Habeas Corpus...Senate Panel vote in favor of its restoration.

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
On Friday, with little fanfare, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on a bill that would restore the cornerstone of American jurisprudence, <i>habeas corpus</i>.

It was effectively stripped from the Constitution by the Military Commissions Act which essentially states that ANYONE, including US citizens, can be declared an enemy combatant by Presidential fiat, ANYWHERE. This means the whole world, including America, is a battlefield, and there are no rights on a battlefield.

For those who have forgotten, the Military Commissions Act

<blockquote> * Allows the president alone to decide who is and who is not an enemy of this country.
* Eliminates the Constitution’s due process right to habeas corpus for people the president decides are enemies of our country, and permits the government to keep hundreds of detainees imprisoned indefinitely and without charge.
* Lets the president make up his own rules on what is torture and abuse, instead of simply following the rules in the Geneva Conventions; and
* Removes accountability for top government officials, which means that we can’t know that torture and abuse has stopped and won’t happen again. - <a href=https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?id=557>ACLU</a></blockquote>

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy and Republican ranking member Arlen Specter both supported the bill. This bill, S 185, makes it clear that the issue is not simply a partisan one, but rather a patriotic one, in the truest sense of the word.

It should be noted that all of the other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee voted against the bill...An odd contradiction since they DID take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and that oath supercedes any loyalty to party and president.

It would behoove us all to contact our congressional representatives and urge them, in the strongest possible language to support this bill.

For the text of the bill and similar legislation in the House, go <a href=http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-185>HERE</a>
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
56,932
Reaction score
15,322
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
Thank Goodness! Jimminee Christmas!
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
There is hope for us all.

I will never forget the day I watched the Attorney General Of the US say the contitution does not guarantee Habeas corpus.

It will go down in history as complete idiots statement.
 

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
I have written before on this subject and received great support from self avowed rEpublicans as to the importance of the Writs of Habeas Corpus.



There is hope for us all.

I will never forget the day I watched the Attorney General Of the US say the contitution does not guarantee Habeas corpus.

It will go down in history as complete idiots statement.
This is good news for those of us that belive in it's necessity in the American way of life that we so enjoy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
10,029
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
You obviously missed the news yesterday where the 4th Circuit court ( well part of it) ruled 2-1 US legal residents and citizens INSIDE the boarders can NOT be treated in the manner of removing their rights. The White House has called for a total 4th Circuit review, but I suspect that will be a lose for them too. And I also believe if forced to the Supreme Court the Constitution will win.

However this only applies to ONE individual and has no bearing on the tribunal or the rest of the hundreds of terrorists held. Just as the Senate proposal only applies to people INSIDE the Country at the time of their detainment,
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
I hope you are right.

This very right leaning SCOTUS scares me.
 

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
Anytime a Presidential election and a stopping of the vote count is decided on a 5/4 Supreme Court decision, the citizens under that court system should be very afraid.



I hope you are right.

This very right leaning SCOTUS scares me.
It just ain't American, IMHO.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Anytime a Presidential election and a stopping of the vote count is decided on a 5/4 Supreme Court decision, the citizens under that court system should be very afraid.





It just ain't American, IMHO.
Correct. The DNC should start appointing judges, with the senate confirming. Gottcha.
 
OP
Bullypulpit

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Correct. The DNC should start appointing judges, with the senate confirming. Gottcha.
No, all available candidates should be placed in a pool and ranked according to their qualifications, and be assigned a number to be picked at random. Names and party affiliations would not be known, only their qualifications.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
No, all available candidates should be placed in a pool and ranked according to their qualifications, and be assigned a number to be picked at random. Names and party affiliations would not be known, only their qualifications.
at least you admit wishing to do away with constitution.
 

hjmick

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2007
Messages
22,359
Reaction score
7,026
Points
360
Location
Charleston, SC
No, all available candidates should be placed in a pool and ranked according to their qualifications, and be assigned a number to be picked at random. Names and party affiliations would not be known, only their qualifications.
I find it very hard to believe that you would be expressing this blatant disregard of the Constitution if there were a president in office whose opinions and ideas you shared and who was appointing judges with whom you also agreed.
 

RetiredGySgt

Diamond Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
47,985
Reaction score
10,029
Points
2,040
Location
North Carolina
Anytime a Presidential election and a stopping of the vote count is decided on a 5/4 Supreme Court decision, the citizens under that court system should be very afraid.





It just ain't American, IMHO.
As opposed to a democratic court ruling to violate the very laws of the State they are supposed to uphold? I know which court I find in contempt.
 

Psychoblues

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
2,701
Reaction score
142
Points
48
Location
North Missisippi
I don't know if there ever was a court found in contempt, but I know quite a bit about being found in contempt of court!!!!!!!!


As opposed to a democratic court ruling to violate the very laws of the State they are supposed to uphold? I know which court I find in contempt.
Laws ain't nothing but legal wranglings for the rich boys to use against you and me. You can take that to the bank, RGS.
 
OP
Bullypulpit

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
at least you admit wishing to do away with constitution.
I find it very hard to believe that you would be expressing this blatant disregard of the Constitution if there were a president in office whose opinions and ideas you shared and who was appointing judges with whom you also agreed.

No, I'm simply suggesting that some objectivity be introduced to the process.
 

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
those living in america, should lose their rights.

But why cant we lock up terrorists?
Short answer:

If American citizens or if the terrorists are caught in US proper, they are entitled to due process and all that the legal system affords.

If non-citizens are picked up in the war effort, not identified as 'soldiers', then those are who should be at Gitmo.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top