Does Congress Find Facts Or Construct Them - the Ascendance of Politics Over Reliability, Perfected in Gonzales V
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Cleveland-Marshall College of Law Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Cleveland State Law Review Law Journals 2008 Does Congress Find Facts or Construct Them - The Ascendance of Politics over Reliability, Perfected in Gonzales v. Carhart Elizabeth De Coux Florida Coastal School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Law and Politics Commons, and the Legislation Commons How does access to this work benefit oy u? Let us know! Recommended Citation Elizabeth De Coux, Does Congress Find Facts or Construct Them - The Ascendance of Politics over Reliability, Perfected in Gonzales v. Carhart, 56 Clev. St. L. Rev. 319 (2008) available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol56/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DOES CONGRESS FIND FACTS OR CONSTRUCT THEM? THE ASCENDANCE OF POLITICS OVER RELIABILITY, PERFECTED IN GONZALES V. CARHART ∗ ELIZABETH DECOUX I. CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES AND THEIR HEARINGS AS TOOLS USED IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS .............................................................................. 326 A. The Early Development of the Congressional Committee.................................................................... 326 B. Congress’s Authority with Regard to Committees....... 328 C. A Hearing in the Aftermath of the Lincoln Assassination as an Early Indication, in a High-Profile Matter, of Congress’s Concern with the Reliability of Evidence ................................... 332 II. MODERN CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS AS INDICATORS OF THE DEGREE TO WHICH CONGRESS VALUES RELIABILITY ........................................................................ 336 A. Evidence Rulings in the Age of Televised Hearings ...................................................................... 336 B. The Rules of Congress Say Little About Evidence....... 337 C. What Impeachment Trials in the Senate Reveal about Legislators’ Emphasis on Reliable Evidence .... 338 1. Reliability in the First Impeachment Trial Hearing in More than Half a Century: The Claiborne Impeachment ................................ 340 2. Reliability in an Impeachment in Which Senators Vote Without Being Present When the Evidence Is Received: The Case of Walter Nixon .................................................................... 341 3. Reliability in an Impeachment Where the Senate Convicts After a Jury Acquits: The Hastings Impeachment ......................................... 344 ∗Assistant Professor of Law, Florida Coastal School of Law, J.D., Mississippi College School of Law 319 Published by EngagedScholarship@CSU, 2008 1 320 CLEVELAND STATE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 56:319 4. Reliability in an Impeachment in Which the Senate as a Whole Makes the Decision, but Does Not Hear Any Witnesses in Person: The Clinton Impeachment .................................... 344 D. High Stakes and Low Blows: The Senate Judiciary Committee’s Hearing on Sexual Harassment Charges Against United States Supreme Court Nominee Clarence Thomas ........................................................ 348 E. Oversight and Investigation by a House Subcommittee: Responding to Hurricane Katrina ............................... 361 III. THE PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION PROHIBITION ACT OF 2003: CONGRESS MAKES FINDINGS BEFORE HEARING EVIDENCE; THE COURT EMPLOYS THOSE FINDINGS, THOUGH ACKNOWLEDGING THEY ARE INCORRECT................................................................... 362 A. Erroneous Legislative Findings Underlying the Partial-Birth Abortion Prohibition Act of 2003 .......... 362 B. Judicial Review of Congressional Findings, Erroneous and Otherwise............................................ 364 C. The Court Incorporates Congress’s Erroneous Findings into Its Analysis in Gonzales v. Carhart ....... 370 IV. CARHART II: A RULING IN SEARCH OF A RATIONALE? ........ 374 A. Searching for Answers in the Text of the Court’s Opinion........................................................... 374 B. Searching for Answers in the Subtext .......................... 377 V. CONGRESS SHOULD EMPLOY NEUTRAL FACT-FINDERS OR ADOPT AT LEAST RUDIMENTARY EVIDENCE STANDARDS ......................................................................... 379 A. Evidentiary Rigor as Institutional Competency........... 379 B. Models of Non-Partisan Fact-Finding ........................ 381 VI. CONCLUSION........................................................................ 385 On July 7, 1988, Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North,1 his uniform crisp and 1North’s “spit and polish” image had a positive influence on the public’s perception of him. LAWRENCE E. WALSH, FIREWALL: THE IRAN-CONTRA CONSPIRACY AND COVER-UP 133 (1997) (referring to a tidal wave of public support for North). Otto Friedrich, “The Roughest Year” Scandal, War, Crash, Plague . and Who’s in Charge, TIME MAG., January 4, 1988, at 32 (referring to the public support for North). A native of San Antonio, Texas, an altar boy, and a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, North saw combat in Vietnam, service for which he was awarded two Purple Hearts, the Bronze Medal and the Silver Star. Richard Stengel et https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol56/iss2/5 2 2008] DOES CONGRESS FIND FACTS OR CONSTRUCT THEM? 321 his medals gleaming, stood ramrod straight before a panel of lawmakers and a bank of television cameras.2 Raising his right hand with the sharpness usually reserved for a salute,3 he swore to tell the truth. North was testifying before the congressional committee4 investigating a matter popularly referred to as the Iran-Contra Affair: the U.S. government’s covert sale of arms to Iran and diversion of the monetary proceeds to Nicaraguan rebels known as Contras.5 North, a National Security al., True Belief Unhampered by Doubt, From Small-town Boy to Shadow Secretary of State, Oliver North Did Not Know When to Stop, TIME MAG., July 13, 1987, at 28. When Marine Pvt. Randy Herrod, who had served under North, was accused of participating in the massacre of sixteen women and children during a search-and-destroy mission in the Vietnamese village Son Thang, North testified in his defense, crediting Herrod with saving his life in battle; Herrod was acquitted. Michael D. Sallah & Mitch Weiss, Experts: Earlier Tiger Force Probe Could Have Averted My Lai Carnage, TOLEDO BLADE, Oct. 19, 2003, at 1, available at http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/SRTIGERFORCE/110190 166. After North’s Congressional testimony, North faced a criminal trial on three charges: accepting an illegal gratuity; aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry; and destruction of documents. United States v. North, 920 F.2d 940, 942 (D.C. Cir. 1990). He was convicted on all charges, but the convictions were later overturned because of the likelihood that North’s widely publicized, immunized testimony before Congress had influenced the testimony of witnesses at his criminal trial. Id. On remand, the independent counsel who had prosecuted North moved to dismiss all charges because he believed it was impossible to establish that witnesses had not been influenced by North’s congressional testimony; the trial court granted the motion. John W. Mashek, Charges on North Dismissed, Prosecutor Can’t Meet Requirement, BOSTON GLOBE, Sept. 17, 1991, at 1. In 1994, North ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate. Nancy Mathis, Election ’94: Nation/Republicans gain Senate control/But Democrat Robb holds off Oliver North in Virginia, HOUSTON CHRON., Nov. 9, 1994, at A42. 2 Sally Jacobs, North the Family Man Faces BC Crowds, Pro and Con, BOSTON GLOBE, Nov. 3, 1988, at 31. 3Associated Press, Photo: Lt. Col. Oliver North shown taking the oath before the Iran- Contra committee in Washington on July 7, 1987, reprinted in Dawn Ceol, High Court Gives North Big Victory, WASHINGTON TIMES, May 29, 1991, at A1; also available at http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- srv/politics/images/daily/north_070787ap.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp -srv/politics/special/clinton/frenzy/iran.htm&h=152&w=200&sz=16&hl=en&start=11&um=1 &tbnid=VETlLNOlGGp5pM:&tbnh=79&tbnw=104&prev=/images%3Fq%3Doliver%2Bnort h%2Bap%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rls%3DTSHA,TSHA:2005-52,T SHA:en. 4The Senate and the House each had a committee investigating the matter, so the title of the proceeding is Iran-Contra Investigation: Joint Hearings Before the S. Select Comm. on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and the H. Select Comm. to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran, 100th Cong. pt. I (1987) [hereinafter Hearings Iran] (testimony of Oliver L. North). 5United States v. North, 698 F. Supp. 322, 324 (D.D.C. 1998) (recounting North’s statements that the money raised by the sale of missiles to Iran was used to support the contras); United States v. North, 920 F.2d 940 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (vacating some of North’s convictions and reversing other); Abraham D. Sofaer, Iran-Contra: Ethical Conduct and Public Policy, 40 HOUS. L. REV. 1081, 1084 ( 2003) (“The first sale of arms to Iran during the Reagan Administration took place on August 20, 1985 . .”). Published by EngagedScholarship@CSU,