U.S. Defends Military Custody of Suspect in 'Dirty Bomb' Case

New York Times ^ | 6/27/02 | BENJAMIN WEISER

[kattracks]

he government asked a federal judge in Manhattan yesterday to reject a petition seeking the release of Jose Padilla, the former Chicago gang member accused of plotting to explode a radioactive bomb in the United States.

The government argued that the federal court in New York lacked jurisdiction over Mr. Padilla, who is being held in a Navy brig in Charleston, S.C., and that the petition, for a writ of habeas corpus, "seeks to interject this court into the president's conduct of ongoing hostilities."

The petition, filed on Mr. Padilla's behalf last week, asked that the government be ordered to return him to New York, so that the legality of his detention could be decided. It also asked that he be released, arguing that his rights had been violated.

Mr. Padilla, who has not been charged, was initially detained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Chicago in May and was brought to New York, where, on June 9, he was transferred to military custody. He is being held in Charleston as an enemy combatant.

In its papers, the government describes as "extraordinary" the request that Mr. Padilla, who is also known as Abdullah al-Muhajir, be brought back to New York and "released into the public."

"Padilla is currently being held," the government says, "consistent with the laws and customs of war."

The government's motion, which was signed by United States Attorney James B. Comey and Paul D. Clement, deputy solicitor general, argues that the judge, Michael B. Mukasey, should dismiss the petition or that the matter at least be transferred to South Carolina.

Donna R. Newman, the court-appointed lawyer who filed the habeas request, said of the government's filing: "We fight our cases in court, and our brief will be filed. We are confident that justice will be done here."

[11B3]

Dispense with any further litigation in this case - execute him by military firing squad. Tomorrow.

[WyldKard]

"consistent with the laws and customs of war."

But technically, we aren't in a legal state of war. That Congressional Declaration of Support doesn't count. I don't like this guy, and think he is scum, but I dislike the notion that an American citizen (however odius he may be) is being held in a military prison without any charges being filed without a legal state of war being declared. It's not like he was picked up on the battlefield or anything, either...

The current Government needs to understand they are setting precidents that the Liberals will eventually use to create a "Big Brother" type society. "War Without End" is the justification for everything that happens in "1984"...

I think Congress needs to grow some balls, and figure out a way to declare a legal state of war. That, or the Constitution needs to be amended appropriately...

[fporretto]

Careful, Wyld. I voiced the very same concerns as you on this thread, and got sawn in half for it. To many, questioning the legitimacy of Padilla's detention is down there with spitting on the Flag.

Governments are at their most dangerous when they enjoy the greatest measure of popular support. Just now, accusing a man of being a terrorist, or in league with them, is enough to ruin his life -- all right, so some lives, like Padilla's, come pre-ruined -- and deny him any chance to explain or defend himself. Because Padilla is a lowlife, it is vitally important that we be certain that his detention is just. Mencken and others have told us how important it is that we defend the rights of those we disapprove, lest we be lured into setting precedents that will be used against us later.

Let's have a look at the written standards, independent of anyone's preferences, that determine when a man may be classified as an "enemy combatant." If Padilla qualifies by the established, Congressionally approved standards, I'll relax. Executive Branch officials are supposed to hew to written law under all circumstances; they aren't supposed to have unlimited discretion about such things. Actually, they aren't supposed to have unlimited discretion about anything, but that's a subject for another day.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com