Posted on 02/28/2005 3:20:44 PM PST by MisterRepublican
SPARTANBURG -- A federal judge in Spartanburg has ordered that an American citizen held as an enemy combatant in a Navy brig in Charleston should be charged with a crime or released.
U.S. District Judge Henry F. Floyd ruled Monday that the president of the United States does not have the authority to order Jose Padilla to be held indefinitely without being charged.
"If the law in its current state is found by the president to be insufficient to protect this country from terrorist plots, such as the one alleged here, then the president should prevail upon Congress to remedy the problem," he wrote.
In the ruling, Floyd said that three court cases that the government used to make its claim did not sufficiently apply to Padilla's case.
Floyd wrote that, in essence, "the detention of a United States citizen by the military is disallowed without explicit Congressional authorization."
Floyd wrote that because the government had not provided any proof that the president has the power to hold Padilla, he must reject the government's claim of authority.
"To do otherwise would not only offend the rule of law and violate this country’s constitutional tradition, but it would also be a betrayal of this nation’s commitment to the separation of powers that safeguards our democratic values and individual liberties," he wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecarolinachannel.com ...
Yeah I read Quinn and I thought it was a mistake not to try the one who was a citizen. This is just too much power for a President, and particularly so when war has not been declared. We could easily end up a banana republic if a politician like Hilary was to win the presidency.
Regardless of whether or not he is accused of terrorism, he IS an American Citizen and as such is protected by our Constitution from this abuse of power.
You'd better pray that he gets charged and gets his day in court, because if it can happen to him, it can and will happen to any one of us.
Then we are on the same page. I believe that GWB only has good motives for the U.S., however, if he can use it with good motives, what about when we get "a president" who sees the American people who disagree with her as "enemy combatants"?
Believe me, Hitlery would just LOVE to be able to declare anyone who opposed her politically as a "person of interest" or "terrorist supporter" or "enemy combatant" and have them held indefinitely in a U.S. jail without charges or bail.
We must always invoke and exercise ALL of our rights. The government needs to convince me that the war on terror isn't over. I am starting to believe it is over and the current fight is a 'war' over the control and use of nuclear weapons, not terrorism.
Padilla is still a US citizen, it is time to charge him or release him!
"Sorry friend, that's not how it works. I asked a question. You answer."
You asked a question about a highly fact-based inquiry and refused to provide sufficient facts for the inquiry. No one with at least half a functioning brain answers those sorts of questions. Quit grandstanding.
Sorry but Padilla needs to get his day in court he is an AMERICAN CITIZEN if the government can screw him out his rights today YOU can bet money that the next Democrat that gets elected to POTUS will try to do the same to you for being a Republican!
Which in the eyes of the RAT party means that you are a racist/facist/homophobe you are a gun owning proto-terrorist who is a knuckle dragging mouth breathing inbred who belongs in a concentration camp for the good of all of humanity! Think that I am exagerating hell listen to the folks over at the dailykos blog or on DU or just simple go visit the local Democrat party & listen in on a local party meeting .
I understand you're reticence to answer. It is a difficult situation.
But it happened none the less and anybody who thinks that the CIA fires missiles up tailpipes without knowing who is in the car is simply kidding themselves.
So the questions you have to answer are really quite simple. Should the men fighting the war on terrorism be charged for killing this guy? Should the chain of command be charged? Should Bush be impeached? These are all valid questions.
The answers would clearly be yes if they had done this to an American citizen who was not an islamofascist or terrorist during peacetime. But not so clear now. And of course my position is they shouldn't be charged.
It's easy to be principled when principle is free, not so easy when costs are involved.
I am quite sure that had Padilla been released on bail after his capture and had he gone on to explode a dirty bomb in any man's town or city the same folks defending his rights now would be screaming for his head and Bush's head.
Life isn't black and white, there are infinite shades of gray.
>"Appeal."<
Appeal what...the Bill of Rights for U.S. citizens?
As so many others on this thread have said: Charge him, give him a speedy trial.
Nope. They will be labled "domestic terrorists" for posessing too many firearms a la Waco, or for protesting in front of abortion clinics, or maybe they will be deemed "techno terrorists" for violating the DMCA by putting data from Paris Hilton's sidekick on the Internet like the "T-Mobil Terrorist." Then they will be locked up without a trial never to be heard from again.
Just ask Kevin Mitnick.
Fascinating isn't it? All of their arguments boil down to some variation of, "It's just too hard to simultaneously uphold the Constitution and defend the Republic from terrorists."
Yes, and when does the U.S. become that we are trying to defeat? We need to protect ourselves from ourselves.
No kidding.
*shakes his head*
How about the old time prison logbook notation, "shot while trying to escape"? Works for me. < /sarc >
Seriously, warm up the military tribunal and start with this clown. Let's get all the challenges over with so we know what we can & can't do.
I'm sure that they told HIM, but there's no rule that says anyone else has to know!
This is a correct ruling. We cannot go detaining U.S. citzens without charges.
Where did I say that every grand jury presentation is nothing but lies?
Sorry, but if you are going to resort to childish debate tactics such as putting words in my mouth, then we're done.
"People. This is a good thing. CHARGE Padilla for goodness sake! He's an American citizen, and if we allow American citizens to be held indefinitely without charge just by Presidential decree, what happens when Hillary is Prez?"
a lot of readers here would gladly endorse detention without charges for years for a us citizen arrested in the US for this example, then would squeak loudly when a future administration managed to expand this power to a more mundane accusation (since he isn't charged).
I am not saying that he isn't all of the bad things the government says he is (I don't know and neither does anyone else here who doesn't have a very high security clearance on this topic), just that it were well to be careful what one wishes for.
"What DO you do in a situation like this? It is something that wasn't forseen in the Constitution."
As you note, there is not perfect answer. What works in the interests of security today may create a precedent that we will all rue down the road.
Which may be why he has not been charged; the information could alert other targets that they are in peril.
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.