Subject:
|
Somethings been bothering me...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Dec 2003 15:45:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
351 times
|
| |
|
|
(moreso than usual...)
From
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/22/security.padilla.backlash.reut/index.html
"
Two court rulings last week about the rights of prisoners held in the U.S. "war
on terrorism" represent a rebuke to the Bush administration's legal tactics
following the September 11 attacks, analysts and human rights organizations
said.
"
Down the page this gets mentioned--
"
"The two cases are different. It's questionable whether people captured during a
war in Afghanistan are entitled to any of the protections of the U.S.
Constitution," said Robert Levy,
"
Here's the thing--these people are being detained by US forces. They are being
detained under some US ruling. Whether they are US citizens or not is
immaterial--they are 'in jail' due to violation of some US law or policy.
And isn't the Constitution the 'gandpappy' of US law--aren't *all* US laws
beholden to the Constitution? In other words, if anyone is being detained by a
US ruling, doesn't that person have the right to appeal to the Constitution,
even if they are not American?
Hey Dubya--you can't have your cake and eat it, too.
"
The White House speedily announced it would seek a stay, calling the decision
"troubling and flawed."
"
No, the white house is 'troubling and flawed' if they think this double standard
is Just and right.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Somethings been bothering me...
|
| (...) of the Cato Institute... (...) I'm mostly on the same page as you here. However I don't think the US constitution ever promised that non citizens have any particular rights outside of US borders did it? I think habeas corpus applies to (or at (...) (21 years ago, 23-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
