Replies

In a nutshell, we cannot permit the executive branch to declare unilaterally that a U.S. citizen may be characterized as an enemy combatant, whisked away, detained indefinitely without charges, denied legal counsel, and prevented from arguing to a judge that he is wholly innocent.

BUMP

You should read the 1942 decision.

The court stated a lot of history in that decision. "Unlawful combatants" can also be spies. The guy came to do "recon". That is "spying".

Throughout history spies have been hung. Starting with the revoulutionary war, the war of 1812, the Civil War.

This is nothing new. No precident -- we've been there, done that.

A few points. There is no requirement that an unlawful combatant be tried and punished. Alternatively, like POW's they can simply be detained until the end of hostilities so they can't kill any more of us. (Before you jump on this and start screaming Geneva Convention and no Declaration of War, I would simply note these guys fight illegally, don't wear uniforms, don't abide by the Convention and aren't entitled to its protection.)

Second, any citizen should be able to file a habeas corpus petition. If he can show he isn't an illegal combatant (that's the correct standard, no crime need have been committed other than taking arms against the U.S.), then the court can order his release.

"Congress must get involved, exercising its responsibility to enact a new legal regimen for citizen-detainees in time of national emergency." That'll be the day. With the Daschle Dims in charge of the Senate, we'd get Congressional action after some Al-Qaeda nut finally succeeds in nuking us. We're in a war now; I want the enemy soldiers locked up until it's over.