After dismissing as "baseless hysteria" concerns of the American Library Association and others over Section 215 of the Patriot Act and the authority given to the FBI to investigate the reading habits of individuals in public libraries and elsewhere, AP reports this afternoon that Attorney General John Ashcroft has told the President of the American Library Association that the federal government will disclose how many times the FBI has sought records from libraries and businesses under the anti-terrorism law. The move seems to be in response to a statement issued Wednesday by ALA President Carla Hayden, in which she said:

And now Attorney General John Ashcroft says the FBI has no interest in Americans’ reading records. While this may be true, librarians have a history with law enforcement dating back to the McCarthy era that gives us pause. For decades, and as late as the 1980s, the FBI’s Library Awareness Program sought information on the reading habits of people from “hostile foreign countries,” as well as U.S. citizens who held unpopular political views.

We are deeply concerned that the Attorney General should be so openly contemptuous of those who seek to defend our Constitution. Rather than ask the nations’ librarians and Americans nationwide to “just trust him,” Ashcroft could allay concerns by releasing aggregate information about the number of libraries visited using the expanded powers created by the USA PATRIOT Act.

According to AP, the ALA has welcomed today's move, although no official statement has yet been released on its website.

The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision postponing the California recall is unsound, according to Harvard law professor Einer Elhauge. Read Rewire This Circuit, his op-ed published today in the Wall Street Journal (not available online) and now reposted by Harvard Law School.

Steve Rubenstein of the San Francisco Chronicle files this report on how the California recall and associated legal battles are striking the 4000 lawyers from 120 countries in town for the annual meeting of the International Bar Association.

President Bush, Chief Justice Rehnquist and other dignitaries spoke this morning at a rededication ceremony marking the opening a new exhibit housing the original US Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights, again on display after two years of preservation work. An AP story on the rededication is available here; audio of the President's remarks is online from the White House here. The National Archives hosts a virtual version of the exhibit here, featuring high resolution images of each of the original documents.

The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights has posted online the full text of its latest report Assessing the New Normal: Liberty and Security for the Post-Se[ptember 11 United States, documenting "the continuing erosion of basic human rights protections under U.S. law and policy since September 11 in five areas: government openness; personal privacy; immigration; security-related detention; and the effect of U.S. actions on human rights standards around the world. " Download the 144-page report here[PDF].

In honor of Constitution Day, the Cato Institute in Washington DC is hosting a half-day conference on the U.S. Supreme Court, both to review the term just expired, and to preview the term ahead. Featured speakers include Federal Election Commission Vice Chairman Bradley A. Smith and Kenneth W. Starr. Watch the conference live here.

Craig Jones, an associate with Bull, Housser & Tupper in Vancouver, British Columbia, writes:

Just for the record, your account of the motion voted on by Parliament regarding same-sex marriage is incorrect. Your text is of the motion as originally drafted; by the time it was voted upon, it had been amended to remove the last clause - the commitment to take 'all necessary steps'. This was to overcome concern that it would require the government to invoke the 'notwithstanding clause' of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in order to overcome several recent court decisions confirming that the opposite-sex definition was unconstitutional.

Thanks for setting us right, Craig!

Word is now coming in on multiple wires of a Spanish judge's formal indictment of 35 persons, including Osama Bin Laden and Al Jazeera journalist Taysir Alouni, for the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States. The Financial Times carries this Reuters story, while Al Jazeera's English-language website reports here, repeating its claim that Alouni is innocent.

The US State Department has made available a transcript of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's remarks at a press conference in Bahrain on Tuesday, held in association with the 2003 Arab Judicial Forum which she is attending [for previous coverage in JURIST's Paper Chase, click here]. While emphasizing the importance of judicial training and ethics in a functioning democracy, Justice O'Connor also commented on the need to train law students to be consensus builders:

I think it is great when law schools train lawyers how to mediate and solve problems between people - by negotiation as well as in court. When I went to law school, law schools didn't teach those things. Today, I think we are better off trying to solve some problems through mediation. Law schools today are trying to teach students how to solve problems through negotiation.

Read the complete transcript.

Former NATO Supreme Commander and Rhodes Scholar General Wesley Clark announces his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President today in Little Rock at 12 Noon ET. An official campaign website is up and running here. A video announcement by General Clark to supporters is available here. MeetClark.com provides lengthy quotes outlining General Clark's basic positions on a series of international and domestic legal issues, including the PATRIOT Act, the International Criminal Court, affirmative action, and separation of church and state.

In a Tuesday op-ed in the New York Times, Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman says that the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should have allowed the California recall to go on instead of disrupting the process.

In a vote Tuesday evening, Canadian Members of Parliament defeated an Opposition motion reaffirming the heterosexual definition of marriage by a vote of 137-132 according to a report from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The motion read:

That, in the opinion of this House, it is necessary, in light of public debate around recent court decisions, to reaffirm that marriage is and should remain the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that Parliament take all necessary steps within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada.

The Canadian Liberal government announced its intent to legalize same-sex marriages this summer after an Ontario court ruling supporting their constitutionality. If that legislation passes, Canada will become the third country to recognize same-sex marriage after the Netherlands and Belgium. For more background, see Same-Sex Marriage: Canada, Europe and the United States, by Duke law professor Ralf Michaels.

On September 17, 1787, the United States Constitution was adopted by the 39 delegates to the federal Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. Learn more about the Constitution from the recently-opened National Constitution Center.