Re: IP: US Senate's Anti-Terrorist Forfeiture Rules of Evidence

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

> From: <eck () panix com>
> Subject: Re: IP: US Senate's Anti-Terrorist Forfeiture Rules of Evidence
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 17:24:38 -0400 (EDT)
> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6]
>
> David Farber writes:
> + >From: Matthew Gaylor <freematt () coil com>
> + >Subject: US Senate's Anti-Terrorist Forfeiture Rules of Evidence
> +
> + >The Senate bill, S. 1510, "The USA Act of 2001", under section  316.
> + >ANTI-TERRORIST FORFEITURE PROTECTION has the following bit of good news:
> + >
> + >"(b) Evidence.--In considering a claim filed under this section, the
> + >Government may rely on evidence that is otherwise inadmissible under the
> + >Federal Rules of Evidence, if a court determines that such reliance is
> + >necessary to protect the national security interests of the United 
> States. "
> + >
> + >Well, there you go. "National security interests" trumps the rule of law.
> + >Seems that we've been through this movie before -- but rarely during peace
> + >time (has war been declared?).
> + >
> + >Leon Felkins
>
> Dave, note that section 316 (and, indeed, the entirety of Title III of
> S.1510) was pointedly removed by the House prior to passing a modified
> version of the Senate bill.


For archives see: http://lists.elistx.com/archives/interesting-people/