The U.S. Justice Department insists online gambling is against the law. But that's not stopping online bettors from rolling the dice, according to Elliot Borin in Wired Magazine's OnLine Gaming Illegal (Wink, Wink).

"Many watchers of online casino operations remain convinced the industry is still on a roll. As proof, they cite a federal court decision in Louisiana that could de-fang the Justice Department's virtual bite, Congress' repeated repudiation of such measures as the Internet Gambling Prohibition Act and a successful Nevada ballot initiative directing the state legislature to begin issuing online gambling licenses. (Several Las Vegas casinos now operate online by way of the Isle of Man.) "

"In a recent letter to the Nevada Gaming Control Board, the Justice Department restricted Nevada's Internet casino business and banned all Internet wagering that crosses state lines. "

"The Wire Act appears to outlaw Internet gambling," said Bradley Gross, a partner in the Technology Law Group of Becker & Poliakoff, referring to the prohibition of the Federal Interstate Wire Act of 1960 against engaging "in the business of betting or wagering knowingly or (using) a wire communication facility for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers or information assisting in the placing of bets or wagers."

"However, the act specifically limits its application to sporting events and contests, and casino games are generally not considered contests because the participant is competing against mathematical odds, not other people," Gross said. "

At 11:30 a.m. Tuesday (tomorrow) 135,000 petitions will be delivered to to all 100 U.S. senators urging them to enact safeguards to protect the innocent from wrongful conviction and execution. The petitions urge the senators to pass the Innocence Protection Act.

The legislation, which has strong bi-partisan support in both the House and Senate, ensures those facing a potential death sentence get a qualified lawyer, and that those convicted of a crime have access to DNA testing. The bill was recently approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the counterpart House bill is now cosponsored by 243 members of Congress ---- more than half the membership of the House.

One of the Innocence Protection Act's Senate sponsors, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) will be joined by death row exoneree Kirk Bloodsworth and other members of Congress at a press conference to present the petitions.

The delivery will take place at the new Senate "Swamp" Site at Russell Park, Constitution and Delaware, across from the Capitol (near Russell Senate Office Building).

Present will be Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt), Senator Susan Collins (R-Me), Representative Ray LaHood (R-Il) and Kirk Bloodsworth, the first person freed from death row as a result of DNA testing.

In November, South Dakota will vote on giving juries the right to return not guilty verdicts in cases in which they disagree with the law--such as cases involving tax protesters and medical marijuana users.

We're in favor of juries being able to nullify unfair or draconian laws. Generally speaking though, we are not in favor of amending the Constitution. Couldn't a state statute accomplish the same thing? What are we missing?

"In November, voters in South Dakota will decide whether to give tax protesters, medical marijuana users and other criminal defendants a new right. A proposed constitutional amendment would allow defendants there to concede their guilt but nonetheless argue for acquittal on the grounds that the law under which they were charged is misguided or draconian."

This might be the saddest thing we read today:

"The petty thief at the center of a nationwide debate over the use of electric stun belts on inmates died hours before he was to be released from prison, his attorney said on Friday."

"Ronnie Hawkins, 52, was serving a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life for petty theft -- his third felony under California's three strikes law -- when he died on Thursday of AIDS-related illness at a prison in Vacaville, California, his attorney Stephen Yagman said."

"Last month, a U.S. magistrate ordered Hawkins to be freed, ruling that he had served enough time for the crime he committed."

Here's more information on why three-strike laws should be repealed.

Today's editorial in the L.A. Times In Defense of the Innocent points out that "for every seven people executed since 1977, one person on death row is eventually exonerated by new evidence."

In calling for passage of the bipartisan Innocence Protection Act now pending before Congress, the Times notes:

"Some 3,700 men and women around the nation now have a date with the executioner. The prospect that innocent people could be among them should frighten every American."

Here's more on the Innocence Protection Act.

The New York Times today calls on the Government to stop betraying the families of the foreign 9/11 victims.

"Shockingly, many of those who were grieving the loss of a loved one at ground zero on Wednesday are now subject to deportation. Congress ought to rectify this unconscionable situation immediately. It should grant the hundreds of family members of lawfully employed foreigners who perished in last September's terrorist attacks the right to reside in the United States, regardless of when their original visas expired. It would also be fitting to honor the foreign casualties of this attack on American soil by offering citizenship to any of their dependents who wish it. "

What a positive step that would be, we hope the powers that be are listening.

Received today from the Marijuana Policy Project, which is working hard to see that legalization passes in Nevada in November. They're asking for $10 contributions to keep their tv ads running up to the election:

"We took our opponents by surprise by launching the first wave of TV ads in Nevada. Please visit this site to view the two ads and to make a donation so that we can afford to continue
running them."

"The first ad features the state government's official explanation of what our initiative would do. It then concludes with the tag line: "In the privacy of a home, or under the care of a doctor, vote YES on Question 9."

"The second TV ad features people openly smoking marijuana in public, then explains that this kind of activity would remain banned under our initiative. We felt the need to demonstrate this because our opponents have been lying by saying that our initiative would let people smoke pot anytime, anywhere, all the time and everywhere. The ad goes on to explain that our initiative removes penalties for people who use marijuana in private, as well as giving patients greater access to medical marijuana. It shows images of a private home and a physician talking to a patient. The ad concludes with the same tag line as the
first commercial."

What could be more ridiculous or unfair than denying college aid only to drug offenders, including those convicted for small amounts of pot, while allowing aid to be granted to those convicted of violent crimes?

We're bumping our earlier post on the 87,000 students being denied financial aid due to a mis-interpreted drug law. Sixty-seven members of Congress have co-sponsored a bill (H.R. 786) to repeal the law, but it has yet to receive a hearing. 30,000 students are affected in the 2002-2003 school year alone.

From NORML today:

"The provision, spearheaded in 1998 by Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.), withholds grants, loans or work assistance from anyone convicted of a drug offense, including the misdemeanor possession of marijuana. Those applicants convicted of other crimes, including violent crime, remain eligible."

In recent years, the Department of Education has interpreted the provision as meaning that any applicant with a prior drug conviction is ineligible to receive financial aid. The provision's sponsor has since alleged that he never intended to make the law retroactive. Nevertheless, Souder has done little to support legislative efforts to amend it."

"Currently, legislation introduced by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass) to repeal the ban is pending before Congress. Sixty-seven members of Congress have co-sponsored the bill (H.R. 786), although it has yet to receive a hearing."

Here's a letter you can send to your member of Congress in support of H.R. 786.

We have been reporting that a RAVE Act protest would be happening on Sept. 6 at the Capitol. Many have asked us for a recap of the protest and what happened. Here's what we could find:

"About 400 opponents of a bill in Congress to equate some raves with crack houses danced to DJ-spun tunes during a protest this afternoon at the Federal Building in Westwood, police said. "

"No arrests were made, said Los Angeles police Sgt. D. Koeh of the West Los Angeles Station. "Freedom to Dance" organizers hoped to raise young voters' ire against the Reducing Americans' Vulnerability to Ecstasy, or RAVE, Act sponsored by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., D-Del."

"The bill could face a final vote in a few weeks."

"Young people in oversized pants danced to the sounds of DJs Doc Martin, Colette and Garth Trinidad of KCRW. Some in the crowd carried signs that read, 'Say Yes To Freedom.' "

"Similar demonstrations were held in New York, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington, D.C. "

"The RAVE Act, which would modify a 1986 law making it a federal crime to knowingly house or rent residences to drug dealers, would expand the definition of a crack house to include raves and "one-off" music events."

"The law aims to discourage rising ecstasy use and would subject convicted party organizers to $250,000 fines and up to 20 years in prison."

"Some in the Los Angeles dance scene, however, fear the bill will discourage music events more than drug use. They say it could put a dark cloud over the budding multimillion-dollar dance music industry, much of it based locally."

"They're targeting electronic music as a genre and that's hurting me because that's my kind of music," demonstrator Eric Moreno told ABC7. "

"The bill "sounds good on the outside," Megan McDonald to the station. "You're going to stop drug use. But it's not going to stop any drug use. It's just going to start attacking parties."

This is a bill that deserves to be soundly defeated. We will help you track it to Election day, and your local organizations can tell you how best to lobby against it.

Sorry, but we've lost the source for that whole quote. We will try to find it this evening and edit the post to include it. If any of you come across it, please put it in the comments section.

Beginning tomorrow we hope your thoughts turn to Congress and the many bills that need passage. To us, first and foremost is the Innocence Protection Act.

Faxes are better than emails. Thanks to Skippy the Bush Kangaroo for taking us to The Phone Company where you can write your fax and they will send it for you--for free--using your webrowser or email box.

As we reported last week, prison rape is no joke.

The current issue of The Nation carries Silja J.A. Talvi's moving article Prison's Shameful Secret, that begins with the experience of Roderick Johnson, a 33-year-old African-American Navy veteran from a small town in rural Texas.

Johnson "didn't ask for it. Prison did it to him, and his life will never be the same. While serving time for a nonviolent offense, Johnson endured the equivalent of sexual slavery at the hands of prison gangs...."

" For men, rape and sexual abuse in prison is now so commonplace that according to a recent study, one in four male prisoners in state and federal facilities experience pressured or forced sexual contact. "

"A bright spot in this otherwise dismal situation is the recent introduction of the Prison Rape Reduction Act of 2002, co-sponsored by Senators Ted Kennedy and Jeff Sessions, and Reps. Bobby Scott and Frank Wolf."

Here is our July, 2002 description of the this important and necessary legislation.

In recognition of the new year holiday, the return of Congress and the upcoming elections, we think this is a good time to post our relatively short list of our top legislative priorities:

Passage of the Innocence Protection Act.

A moratorium on the death penalty now, abolition in the future.

Eliminating mandatory minimum sentences.

Greater protections for non-citizens.

Fair treatment of juvenile offenders.

Blocking passage of the Victims Rights Amendment and other attempts to treat the Constitution as a “rough draft.”

Preventing more anti-terrorism laws passed in haste, without adequate opportunity for review.

Ensuring our laws reflect a balance between our need for security and the cherished individual freedoms that distinguish our nation and make it the beacon of liberty.

For more information about these issues, use the searchbox to the right or visit the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers' excellent Legislation page.