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

To: Peach
Lindsey Graham may have stood up to this amendment, but he is trying to get access to the appeals courts for the terrorists.

I don't think that's the case.

Instead, didn't Graham sponsor a bill that would eliminate the appeals of detainees declared to be "illegal combatants"?

30 posted on 11/15/2005 5:53:26 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: okie01

I had thought that Graham was standing up against the appeals process for terrorists too.

But this is what USA Today (Tuesday) had to say about that matter and then they quoted Graham as it relates to the appeal of rulings of military tribunals to the federal courts.

Detainees who receive punishments ranging from 10 years in prison to death would receive an automatic appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Graham said: "Instead of unlimited lawsuits, the courts now will be looking at whether you're properly determined to be an enemy combatant and, if you're tried, whether or not your conviction followed the military commission procedures in place."

Why is Graham thinking that terrorists should get a hearing in higher courts and any appeals whatsoever?


81 posted on 11/15/2005 6:26:32 PM PST by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | 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