SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Thursday December 17 2015, @08:42AM
from the wheels-of-justice-turn-VERY-slowly dept.
from the wheels-of-justice-turn-VERY-slowly dept.
In a six-six vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has declined to review en banc its June ruling in Turkmen v. Ashcroft. In June, the court had said that people held by the federal government in connection with the 9-11 attacks can sue federal officials for Bivens damages resulting from violations of the detainees' constitutional rights.
The case was originally filed in 2002 and may next be brought to the Supreme Court. The Center for Constitutional Rights is representing the plaintiffs. The order denying rehearing, and other documents about the case, are available on its site.
news reports:
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals: 9-11 Detainees Can Sue Federal Officials
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 19 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Remember Darwin; building a better mousetrap merely results in smarter mice.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Thexalon on Thursday December 17 2015, @02:32PM
My attitude on this: Sure, monetary payments from lawsuit damages / settlements don't really compensate for being locked up unjustly. On the other hand, they are a far sight better than having no penalties at all for locking somebody up unjustly.
Of course, there is another solution, but one that nobody in law enforcement would like:
1. Find out the person or persons responsible for breaking the rules that led to the person being locked up unjustly.
2. Lock them up for the same amount of time, under the same conditions, in the same facility.
Yeah, it would be harsh, but it would also maybe make police and prosecutors and judges more careful about following the rules.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Thursday December 17 2015, @04:39PM
Or perhaps things would go too far, and people who should be locked up wouldn't be because there's a risk to those doing the locking up.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday December 17 2015, @07:15PM
Our law is based on the idea that it is better for 10 guilty men to go free than to imprison one innocent, so I don't see the problem.
(Score: 2) by Mr Big in the Pants on Thursday December 17 2015, @08:44PM
I understand the sentiment (vengeance-based justice seems to rule much of the US legal system) but it would not be inappropriate.
- Firstly, the costs involved would be huge to have one or more additional legal cases attached to every event.
- Every time this happened a huge "blame game" would then ensue between individuals, departments, etc.
- The fall guy(s) may not be the guilty - e.g. people following policy being blamed unfairly.
- Systemic abuses have no one person to blame.
Attaching a monetary penalty to the justice system and consequences for departments who rack up these bills will cascade into disciplinary hearings for those responsible.
I know this sort of "justice" especially appeals to authoritarian personalities; having a target for blame and vengeance being a priority above all else. But it simply could not work.
In my country (NZ) we have an "independent" police complaints authority. Anyone can go to them to have their case reviewed. Our country has fucked that up by this authority not being as independent as it should be although it still manages a reasonable job despite this in the worst cases.