Marquette University Law School Faculty Blog

Gratitude is an Attitude: Teachings from Cedric Prakash, S.J., a Human Rights Defender from India

Post author:Lisa J. Laplante
Post published:November 15, 2009
Post category:Human Rights

Last week, I learned from Cedric Prakash, S.J., who currently holds the Marquette University’s Distinguished Wade Chair, that the people of India do not have words to express the concept of “thank you.” Culturally, their orientation comes from a place of non-possession that makes recognition for giving unnecessary.

Confounded, I asked: “What if you really want to express your gratitude?”

Fr. Prakash patiently reminded me, “Lisa, gratitude is an attitude.”

Despite this cross-cultural teaching, I now find myself writing about Fr. Prakash unable to refrain from using the word “thank you” to express how grateful I feel when contemplating his selfless dedication to defending the human rights of minorities in his home state of Gujarat, India.

Seventh Circuit Criminal Case of the Week: Yes, Eco-Terrorists Are Real Terrorists

Post author:Michael M. O'Hear
Post published:November 15, 2009
Post category:Criminal Law & Process Environmental Law Federal Criminal Law & Process Federal Sentencing Seventh Circuit

seventh-circuit51 On the night of July 20, 2000, Katherine Christianson, Bryan Rivera, and two companions damaged or destroyed more than 500 trees at a United States Forest Service facility. Was it a prank? A dare? A harvest for the thneed industry? No, Christianson and Rivera were members of the eco-terrorist group Earth Liberation Front, and their target was the Forest Service’s genetic-engineering experiments on trees in Rhinelander, Wisconsin. ELF issued a press release the next day claiming responsibility for the attack and asserting that “the Forest Service, like industry, are [sic] capitalists driven by insane desire to make money and control life.”

Eight years later, Christianson and Rivera pled guilty to destroying government property and were sentenced to two and three years of prison, respectively. On appeal, Rivera challenged the district judge’s decision to apply the terrorism enhancement of the sentencing guidelines. He argued that he was not a terrorist because his motivation was “the hope of saving our earth from destruction.” The Seventh Circuit, however, rejected his argument and affirmed the sentence in United States v. Christianson (No. 09-1526) (Manion, J.).

Feingold: Sept. 11 Prosecutions Will Advance Justice and American World Standing

Post author:Alan J. Borsuk
Post published:November 13, 2009
Post category:International Law & Diplomacy Speakers at Marquette U.S. Supreme Court

The decision to prosecute five people accused of involvement in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks in federal court in New York drew support Friday from US Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) in comments at a one-hour discussion at Marquette University Law School.

“That’s the way to go,” said Feingold, who has been highly critical of the long confinement, without trial, of the suspects at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

At the same time, US Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. announced that several other suspected terrorists will be tried in military courts. That group includes Ad Al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who allegedly planned another major attack, the bombing of the Navy destroyer Cole in 2000 in Yemen.

The decisions to go the two different routes in the cases will provide an interesting opportunity to compare civil and military handling of cases of this kind, Feingold told Mike Gousha, who moderated the session and who is a distinguished fellow in law and public policy at the Law School.

Feingold said bringing the Sept. 11 suspects, including Khalid Shaikh Muhammed, who has claimed he masterminded the attacks, into civil courts and allowing the justice system to proceed to a verdict on their cases is the appropriate course, said Feingold, a member of the Senate’s Judiciary Committee. “This advances not only our legal system, but our credibility in the world,” he said.