4000bce - 399
400 - 1399
1400 - 1499
1500 - 1599
1600 - 1699
1700 - 1799
1800 - 1899
1900 - 1999
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 98-8899 FREDERICK HARRIS, et al., Appellants, v. WAYNE GARNER, et al., Appellees. ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF FOR AMICUS CURIAE LAW PROFESSORS JOAN FITZPATRICK, GREGORY H. FOX, NATSU TAYLOR SAITO, RALPH G. STEINHARDT, AND JOHAN D. VAN DER VYVER IN SUPPORT OF APPELLANTS Natsu Taylor Saito Associate Professor of Law Georgia State University Fourth Floor, Urban Life Bldg. 140 Decatur Street, S.E. Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 651-4158 Counsel of Record for Amici Frederick Harris, et al. V. Wayne Garner, et al., No. 98-8899 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS AND CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, the undersigned counsel of record certifies that the following listed persons and entities have an interest in the outcome of this case: 1. Thurbert Baker, Georgia Attorney General, Attorney for Defendants-Appellees. 2. Mark A. Basurto, Georgia Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for Defendants-Appellees. 3. Duke Blackburn, Defendant-Appellee 4. Michael J. Bowers, former Georgia Attorney General. 5. Stephen B. Bright, Southern Center for Human Rights, Attorney for Plaintiffs-Appellants. 6. Dayton Brinkley, Plaintiff-Appellant. 7. Danny Chadwick, Plaintiff-Appellant. 8. Leonis Cook, Plaintiff-Appellant. 9. William Daley, Plaintiff-Appellant. 10. Joan Fitzpatrick. 11. Gregory H. Fox. 12. Wayne Garner, Defendant-Appellee. 13. Frederick Harris, Plaintiff-Appellant. 14. Hon. Claude W. Hicks Jr., United States Magistrate Judge, Middle District of Georgia. 15. Willie Hooks, Plaintiff-Appellant. 16. John C. Jones, Georgia Senior Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for Defendants-Appellees. 17. Alan Kilgore, Plaintiff-Appellant. 18. Leroy Langes, Plaintiff-Appellant. 19. Diane Festin LaRoss, Georgia Assistant Attorney General, Attorney for Defendants-Appellees. 20. Hon. Hugh Lawson, United States District Judge, Middle District of Georgia. 21. Samuel Locklear, Plaintiff-Appellant. 22. Farrell Nation, Plaintiff-Appellant. 23. Natsu Taylor Saito. 24. George P. Shingler, former Georgia Deputy Attorney General. 25. Ralph G. Steinhardt. 26. A.G. Thomas, Defendant-Appellee. 27. Robert E. Toone, Southern Center for Human Rights, Attorney for Plaintiffs-Appellants. 28. Twenty-two Unnamed Tactical Squad Officers of the Georgia Department of Corrections, Defendants-Appellees. 29. Johan D. van der Vyver. 30. James Wade, Plaintiff-Appellant.
Law Professors Joan Fitzpatrick et al. ("Amici") respectfully request leave to file a Statement Amicus Curiae in the above styled action. Amici's proposed brief is being submitted for filing simultaneously with this motion. In support of this motion, amici state as follows:
Amici are interested in questions of statutory construction as they relate to binding norms of international law in the United States. The District Court's ruling, which unwittingly contravenes these norms, is of great concern to amici.
Amici are professors of law expert in the fields of statutory construction, international law and the application of international law by the courts of the United States, as more particularly set forth in the Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement. The views of jurists on points of international law are taken into account when such questions arise in U.S. courts. See, e.g., The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677, 700 (1900); United States v. Smith, 18 U.S. 153, 160-61 (1820).
Amici, through scholarship and practice, have contributed to the development of jurisprudence on various questions related to the pending matter. Amici therefore seek leave to present their views to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit of the United States concerning the construction of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ("PLRA"), Pub. L. No. 104-134, §§ 801-810, 110 Stat. 1321 (1996), in light of the international legal obligations of the United States, in the context of the present appeal of the decision of the District Court.
Counsel for Appellants has consented to the filing of the Statement Amicus Curiae. Defendants-Appellees do not oppose the filing of this Amicus Curiae brief.