“Cold Cash” William Jefferson (D-La.) has won a partial legal victory by convincing a court of appeals that the FBI acted unconstitutionally, in part, when it raided the indicted Congressman’s office and seized records:
WASHINGTON (AP) - The FBI violated the Constitution when agents raided U.S. Rep. William Jefferson’s office last year and viewed legislative documents, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.
The court ordered the Justice Department to return any privileged documents it seized from the Louisiana Democrat’s office on Capitol Hill. The court did not order the return of all the documents seized in the raid.
It wa a mixed bag of an opinion. The DC Court of Appeals found the search itself was constitutional, but the FBI went too far in viewing legislative materials without giving Jefferson a chance to argue in favor of their privilege.
“The review of the Congressman’s paper files when the search was executed exposed legislative material to the Executive” and violated the Constitution, the court wrote. “The Congressman is entitled to the return of documents that the court determines to be privileged.”
But, as noted, the court did not require the return of all seized documents, though it is unclear what it is the FBI was allowed to keep. Neither did the court rule whether those unprivileged documents can be used in Jefferson’s corruption trial, or if the partially illegal search will require the exclusion of that evidence. That will be a decision for the trial judge who hears the case.
The FBI’s action has created some very strange political bedfellows:
The case has cut across political party lines. Former House Speakers Newt Gingrich, a Republican, and Thomas Foley, a Democrat, filed legal documents opposing the raid, along with former House Minority Leader Bob Michel, a Republican.
Conservative groups Judicial Watch and the Washington Legal Foundation were joined by the liberal Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington in supporting the legality of the raid.
I’m sure Newt’s support of an indicted Democratic congressman will help him with conservative Republicans if he decides to run for President.
In case you have forgotten the background of this matter:
The raid was part of a 16-month international bribery investigation of Jefferson, who allegedly accepted $100,000 from a telecommunications businessman, $90,000 of which was later recovered in a freezer in the congressman’s Washington home.
Jefferson pleaded not guilty in June to charges of soliciting more than $500,000 in bribes while using his office to broker business deals in Africa. The Justice Department said it built that case without using the disputed documents from the raid.
Let’s face it. Louisiana politicians have been pretty good at engaging in hanky panky while staying out of jail. Will Jefferson follow in that tradition and walk?
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
23 Responses to “Court finds FBI’s actions illegal in Jefferson raid”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
I remember the outcry when this happened. I guess the FBI overstepped, but geez what a slime bag he is. He procured a helicopter that was busy trying to save people in N.O. when he went to get his cold cash. Money over life.
“exposed legislative material to the Executive”
The same bunch that thinks every file and communication between Bush and Gonzalez (when he was White House Counsel) thinks Jefferson’s files and documents are verboten. Methinks leftnut double standard is in effect.
He hasn’t even used the race card yet. Sure thing.
Sorry ST, but he’s already done it. Remember a dhimmicrat will AWAYS play the race card:
” Following his indictment, Jefferson’s supporters accused the Bush administration of targeting black Democrats to shift attention from the legal troubles of Republican congressmen.”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QPKFE80&show_article=1
1. aw
What’s wrong with you? Don’t you keep cash in your freezer? I, myself, currently have 2 gold bars and a Picasso on ice.
4.
At least they get an A for consistency, eh?
I thought this money was discovered in his New Orleans home during Katrina?
Arrogancy run amuck.
The taxpayers pay for those offices. The taxpayers pay the damn politicians. The politicians are responsible for the taxpayers’ money. If I think the FBI should be searching one of these offices to find corruption they should be able to do a body cavity search if necessary. (eeyew) I am incensed that these arrogant bloodsuckers think they are above the law. If I could vote each and every one of them out, I would.
/spits
/spits again
/spits a third time
Actually, the appeals court did us a favor. It ruled that the FBI could not use anything it read in Jefferson’s office (subject to privilege); however, anything to do with the bribary case could be used by the trial judge, at the trial judge’s discretion. The FBI, however, has said it did not need anything in Jefferson’s office in order to convict Jefferson, but had to wait for the appeal to go forward with the case. This is good news to me.
Please - my memory is somewhat limited (tell Aggie joke here), but didn’t the citizens of Louisianna re-elect him AFTER this all came to the surface? Or is he soon up for re-election and I’ve read somewhere that if the election had been the day of some pollsters poll, he’d be re-elected hands down. Is it too late to Louisianna back to the French? The way the Dimonuts and RHINO’s are spending money in Washington - who’d notice the refund of a few million!
That should be “Is it too late to GIVE Louisianna back to the French?”
In the use of the term, “African-American”, it has become, in Jefferson’s case, more important to be an African, first and the an American, second. With people like Jefferson (and don’t forget Marion Berry), it has been better for them to play the “race card” to get reelected all the time. The African-American people will never get any respect as long as they show a forgiveness for people Jefferson, Jackson, Sharpton and Quanell Ten who would rather “pimp” their people than represent them.
Pimping is not limited to the African-Americans, look at the Hispanic leaders who continue to push bilingual education to keep their people from educating themselves out of poverty. Economic rewards should be incentive enough for Hispanics to know they need the English language.
10.
Your Aggie memory is quite correct. The people of his district re-elected Jefferson AFTER he had been indicted, and AFTER it was well-publicized that $90,000 was found in his freezer. Go figure.
But the BIG question is
Is the cold cash considered “Legislative Material”
Actually a win-win for the GOP. Jefferson’s trial will be on acceptance of bribes, and the DOJ believes it needs nothing of a poltical nature found in his office to advance the case. In excluding legislative materials the court reinforces the separation of powers. Bush’s White House will be able to cite the ruling as stare decisis in refusing to have his aides subponeaned to testify in front of congress.
#2 Faster
Good point on Left-wing double standards.
#8 tedtam
I sympathize with your frustration. However, the importance of the principle of separation of powers cannot be overstated. It is an ongoing battle and part of the sometimes extreme tensions and contentions, between the branches, which were deliberately built into our constitution.
#15
David B P
I agree completely. Win-win.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL????
How?? No explanation is ever given here as to what provision was violated???? Have these a-holes ever read the US constitution???
I doubt it, this is as phony as the Sandy Berger papers that ‘inavertantly’ fell into his pants.
This governemnt, executive, legislative, and judicial has lost any credibilty it has ever had.
IT’s just a matter of time before this kind of corruption will destroy the what’s left of the festering rot that DC has become.
Note to self: pick up more 7.62 x 39 ammo!!!
pbfloyd,
read what david said in his # 15 and texpat said in his #16 and let us know if you need any more explanation. I said it earlier in my #9.
Neo: Of course I know you know your legalese, but from what I am reading you all three are discussing the ramifications of the decision, and that is all well and good.
What I want to know is what part, specific part, of the William Jefferson’s right’s we’re violated?? What actions, taken on the behalf of the FBI, violated the code?? Just because someone claims something, doesn’t mean there is a basis in fact.
Courts are making decisions all the time that have no basis in the actual verbage of the Constitution, and as such are unConstitutional themselves, in my view.
I know there is executive privilge, but never heard of legislative privilege, where lawmakers can use their elected office to be lawbreaklers.
Maybe I’m just dense, but I did not know the US Constitution gave the people who break the law more rights than the people who obey them??
I am not ranting, but seriously seeking info: can anyone explain?
I’m glad at least that the courts are still around to nullify the executive branch. He’s probably guilty as sin, but there has to be oversight and appeal when Government comes after us. I wish the courts would have been more helpful to the people in Waco. I think that they thought they were being attacked. Speaking of that, why do not the ATF go after armed gangs in ‘No Go’ areas?
Hey, one of the thing that makes our system great is it is a system based on the laws, and I’m all for due process, for everyone. It is basic and fundamentally important, which I readily acknowledge.
It’s just when a court renders a judgement as ‘unconstitutional, I would expect them to specify what part of the verbage of the document was violated?
Maybe I missed it, and I’m sorry, but just taking their ‘judgement’ as fact, I refuse to do. If they cannot abide by the document that they have sworn to uphold, then I no longer recognize their authority over me.
If they are afforded special privileges because they hold elected office, then that violates the ‘equal protection under the law’ clause, and as such MY rights are violated.
Is just another incident like Sandy Berger’s,
where they have a seemingly ’silent hand’, which protects their own. It’s like the mob is running the country, sure seems like it to me.
19, 21
I think you raise good points. To my knowledge, the words “legislative privilege” in this context does not appear in the Constitution. This decision, and the concept of “legislative privilege” is a by-product of the separation of powers doctrine, which the Court here applied to determine that the executive had no right to seize purely legislative materials from Jefferson as they were subjec to a “privilege” from such executive action. Note that the Court did not say everything seized must be returned, so presumably anything dealing with corrupt activity is still in the FBI’s hands.
I need to read more on this story. What is unclear to me is why the FBI seized purely legislative materiasls in the first place. It appears that they may have just made a wholesale grab with the intention to sorthing them out later. I will try to set aside time to read the opinion itself. From over 20 years of law practice, one thing I know is this: The MSM almost never gets the details correct when it comes to a court case.
#22 RickG:
Thx for that info! I would equally interested to hear what your research turns up.
But am not surprised by your last assertion, the LameStreamMedia gets almost nothing right, IMO.