« Any early concerns, questions, curiosities about class requirements or expectations? | Main | Express strongly-held beliefs in the comments here... »
January 14, 2009
Earn extra credit: note/link/discuss sentencing topics raised during AG-nominee Holder's confirmation hearing
As some of you may already know, President-elect Barack Obama last month nominated Eric H. Holder Jr. to be the next Attorney General of the United States, and Holder's Senate confirmation hearings are scheduled to begin Thursday morning at 9:30 am. The hearings can be followed via webcast through this official webpage of the Senate Judiciary Committee, where one can also find lots and lots and lots of documents and letters concerning AG-nominee Holder's background and professional history.
With the exception of the President and perhaps swing-vote Supreme Court Justices, the Attorney General of the United States is probably the single person most able to influence national criminal justice policy and practice. For that reason and others, students concerns about racial and socio-economic inequality in the operation of the criminal justice systems should note that (1) Holder would be the first African-American AG if he is confirmed, and (2) that, according to this recent AP article, Holder "will earn $4.6 million from his law firm this year and next, including deferred compensation and a separation payment. "
I have done a lot of Holder-related posts over at my main blog (many of which I have linked below). These posts should give you a sense of some of the sentencing-related issues that may (or may not) arise during his confirmation hearings. Students interested in earning early extra credit can/should use the comments to note and discuss any sentencing topics that arise during these hearings (and/or link to news accounts about the hearings).
Some posts at SL&P on the Holder pick for Attorney General:
- How much will guns and drugs come up during the Holder hearings?
- Headaches on the path to Holder's AG confirmation
- Real headaches or just hiccups on nominee Holder's path to AG?
- Any early federal sentencing thoughts on Eric Holder, the next U.S. Attorney General?
- Three late afternoon thoughts on the Holder pick: race, tough and tech
- President-Elect Obama officially names Eric Holder as his AG pick
- Pardons, politics, race and justice: why Holder should come out swinging
- Interesting reflections on Obama appointees from drug policy reformers
January 14, 2009 in Who decides | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c8ccf53ef010536d196dd970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Earn extra credit: note/link/discuss sentencing topics raised during AG-nominee Holder's confirmation hearing:
Comments
For those in the class who know little about Mr. Holder and his pardons (like myself), here is an informative article in the Washington Post entitled "Mr. Holder and Pardons." It addresses many of the issues that are sure to come up today, most of which are also discussed in previous postings by Prof. Berman.
Posted by: Andrew Lenobel | Jan 15, 2009 9:41:14 AM
Attached is a link to "Live Blogging Confirmation Hearing"
A lot of this revolves around the pardoning issues and aftermath of the Bush administration, but since I believe we briefly mentioned guns laws regarding criminal sentencing in the first day class, here is a portion that might be potentially relevant to criminal sentencing
"Gun Rights | 10:35 a.m. On the right to bear arms, under the 2nd Amendment, although Mr. Holder said he had sided with those who believed it did not confer an individual right, he pointed out the Supreme Court had ruled that it does in the recent gun law case involving Washington, D.C. “The reality is now the Supreme Court has spoken and that is now the law of the land,” and must be respected, he said."
Posted by: Zachery Keller | Jan 16, 2009 9:50:38 AM
I had a busy weekend and was just now able to read the Holder transcripts. I found the Day 1 transcript here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/us/politics/16text-holder.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
Day 2: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/16/us/politics/16text-holdertwo.html?pagewanted=15
Like Zachery said, the Senators were pretty redundant in asking about the Marc Rich pardoning, the DoJ scandals, Gitmo, waterboarding/torture, FISA, and the Heller case. Sentencing made just a cameo. Although disappointing, this is not surprising considering how infrequently criminal sentencing issues come up in everyday political discourse. I remember my boss at the Ohio Sentencing Commission showed me a letter he received that listed Obama and McCain's views on criminal issues. That was the only time I noticed criminal justice issues mentioned in print or debate throughout the campaign.
I noticed Sen. Cardin briefly touched on the crack sentencing disparity at the top of p. 42 and Sen. Feingold asked for an updated death penalty study on p. 67.
My favorite quote came from Second Amendment scholar Stephen Halbrook, at p. 15 on Day 2. Halbrook said:
"Much has been said about unjust prison sentences imposed on persons who possess crack cocaine, not to mention the rights of alleged terrorists held at Gitmo and other places. And we would hope for sympathy to be shown for Americans who bother no one and who merely wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights without being sent to prison because they possess a gun without the government's permission."
Actually, Halbrook was wrong. Little had been said about crack cocaine sentences. I wonder if he was anticipating more discussion or just using it to make his political point.
Posted by: Shawn | Jan 20, 2009 1:09:03 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Recent Comments