Judge Says Mukasey Wrong on Need for New Terrorism Framework
A federal judge is defending the ability of the federal courts to hear terrorism cases—and taking issue with a suggestion to the contrary by attorney general nominee Michael Mukasey.
U.S. District Judge John Coughenour of Seattle writes in a New York Times op-ed that his experience in a terrorism trial has strengthened his conviction that U.S. courts are capable of doing the job. He presided over the trial of Algerian terrorist Ahmed Ressam, convicted of a plot to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport.
Coughenour says he is concerned about statements Mukasey made in a Wall Street Journal commentary (sub. req.) in which he urged Congress to consider proposals for a “new adjudicatory framework” in terrorism cases.
“If confirmed, Judge Mukasey will join Michael Chertoff as another esteemed former jurist in the executive branch facing the formidable task of keeping our nation safe from terrorism,” Coughenour writes. “The distinction between the roles of judge and law enforcement officer should not be lost in the transition.”
