what path to take and where will it lead?

[DKSuddeth]

Interesting USSC case coming up about Jose Padilla and whether or not the constitution forbids the Bush administration from holding U.S. citizens indefinitely and without access to lawyers or courts when they are suspected of being “enemy combatants.”

What happens if the USSC sides with Padilla? would the bush administration then charge him, release him, or defy the USSC decision and continue to hold him as they are?

opinions anyone?

 

[Scourge]

I don't think anybody is supposed to held indefinitely - in War or in criminal cases. I don't think Bush has a leg to stand on technically...

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Interesting USSC case coming up about Jose Padilla and whether or not the constitution forbids the Bush administration from holding U.S. citizens indefinitely and without access to lawyers or courts when they are suspected of being “enemy combatants.”

What happens if the USSC sides with Padilla? would the bush administration then charge him, release him, or defy the USSC decision and continue to hold him as they are?

opinions anyone?

If that turns out to be the case I would say charge him and put him in a federal prison and let him have his day in court.

Then again, they know what's best for national security. I'm hoping that's the route they would take.

 

[acludem]

Padilla is a U.S. Citizen and as such has every right to a fair and speedy trial. The Bush administration and the Aschcroft "Justice" Department have been denying Padilla and others their fair day in court for a long, long time. I have little faith that the majority of the USSC that elected Bush would make a decision to undermine his election campaign (a decision to force a trial here certainly would).

Bush and Ashcroft do not have a Constitutional leg to stand in thi case, but that doesn't mean the USSC won't create one for them.

acludem

 

[RightyRightOn]

I suspect the admin would not hold him and others without good reason. Perhaps the evidence against him would risk national security if it was made public. The admin may be worried about a court letting him off. The USSC will probably rule in favor of Padilla. and the admin will then charge him.

 

[5stringJeff]

I agree with acludem that Padilla deserves the right to a fair and speedy trial. I do not agree with his assessment of Bush's administration, but that's for a different thread.

The Constitution is clear... every citizen deserves a fair and speedy trial, regardless of the crime. If they think he's committed treason, try him for it.