LOL!
It is the courts who have declared that the Sixth Amendment means what it says: "In all criminal prosecutions..."
(Yes, it's hard to believe the Supreme Court ever supported the Constitution... )
If any criminal prosecutions are commenced against Padilla he will enjoy his Sixth Amendment rights just as he is currently enjoying his right to petition for Habeas Corpus.
"It is the courts who have declared that the Sixth Amendment means what it says..."
That's the way it should be, at least. In fact, some time back, the court ruled that the Justice department had to allow Padilla access to an attorney. But, Dubya and Ashcroft have decreed that the courts may not review their decision and is now pulling a klinton (stonewalling).
Dubya knows that the court, alone, has no enforcement power and is therefore, dependent upon the Justice Department, that Dubya and Ashcroft control, to enforce court rulings. Dubya has figured out that since he controls the enforcement arm of the court, he can just ignore the court. After all, what are the justices going to do - strap on six-shooters, march into the Whitehouse, arrest him and throw him in Leavenworth?
Of course not. He's King George I and has no need for courts.
There is, at least, one positive side to all of Dubya's unconstitutional chicanery - klinton didn't think of it... or at least, if he did think of it, he didn't have the gall to actually try it, as did Dubya.
At least, now we know why Dubya didn't have klinton prosecuted for his gross abuses of power. Dubya was establishing precedent, so the next President won't go after him, when he is out of office. That's a sad statement about the state of our government. What makes it even sadder, is that it has to be said about a President who claims to be a Republican, even though he is not.