the claims being made about West without confirming both his identity and the nature of his activity at Gay.com. Ideally, one of the homosexual youths who were sources would have agreed to be identified publicly. But, openly stating that one is gay is a delicate matter. The newspaper chose not to publish the names of its young sources. In the absence of a named source, using the unnamed one, Moto-Brock, became necessary. After the articles was published, other gay young men, at least one of whom used his name, confirmed their accuracy.

Both of these situations reveal why a rule of never using anonymous sources is not one media should adopt. Such an edict would ignore the reality of the role power plays in relationships. Nixon was chief executive of a nation. West is one of the most powerful politicians in Washington, after years of being majority leader of the state Senate. Often, the only way to investigate allegations of impropriety or illegal behavior by powerful persons is to allow the sources to remain confidential.

What's the art?

The paraphernalia of Sherlock Holmes.