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

To: ConsistentLibertarian
We probably do see the government and the current state of affairs quite differently. In sum, here is my view:

The US Supreme Court has been making decisions for a very long time strengthening due process. Any inappropriate use of the new law will be tried. The courts will be used to avoid military tribunals and to have surveillance evidence thrown out.

Just like criminal law and civil law are quite different, laws applicable to war are different. We are in a war and the battlefield is main street and wall street. The USSC has held that a citizen can be tried by military tribunal for an act of war against the U.S. I believe they will also concur that any person engaged in such conduct is also not protected by other due process.

If we have a citizen, an alien, or an illegal – on U.S. ground – suspected of aiding, abetting or executing an act of war against this country then no, I agree with the USSC and absolutely do NOT extend constitutional rights to them, nor a need for a grand jury, probable cause, discovery or appeal. In my view, they have forfeited the right to due process by acting violently against the entire body of citizens.

I’m not afraid of these new laws. If the legal tools of war are abused, they will be partially overturned in federal court – as they have been in the past.

And, as in the past, the USSC will come down in favor of due process for a citizen or legal alien not engaged in an act of war - even a very disgruntled citizen who resents government at all.


41 posted on 12/02/2001 12:39:03 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Alamo-Girl
You're tangling up different issues, for example secret trials in military courts and CIA surveillance powers. You might find the same people on both sides of those two issues, but they are distinct and you can't think anything through if you don't at least keep track of the topic. Here's one vivid example of the confusion: "If ... a citizen ... suspected of aiding, abetting or executing an act of war against this country then no, I ... absolutely do NOT extend constitutional rights to them". The proposal under discussion here is wether the CIA should be allowed to do surveillance EVEN WHEN a person is not even _suspected_ of a crime. If we're going to make progress, you have to at least face the issue. When you retreat back to "they have forfeited the right to due process by acting violently against the entire body of citizens" your running away from the actual tradeoff between state power and individual liberty you say you're eager to make.
42 posted on 12/02/2001 12:50:20 PM PST by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | 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