Judge orders 470 GOP protesters released

AP ^ | 9/2/2004, 6:47 p.m. ET | SARA KUGLER

[taxcontrol]

Repealing the 16th is one of several options I would support. However, with taxes there still needs to be two parts of the equation. The 16th only governs WHERE Congress will obtain tax dollars. We (the People) also need to restrict Congress on HOW MUCH taxes Congress can collect.

And then there is a whole 'nother discussion on spending and budgets.

[SunkenCiv]

A fine is stupid, but this judge doesn't seem to be some a-hole activist. Having these violent rioters on the street sounds perfect to me -- might put NY state back in play. :')

[mjaneangels@aolcom]

"Do I want to revise the U.S. Constitution to allow temporary arrests with no due process? Not on your life."

You have said in a prior post that the 6th amendment gives the people the right to a speedy trial, yet you are arguing, not for a speedy trial, but for a speedy arraignment and putting a 2 day limit on that. That is extra-constitutional. The constitution only addresses from arrest or indictment to trial, and indicates that that must be speedy. There is no 2 day limit, nor is there any constitutional requirement regarding arrest to arraignment time frame.

[lugsoul]

So, you think the Constitution allows the state to jail citizens without charging them? Go back to school.

What is even scarier than the fact that you believe this is that you seem to think it would be a good thing.

[mjaneangels@aolcom]

"So, you think the Constitution allows the state to jail citizens without charging them?"

Do you know what an indictment is? I did use that word in my reply.

"Go back to school."

That is not worthy of my response.

"What is even scarier than the fact that you believe this is that you seem to think it would be a good thing."

I never said that. You are the one who just got caught spinning the constitution your way and you are trying to divert that to me. It is not going to work.

[lugsoul]

You can call it "spinning" the Consitution "my way" all you want - the simple fact is that the Courts have "spun" it that way for a century.

Yes, I do know what an indictment is. Do you? It is the formal written accusation of a crime. And the due process requirements of the Consitution require an indictment or an arraignment - the alternative method of a formal charge - within a short time after a person is taken into custody. The specific time frame does differ from state to state, and in NY the presumptive time frame is 24 hours. Sorry you don't think that citizens who are jailed have the right to be formally charged, but that is what the law of this country requires. I think it is a good thing. Your resistance to the concept indicates that you think otherwise.