Supreme Court Orders New Hearing for Troy Davis
SANCHEZ: He's a convicted cop killer sitting on Georgia's death row. But this morning, Troy Davis eloped with a new lease on life. The U.S. Supreme Court has ordered a new hearing, and Davis's family says new evidence will clear him of the 1991 murder of an off-duty police officer.</s>MARTINA CORREIA, TROY DAVIS' SISTER: We felt like if they gave Troy an evidentiary hearing, they would see that there's so much doubt in this case that he should not be executed.</s>MARK MACPHAIL JR., MARK MACPHAIL'S SON: It's very frustrating, yes. It just see that, you know, they're all looking on Troy and not looking at what my father gave up. My father lost his life.</s>SANCHEZ: So what happens now? We turn that question to a nationally recognized legal scholar who loves to be introduced that way, I'm sure. Jonathan Turley, he's a Maurice C. Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University Law School. We usually just refer to him as that guy that knows all about constitutional law. You know, it's amazing that in our day in time that there would be someone on death row where there would be a legitimate question as to whether or not they actually did what they may be killed for.</s>JONATHAN TURLEY, PROF. OF LAW, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIV.: You know, what's fascinating about this case is that you had a divided Supreme Court and the issue that divided them was whether, in fact, you do have a constitutional right to be able to present evidence of your innocence. In descent, Justice Scalia calls this a fool's era and said that the Supreme Court had never said that even if judges were convinced someone was innocent, they're entitled to an evidentiary hearing. Now, that may strike people as rather odd. But in fact, the Supreme Court has never really gone as far as it did in this case. It's a very important case where the court is saying if there is real evidence here of innocence, we don't want to execute someone without an evidentiary hearing.</s>SANCHEZ: You know, rarely is a legal case scandalous but this next story that I'm going to share with you, Jonathan, I think it could be considered scandalous. Let me tell you about this one, it too, involves a case that a judge had to make. It was a judge who was dealing with a possibility of a death row. Sharon Keller of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the name of the judge in this case. The judge faces charges of misconduct now. Let me see if I get this right, she refused to accept a last-minute filing to delay an execution and literally had somebody in her office says, we're done working at 5:00.</s>TURLEY: Yes, what's fascinating about this case. First of all, Keller went home early to meet a repair man, and yet she really couldn't be bothered to keep the court open. In fact, some people at the court wanted to keep it open, really for a matter of minutes. The lawyers said they had computer problems and this was a final round death appeal. To make things worse, the Supreme Court that afternoon had said that it would look at lethal injection and whether in fact it was constitutional. And so, she now faces these charges. She is known as a very conservative judge and she is known as a hanging judge in Texas by people who don't like her, but these charges were found to have merit and she's going to stand to answer them. Obviously, for the inmate, it's too late. He was executed that day.</s>SANCHEZ: This is amazing. I mean, the idea that somebody who is a judge would close their offices at 5:00 when a man's life and a decision this important hangs. As a matter of fact, we got a story. Let's watch this together, if we can, Jonathan. This just came in to us. It's James Munoz. He's the reporter with CNN San Antonio affiliate KENS. Let's watch.</s>JAMES MUNOZ, KENS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Judge Sharon Keller was first elected to the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals in 1994. Today she is at the center of a rare hearing to gather facts. A commission will review the findings to determine whether or not Judge Keller responded appropriately to attorneys who tried to file a last-minute stay of execution. On September 25th, 2007, Michael Rashard was to be executed at 6:00 p.m.. He was convicted in the 1986 sexual assault and shooting death of Marguerite Dixon. That morning, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review lethal injection practices. Attorneys for Rashard wanted to request a stay of execution but were told the clerk's office closed at 5:00 p.m.. Rashard was executed at 8:20.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The U.S. Supreme Court was not able to, based on their own rules to issue a stay, even though they issued a stay on the next person who the court case came to them and the one after that and there were no more executions for another seven months.</s>MUNOZ: The case has energized groups against the death penalty. Inside the court room the only goal is to hold Judge Keller accountable if in fact, she failed to uphold death penalty policies in Texas. (on camera): A commission will review the findings from this hearing. They could issue a public censure, dismiss the case or recommend the judge be removed. In Texas, James Munoz, for CNN.</s>SANCHEZ: Can you imagine a lawyer calling a judge's office and saying, hey I need to talk to the judge, I got new information that might actually prove my client's innocence and getting a message from the judge or his assistant saying, sorry, the judge doesn't work past 5:00? Now in fairness to her, Jonathan, apparently there's a discrepancy now as to whether the person just didn't know that this was about the death row case and they were just responding that the judge stops working at 5:00, period. So -- but if she did, if the judge did this, should she be disbarred?</s>TURLEY: I actually think that putting aside a question of disbarment, I think it is warranted to look at whether she should be removed from the bench. She may be punctual but she appears to lack any element of mercy. And you know, we would be put out if he were standing in a sandwich shop that said, sorry, we make the last sandwich at 5:00. Here we are talking about a man's life. What is also sort of odd is that you had other judges who did stay after 5:00. They were aware of the death penalty case but they weren't aware that the judge had closed the office. And so, what really this does, it undermines the integrity of the system. It undermines all judges and lawyers because it's hyper technical and in so many ways this is a perfect pairing with the Supreme Court case. On one side, you have people who say look this is all about keeping the courts working and we can't have endless appeals. People have got to comply with the rules. And then you have on the other side people saying, yes, but at the end of the day, our legal system is measured by the quality of justice not his punctuality.</s>SANCHEZ: Let me ask you another question, I'm curious about. I think you're the perfect person to ask since I was thinking about this. Do we have that video, by the way, do we have the video from Phoenix yesterday where these gun advocates showed up? Look at this fellow. Some people, and I know the blogs have been criticizing me overnight saying that I described it as an assault rifle. It's an AR15, 13 and maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. I don't know, it's a big gun. Let's leave it at that. He's there where the president is going to be speaking, our reports independently now confirm there may have been 10 or 12 other people there with guns. I would think that would be a very difficult assignment for Secret Service if a lot of people start showing up with these. Here's the question to you. I know as a reporter we can't fly our planes or helicopters near the president. There is a safe zone, an air space that's created whenever the president travels. Would it be constitutionally considerable to have a no-gun zone within a certain jurisdiction when the president travels, as well?</s>TURLEY: You know, it's a wonderful question because there is a real legal anomaly here. It's actually easier to control flight patterns, which are under the ultimate control of the federal government, even though they have some local jurisdiction.</s>SANCHEZ: Right.</s>TURLEY: The problem with the Secret Service is that you have had in the last few years a radical expansion of gun rights laws that include the right to bring guns in the church, schools, bars. You know all these passed in the past few years. And so they go into these areas that have state law guaranteeing the right to carry non- concealed weapons in many cases. The Secret Service always has the ability to hold someone on suspicion of a threat. But it gets very, very dicey when someone is engaged in a lawful activity because for gun rights advocates, their position is, look, there's first amendment rights and they can't stop people from speaking and there's second amendment rights and you can't keep us from having guns and that's part of the sort of the aftermath of the Supreme Court decision recently that did find that guns are an individual right protected by the Constitution. We may have to deal with the question you just gave.</s>SANCHEZ: Yes, it's interesting how laws can sometimes be conceptionalized and sometimes it happen through a process like this. We'll watch it and we'll see what happens. Jonathan, always good to see you.</s>TURLEY: Thank you.</s>SANCHEZ: Thanks for being with us. It's a make or break month for health care reform. That's why the music is playing underneath me and one major part of President Obama's plan is up in the air right now. Here is what we now. The White House now says the president is still keeping a public health insurance option on the table, which is very different from what they said yesterday, which is different from what they said back in July. Nonetheless, this after some administration officials made it seem like he would drop the plan, if it took that to get it passed. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius seemed to do just that right here on CNN Sunday. Now, the public option would be a government-run alternative to a private insurance companies. Dropping it would please conservatives, but it would anger many Democrats who are supporters of the current plan who say, we may not vote for anything if it's not there. Democrats have taken their lumps over the president's plan at a lot of recent angry town hall meetings and now Carol Costello tells us they're starting to rally their own supporters to show up at these things and fight back.</s>CAROL COSTELLO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was like a good old-fashioned duel. On one side, those opposed. Armed with sharp words.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop Obama now! Stop Obama now!</s>COSTELLO: And signs that cut right to the chase. But this time Obama supporters roused themselves and fought back, but they didn't exactly throw stones.</s>COSTELLO: And at this protest they didn't carry signs calling the other side controversial names.</s>SARA EL-AMINE, ORGANIZING FOR AMERICA: They're staying respectful. We are, you know, out for - for the first time, I feel like it's a turning point for us. Folks have been really focusing on the other side and we've outnumbered them, at least three to one today, if not more.</s>COSTELLO: The pro-Obama crowd is part of the president's Organizing for America grassroots network. The same network that worked so hard for him during the 2008 campaign. It's just one weapon the democrats have been using lately to combat combative town hall meetings.</s>ANNOUNCER: Why is Congressman Boehner taking the side of the insurance companies in the health care debate?</s>COSTELLO: These ads are part of the strategy, too. Paid in part by pro-Obama union groups. Some analysts say it all comes way too late.</s>LARRY SABATO, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: A lot of democrats would say it's about time or it's past time. The administration lost control of the message on health care and once a president loses control of the agenda, it is very difficult to get it back.</s>COSTELLO: Sabato says the president never did control the message because he didn't come up with his own plan. Leaving that to lawmakers who crafted several plans, all open to interpretation and rumor, like the death panel law. When something like they want to kill grandmas out there, it's tough to fight, even though the president has tried.</s>BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For all the scare tactics out there, what is truly scary, what is truly risky is if we do nothing.</s>COSTELLO: Well, his supporters are now trying to do something more.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, we can!</s>COSTELLO: Even if they only succeed in drowning out the competing noise. (on camera): But analysts like Larry Sabato say scary seems to be working right now. A major health care plan was not passed by the Senate before the August break and although the president denies it, his administration left some wiggle room in the favored public health insurance option. Sabato says if that goes by the wayside, expect the president to pass the plan, but one that has been seriously scaled back. Carol Costello, CNN, Washington.</s>SANCHEZ: And guess what, you're going to be hearing more questions, more opinions on health care reform and town hall meetings across the country today. They include Congressman Barney Frank session in Dartmouth, Massachusetts. Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. will hold a town hall meeting in Chicago and some other congressmen are going to hold town hall meetings, we understand, in Florida, in Oklahoma and in Texas and our cameras will be there. Now, if you want to know more about the health care debate and how the reforms could affect you and your family, check out our special health care in America section at cnn.com and you can get the very latest from town hall debates, fact checks, I-reports and other health care news. Just go to cnn.com/healthcare. So who's doing well today? Look at that. 62, that's enough. See the plus side in front of the 61 now? That means so far, at least, it looks like the market is up, a bit of a rebound from yesterday. The good guys to the Taliban zero. We're going to tell you about some big arrests on the other side of the world. Stay with us.