Replies

You wrote: "What it comes down to is simply this: As per the United States Constitution: you cannot arrest an American citizen on American soil and hold him in prison indefinitely without a lawyer or trial." Were you aware that in 1942 an American citizen, arrested on American soil in civilian clothes, but in the company of German saboteurs and working with them, was arrested, tried by a military tribunal outside the usual courts, and convicted?

Read In re: Quirin, 1942, for the circumstances in which the Bill of Rights cease to apply to an American citizen. This case deals with and dismisses in certain circumstances the Milligan case, which you have on your click list.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Mayor Nagin: 10,000 Counts of Manslaughter"

I've read Quirin many times since the government attempted its use to cover its actions in the Padilla case. However, aside from my disagreements with the court's overly broad deferment in the Quirin case (along with Chief Justice Stone's own reservations, among others), I don't think it's particularly applicable to the Padilla case.

First of all, in Quirin, the court never even addressed Haupt's purported US citizenship. The entire issue was rushed past in an effort to simplify the whole thing (and rush the case through the court). Quirin also relies in part on the Presidential proclamation, which reads in part: "all persons who are subjects, citizens or residents of any nation at war with the United States or who give obedience to or act under the direction of any such nation, and who during time of war enter or attempt to enter the United States". As many have noted many times previously, no official declaration of war has been made in the War on Terrorism, and we are not at war with any given 'nation', as such. Granted, we are in a conflict with an unknown number of individuals, but the current situation would appear to invalidate the effect of that proclamation. Also, in the Court's decision, it noted that: "But the detention and trial of petitioners-ordered by the President in the declared exercise of his powers as Commander in Chief of the Army in time of war and of grave public danger-are not to be set aside by the courts without the clear conviction that they are in conflict with the Constitution or laws of Congress constitutionally enacted.". In essence, the SCOTUS refused any sort of litmus test for this type of case; preferring instead to simply move along the Quirin case as soon as possible while leaving the issue of citizen detentions and trials by the military all but unresolved. Failing a new litmus test in Quirin, we're left with the old one from Milligan: "Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."

All this stuff aside, we're left with one very important fact: Jose Padilla isn't even getting a military tribunal. He's an American citizen who's just been sitting in solitary for the past 3 years. He was arrested in Chicago by the FBI using a Material Witness warrant to compel his presence for testimony in a trial that never existed, then quietly handed over to the military. Since then, the government has done everything it could to block his lawyer's access to him and the courts on his behalf. This is the stuff nightmares are made of. I don't think Padilla's a nice guy, and I think he's probably guilty. What I think, however, doesn't matter. What does matter is his Constitutionally "guaranteed" (whatever that means) rights. If Padilla's rights can be stripped away at a moment's notice, so too can the rights of each and every one of us sitting here reading about it. Are we some special, protected class that is immune to some future President's whims? What, precisely, is our recourse when one of us is whisked away by minions of President Hillary in the middle of the night for 'being a terrorist'? Are we to defer to her judgment because there exists a state of worldwide conflict? How much trouncing on the US Constitution are we to accept before we stand up and decide that no more is to be tolerated? Personally, I draw the line when American citizens are plucked off the street and tossed in prison with no trial.