The 54 former State Attorneys General in their
brief told the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals: "Such an interpretation puts
at risk every politician who accepts a campaign contribution."
"...criminalizing activities that fall short of an explicit quid pro quo
agreement, can only lead to an impermissible chilling effect on the First
Amendment right to contribute to political campaigns."It
is important to every elected official and their contributors that this First
Amendment issue be clarified.
~
Issues missed by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals:
~
* Statute of limitations--It's undisputed that the alleged actions that made up the government's bribery charge against Siegelman and Scrushy [Richard Scrushy, Siegelman's co-defendant, founder/CEO of HealthSouth] took place outside the five-year statute of limitations. So how did the government get away with bringing this case, much less winning it? It drafted an indictment that was vague, and when Siegelman/Scrushy moved for a bill of particulars that would have required a few specifics, the judge denied it. Defense attorneys raised the limitations defense in a proper manner for a case involving a vague indictment. But the trial court, and the 11th Circuit, wrongfully ruled that they had waived the defense.
~
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
