Sunday, July 18, 2010

Editorial: She broke no law

Who is Lynne Stewart?

lynne2

Like many women, she has many roles. She is the attorney who took on the clients that didn't bring in the big pay days but that needed defending. She's a noted chapter in the story of Civil Rights. She's a mother and a grandmother. She's the wife of Ralph Poynter. She's a breast cancer survivor. She's a woman who can step in front of a saddened and depressed group of people and have them on their feet and motivated in less than ten minutes. She's a woman who loves "the good fight" and will fight it regardless of whether or not she thinks she can win. She's a woman who fights "the good fight" but never forgets or loses her sense of humor.

Somehow she became a prisoner of the US penal system.

Somehow.

We're still confused on that.

Not only are we confused, we think history's going to be confused as well.

At its website, the Federal Bureau of Prisons loftily explains/brags, "The Federal Bureau of Prisons protects society by confining offenders in the controlled environments of prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure, and that provide work and other self-improvement opportunities to assist offenders in becoming law-abiding citizens."

Oh, okay. The BOP takes criminals and turns them into law abiding citizens? Okay. Maybe. But they take criminals, right? They take people who broke the law. You have no need to take someone who followed the law and teach them to be law abiding citizens, right?

The implication being, if you follow the law, you're fine.

That's how it's supposed to work.

But Lynne Stewart is a political prisoner. She's not in prison because she broke a law. There is no law on the books that anyone can point to and say, "This is the law that Lynne broke."

Lynne's an attorney. She knows the law is the law. She knows things are open to interpretation.

She broke an agreement.

We don't dispute that. She doesn't dispute that.

The prisons imposed a list of conditions. If she didn't say she'd follow them, she couldn't see her client. But these were conditions, not laws. Only Congress can pass federal laws. The executive branch cannot pass laws. (BOP is a part of the executive branch, it falls under the Justice Department.)

Lynne's 'crime' was releasing a press statement from her client to Reuters' news agency.

The idea that Lynne was breaking the law is ludicrous because there is no law. The idea that Lynne interpreted the conditions as laws is silly not only because Lynne is trained in the law but also because why would she release a press release if she thought it would get her sentenced to prison?

She skirted the conditions. We don't dispute that. But conditions are not laws. Things that the executive branch wants are not laws unless Congress sees fit to make them laws.

Lynne did what she did -- which wasn't a crime -- in 2000. Bill Clinton was the president then. Janet Reno was US Attorney General. Reno knew about the conditions. She approved of them. She also knew Lynne had broken them. She made the decision not to prosecute because she's smart enough to know that a law is a law. Nothing but a law passed by Congress constitutes a law.

The Bush administration was installed by the Supreme Court at the end of 2000 and sworn in at the start of 2001. Arianna Huffington's friend John Ashcroft (she loves his "marvelous" -- her term -- singing voice) became Attorney General -- proof positive that fate is either severely f**ked up or the ultimate prankster. And Ashcroft wanted Lynne behind bars. So, after 9-11, he decided to grand stand on 9-11 and make Lynne's 2000 actions -- which had nothing to do with 9-11 -- all about 9-11.

He scared up a verdict of guilty -- though no one's ever supposed to point out that you can't be found legally guilty of breaking a condition. You can only be found legally guilty of breaking the law. No law was broken.

Lynne got a judge who seemed to realize that a travesty had taken place. He sentenced her to 28 months and not the 30 years the government wanted.

Barack Obama could have issued a pardon or commuted her sentence. He didn't do so. Instead, he had the Justice Department go after Lynne. Instead of 28 months, they wanted a stronger sentence. And last week, the government monkeys showed up screeching in court about 9-11 all over again. And the judge sentenced 70-year-old Lynne Stewart (she'll be 71 in October) to ten years of prison.

And Lynne broke no law.

History's going to have a really fun time trying to unravel how that happened. It will also puzzle over how so many people were silent as Lynne was targeted and persecuted.

Lynne's a political prisoner.

One of the best radio broadcasts last week was n Taking Aim on WBAI. They devoted the full hour to a rally for Lynne. This was before the judge's sentencing. We're sure they have something planned for this Tuesday at 5:00 p.m. EST. We're also sure that few others will make the time to notice. But Lynne's a political prisoner. She never belonged in prison and she certainly *didn't* deserve a sentence of ten years.

------
C.I. note, 7-18-2010: "*didn't*" just added. Thank you to TCI community member Brandon who e-mailed TCI to say we were missing a word in the last sentence. We were tired, our apologies and thank you to Brandon for catching it.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
 
Poll1 { display:none; }