Law lords to rule whether decision to invade Iraq warrants inquiry

• Secret evidence is incompatible with the rule of law

  While the use of secret evidence may be acceptable initially (as part of an investigation or short-term detention while more evidence is gathered), the defense needs access to this evidence. Without it, any trial or legal process is simply unfair.

  
  
• The long-forgotten "mere evidence" rule

  The "mere evidence" rule, forbidding searches for documents that were themselves not “instrumentalities” crimes (or contraband themselves) lasted well into the twentieth century before being abandoned. So why were telegrams never explicitly covered by the rule?

  
  
• Should the government need a warrant to access your Google Books history?

  Should accessing content via the Google Books service provide the same protections as one would receive when relying on a bookstore? The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the ACLU say, "Yes."

  
  
• Access to federal court records gets less free

  I had always hoped that PACER--which I hear runs a surplus anyway--would trend downward in price as the cost of delivering electronic access decreases. Instead comes the news that the price will rise by 25%, from 8 to 10 cents per page.

  
  
• Extending the Fourth Amendment beyond the home: Ex parte Jackson (1878)

  Ex parte Jackson, which dealt with government agents opening mail in search of banned lottery materials, hints at the future Court's ruling on wiretaps in Katz v. United States that the Fourth Amendment "protects people, not places."

  
  

Post title: Law lords to rule whether decision to invade Iraq warrants inquiry

Authored by: krisnelson

Date posted: Feb 4, 2008

Categorized as: government • international • law

Tagged with: government • law

Alternate URL: /2008/02/law-lords-to-rule-whether-decision-to.html