Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sandy
Well, I guess it doesn't.

:-} Well, we'll have to disagree there. Congress seems satisfied that it did. Two judges on the second circuit differ. I'll side with Congress on this one.

If that's the case, they shouldn't have any problem passing specific legislation allowing Padilla-like citizen detentions. Personally, I don't think that's too much to ask.

Worm-like would be more apt but Congress should do what Congress should do, not what two judges on the Second Circuit tell them to do imo.

I like checks and balances.

So do I but from where I sit, it is the federal judiciary that is in the most urgent need of checking and balancing. Maybe even a rotation of the tires.

But these are simply the opinions of an amateur.

379 posted on 12/19/2003 9:24:29 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies ]


To: jwalsh07
If that's the case, they shouldn't have any problem passing specific legislation allowing Padilla-like citizen detentions. Personally, I don't think that's too much to ask.

I believe I misunderstood your point here. If you are suggesting that Congress should address Padilla-like characters in the code to clarify matters for the future, I'd agree with that.

I'd even agree that they should use the term "Padilla-like".:-}

380 posted on 12/19/2003 9:37:56 AM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 379 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson