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

Skip to comments.

Judge strikes president's authority to designate terrorist groups
AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 11/28/06 | Linda Deutsch - ap

Posted on 11/28/2006 4:32:42 PM PST by NormsRevenge

A federal judge has ruled that a portion of a post-Sept. 11 executive order allowing President Bush to create a list of specially designated global terrorist groups is unconstitutionally vague.

U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins, in a Nov. 21 ruling released Tuesday, struck down the provision and enjoined the government from blocking the assets of two foreign groups which were placed on the list.

The ruling was praised by David Cole, a lawyer for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Constitutional Rights.

"This law gave the president unfettered authority to create blacklists," he said. "It was reminiscent of the McCarthy era."

Charles Miller, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice, said, "We are currently reviewing the decision and we have made no determination what the government's next step will be."

The judge's ruling was a reversal of her own tentative findings last July in which she indicated she would uphold wide powers asserted by Bush under an anti-terror financing law. She delayed her ruling then to allow more legal briefs to be filed.

The long-running litigation has centered on two groups, the Liberation Tigers, which seeks a separate homeland for the Tamil people in Sri Lanka, and Partiya Karkeran Kurdistan, a political organization representing the interests of Kurds in Turkey.

Both groups have been designated by the United States as foreign terrorist organizations.

The judge's 45-page ruling granted in part and denied in part a legal challenge brought by the Humanitarian Law Project, which seeks to provide training to the groups in human rights advocacy and provide them with humanitarian aid.

The judge outlined the history of Bush's Executive Order 13224 issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. He declared then that the "grave acts of terrorism" and the "continuing and immediate threat of future attacks" constituted a national emergency.

He blocked all property and interests in property of 27 groups or individuals named as "specially designated global terrorists (SDGT)." Bush also authorized the secretary of the treasury to designate anyone who "assists, sponsors or provides services to" or is "otherwise associated with" a designated group.

Collins found that Bush's authority to designate SDGTs is "unconstitutionally vague on its face." She also found that the provision involving those "otherwise associated with" the groups is vague and overbroad and could impinge on First Amendment rights of free association. She struck down both provisions.

However, she let stand sections of the order that would penalize those who provide "services" to designated terrorist groups. She said such services would include the humanitarian aid and rights training proposed by the plaintiffs.

Cole said the Humanitarian Law Project will appeal those portions of the executive order which were allowed to stand. He said the judge's ruling does not invalidate the hundreds of SDGT designations already made but "calls them into question."

Cole said the value of the decision is it "says that even in fighting terrorism the president cannot be given a blank check to blacklist anyone he considers a bad guy or a bad group and you can't imply guilt by association."


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: authority; bushhaterswin; cinobackstabbers; collins; cutandruncinos; iraqbackstabbers; kurdistan; lbackstabbers; losertarians; pkk; sanfranciscovalues; sdgt; srilanka; tamil; terroristgroups
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 261-279 next last
To: daybreakcoming
Every time I hear one of Pelosi's idiotic utterances, I silently curse the protest voters.

I silently curse the republican leadership who let down the conservatives who put them in office. cart/horse?

201 posted on 11/28/2006 8:34:45 PM PST by glock rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

Aren't you people ever happy? You got what you wanted. Just celebrate Senator Ass and be done with it.


202 posted on 11/28/2006 8:36:18 PM PST by AmishDude (Mark Steyn is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

"... the Humanitarian Law Project scored a legal victory ....when a Los Angeles Federal District Court judge struck down parts of the Patriot Act. The section of the Act in question barred American groups like HLP from providing advice and non-military aid to known terrorist groups across the globe."

Par for the course, a LA Federal judge aids and abettes groups like the HLP who are sypathetic to their brother enemies of the US. I'd remove this judge immediately, and freeze the assests of the HLP.


203 posted on 11/28/2006 8:48:30 PM PST by oneamericanvoice (HLP and some Federal Judges...useful idiots of the enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
It's why I am not here as much as I used to be.

You and me, both. I used to live here, and learn so much. Now, all I learn is that too many people would shoot their foot off before finishing the race. And that they are proud of it, too.

I've been a monthly contributor for quite some time. I have been considering the benefit of my contributions.

Becki

204 posted on 11/28/2006 8:55:35 PM PST by Becki (I pray daily for President Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: babygene
I don't know that I disagree with this judge. What the heck does "otherwise associate with" mean exactly? If your brother in law plays poker with someone in this group is that covered? It is too vague...

In the treason and sedition laws don't you find the phrases "gives aid and comfort to" just as vague? If your brother-in-law invites them to his house to play poker and he supplies refreshments and loses all his money to them which they then use to further their treasonous/seditious plans, didn't he give aid and comfort to them? Should we send this judge in to strike down these laws because of the 'vague' phrases in them?

205 posted on 11/28/2006 8:57:11 PM PST by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude

"Aren't you people ever happy? You got what you wanted. Just celebrate Senator Ass and be done with it."

That's the attitude that will get you a Democrat president in 2008. I guess you'll find someone to blame that on too.



206 posted on 11/28/2006 8:57:32 PM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

Contrary to popular belief, I don't run anything. I know you feel impotent

...politically...

but if the unappeasables don't seem to care, then there ain't nothin' I can do.


207 posted on 11/28/2006 8:59:45 PM PST by AmishDude (Mark Steyn is my hero.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: samadams2000

Nancy chucky and harry are soo glad "they" stood home
good job


208 posted on 11/28/2006 9:01:12 PM PST by italianquaker (Democrats its time to fish or cut bait, no more blaming Prez Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace; fallujah-nuker

"And who had a hand in writing that EO in such a way that it could be interpreted as being too vague? Could it have been Alberto Gonzalez? Or maybe Harriett Meiers?

I'm just sayin' . . . ."

What kills me is that this socialist bum judge actually thinks the Constitution protects foreign organizations. Foreign organizations have no rights under the Constitution. It's a FOR US CITIZENS ONLY contract.


209 posted on 11/28/2006 9:05:02 PM PST by neutronsgalore (Nature, getting rid of Muslims one tsunami at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: glock rocks
Oh I have cursed the republican narcissistic glory hounds in Congress for the last five years if that is what you are speaking of. But in fairness, they have done less harm to the country than Pelosi, Inc. will do.
If I could only clone my Congressman John Cornyn.......
210 posted on 11/28/2006 9:09:02 PM PST by daybreakcoming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
That's a good point, the EO should be more specific. However that doesn't make it "unconstitutionally" vague. The EO should be construed by the judge to be constitutional if that can be reasonably done, IE: to mean "otherwise associate with in a way not protected by the Constitution". Which is what it means since the Constitution cannot be amended by mere law or fiat.

This is an excellent statement. The fact that you can set up a straw man argument using the words of the law, doesn't mean that the law is vague and unconstitutional.

211 posted on 11/28/2006 9:15:58 PM PST by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Now tell me genius, how is Bush supposed to stop a lawsuit and the findings of a Clinton appointee.

Make like President Lincoln and issue an arrest warrant for the judge.

Who knows, if Bush plays his cards right, he could end up on Mount Rushmore!

...and there might even be a Mount Rushmore left for him to be on

Cheers!

212 posted on 11/28/2006 9:16:48 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: daybreakcoming

...and if there were to be senate clones made, I'd go for Inhofe.


213 posted on 11/28/2006 9:22:11 PM PST by glock rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

OIC, so these are just clubs or groups like the Rotary or Lions clubs. President Bush is just too mean to these much maligned and misunderstood "groups". They're just AlQueda re-enactors. Thank Allah that this judge was able get them off the hook.

Oh, and "Death to America" :o)

/s/squared


214 posted on 11/28/2006 9:23:25 PM PST by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

OH how cute. This one judge wants to make a name for herself.

These little judges making rulings that won't stand up upon appeal are rather funny.


215 posted on 11/28/2006 9:24:03 PM PST by rwfromkansas (http://xanga.com/rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elyse
What is vauge about the term giving aid? That's pretty clear.

If it said "giving aid or comfort" or "otherwise associated with" there would be a problem.

"Otherwise associated" with is too broad. A prosecutor could interpret that any way he or she wanted to. It could be interpreted to mean if you rode on the same buss or stayed at the same hotel.

Kind of like article 32 in the UCMJ. That basically says "anything that is not covered by another article".

It just needs to be rewritten to be more specific.
216 posted on 11/28/2006 9:26:21 PM PST by babygene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
The ruling was praised by David Cole, a lawyer for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Constitutional Rights.

"This law gave the president unfettered authority to create blacklists," he said. "It was reminiscent of the McCarthy era."

Commies all of whom have to throw McCarthy around to get anything done. They should all be in jail. They are a danger to our country. Do they realize they are putting us back into a September 10th mentality as far as islamofacists terrorism goes?

These lists are used to follow the money.

2006 OFAC Recent Actions

"specially designated global terrorists" (SDGT)

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13224 - BLOCKING PROPERTY AND PROHIBITING TRANSACTIONS WITH PERSONS WHO COMMIT, THREATEN TO COMMIT, OR SUPPORT TERRORISM

217 posted on 11/28/2006 9:30:32 PM PST by b4its2late (Liberalism is a hollow log and a mental disorder.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: babygene
"Otherwise associated" with is too broad. A prosecutor could interpret that any way he or she wanted to. It could be interpreted to mean if you rode on the same buss or stayed at the same hotel.

That is a perfect example of a straw man argument. If a prosecutor chose to apply this law in that way he would be violating other constitional laws. That does not make this law unconstitional.

218 posted on 11/28/2006 9:44:10 PM PST by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: babygene
constitional = constitutional

One day I'll realize that spell check is my friend.
219 posted on 11/28/2006 9:46:12 PM PST by Elyse (I refuse to feed the crocodile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: ARealMothersSonForever

Know-at-alls like yourself tick me off; you really don't understand the Constitution of the United States of America at all, because little one, if you bother reading it, it guarantees the right for a President of the United States of America to declare Executive Order. You are just a Pseudo-conservative.


220 posted on 11/28/2006 9:54:26 PM PST by jdlucas04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 261-279 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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