Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Federal court rules against arbitrary suspension of habeas corpus

Discussion in 'Legal' started by foob, Jun 11, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. foob

    foob Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2006
    Messages:
    593
    Location:
    Indiana
    Just thought everybody should know somebody cares about the constitution. Doesn't even look like he's a citizen.

    If you support the indefinite detention of a US resident just because the President labels him an "enemy combatant", just remember one day when they come for your firearms they can use the same excuse.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/enemy_combatant

     
  2. qlajlu

    qlajlu Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    Kearns, Utah
    I'll probably get in trouble with what I am about to say, but it is good to see the Constitution upheld for a change. I have faith in the investigative agencies in the U.S. and just to incarcerate a person because it is believed that person is involved in something illegal or to use an arbitrary label is, in my estimation, unconscionable, especially since he IS a U.S. citizen. If he was a threat to national security, there has been more than ample time to bring charges.

    Now illegal aliens are another matter entirely. Illegal aliens SHOULD NOT be afforded our Constitutional protections in matters of U.S. security. If they want that protection, then they best get busy and become a citizen AFTER LEGALLY ENTERING THE U.S.

    Just my $0.02 worth.
     
  3. Crunker1337

    Crunker1337 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,168
    I'm glad. Anyone legally in this country should be guaranteed basic rights.
     
  4. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    I'm glad, too.

    There have to be limits to Executive power, and it's up to the court to make sure of that.
     
  5. Mumwaldee

    Mumwaldee member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Messages:
    289
    Location:
    Tennessee
    Yeah,

    Why are they housing these suspects for years with no charge when they could be illegally surveilling and wire-tapping them like ordinary Americans.
     
  6. eric_t12

    eric_t12 Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    Messages:
    172
    Location:
    SD
    :D lol
     
  7. SoCalShooter

    SoCalShooter Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    3,091
    Location:
    That's for me to know and not you!
    Well this is good to hear, now if we can just get the patriot act repealed we will be a lot better off and safer too.
     
  8. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    Such a ruling deserves a little more play.

    http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/067427.P.pdf

    Note that the court does not call for his release, merely that he should not be held without charge as the executive does not have that power. This is in my mind a very correct ruling.
     
  9. MrTuffPaws

    MrTuffPaws Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,511
    Location:
    Az
    WOOT! It is nice to see the consitution in action again.
     
  10. araiford

    araiford Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2007
    Messages:
    120
    Location:
    Old Dominion
    It is scary that our President thinks he can order the military to detain someone indefinitely.
     
  11. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    And the dissent op...



    What we are talking about here is likely a very, very bad man. Still does not mean that he does not have rights.
     
  12. ArmedBear

    ArmedBear Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    23,171
    Yes. See, that's why I can't get as animated about some of this stuff as a lot of the BDS sufferers, including Libertarians. I actually do think that the intent of these detentions is a good intent. I do think that the Executive Branch has its heart in the right place, and I do not believe that I see some runaway abuse of power for power's sake, nor for political ends. Mistakes, biases, sure, but there hasn't been an administration since 1787 without these inevitable human characteristics.

    Hell, I don't really care about HIS rights. He probably has the right to a hanging.

    HOWEVER, this stuff needs to be spelled out so that the potential for abuse -- and it's a huge potential -- can be limited. All of our rights must be protected, and in this case, that requires protecting his, such as they are.

    We can't always rely on government officials to have their hearts in the right place. Many do, especially when it comes to national security. But it wouldn't take many to destroy our whole system, without checks, balances and limits.
     
  13. alan

    alan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,594
    Location:
    sowest pa.
    There might yet be hope for the nation.
     
  14. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    Judge Gribbon is an anti-Bush liberal. She has voted down the partial birth ban in VA, invoking the name of higher powers at town meetings and other such rulings.

    I think the dissent is better written than the majority, but I still agree with the decision even if the premise is not the best.

    Bear- The run away power abuse comes later. This is what I have problems getting people to understand. Pres. Bush I think means well and his intentions are likely good. The issue is what about the next guy? or Girl? Think they will care what he was doing or why? Very unlikely I say. They will say; "hey look I have a new toy what can I do with it?"
     
  15. insidious_calm

    insidious_calm Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    337
    I'm curious what you could possibly gain from keeping someone locked up and isolated that long? Aside from the obvious reason that you screwed up and he really isn't a terrorist and you don't want that fact to get out. Dead men tell no tales after all, apparently neither do those held indefinately in military isolation.

    I have no idea whether the guy is a terrorist or not. If he is why not charge him and convict him? Or, are we no longer a country of laws and justice? The whole "enemy combatant" things stinks of imperialism. I believ there are terrorists in this country, both foreign and domestic. I also believe they should be brought to justice and I fail to see how that has been accomplished in this case. Anyone?

    The more I read about this situation and others the less I like it. It goes against everything this country stands for. If we abandon the founding principles of this country in the name of the GWOT then what really is left to fight for?


    I.C.
     
  16. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Not likely since I am not a resident alien (which is the defining word apparently left out of the the "US resident" description above).
     
  17. Flyboy

    Flyboy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,888
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, OK
    ...well, based on what I've seen from Bush, and what I've read in the Constitution, I'd say that's probably true of the Framers, too.
    ...which ban is within the enumerated powers...how?
     
  18. Matt King

    Matt King Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,151
    Location:
    USA
    I have no doubt that the man held is a terrorist. However, you still have the right to fair trial, even if you are evil. This is a big win for the Sixth Amendment.

     
  19. jselvy

    jselvy member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    518
    Let's give him a fair and speedy trial and then hang him outside the courthouse.
    All legit and aboveboard.
    Or we could grant him the gift of being punished according to Islamic Law and Just behead him.
    Coat him in Lard first so he has NO chance at Paradise of course.
    Fight Religion with Religion

    Jefferson
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2007
  20. Lew

    Lew Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    197
    Location:
    Wyoming
    What war powers in Article 1 and 2, I'd like to know.
     
  21. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    Flyboy: All I am saying is that she may have done the right thing for the wrong reasons. I think the ruling is weak. And should have gone into more on the constitutional protections instead of the status and location of the person. It is hard to argue this point:

    To say that he is not combatant because he was found in the US without a uniform or clear ties to the organization in question is weak at best. The law itself should be thrown out or broadly rewritten.

    The founding fathers had an answer for those who supported the British during the war; they expelled them.

    Why indeed? What is worse to die a martyr for your cause and go to paradise or to remain in prison until you lose control of your bowels and then die anyway?
     
  22. insidious_calm

    insidious_calm Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    337
    Titan6 tossed this into the ether:
    Which I would be perfectly fine with had he been tried and convicted. Perhaps the question to be asked is why is the government afraid to put him on trial? See your logic fails that point. If he is a terrorist put him on trial, convict him, and punish him. Whether they be put to death, imprisoned for life, or some other suitable measure matters not to me.

    There is nothing legitimate to gain by keeping someone locked in isolation for 5 years without a trial. Though I am quite eager to hear you try to justify it. You either believe in the founding principles of this country or you don't belong in it. That goes for everyone as far as I'm concerned.
     
  23. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
    Calm- Easy big guy.

    Not a chance of that. My only concern is that the court decision was not strong enough and might get overturned on appeal. I was just offering a possible reason for why somone might be locked in a dark hole forever not a justification.
     
  24. foob

    foob Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2006
    Messages:
    593
    Location:
    Indiana
    Er... Jose Padilla is a citizen. He also got indefinite detention until recently. The declaring of somebody as an enemy combatant has no restriction on nationality or location of arrest.
     
  25. thexrayboy

    thexrayboy Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,324
    Location:
    northern nevada

    Whether or not the Executive branch has its "heart in the right place" or not is really irrelevant. The constitution and concepts such as Habeus corpus were concieved and made part of our fundamental principles to prevent abuse of power, whether the abuse being perpetrated is malevolent and for nefarious purpose or of a benevolent protective nature is not and should never be a factor.

    The basic facts are that this man is being held against his will. If he has committed a crime the government must charge him with it, try him and let the facts dictate the outcome. It should not matter what his race, religion, belief or crime is. If we allow any exception to the principles of Habeas corpus we open the gates to a hellish existence where Big Brother can whisk anyone and everyone it chooses away to some gulag. All in the name of "national security" or whatever cause du jour is prevalent.

    Intent is irrelevant. Holding the government to the letter of the law is the only proper way for this issue to be dealt with.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page