Leahy Reveals Discussions With DOJ Over McNulty Memo

At this morning's Senate Judiciary Committee markup, Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said he has met with Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip (pictured) to address concerns about the Justice Department's policy of seeking attorney-client privilege waivers in corporate investigations.
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., has legislation pending that would ban the practice, but Leahy has so far been reluctant to proceed with the bill on the grounds that he would rather negotiate with the Justice Department.
The House has already passed its version of the legislation.
The current DOJ policy is enshrined in the so-called McNulty Memo, named after former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty.
The question now is: will there be a Filip Memo?
Here's what Leahy had to say this morning:

"Just as I have consulted extensively with Senator Specter about nominations, I want to work with him regarding his recent request that we consider a bill controlling how Federal prosecutors should act and superseding Department of Justice guidelines with a statute for assertions of corporate attorney-client privilege and possible abuses of that privilege.

"I recently met with the new Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip. He says that he has reviewed the past policy and is working on improvements. I believe that he has also met recently with the Senator from Pennsylvania. If there are not further developments when we return after the July 4 recess, the Committee may well have to turn its attention to legislative options."

Phone Companies Off The Hook

The House of Representatives has approved the latest version of the wiretapping bill.
That means the telcos have effectively got the legal immunity they wanted so badly.
The Senate still has to vote on the bill, but a majority of members have already come out in support of an immunity provision, so it would appear to be a done deal.
The vote is a major loss for the plaintiffs in various cases consolidated before a federal judge in San Francisco.
More on the vote here.

A Note On Judge Kozinski's Web Site

This is not a story I've been covering (see elsewhere for the full details) but I do have one observation about the nature of Judge Alex Kozinski's site.
One of the issues under debate is whether Kozinski's site was or was not public (Prof. Lawrence Lessig talks about it here).
I would just note that, a few months ago, while researching a story on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, I googled Kozinski's name and his personal site was quite clearly available for public perusal.
There was no home page as such, but what I came upon was a list of all Kozinski's published journalism, including a piece he wrote for the New Yorker and various book reviews.
I didn't come across anything else, I might add. But based on my own experience, it did seem like it was pretty easy to access the site using just Google.

Judgeships Hearing Called Off Due to Republican Objections

For the third time in a week, a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing has met with objections from Republicans.
This afternoon, the committee was due to hear testimony on the Federal Judgeship Act, a bill the committee passed last month, but only on the condition that the hearing was held to address some Republican concerns.
But, citing the slow rate of judicial confirmations this year, Senate Republicans decided to pull the plug on it, as they did with recent hearings on detainee interrogation procedures and alleged pro-business Supreme Court decisions.
It's an interesting one because the judgeships bill is actually broadly bipartisan, with the likes of Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., whose state will benefit, fully supportive.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., will probably be most frustrated by the delay as her state is set to gain the most judges if the legislation passes.

Quick Change Of Tune From Dems On SCOTUS After Habeas Ruling

As I reported yesterday, Democrats - including Sen. Patrick Leahy (pictured) - piled in on the Supreme Court for some of its recent rulings, which they criticised for ignoring congressional intentions.
Today, the justices are heroic defenders of the Constitution, according to Leahy and his party colleagues.
That's because the Supreme Court upheld the habeas corpus rights of Guantanamo Bay detainees in its Boumediene v. Bush ruling today.
Yesterday, Leahy condemned the Supreme Court as being full of activist judges.
“I can’t think of more activist judges than the Supreme Court, who have overturned congressional actions intended to protect consumers," he said.
Today, after the court overturned a section of the Military Commissions Act (which was, of course, passed by Congress), Leahy was singing a different tune.
"Today’s Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush is a stinging rebuke of the Bush administration’s flawed detention policies, and a vindication for those who have also argued from the beginning that it was unwise as well as unconstitutional," Leahy said.

Republican Senator Objects To Democrat SCOTUS-Bashing

An anonymous Republican senator cut short a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on recent Supreme Court rulings this morning.
The hearing, featuring a panel of legal experts and two frustrated consumers, was largely a forum for Democrats to attack some recent court decisions they deem to be damaging to average Americans.
Although Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the ranking member of the committee, said he agreed with some of the criticism the court faces, especially on its broad reading of federal preemption of state law, one of his colleagues obviously didn't.
Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., (pictured) who had left the hearing by the time the objection was made, wasn't too happy about it.
"This behavior is a disgrace to the Senate," he said in a statement.
Recent cases under the microscope included equal pay case Ledbetter v. Goodyear and medical device case Riegel v. Medtronic.