Judge strikes president's authority to designate terrorist groups

AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 11/28/06 | Linda Deutsch - ap

[glock rocks]

Every time I hear one of Pelosi's idiotic utterances, I silently curse the protest voters.

I silently curse the republican leadership who let down the conservatives who put them in office. cart/horse?

[AmishDude]

Aren't you people ever happy? You got what you wanted. Just celebrate Senator Ass and be done with it.

[oneamericanvoice]

"... the Humanitarian Law Project scored a legal victory ....when a Los Angeles Federal District Court judge struck down parts of the Patriot Act. The section of the Act in question barred American groups like HLP from providing advice and non-military aid to known terrorist groups across the globe."

Par for the course, a LA Federal judge aids and abettes groups like the HLP who are sypathetic to their brother enemies of the US. I'd remove this judge immediately, and freeze the assests of the HLP.

[Becki]

It's why I am not here as much as I used to be.

You and me, both. I used to live here, and learn so much. Now, all I learn is that too many people would shoot their foot off before finishing the race. And that they are proud of it, too.

I've been a monthly contributor for quite some time. I have been considering the benefit of my contributions.

Becki

[Elyse]

I don't know that I disagree with this judge. What the heck does "otherwise associate with" mean exactly? If your brother in law plays poker with someone in this group is that covered? It is too vague...

In the treason and sedition laws don't you find the phrases "gives aid and comfort to" just as vague? If your brother-in-law invites them to his house to play poker and he supplies refreshments and loses all his money to them which they then use to further their treasonous/seditious plans, didn't he give aid and comfort to them? Should we send this judge in to strike down these laws because of the 'vague' phrases in them?

[Prokopton]

"Aren't you people ever happy? You got what you wanted. Just celebrate Senator Ass and be done with it."

That's the attitude that will get you a Democrat president in 2008. I guess you'll find someone to blame that on too.

[AmishDude]

Contrary to popular belief, I don't run anything. I know you feel impotent

...politically...

but if the unappeasables don't seem to care, then there ain't nothin' I can do.

[italianquaker]

Nancy chucky and harry are soo glad "they" stood home
good job

[neutronsgalore]

"And who had a hand in writing that EO in such a way that it could be interpreted as being too vague? Could it have been Alberto Gonzalez? Or maybe Harriett Meiers?

I'm just sayin' . . . ."

What kills me is that this socialist bum judge actually thinks the Constitution protects foreign organizations. Foreign organizations have no rights under the Constitution. It's a FOR US CITIZENS ONLY contract.

[daybreakcoming]

Oh I have cursed the republican narcissistic glory hounds in Congress for the last five years if that is what you are speaking of. But in fairness, they have done less harm to the country than Pelosi, Inc. will do.
If I could only clone my Congressman John Cornyn.......

[Elyse]

That's a good point, the EO should be more specific. However that doesn't make it "unconstitutionally" vague. The EO should be construed by the judge to be constitutional if that can be reasonably done, IE: to mean "otherwise associate with in a way not protected by the Constitution". Which is what it means since the Constitution cannot be amended by mere law or fiat.

This is an excellent statement. The fact that you can set up a straw man argument using the words of the law, doesn't mean that the law is vague and unconstitutional.

[grey_whiskers]

Now tell me genius, how is Bush supposed to stop a lawsuit and the findings of a Clinton appointee.

Make like President Lincoln and issue an arrest warrant for the judge.

Who knows, if Bush plays his cards right, he could end up on Mount Rushmore!

...and there might even be a Mount Rushmore left for him to be on

Cheers!

[glock rocks]

...and if there were to be senate clones made, I'd go for Inhofe.

[Liberty Valance]

OIC, so these are just clubs or groups like the Rotary or Lions clubs. President Bush is just too mean to these much maligned and misunderstood "groups". They're just AlQueda re-enactors. Thank Allah that this judge was able get them off the hook.

Oh, and "Death to America" :o)

/s/squared

[rwfromkansas]

OH how cute. This one judge wants to make a name for herself.

These little judges making rulings that won't stand up upon appeal are rather funny.

[babygene]

What is vauge about the term giving aid? That's pretty clear.

If it said "giving aid or comfort" or "otherwise associated with" there would be a problem.

"Otherwise associated" with is too broad. A prosecutor could interpret that any way he or she wanted to. It could be interpreted to mean if you rode on the same buss or stayed at the same hotel.

Kind of like article 32 in the UCMJ. That basically says "anything that is not covered by another article".

It just needs to be rewritten to be more specific.

[b4its2late]

The ruling was praised by David Cole, a lawyer for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Constitutional Rights.

"This law gave the president unfettered authority to create blacklists," he said. "It was reminiscent of the McCarthy era."

Commies all of whom have to throw McCarthy around to get anything done. They should all be in jail. They are a danger to our country. Do they realize they are putting us back into a September 10th mentality as far as islamofacists terrorism goes?

These lists are used to follow the money.

2006 OFAC Recent Actions

"specially designated global terrorists" (SDGT)

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13224 - BLOCKING PROPERTY AND PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS WITH PERSONS WHO COMMIT, THREATEN TO COMMIT, OR SUPPORT TERRORISM

[Elyse]

"Otherwise associated" with is too broad. A prosecutor could interpret that any way he or she wanted to. It could be interpreted to mean if you rode on the same buss or stayed at the same hotel.

That is a perfect example of a straw man argument. If a prosecutor chose to apply this law in that way he would be violating other constitional laws. That does not make this law unconstitional.

[Elyse]

constitional = constitutional

One day I'll realize that spell check is my friend.

[jdlucas04]

Know-at-alls like yourself tick me off; you really don't understand the Constitution of the United States of America at all, because little one, if you bother reading it, it guarantees the right for a President of the United States of America to declare Executive Order. You are just a Pseudo-conservative.