Citing new evidence since his 2006 conviction on bribery-related charges, Siegelman's nine-page filing called for a hearing with cross-examination, plus a new trial and new judge.
The arguments responded to a government filing on Aug. 28 that no new evidence has been produced since Siegelman's 2006 convictions to justify a hearing or other relief.
More generally, Siegelman's prosecution remains the dramatic centerpiece of still-unsolved allegations that the Bush administration mounted a nationwide effort to change the country's political leadership by hundreds of disputed prosecutions of Democratic office-holders, candidates and contributors.
Nowhere else have so many whistleblowers stepped forward and so many investigative reporters unearthed scandal, with so little result. If you'd like to see a step-by-step of what DoJ does to a whistleblower -- and its justifications for doing so -- read my new 5,000-word OpEd News interview with Grimes, who played figured prominently in Siegelman's arguments as an insightful professional.