Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Year in Review: Legal Stories We Should Have Heard More About in 2010

3 years ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size

In this three-part series, Politics Daily's legal analyst Andrew Cohen takes a look at the year in the law. Part 1 focuses on the 2010's most under-reported legal stories. Part 2 will focus on the year's most over-reported legal stories. And Part 3 will wrap up the year-ender package with a look at major legal events and issues.

The Five Most Under-Reported Legal Stories of the Year

No. 1: United States Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's emergence as a conservative firebrand.

The year started off with a bang for the 2006 appointee of President George W. Bush when he visibly scoffed at remarks made by President Barack Obama during the State of the Union address. At the time, the president was criticizing the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. F.E.C. It was by far the most important case of the year, in which the court's conservatives gutted federal campaign finance laws by expanding the scope of First Amendment protection for corporate "speech." Justice Alito later said pointedly that he did not plan to attend next year's SOTU address.

In October,
Justice Alito's speech to the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research also was notable for his remarks about "judicial activism" and the Constitution. Editorial writers, he said, "may not appreciate the difference between what the Constitution means, and what one might like it to mean... [but] ordinary people still do get this critical distinction. The assault on the traditional idea of the role of judges began more than 100 years ago but ordinary people stubbornly hold on to some old-fashioned beliefs and one of these is the idea that the Constitution means something, statutes mean something, and the role of the judge is to interpret and apply the law as written."

Samuel AlitoThen, during oral argument before the court in late November, Justice Alito forcefully expressed his concerns about a plan endorsed by the lower courts to reduce California's prison population to constitutional levels. "If 40,000 prisoners are going to be released," he said, "you really believe that if you were to come back here two years after that you would be able to say they haven't contributed to an increase in crime?" Court observers say it takes about five years for the average justice to find his or her groove on the Supreme Court. And, indeed, as Justice Alito moves into his fifth year he is finding his voice.

No. 2: The relationship of Arizona's prison industry to the state's controversial new immigration measures.

As my colleague Jill Lawrence pointed out, Arizona was very much in the news this past year. But one component of the state's memorable journey through the courts and the cable channels did not receive its due. NPR, to its credit, spent the time to figure it out, reporting in late October:

"NPR spent the past several months analyzing hundreds of pages of campaign finance reports, lobbying documents and corporate records. What they show is a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to help draft and pass Arizona Senate Bill 1070 by an industry that stands to benefit from it: the private prison industry. The law could send hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants to prison in a way never done before. And it could mean hundreds of millions of dollars in profits to private prison companies responsible for housing them."

The Arizona immigration law is now before the federal courts -- on appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The good news for its supporters is that the role of the prison industry in crafting the legislation won't likely play into the judges' ruling. The bad news is that there are plenty of other things wrong about the law. (Updated: credit where it's due. MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and her team also focused upon this important issue, in August. I apologize for the omission).

No. 3: Lingering problems at the Interior Department.

It wasn't just the department's slow response to the massive Gulf oil spill. It wasn't just the way a federal trial judge used a written opinion to eviscerate Mineral Management Service's staffers over their push for an undersea drilling moratorium. It wasn't the shoddy way in which the Bureau of Land Management treated wild horses out West, to the benefit of corporate interests, which led to unnecessary deaths and a much-needed internal review. It was all of these things, and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's leadership, that reveal the lingering problems. Just two years after the agency's sex and drugs scandal, you would have thought more folks would still be paying attention. It's just our land, air, water and animals that are at stake, after all.

No. 4: The corporate fraud trial of David H. Brooks.

I have covered and followed hundreds and hundreds of trials in my time as a legal analyst. I have never seen one like this. Brooks was charged, tried and convicted of massive fraud involving his former body-armor company DHB Industries. The narrative of his federal trial in Central Islip, N.Y. -- allegations of mind control, pens allegedly hidden in orifices, the whiff of jury tampering -- reads like a movie script that some producer would reject as too unbelievable even for Hollywood. The case involved sex, drugs, money, innocent victims and bizarre courtroom behavior, and if all of that had occurred in front of courtroom cameras, United States v. Brooks, et. al, would have become the most closely watched court case of the past decade.

No. 5: The Four Horsemen of Federalism (or Interposition)

The Republican attorneys general of four states -- Arizona, Florida, Texas and Virginia -- collaborated extensively in 2010 on a legal crusade against federal authority and power. They joined in legal filings against health care, copied one another's tactics on immigration, challenged federal climate control legislation, and otherwise made life miserable for the White House and Justice Department. Indeed, the level of support and coordination between and among these state attorneys was remarkable -- you may have to go back to the 1960s or even the 1930s for its equal -- and a wonderfully specific example of the level of tension these days that exists along the federal-state divide.

Filed Under: Law, Supreme Court, Analysis

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

21 Comments

Filter by:
morggrffth

I would really like to see the under reporting of the BLM and especially the many deaths of our native wild mustangs that have resulted from this treatment. It has been extremely difficult to find reporters who check information and sources for accuracy. Perhaps Mr. Cohen could put a word in some good reporters ears and push for more unbiased reports on this issue.

January 01 2011 at 4:07 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Mike

IN the year 2000 the Supreme court basically picked our President, (Bush over Gore), the vote was strictly by party line. Those appointed by republicans sided with Bush, those appointed by democrats sided with Gore. Ironically a justice appointed by Bush during his presidency, (Alito), was key in voting to give corporations the same rights of free speech as individuals promised in our constitution. Is this irony lost on us and by us I mean, We The People. This guy has a job for life, Do you? He will continue to affect our lives for the rest of his. Sad, sad, sad.

December 27 2010 at 9:54 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
umwolverine

Mr Cohen: Long before NPR did a story on the Arizona prison system and the tie-in to Arizona SB 1070, Rachel Maddow did several stories on it. Specifically, in August 2010. http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/08/14/4886337-arizonas-one-man-prison-industry

December 26 2010 at 9:25 PM Report abuse -1 rate up rate down Reply
ettu

"collaborated extensively in 2010 on a legal crusade against federal authority and power"............considering what the current power structure in DC is attempting to do to the States, and the citizens, I am amazed you could only come up with 4 examples. I expect you will see far more jump on the bandwagon. It is a war, and the States have the backing of the US Constitution.

December 26 2010 at 5:16 AM Report abuse +10 rate up rate down Reply
4 replies to ettu's comment
ettu

"What they show is a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to help draft and pass Arizona Senate Bill 1070 by an industry that stands to benefit from it:..........Perhaps, but hardly the main reason for the law. We are under dire economic stress, much of it due too the greed of some, either political or financial, or both, and the illegal immigrants place a huge burden on the citizens. How often has Congress passed laws that will increase the financial success of their supporters, and enrich themselves? If you are going to report on matters such as those in your article, you need to balance your conclusions with the "other" side of the story. Very biased reporting.

December 26 2010 at 5:12 AM Report abuse +8 rate up rate down Reply
ettu

"visibly scoffed at remarks made by President Barack Obama during the State of the Union address. At the time, the president was criticizing the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. F.E.C.".......Most Americans would agree the Justice was justified, considering the President was fabricating before a captive audience. Please, in your 3 part series, address the issues, and number of times, the President has circumvented Congress, and misinterpreted the Constitution, in his quest to implement his "vision" of what America should be.

December 26 2010 at 5:06 AM Report abuse +9 rate up rate down Reply
3 replies to ettu's comment

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>