WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey argued before the Supreme Court on Tuesday to uphold the entire conviction of a terrorist implicated in the failed millennium bomb plot.
Michael Mukasey is the first attorney general to appear before the high court in almost 12 years.
The justices heard directly from the head of the Justice Department in oral arguments, but they appeared divided over whether the government's case should prevail.
Defendant Ahmed Ressam was found guilty of various conspiracy charges in the plan to detonate explosives at Los Angeles International Airport in the days before New Year's Day 2000.
It was the first time a federal attorney general appeared before the high court in nearly a dozen years. Mukasey was low key and loose, joking with the justices on a few occasions.
But his appearance was relatively brief. Given 30 minutes to argue his points, Mukasey took only 19, and often gave short answers when questioned, including several "yes" and "no" responses. He ended his initial session by telling the court, "I guess I'm done here."
His rebuttal lasted under three minutes. The justices were polite, and never pressed Mukasey hard.
Ressam had trained in Afghanistan with al Qaeda members to plant explosives at the airport, but the scheme was foiled when customs agents in Washington state discovered explosives in his car as he and another man crossed into the United States from Canada on a ferry.
The Algeria native was sentenced to a total of 22 years after his 2005 conviction. The government had separately appealed that prison term as unreasonably light.
One of the counts included using "fire or an explosive to commit" a related felony, which carries a maximum 10-year prison term. Underlying that charge was that Ressam made "false statements on a customs declaration" when he crossed the Canadian-U.S. border.
A federal appeals court concluded the government failed to show the explosives were carried "in relation to" the underlying false statement offense. The judges on that panel compared the case to a similar federal law that banned multiple criminal charges for someone who carried a gun during a underlying felony, such as dealing drugs.
The government then took its case to the Supreme Court, arguing that if the appellate ruling was allowed to stand, it would be almost impossible to prosecute terrorism-related cases on that charge.
Criminal law experts say a conviction for making a false statement is an effective way for prosecutors to tie defendants to ongoing, far-reaching and often amorphous terror plots hatched overseas.
Court officials said the last attorney general to appear before the justices was Janet Reno 12 years ago. Mukasey's predecessors in the Bush administration -- John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales -- never handled those special duties.
Normally the department's solicitor general's office, now headed by Paul Clement, directs appeals before the federal courts.
No reason was given for Mukasey taking on the extra workload, though he indicated Friday he had been told it was sometimes customary for a new attorney general to argue a case before the high court. He said he liked the idea, and was ultimately assigned the Ressam case.
Court spokeswoman Patricia McCabe Estrada said attorneys general in prior administrations appeared regularly before the high court.
Officials said Mukasey attended several practice sessions, called moot courts, where officials simulate likely questioning.
Sporting the traditional gray "long coat " worn by federal government lawyers arguing before the high court, the 66-year-old Mukasey was referred to by the justices as "general." Only Justice Clarence Thomas did not ask the attorney general questions.
Mukasey made no comment to reporters on the case after arguments.
When he was a federal judge working in New York City, Mukasey oversaw trials of several people subsequently convicted of terrorism.
Among them were Omar Abdel Rahman, who received a life sentence for his role in the plot to blow up the United Nations and other Manhattan landmarks in the mid-1990s; and Jose Padilla, who was initially charged as an enemy combatant and held for years in U.S. military custody.
Padilla was later convicted in a Florida federal court on lesser conspiracy charges.
The case argued Tuesday is U.S. v. Ressam (07-455). A ruling is expected by late June. E-mail to a friend
CNN's Terry Frieden contributed to this report.
All About U.S. Supreme Court • Michael Mukasey
| Most Viewed | Most Emailed |
From the Blogs: 
Sit tight, we're getting to the good stuff
