Skip to comments.
Supreme Court to rule in case of US-born terrorism detainee.
Associated Press
| January 9, 2003
Posted on 01/09/2004 10:19:49 AM PST by Timesink
WASHINGTON (AP) Supreme Court to rule in case of U.S.-born terrorism detainee.
TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: enemycombatant; hamdi; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
1
posted on
01/09/2004 10:19:49 AM PST
by
Timesink
To: Timesink
If he's a citizen, give'em a trial. That whole unalienable rights bit. Just wait till Hiterly comes to power btw.
2
posted on
01/09/2004 10:21:14 AM PST
by
KantianBurke
(Don't Tread on Me)
To: KantianBurke
If he's a citizen, give'em a trial. No, treat him as a enemy combatant. Medicate, interrogate, analyze, exploit, and when he is no further use give him a fair trial and a fast hanging.
To: Timesink
Does this just mean they'll grant cert, or does this mean they're about to announce a decision?
4
posted on
01/09/2004 10:23:22 AM PST
by
sourcery
(This is your country. This is your country under socialism. Any questions? Just say no to Socialism!)
To: Timesink
Sad, but "made in the U.S.A."
5
posted on
01/09/2004 10:23:35 AM PST
by
miltonim
To: Timesink
If this rogue court continues its anarchistic trend, it will rule that it's perfectly okay for the U.S. government to deny U.S. citizens their constitutionally-protected rights however and whenever it wants.
6
posted on
01/09/2004 10:24:28 AM PST
by
Imal
(It is unfortunate that reason is currently confined to a minority of the Supreme Court.)
To: All
|
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use
PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
|
|
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER
|
7
posted on
01/09/2004 10:25:10 AM PST
by
Support Free Republic
(If Woody had gone straight to the police, this would never have happened!)
To: KantianBurke
If he's a citizen, he ought to get a hearing solely on the issue of whether he's an enemy combatant. If he is, he goes to POW camp for the duration.
8
posted on
01/09/2004 10:25:31 AM PST
by
colorado tanker
("There are but two parties now, Traitors and Patriots")
To: af_vet_1981
No, treat him as a enemy combatant. Medicate, interrogate, analyze, exploit, and when he is no further use give him a fair trial and a fast hanging.
How do you know he's guilty?
9
posted on
01/09/2004 10:28:15 AM PST
by
Robson
To: Timesink
Article III Section. 3.
Treason against the United States,
shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be
convicted of Treason unless on the
Testimony of two
Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open
Court.
Convictions, testimony, witnesses, court.
Sounds like the makings of a trial to me. The Constitution is clear in this case (not that that matters anymore). American citizens get trials when accused of levying War against the US.
The issue here is not what we do with traitors, it's how we determine who is a traitor. Does one branch of government with no checks or balances hold unchecked power? That's not our form of government.
BTW, if he's found guilty I say we hang em.
10
posted on
01/09/2004 10:29:28 AM PST
by
freeeee
(I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it)
To: sourcery
Does this just mean they'll grant cert, or does this mean they're about to announce a decision?Grant cert. The AP doesn't send out breaking news alerts saying "news is forthcoming".
11
posted on
01/09/2004 10:30:07 AM PST
by
Timesink
(I'm not a big fan of electronic stuff, you know? Beeps ... beeps freak me out. They're bad.)
To: af_vet_1981
No, treat him as a enemy combatant. Medicate, interrogate, analyze, exploit, and when he is no further use give him a fair trial and a fast hanging.Good thing the Founding Fathers were wiser men than you and gave us the Bill of Rights and specific constitutional provisions regarding proof of treason
12
posted on
01/09/2004 10:38:10 AM PST
by
WackyKat
To: KantianBurke
Correct. The government cannot suspend constitutional rights just because they feel like it.
13
posted on
01/09/2004 10:41:53 AM PST
by
Sloth
("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, 'Zoolander')
To: af_vet_1981
No, treat him as a enemy combatant. Medicate, interrogate, analyze, exploit, and when he is no further use give him a fair trial and a fast hanging.
And yet I bet you would be outraged if another country treated American POWs that way.
14
posted on
01/09/2004 10:44:03 AM PST
by
drjimmy
To: WackyKat
"Good thing the Founding Fathers were wiser men than you".....
LOL,
With all due respect to the Founding Fathers, that is a rather low hurdle to clear.
To: Sloth
The government cannot suspend constitutional rights just because they feel like it.Apparently,The Campaign Finance Reform Act and The Patriot Act says they can
16
posted on
01/09/2004 10:52:22 AM PST
by
WackyKat
To: Robson
How do you know he's guilty? hold his head under water - if he drowns, he's innocent, if he doesn't, he's guilty and should be hanged.
To: WackyKat
Well, technically they *can* suspend them... they just cease being the legitimate government of the United States at the same instant.
18
posted on
01/09/2004 11:00:14 AM PST
by
Sloth
("I feel like I'm taking crazy pills!" -- Jacobim Mugatu, 'Zoolander')
To: Sloth
The government cannot suspend constitutional rights just because they feel like it.Ummmmmmmmmmm - Lincoln did! In a time of war no less!
19
posted on
01/09/2004 11:12:49 AM PST
by
Core_Conservative
(ODC-GIRL - the love of my life! - supporting Homeland Defense!)
To: Core_Conservative
The government cannot suspend constitutional rights just because they feel like it.
Ummmmmmmmmmm - Lincoln did! In a time of war no less!
Yes, and 5 years later Lincoln was forced to restore those rights because the Supreme Court was threatening to rule against him on appeal.
20
posted on
01/09/2004 11:27:31 AM PST
by
Robson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson