1) Is it legal for the lawyer of a terrorist to publicly pass along her client's request to end a cease fire? Apparently, it's illegal for the lawyer of a mobster to announce that said mobster wants someone whacked. Are the two cases equivalent in the relevant legal respects?
2) If illegal, does it fall into the tricky category of righteous lawbreaking? (I don't think anyone would want to condemn a lawyer who broke the laws of attorney-client privilege to facilitate the underground railroad. But respect for the rule of the law as it is, and not just the spirit of what it ought to be, generally needs to count for a lot.)
-- Luke
----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 12:06 PM Subject: Re: Lawyers Should be Indicted (Re: [lbo-talk] Doug Henwood profile
> Nathan Newman wrote:
>
> >The 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center has zero chance of eliciting
such
> >a response, and I think it's dangerous for the Left to fit this case into
> >the general paradigm of righteous political lawyering.
>
> Neither is defending mobsters. But that doesn't mean the government
> should eavesdrop on Tony Soprano's lawyer.
>
> >The point here is that the best lawyers for those accused of being
> >terrorists are people who don't sympathize with their politics.
>
> That's not for us, or the government, to decide. You're sounding more
> like a State Department socialist every day.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk