“As do many citizens, I find it incredibly offensive that these foreign governments are using our court system to meddle in a domestic legal dispute and to oppose the rule of law,” Brewer said in a statement after Arizona filed a motion Tuesday to disallow the briefs.
The Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona argues the state’s immigration law could have negative affects on U.S. foreign relations:

S.B. 1070 also interferes with U.S. foreign affairs priorities and rejects any concern for humanitarian interests or broader security objectives, and will thus harm a range of U.S. interests. Thus, because S.B. 1070 attempts to set state-specific immigration policy, it legislates in an area constitutionally reserved to the federal government, conflicts with the federal immigration laws and federal immigration policy, conflicts with foreign policy… and is therefore preempted.

Briefs from foreign governments, then, could be helpful to the Justice Department’s case. Latin American governments have been critical of the law, claiming it could harm their relations with the United States. Mexican politicians even argued it could lead to more violence along the border because Mexican police would be less likely to interact with their American counterparts.

Arizona has support from 11 other states that have filed “friend-of-the-court” briefs defending its law: Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia. Worth noting: The attorneys general who filed the briefs in Michigan, Florida and Pennsylvania were seeking the Republican nomination for governor at the time.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), for example, told Fox News this morning that he’s “disappointed” in Sanford, but he’s not ready to ask to governor to resign, arguing that his capacity to govern hinges largely on the health of his marriage.

I’m not sure where he is in his personal life with his wife. And that does have a lot to do whether or not he should continue. South Carolina needs some strong leadership right now, so if he’s not together … We need to do what’s best for our state, and we are looking at that right now.

DeMint, of course, had urged former Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) to step down after his arrest for lewd conduct in an airport men’s room. Heterosexual flings, it seems, don’t threaten family values quite so much.

“Adrian has checked in but we haven’t made any decisions,” Mr. Weisser said. “Obviously, there’s a lot to think about. We need to talk to the governor and his people. It’s just such an unusual situation. You don’t want to rush into any decision.”

You really don’t want to rush it. In nine months, who knows where Sanford will be? Serving out his term as governor, largely forgiven by voters? Living in disgrace in Argentina after an impeachment trial? Rebuilding his life as a pundit? Nonetheless, the book is no longer the pre-presidential campaign manifesto that Sentinel paid for.

In a drawn-out press conference that began with a long series of apologies and repeated references to his friend Tom Davis, Sanford finally came to “the bottom line” when he said, “I’ve been unfaithful to my wife.” His mistress is an old friend with whom he began a relationship a year ago, he said.

The revelation comes on the heels of a similar admission by Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), who, like Sanford, has been mentioned as a possible 2012 presidential candidate.

Sanford’s wife and children were not present at the conference.

–

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

The Inter-American Commission, an arm of the Organization of American States — of which the United States is a member — normally sits in judgment of countries like Argentina and Chile, whose histories of torturing and “disappearing” political opponents and committing war crimes are notorious. But there were the commissioners, from various Latin American countries, listening to the arguments of Center for Constitutional Rights President Michael Ratner and ACLU human rights program director Jamil Dakwar, that the Bush administration had enacted laws and taken steps in litigation to shield itself from accountability for such crimes — and so far, the Obama administration had not changed those policies.

In particular, Ratner was talking about provisions of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that provides immunity for Bush administration officials who authorized torture of military combatants, violated the Geneva Conventions or otherwise broke the law on the advice of government lawyers. He also cited the positions that the Bush and Obama Justice Departments have taken in seeking to dismiss cases on the grounds that they would expose “state secrets” or otherwise interfere with executive powers.

Dakwar recounted the story of German citizen Khaled el-Masri, an ACLU client who claims he was tortured at a CIA “black site” but whose case was dismissed because of that “state secrets” privilege.

And both lawyers argued that a truth commission, along the lines of one proposed by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt), if it provided immunity and foreclosed prosecutions would never be an adequate substitute for criminal prosecutions, which they argued are critical to holding the United States accountable for violations of international law.

“That’s the way to demonstrate that those violations will not be tolerated and wil not be repeated,” said Ratner. “Otherwise what you’re faced with is impunity … A commission can’t be used as a substitute for criminal liability.”

Lewis Amselem, the U.S. representative to the commission, for his part, respectfully listened to the list of charges and nodded. He responded with his own list of all the pronouncements the Obama administration has made about closing Guantanamo, ensuring the prison meets Geneva Conventions standards, and reviewing the cases of every detainee to facilitate their eventual transfer. He didn’t defend any of the particular provisions of the Military Commissions Act or the legal positions of the Justice Department as described, but promised to bring the concerns back to the State Department. He promised to report back to the commission with the administration’s policy on a truth commissions, as well as to answer questions from the commissioners about how many Americans have been prosecuted for torture in military and civilian courts.

Ratner, however, was ready with the answer:  “None.”

Although there have been cases brought through the military system charging assault of prisoners, only lower level military people at Abu Ghraib were charged, “under the theory of the Bush Administration that this was not a policy or practice of the United States, it was just a few bad apples.”  Prosecutors “only had authority to look down the chain of command, not up the chain of command,” said Ratner.

While the commission’s rulings are not binding, it has authority to make recommendations to the U.S. government. Lawyers involved said they expected those to be issued within the next few weeks.

–

It’s no longer a “state secret” that TWI has a Twitter feed. You can follow us here.